Skip to main content

Rohingya repatriation? As ICJ hearing draws nearer, Myanmar begins to 'show concern'

By Sumaiya Jannat 

On April 24, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will hear Gambia's case of Rohingya torture against Myanmar. And before that, Naypyidaw wants to start repatriation of Rohingyas to keep the attitude of the court in their favor. The country has sent a technical team to quickly verify the Rohingya. Earlier, the country had adopted the same strategy.
A 17-member technical team from Myanmar arrived in Bangladesh a few days back. The delegation was divided into four groups and is scrutinizing the Rohingya. They sought to conduct last-minute verification of the Rohingyas who have already been verified. This verification lasted for five days.
The counter-memorial or reply to the allegations raised against Myanmar should be made in the hearing of the ICJ in April. As a result, Naypyidaw appears to be seeking to repatriate some Rohingya before that to show progress in the court.
Bangladesh is not looking at Myanmar's activities with simple eyes. Dhaka has been pressuring Myanmar to start repatriation for a long time. But the country never paid attention to it. Now that the court hearing has come, their roar has increased. Although preparing to take the first batch, there is no guidance from Myanmar on when to take the second batch, who to take or when to complete the verification. As a result, repatriation to the court has started but it is not regular.
The pilot project to start repatriation under the trilateral initiative with the participation of China was taken up in October 2021. At that time, Myanmar gave two lists of 711 Muslim and 317 Hindu Rohingya. It can be seen that if the Muslim Rohingyas are repatriated, many will be separated from their families. Bangladesh objected to it. Because no Rohingya will go back unless the whole family goes together. At that time, Myanmar expressed its interest to take back 440 Hindu Rohingyas staying in Bangladesh first. But Dhaka does not agree to this.
Naypyidaw is playing the religious card. An example of this is the repatriation of all Hindu Rohingyas together. In this case, Bangladesh fears that Myanmar may spread anti-Muslim propaganda. Hindu Rohingya will go, but gradually. Myanmar says it is under pressure from a neighbouring state to take back the Hindu Rohingya. Neighbouring countries have built houses for the Hindu Rohingyas by spending huge sums of money. They want to ensure that the Hindu Rohingyas get that share first.
Last July, the ICJ dismissed Naypyidaw's four objections. The court ruled to continue the case against Myanmar. They want to repatriate with that in mind, so that they can present something positive in court. As it did before the 2022 court hearing. In February that year, Naypyidaw sat in on the Joint Working Group meeting, and presented it to the court.
Myanmar's sudden push for repatriation cannot be taken lightly. If they really wanted to repatriate, the country would have completed the selection of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya in the beginning, so that the Rohingyas can be repatriated within a specific time interval of 1-2 months.
If the repatriation is regular, the confidence of the Rohingya will return. They will be encouraged to go. And if it doesn't, it's doubtful how durable the first mover will be.
When asked who will take care of the first batch when they go to Rakhine, a concerned official said, ASEAN has a monitoring office in Rakhine. They will monitor the situation of the Rohingyas. Also, the United Nations will take care of the Rohingyas. However, since the transportation system is not convenient, the United Nations must gain speed to do this work.
So far, Bangladesh has provided complete information of about 830,000 Rohingya to Myanmar. Out of this, only 7-8 percent, about 70 thousand Rohingyas have been verified by the country. Naypyidaw has given a green signal for 52 percent of these 70,000 Rohingyas.
Myanmar finally sent a delegation to take back the Rohingyas who fled to Bangladesh in the face of violence in Myanmar. The delegation came to Teknaf in Cox's Bazar district of Bangladesh on March 15 to re-verify the information of the Rohingya who were listed for repatriation.
In 2018, Bangladesh sent a list of 888,000 Rohingya refugees to Myanmar with the aim of repatriating Rohingya. Then a return list of 68,000 Rohingyas was sent by Myanmar. From that list, 1140 people were initially selected for family-based repatriation. Of these, Myanmar agreed to the repatriation of 711 Rohingyas, but had objections to the remaining 429.
