Myanmar’s de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi on Wednesday told the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that the Gambia’s Rohingya genocide case against her country is “incomplete and misleading” and should not be heard by the court.

Suu Kyi who leads the Myanmar’s legal team in The Hague defended the actions of her country’s military and said the army was fighting “terrorists”.

“Gambia has placed an incomplete and misleading picture of the factual situation in Rakhine state in Myanmar,” she said.

The de facto leader said the Myanmar’s military operation of August 2017 in western Rakhine State was a “counterterrorism clearance operation” in response to coordinated Rohingya militant attacks against dozens of police stations.

Suu Kyi conceded that though disproportionate military force may have been used and civilians killed, the acts did not “constitute genocide”.

She said Myanmar was taking steps to punish soldiers responsible for what she described as “isolated cases of wrongdoing” during the operation in western Rakhine State.

“Surely, under the circumstances, genocidal intent cannot be the only hypothesis. Can there be genocidal intent on the part of a state that actively investigates, prosecutes and punishes soldiers and officers that are accused of wrongdoing?”

The Gambia last month submitted a case before the ICJ accusing Myanmar of committing genocide against the minority Rohingya Muslims and for violating the 1948 Genocide Convention. It argued that it is every country’s duty under the convention to prevent a genocide from taking place, or to punish those responsible

More than 730,000 Rohingya fled Myanmar to Bangladesh after the military launched its crackdown and 10,000 people may have been killed according to human rights groups.

A U.N. fact-finding mission found that “the gravest crimes under international law” had been committed in Myanmar.  .

The Gambia is requesting for “provisional measures” from the court – to protect the Rohingya population until the case is heard in full.

Myanmar lawyer William Schabas appealed to the court to reject the demand for an injunction and said the court did not have jurisdiction.

He argued the reported number of 10,000 deaths in Rakhine did not meet a threshold for genocide, which requires that a specific ethnic group is destroyed in whole or in part.

The court has no enforcement powers, but its rulings are final and carry significant international weight.