HRC63: ICJ Calls for Protection of Lawyers and Accountability in Myanmar

United Nations Human Rights Council
63rd Regular Session
Item 2
Oral Statement for the EID on reports of the HC and IIMM – Myanmar
Vice President,
The ICJ and IBAHRI welcome the continued efforts to document serious violations and abuses and advance accountability by the IIMM and the OHCHR in the context of continued unlawful aerial attacks against civilians by the military.
We wish to draw particular attention to the continuing practice of enforced disappearances in Myanmar and to those who seek to protect the rights of victims and their families.
The junta continues the widespread practice of arbitrary detention, incommunicado detention, whereby persons are systematically denied access to legal counsel, and family members are often denied information about the fate or whereabouts of their relatives.
In such cases, lawyers are often among the first to whom families turn. They search for the disappeared persons, challenge arbitrary or unlawful detention, document violations and preserve information that contributes to truth, justice, reparation and accountability.
Lawyers undertaking these critical professional duties themselves face intimidation, unwarranted surveillance, arbitrary detention and other forms of reprisal. Some have been convicted on spurious charges, had their licenses removed, or been blacklisted simply for representing clients, including those charged under counter-terrorism laws.
We call upon all Member States to ensure that lawyers, human rights defenders, victims and survivors in Myanmar are able to exercise their rights without intimidation or reprisal. We also call for sustained cooperation and technical and financial support to the IIMM and other independent accountability mechanisms and for the preservation of avenues to justice.
Thank you.
Statement delivered by: Sandra Epal-Ratjen, ICJ International Advocacy Director
For more information, contact: Sandra.epal@icj.org

Facts Only

* The ICJ and IBAHRI welcome efforts by the IIMM and OHCHR in documenting violations and abuses related to unlawful aerial attacks against civilians by the military.
* The statement highlights the continuing practice of enforced disappearances in Myanmar.
* The junta employs arbitrary detention and incommunicado detention, denying access to legal counsel.
* Persons in detention are often denied information about the fate or whereabouts of relatives.
* Lawyers are frequently contacted by families seeking to locate disappeared persons and challenge detentions.
* Lawyers face intimidation, surveillance, arbitrary detention, and other forms of reprisal while performing their duties.
* Some lawyers have faced conviction on spurious charges, license removal, or blacklisting for representing clients, including those charged under counter-terrorism laws.
* The statement calls for Member States to ensure rights are exercised without intimidation for lawyers, human rights defenders, victims, and survivors in Myanmar.
* A call was made for sustained cooperation and financial/technical support for the IIMM and other accountability mechanisms.

Executive Summary

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Bar Association (IBAHRI) support efforts by the International Institute of Memory and Management (IIMM) and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in documenting serious violations and abuses resulting from unlawful aerial attacks against civilians by the military in Myanmar. The statement specifically draws attention to the practice of enforced disappearances within Myanmar. This practice involves arbitrary detention and incommunicado detention, where individuals are systematically denied access to legal counsel and information regarding their relatives' fate. Lawyers are noted as the first point of contact for families seeking to locate missing persons and challenge unlawful detentions, though lawyers themselves face intimidation, surveillance, and reprisals. The statement calls on all Member States to ensure that lawyers, human rights defenders, victims, and survivors in Myanmar can exercise their rights without fear or reprisal. Furthermore, there is a call for sustained cooperation and technical and financial support for accountability mechanisms like the IIMM and other independent bodies to preserve avenues to justice.

Full Take

The dynamic presented highlights a fundamental tension between state control mechanisms—arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances—and the foundational principles of legal access, specifically the role of the legal profession in seeking truth and accountability. The pattern observed is the deliberate erosion of procedural safeguards (denial of counsel and information) as a tool of control, which subsequently targets the agents attempting to uphold those safeguards—the lawyers. This creates a self-reinforcing cycle where accountability mechanisms are undermined not only by direct military action but also by the systemic persecution of those who seek redress. The call for support to independent bodies like the IIMM suggests an implicit recognition that state structures are compromised, necessitating external scaffolding for justice pathways. The implication is that the fight for human rights in conflict zones is not just about punishing perpetrators, but about securing the operational space and security necessary for truth-seeking professionals to function. What structural or legal barriers most effectively prevent systemic accountability from operating when the very infrastructure of justice seekers is targeted? What systems exist beyond immediate state recognition that can provide functional security guarantees for these professional actors outside the direct control of the detaining power?

Sentinel — Human

Confidence

This text reads like an official statement delivered in a high-stakes legal or advocacy setting, exhibiting the specific structure and vocabulary of human diplomatic communication.

Signals Detected

Sentence length variance is natural, with varying complexity suited to formal address.

The text maintains a clear, focused advocacy tone without the characteristic hedging or disjunctive balancing often seen in AI-generated synthesis.

The flow is driven by a direct appeal and a specific enumeration of systemic issues rather than broad, template-based argumentation.

The content relies on established legal and human rights terminology and context specific to the Myanmar situation, suggesting direct engagement with factual reporting rather than pure generation.

Human Indicators

Direct invocation of specific bodies (UNHRC, ICJ, IBAHRI) and clear attribution signals a human institutional context.

The focus is narrow and ethically driven, emphasizing concrete actions (enforced disappearances, lawyer intimidation) rather than broad philosophical statements.