Any member of the same family from that initial repatriation list moves to the exclusion list. The delegation has come to Bangladesh this time to re-verify the information of 429 Rohingyas who were excluded when the matter was informed to Myanmar. Refugee Relief and Repatriation Commission (RRRC) Commissioner Mizanur Rahman confirmed this information.
They have sought proper resettlement, dignified citizenship rights, free movement and recognition as Rohingyas
Again, many Rohingya families in that list have given birth to new children. He said it could be considered to record the data of those children as well. The members of this technical team will mainly verify the list of Rohingyas. They interviewed at least 65 Rohingyas on the first day on Wednesday. It is estimated that it may take 5-6 days to verify all the information.
However, the members of the delegation only interviewed the Rohingyas. One of them said that they are not saying anything about repatriation. The repatriation of the Rohingyas was supposed to start twice before, but it was not possible due to objections regarding the security of the Rohingyas.
Two Rohingyas who took part in the interview told BBC Bangla on condition of anonymity that the representatives of Myanmar asked them if they want to return to their country of Myanmar. In response, one said, "Myanmar is my country, why don't I want to return? Bangladesh is not my country. I want to return to motherland again. But we have spoken about some of our demands."
Like him, most Rohingya have sought safety in Myanmar if they return to Myanmar. They have also sought proper resettlement, dignified citizenship rights, free movement and recognition as Rohingyas where their houses have been burnt down. “If they give us security, freedom of movement, civil facilities, houses-places-land make us like before we will definitely go. They burned us all," said a Rohingya.
As evidence of Myanmar citizenship, Rohingya members were asked to show their Myanmar land-deeds, Myanmar-sealed documents, etc. Also various information about their name, identity, address, occupation etc. is taken.
The Rohingya returned with an interview and said, "They asked us various questions such as which area of Myanmar we were in, where we were, in which district, which police station, which mauza, who was the chairman there, who were the assembly members. We have shown our land papers. I could not show many papers. burned.”
However, none of the delegation said anything about whether they will be taken back at all. After 25th August 2017, millions of Rohingyas fled to Bangladesh in the face of violence for the next few months. The Rohingyas who escaped at different times also took refuge in Bangladesh. In total, there are about 1.2 million Rohingya who have been transferred to 33 camps in Ukhia and Teknaf and Bhasanchar.
Although various efforts have been made for the repatriation of these Rohingyas for the past six years, the Bangladesh government has not been able to send even a single Rohingya back to their country. The agreement on repatriation was signed on November 23, 2017, three months after the Rohingya fled from Myanmar. For this reason, a joint working committee of the two countries was formed in Dhaka on December 19 of the same year for the repatriation of Rohingya.
It was supposed to start the repatriation process within two months of signing the agreement. But Myanmar's list has been delayed in the name of verification. An attempt to initiate a round of repatriation in 2018 failed. Later, through the mediation of China, there was an attempt to start repatriation again in 2019, but the Rohingyas did not agree to return, citing concerns about the environment in Rakhine State.
Then in February 2021, Myanmar's military seized power through a coup. This brought the repatriation talks to a standstill. As a result, the repatriation of Rohingyas became uncertain. Later, in the face of international pressure, the country's government repeatedly assured, but so far no initiative has been seen in repatriation.
Mizanur Rahman, Commissioner of the Refugee Relief and Repatriation Commission (RRRC) sees this verification step of Myanmar very positively. He said, “It is definitely a positive response. It was stopped for so long. Now there is a movement. This may advance the repatriation process. But that's a higher-level decision."
Delegates who arrived had no authority to comment on repatriation, only conduct interviews. He said that they will not participate in any program like visiting the camp or holding meetings.

