Global Justice Center Blog

February News Update: Feminists in the Room

For too long, issues of gender have been relegated to the sidelines during high-level forums on international law. At worst, gender is omitted entirely. GJC is proud of our trusted reputation as the feminists in legal spaces, and over the next month, we'll get a chance to demonstrate this strength in a big way.

GJC President Akila Radhakrishnan will be participating in several international law events in March, including delivering a speech at the International Law Conference on the Status of Women, and joining panels at major events hosted by Tufts University and the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights.

We're also hosting a major conference on the inextricable role of gender in the crime of genocide on March 13-14. This conference will gather some of the world's leading experts and activists so register now!

No matter the room, GJC will always center gender quality and women's rights. Thank you for being in this fight with us.

Read the Full Newsletter

UN Secretary-General Delivers Call to Action on Human Rights

NEW YORK – United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres delivered a call to action today on human rights in an address to the Human Rights Council.

Akila Radhakrishnan, president of the Global Justice Center, had the following response:

"The Secretary-General’s call to action is a welcome effort to re-center human rights into the work of the United Nations. Particularly important is its specific area of focus on gender equality and equal rights for women. Still, it is equally important that gender equality is integral to all focus areas as a cross-cutting issue.

“With the UN’s recent failure to adequately respond to the serious violations against the Rohingya in Myanmar in mind — as documented in the UN’s own internal report by Gert Rosenthal — it is essential that this call to action translates to meaningful action. It’s insufficient for the UN to pay mere lip service to the concept of human rights. Rather, the call to action should be used to fundamentally shift the UN’s culture and ensure that all parts of the system work to promote, not suppress, human rights.”

Meet Akila Radhakrishnan, President of the Global Justice Center

Excerpt of DropLabs article that features GJC President Akila Radhakrishnan.

What we become inspired by often is genuinely determined by our experiences. For some, the passions they discovered at a young age eventually do manifest into their professional careers, and for others, such a pathway becomes best informed by time and experience. In Akila Radhakrishnan's story, a mixture of both helped shape the direction of her career today. As a kid, Akila recalls always saying she wanted to be a lawyer, citing her love for being argumentative as an indicator of the direction she wanted to pursue when she got older. However, it wasn't until attending law school, working in the field and learning more about herself and the work she aimed to achieve that a path in advocating for human rights ended up unfolding.

Presently, Akila serves as the president of the Global Justice Center, an international human rights organization. Founded in 2005, the non-profit organization works to advance gender equality by helping to implement and enforce human rights laws. Akila's journey into her present role has been accented by incredibly hard work, a dedication to social justice and a willingness to be as diligent as possible in upholding the GJC's mission.

Read the Article

Letter to UN Security Council members regarding Myanmar’s Independent Commission of Enquiry and the Provisional Measures ordered by the International Court of Justice

Your Excellency,

We are writing to you in light of the recently published summary of the final report of Myanmar’s Independent Commission of Enquiry (ICOE), which was issued the same week that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordered Myanmar to take immediate action to prevent genocide against the country’s persecuted Rohingya minority. In particular, we would like to raise grave concerns regarding the ICOE’s: (1) independence and impartiality; (2) methodology; and (3) flaws in narrative and findings.

The ICOE’s independence and impartiality have been seriously undermined by its reliance on the Office of the President of Myanmar for financial and technical support, as well as by the composition of the Commission itself, which includes at least one official directly implicated in the bulldozing of Rohingya villages damaged during the 2017 crisis in Rakhine State. The executive summary of the ICOE’s report also provides no information as to what sources and materials were relied upon beyond individual interviews, nor how the ICOE corroborated and verified this information, making it impossible to assess the quality of their methodology. Crucially, the ICOE did not interview a single Rohingya refugee in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, regarding the circumstances that resulted in over 700,000 people fleeing the country. Finally, there are serious flaws and misrepresentations in the ICOE’s narrative of the crisis in Rakhine State, including disturbing inaccuracies and omissions in relation to mass rape and widespread sexual violence directed at Rohingya women and girls during the military’s so-called “clearance operations.”

Download the Full Letter 

Behind Myanmar’s Military Alibi: A Path for Compliance with the ICJ’s Order to Protect Rohingya

Excerpt of Just Security op-ed by GJC's Akila Radhakrishnan and Grant Shubin.

In the wake of the ruling from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordering Myanmar to prevent genocide against the Rohingya going forward, the initial excitement was tempered by pragmatics—how this important court order can be enforced so that it actually protects the 600,000 Rohingya who remain in Rakhine State.

To be sure, there is no confusion that these measures are binding—as the court noted, they create international legal obligations that require Myanmar’s compliance. But how can the international community guarantee that Myanmar actually does anything? And does Myanmar’s civilian government have the capacity to do what is needed?

The answers to these questions are mixed, generally relying on exertion of geopolitical pressure, including through the United Nations Security Council, to which the order has been transmitted. As a general rule and absent a concrete enforcement mechanism, ICJ orders have a reliable compliance rate. However, looking at the Myanmar case in context, and in particular the measures requiring prevention of the commission of genocide by Myanmar’s military, compliance will require a serious and concerted effort by both the international community and the civilian government.

Read the Op-Ed