The case was initiated by the Chin Human Rights Organization (CHRO) and other Chin ethnic representatives who sought justice for the victims of the violence in Thantlang. According to the London-based Myanmar Accountability Project (MAP), attacks in Thantlang led to the deaths of at least 250 people and the destruction of over 2,000 homes. The plaintiffs hoped that the Philippines, a member of ASEAN with a strong democratic and judicial system, would provide a platform for accountability for the crimes committed by Myanmar’s military leaders.

Jurisdictional Hurdles in the Philippines

The Philippine court’s decision to dismiss the case was based on the jurisdictional argument that these crimes did not take place on Philippine soil. This rationale highlights the limitations of pursuing legal action in foreign courts under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows countries to prosecute serious crimes like war crimes and crimes against humanity regardless of where they were committed. Despite the setback, CHRO has expressed its intention to appeal the decision to the Philippine Supreme Court, emphasizing the importance of seeking justice for the victims of military violence.

Rationale Behind Choosing the Philippines

The choice to file the complaint in the Philippines was strategic. The Philippines is a key ASEAN country with a robust legal system known for its commitment to the rule of law. Historically, the Philippines has prosecuted war crimes committed during World War II, demonstrating its capacity to handle such cases. Legal experts have pointed out that under Philippine law, there is provision for exercising universal jurisdiction over crimes against humanity and war crimes, even if they were committed outside the country’s borders.

Continued Efforts for Accountability

Despite the dismissal, the Chin Human Rights Organization remains determined to pursue justice. CHRO Deputy Executive Director Salai Za Uk Ling has indicated that they will explore all legal avenues to hold the Myanmar military leaders accountable. This includes filing an appeal to the Supreme Court of the Philippines and considering other jurisdictions within and beyond ASEAN that might have the authority to prosecute these crimes.

Evidence and Implications

The CHRO and its partners have compiled substantial evidence to support their claims. This evidence includes documented instances of killings, widespread destruction of property, and targeted attacks on civilian infrastructure such as churches, schools, and hospitals in Thantlang. These acts are consistent with violations of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit attacks on civilians and protected sites during conflicts.

The legal action by the Chin community and CHRO seeks to highlight the responsibility of senior military leaders in orchestrating these attacks and committing grave human rights violations. By pursuing justice through international legal channels, they aim to bring global attention to the plight of victims in Myanmar and reinforce the principle that war crimes and crimes against humanity must not go unpunished.

Conclusion

The dismissal of the case by the Philippine court is a setback, but it is not the end of the road for justice. The Chin community and human rights advocates remain committed to seeking accountability for the atrocities committed in Thantlang. As the appeal process continues, the case underscores the ongoing challenges and complexities of holding perpetrators of war crimes accountable in international and foreign courts. The outcome of this legal battle could have significant implications for international justice and the fight against impunity for war crimes and human rights abuses worldwide.