Comments

TRENDING

From plagiarism to proxy exams: Galgotias and systemic failure in education

By Sandeep Pandey*   Shock is being expressed at Galgotias University being found presenting a Chinese-made robotic dog and a South Korean-made soccer-playing drone as its own creations at the recently held India AI Impact Summit 2026, a global event in New Delhi. Earlier, a UGC-listed journal had published a paper from the university titled “Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis,” which became the subject of widespread ridicule. Following the robotic dog controversy coming to light, the university has withdrawn the paper. These incidents are symptoms of deeper problems afflicting the Indian education system in general. Galgotias merely bit off more than it could chew.

Covishield controversy: How India ignored a warning voice during the pandemic

Dr Amitav Banerjee, MD *  It is a matter of pride for us that a person of Indian origin, presently Director of National Institute of Health, USA, is poised to take over one of the most powerful roles in public health. Professor Jay Bhattacharya, an Indian origin physician and a health economist, from Stanford University, USA, will be assuming the appointment of acting head of the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA. Bhattacharya would be leading two apex institutions in the field of public health which not only shape American health policies but act as bellwether globally.

The 'glass cliff' at Galgotias: How a university’s AI crisis became a gendered blame game

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan*  “She was not aware of the technical origins of the product and in her enthusiasm of being on camera, gave factually incorrect information.” These were the words used in the official press release by Galgotias University following the controversy at the AI Impact Summit in Delhi. The statement came across as defensive, petty, and deeply insensitive.

Growth without justice: The politics of wealth and the economics of hunger

By Vikas Meshram*  In modern history, few periods have displayed such a grotesque and contradictory picture of wealth as the present. On one side, a handful of individuals accumulate in a single year more wealth than the annual income of entire nations. On the other, nearly every fourth person in the world goes to bed hungry or half-fed.

Thali, COVID and academic credibility: All about the 2020 'pseudoscientific' Galgotias paper

By Jag Jivan   The first page image of the paper "Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis" published in the Journal of Molecular Pharmaceuticals and Regulatory Affairs , Vol. 2, Issue 2 (2020), has gone viral on social media in the wake of the controversy surrounding a Chinese robot presented by the Galgotias University as its original product at the just-concluded AI summit in Delhi . The resurfacing of the 2020 publication, authored by  Dharmendra Kumar , Galgotias University, has reignited debate over academic standards and scientific credibility.

Conversion laws and national identity: A Jesuit response response to the Hindutva narrative

By Rajiv Shah  A recent book, " Luminous Footprints: The Christian Impact on India ", authored by two Jesuit scholars, Dr. Lancy Lobo and Dr. Denzil Fernandes , seeks to counter the current dominant narrative on Indian Christians , which equates evangelisation with conversion, and education, health and the social services provided by Christians as meant to lure -- even force -- vulnerable sections into Christianity.

'Serious violation of international law': US pressure on Mexico to stop oil shipments to Cuba

By Vijay Prashad   In January 2026, US President Donald Trump declared Cuba to be an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to US security—a designation that allows the United States government to use sweeping economic restrictions traditionally reserved for national security adversaries. The US blockade against Cuba began in the 1960s, right after the Cuban Revolution of 1959 but has tightened over the years. Without any mandate from the United Nations Security Council—which permits sanctions under strict conditions—the United States has operated an illegal, unilateral blockade that tries to force countries from around the world to stop doing basic commerce with Cuba. The new restrictions focus on oil. The United States government has threatened tariffs and sanctions on any country that sells or transports oil to Cuba.

Development at what cost? The budget's blind spot for the environment

By Raj Kumar Sinha*  The historical ills in the relationship between capital and the environment have now manifested in areas commonly referred to as the "environmental crisis." This includes global warming, the destruction of the ozone layer, the devastation of tropical forests, mass mortality of fish, species extinction, loss of biodiversity, poison seeping into the atmosphere and food, desertification, shrinking water supplies, lack of clean water, and radioactive pollution. 

Big promises, limited delivery? Rekha Gupta's first year as Delhi CM

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan*  Delhi has witnessed women at the helm before, each leaving behind a distinct political and administrative imprint on the national capital. From diplomacy to development, the city's past female chief ministers shaped governance in their own ways. As Rekha Gupta completes one year in office, the question arises: has her tenure lived up to her ambitious promises? After her first year, Gupta appears to have made tall claims but delivered little since taking the oath of office. Despite coming from a background in student politics, her report card as Delhi chief minister is far from impressive. She seems to understand the nuances of politics, yet she is often seen generating considerable buzz without substantial delivery on the ground.