Displaced individuals fleeing conflict and atrocities often carry with them more than just the trauma of their experiences; they also bring crucial evidence that can aid in international justice efforts. This emerging dynamic was underscored this week in Denmark, where Ngun Siang Dim, a 39-year-old woman from Myanmar's Chin minority now residing there, filed a criminal complaint alleging crimes committed by Myanmar’s military. Dim recounts witnessing homes being burned in her village and the killing or severe injury of relatives and friends.

The complaint leverages the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows national courts to investigate and prosecute certain severe crimes irrespective of where they occurred or the nationality of those involved. Although laws applying universal jurisdiction vary between countries, the principle addresses accountability gaps that traditional international institutions often cannot close. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has limited reach, the International Court of Justice handles disputes between states rather than individuals, and UN Security Council referrals can be hindered by political considerations. Meanwhile, domestic courts in conflict-affected states may be compromised or nonfunctional.

The situation in Myanmar exemplifies these challenges. The country remains divided by conflict, and the military continues to wield significant influence over national legal institutions. For ethnic minorities in regions such as Chin State, Rakhine State, and Sagaing, accessing impartial judicial processes domestically is extremely difficult. However, an increasing number of Myanmar’s displaced population now live abroad across Europe, North America, Australia, and Asia, creating a diaspora with a potential role beyond humanitarian concerns.

The complaint in Denmark builds on precedents set by other conflicts. In the case of Syria, millions of refugees who fled to Europe enabled investigators and courts in countries like Germany to gain access to survivors and witnesses. German courts later convicted former Syrian intelligence officials of crimes including torture and crimes against humanity, signaling that perpetrators can be held accountable outside their home countries despite the impunity they might maintain locally.

Displaced individuals often are viewed primarily as victims in need of protection and support. However, they increasingly serve as witnesses, plaintiffs, and custodians of historical evidence vital to pursuing accountability. Their testimonies and documentation, which might not be safely accessible within their countries of origin, can now inform investigations and legal actions abroad.

Myanmar’s military may control domestic courts, but it cannot necessarily influence judicial processes in places like Copenhagen or Berlin that are willing to pursue international crimes committed beyond their borders. The complaint filed by Dim in Denmark highlights the shifting geography of justice, where displacement inadvertently transports evidence and survivors to jurisdictions of stronger accountability. This development signals a growing potential for refugees and exiles to contribute actively to closing accountability gaps in international justice.