How can speech acts be "attributable to #Myanmar" (the state), as the agent of Myanmar demands, if not via individuals who do the speaking? How does "the state" speak?
Discussion
Loading...
"... or is to be established indirectly by inference from a pattern of conduct. It is not to be established by way of attributing the genocidal intent of individuals to the state." Anthropologist here: what / who is "the state" in this view, then?
How can speech acts be "attributable to #Myanmar" (the state), as the agent of Myanmar demands, if not via individuals who do the speaking? How does "the state" speak?
Still catching up with #ICJ hearing #TheGambia vs #Myanmar - on 20 January, 9 judges began to pose questions to the two parties. 1st Q: on the methodology of how #evidence was collected from anonymous witnesses by third parties. 2nd Q (to Myanmar): how many villages destroyed by ARSA/Tatmadaw/Gov.
more Qs. Is The Gambia able to identify the locations where sexual violence has occurred and which measures were taken to investigate these incidents ? To Myanmar: How does each party characterize ARSA? Q to Myanmar: reasons for refusal to cooperate rgd. int. cooperation in prevention of #genocide ?
Watching the last day of #TheGambia presentings its case (January 27, 2026): "There is no quantitative requirement imposed on the actus reus. The 10.000 deaths at least, caused by the Tatmadaw were each a human tragedy, and they were each a genocidal act within the meaning of Art. 2a." #Rohingya