{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015353805073431242, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026702269692923898, 'mean_word_length': 4.996, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Human Rights Enforcement at the Borders


 In September 2018, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reached a decision that could profoundly impact accountability for transnational human rights violations. In its decision, the Pre-Trial Chamber found that it has jurisdiction over the crime against humanity of deportation as it relates to the government of Myanmar’s treatment of the Rohingya ethnic group. This decision is remarkable for the fact that Myanmar is not a state party to the Rome Statute and therefore not directly subject to the ICC Statute. The Court circumvented this problem by ruling that a portion of the crime was committed in Bangladesh permitting the exercise of jurisdiction in this matter. This article endeavours to accomplish two goals. First, it analyses the Pre-Trial Chamber’s ruling to determine whether it is in compliance with the Rome Statute and international law. Secondly, it will discuss the ramifications of the decision and consider whether it can act as a partial solution for addressing transnational human rights violations being committed in the territory of non-states parties. The article concludes that the decision itself is open to question, creating a danger that it will be susceptible to challenge. The ICC needs to ensure that these sorts of controversial decisions have a firm legal foundation to better deliver justice to the victims of atrocity crimes, and protect the Court from criticism that it is failing victims.