Skip to main content

Humanitarian Intervention in Myanmar

 HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION IN MYANMAR


On February 1, 2021, Myanmar’s military staged a coup to depose the government formed by the

National League for Democracy (NLD), which had come to power after winning national elections

in November 2020. There have been mass protests against the junta and for the restoration of

democracy. Hundreds of people have been killed in these protests. There have been appeals from

the citizens to the international community for the ‘Responsibility to Protect.’ As per this, the

international must do everything possible to defend the lives of innocent people in governments that

are either incapable or unwilling to do so, or are actively assaulting them.


The UN has publicly condemned the military junta and realises that there has to be a prominent

increase in humanitarian aid and it should be distributed through International NGOs and Civil

Society Organisations on the ground. Tom Andrews, the UN Special Rapporteur said that “the

responsibility to protect meant going in to protect, in the best way possible, which has the highest

impact on the junta, but more importantly the least negative impact on the people of Myanmar.” 1 He

further said that the Responsibility to Protect also extends to sheltering refugees who are fleeing for

their lives. The neighbouring countries need to protect and provide for them and the international

community needs to assist the countries.


To avoid appearing to recognise the military junta's authority, the UN refers to them as "de facto

authorities" and limits its involvement with army generals. This nonrecognition sends a strong

message to the world community that the junta's unlawful takeover of power will not be tolerated. It

also raises pressure on the junta to seek a peaceful end to the issue by isolating it. The Security

Council has called for restraint and dialogue. However, it has failed to explicitly call for a reversal

of the coup, preferring instead to push for the release of the previous political leadership. 2 It has also

refused to emphasise the necessity of accountability or to support the concept of retaliating if the

junta does not comply with its requests. There have been considerable calls for the Security Council

to take more forceful measures, including an arms embargo, targeted sanctions, and a referral to the

International Criminal Court, however, they are unlikely to be passed as they might be vetoed by

Russia and China.


1 (2021). MYANMAR CRISIS: Stand with the people and protect them, urges UN rights expert. UN News.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/04/1090012

2 Lilly, D. (2021). The UN’s Response to the Human Rights Crisis after the Coup in Myanmar: Destined to Fail?

International Peace Institute. 10. https://www.ipinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/The-UNs-Response-Coup-in-

Myanmar-Final.pdf


In an ASEAN summit on April 24 th , a five-point consensus plan to address the crisis was laid “(1) an

immediate cessation of violence; (2) constructive dialogue among all parties to seek a peaceful

solution; (3) the appointment of a special envoy to facilitate mediation of the dialogue process; (4)

provision of humanitarian assistance through the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian

Assistance on Disaster Management (5) a visit to Myanmar by the special envoy and delegation to

meet with all parties concerned.” 3 There was no time frame adopted yet it was appreciated as an

initiative toward a political solution to the crisis.


Since 2006, the situation in Myanmar has been on the Security Council's agenda. The council, on

the other hand, has never passed a resolution on Myanmar due to resistance from China and Russia

who are the permanent members. The UN's ability to monitor, document, report, and evaluate

human rights violations has not kept pace with the problem's magnitude. The UN's reaction, both as

an international organisation and as a system of operational bodies, has been tragically inadequate

in comparison to the scope and severity of human rights atrocities occurring in Myanmar.


India condemned the violence in Myanmar, and Mr. Tirumurti, India’s permanent representative to

the UN remarked that for the situation to be resolved peacefully, there was a need for “greater

engagement” with Myanmar. 4 It was a message to the US-led Western bloc from India, that putting

more sanctions on Myanmar will not reverse the current crisis. Previously too, when the

international community strongly condemned the brutal crackdown by Myanmar’s junta and called

for rigid sanctions, India consistently maintained that all initiatives ‘should be forward-looking,

non-condemnatory and seek to engage the Government of Myanmar in a non-intrusive and

constructive manner.’

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more