Benefits of recognising a crime against humanity Establishing the military’s earthquake response as a crime against humanity carries significant legal and political benefits. Crimes against humanity apply to individuals, not states, so would hold General Min Aung Hlaing and his top aides personally responsible. It provides another legal basis for prosecuting them at the International Criminal Court (ICC) or in national courts exercising universal jurisdiction. It would also label the military’s response as an atrocity, thereby delegitimising the military’s forthcoming January 2026 “elections” and dissuading regional leaders from continuing their recent reproachment to the regime. Moreover, given the international community’s weak support so far, this designation would compel global actors under the Responsibility to Protect doctrine to increase aid and ensure it reaches those in need. Evidence of a crime against humanity in the earthquake response A “crime against humanity,” as defined by the Rome Statute (Art. 7), involves acts such as murder, inhumane treatment, extermination, and persecution when knowingly committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack on a civilians. Establishing whether the military has committed a crime against humanity requires examining whether its actions meet each element of this definition. Which criminal acts are the military committing? Despite widespread internet shutdowns, press restrictions, and other repressive measures, journalists, aid workers, and opposition groups have documented clear instances of military obstruction, diversion, and denial of aid to earthquake survivors. The intentional deprivation of essential resources, knowing that it could lead to death, could amount to “murder”. After the earthquake, and even since a declared nationwide ceasefire, the military reportedly continued airstrikes on civilian areas, resulting in further displacement and fear. These ongoing attacks, alongside information restrictions, exacerbate pre-existing conflict vulnerabilities and may collectively be considered “inhumane acts”. Moreover, reports indicate that aid has been intentionally diverted or denied to specific demographic groups in Sagaing, Bago, and Shan regions with strong opposition to the military. Such discriminatory actions, calculated to deprive a segment of the population of fundamental rights, may constitute “persecution” and, if it results in significant deaths, could even reach the threshold of “extermination”.