<![CDATA[The Rohingya crisis remains one of the most protracted humanitarian and legal challenges in contemporary international law. Despite sustained international efforts, repatriation initiatives have failed to address the structural causes of displacement, including statelessness, denial of citizenship, and the absence of meaningful political representation. This article examines whether external self-determination may constitute a legally sustainable and durable solution for Arakan under contemporary international law. Using a normative (doctrinal) legal research method, the study analyzes international legal instruments, judicial decisions, historical sources, and relevant scholarly literature through statutory, case law, historical, and conceptual approaches. The analysis gives particular attention to Reference re Secession of Quebec (1998), the Kosovo and Chagos Advisory Opinions of the International Court of Justice (2010 and 2019), and the communications of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights in Katangese Peoples’ Congress v. Zaire (1995) and Kevin Mgwanga Gunme et al. v. Cameroon (2009). The article argues that the relevant right-holders are the peoples of Arakan collectively, including the Rohingya, the Rakhine, and other historically rooted communities. While international law does not recognize a settled right to remedial secession, the prolonged denial of meaningful internal self-determination, the systematic exclusion of the Rohingya under the Burma Citizenship Law 1982, and widespread human rights violations place Arakan within the category of exceptional cases warranting serious legal consideration. The article further contends that accountability mechanisms before the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court, although essential, cannot by themselves resolve the underlying constitutional causes of the crisis. It concludes that any durable solution must combine accountability, inclusive governance, equal citizenship, and meaningful political participation within a framework consistent with contemporary international law]]>
Copyrights © 2026
