Just hours after Human Rights Watch released an 82-page report on secret detentions and enforced disappearances in Bangladesh, Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan claimed it was a “smear campaign.” Callously ignoring victims’ families who are desperately waiting for answers, he told local media: “Whom will you say disappeared? Many businessmen went into hiding failing to repay their loans in this country. Some people went missing after developing extramarital relationship.”

Under international law, a “disappeared person” is someone held (or last seen) in the custody of agents of the state, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or whereabouts of the person, which places them outside the protection of the law.

Human Rights Watch has produced a detailed analysis of cases where individuals were picked up, often in front of witnesses or family members, by security forces who identified themselves as members of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), Detective Branch (DB), or the “administration.” When these people were not produced in court within 24 hours, as required under Bangladeshi law, family members repeatedly approached police and other officials, who denied the person was detained. While many of these men were eventually produced in court, after a period of weeks or months of illegal detention, others were released with warnings to stay silent. Several were later found killed in so-called gunfights or “cross-fire,” and scores remain “disappeared.”

Instead of committing to investigate these incidents, Khan declared his government will “reject the report outright.” As head of the ministry responsible for internal security, Khan claimed the United Nations had never mentioned enforced disappearances. In fact, like the detailed letters sent by Human Rights Watch requesting comment on these abuses, the Bangladesh government has ignored repeated queries from the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. The Human Rights Committee has also issued stern warnings.

The prime minister, Sheikh Hasina Wazed, while in opposition, repeatedly highlighted human rights violations and promised an end once she gained office. Now nearing the end of its second consecutive term, her Awami League government is not just echoing its abusive predecessors, but its security forces are secretly detaining and disappearing its political opponents and critics, as well as others it deems to be criminals. Party leader Hasan Mahmud accused Human Rights Watch of bias, ignoring previous work condemning opposition violence and its work on the United States. Bangladesh can and should do better.

In the old days, Indians would speak of the “hidden hand,” accusing people of being on the payroll of CIA, or even the KGB. These days, Indian officials seem to have been attributed a similarly long and evil arm of influence by our neighbors.

After the mysterious disappearance and subsequent return of Farhad Mazhar, a Bangladeshi columnist and activist, on July 3, local media in Bangladesh reported conjecture that “Indian agencies” were responsible for the abduction. Nepali analysts have long spoken of “Indian agencies” being involved, usually playing a negative role, in political decisions; but the distrust runs so high that a Nepali national recently even suggested to me that India’s prompt earthquake rescue and relief mission two years ago, was motivated by a hidden agenda.

This is partly because India, by sheer size of its population, military, economy and geography, is an overwhelming presence in the subcontinent. But its officials should have realized by now that repeatedly saying that India wants peaceful ties, based on cooperation, is not enough.

While it is generally accepted that it will, like all other countries, prioritize its strategic interests – primarily linked to China’s growing clout – the open dismay toward India is not without basis. While many of the allegations might be dismissed as local paranoia, India also needs to reconsider its image. India’s clear and unwavering support for core democratic and human rights principles in neighboring countries might go a long way toward dispelling some of the public anxiety.

For instance, many Bangladeshis, particularly opposition party supporters, believe that India is bolstering the ruling Awami League. The Sheikh Hasina government has addressed many of India’s key security concerns, partnering in counter-terrorism operations and closing borders to insurgent groups. Bangladeshi security forces, however, are accused of serious human rights violations including extra-judicial killings, secret detentions and enforced disappearances, often targeting the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the Jamaat-e-Islami. India has failed to raise concerns about these practices, which generates allegations of complicity.

In Nepal, almost everything, even the potholes, are often blamed on “Indian agencies.” When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the Nepali parliament in 2014, it appeared that things might have changed – people came out on the streets to applaud him. Soon after, however, that enthusiasm vanished, to be replaced by a familiar aggrieved suspicion. The unrest in Nepal’s southern plains, the intractable political disagreements, the recent effective blockade on supplies to the hills from the Indian border due to the Terai protests, have played their part. Since the military, the Maoists, and most of the political parties had some role in the abuses that occurred during the civil war, India’s protective hand is presumed in ensuring that its favorites hold office. Such claims would dissipate were India, which played an important part in ending the decade-long Maoist conflict in 2006, to publicly press for conflict-related justice and accountability.

Bhutan’s fledgling steps toward democracy, many Bhutanese believe, were derailed by India, which is accused of weighing in to ensure the election of its preferred candidate. India stumbled in the Maldives too, failing to stand up for the basic rights of the political opposition. Promoting human rights in both places would not only have helped the citizens of these countries, it could have ended the mistrust.

India’s footprint was much more visible in Sri Lanka where Tamil Nadu politicians actively campaigned for the rights of Sri Lankan Tamils. Yet, India failed to condemn laws of war violations by both the Sri Lankan security forces and the rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the final months of the war in 2009, actively scuttling a rights-protecting intervention by the UN Human Rights Council. With the LTTE defeated, India did endorse Human Rights Council resolutions urging accountability, but both the Sinhalese and Tamils have reason to remain suspicious of India’s role.

When Prime Minister Modi invited regional heads of state to his government’s inauguration in 2014, there were hopes that he was signaling a shift in India’s relations with its neighbors.

Modi now needs to turn that sentiment into action by promoting respect for human rights abroad. Concerns over “Indian agencies” are not going to disappear on their own.

On August 9, 2017, the Indian minister of state for home affairs, Kiren Rijiju, told the parliament that “the government has issued detailed instructions for deportation of illegal foreign nationals including Rohingyas,” noting that there were around “40,000 Rohingyas living illegally in the country.”

“India has a long record of helping vulnerable populations fleeing from neighboring countries, including Sri Lankans, Afghans, and Tibetans,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director. “Indian authorities should abide by India’s international legal obligations and not forcibly return any Rohingya to Burma without first fairly evaluating their claims as refugees.”

About 16,500 Rohingya living in India are registered with the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR). The government contends that tens of thousands are unregistered. Minister Rijiju told Reuters news agency, “They [UNHCR] are doing it, we can't stop them from registering. But we are not signatory to the accord on refugees.” He added: “As far as we are concerned, they are all illegal immigrants. They have no basis to live here. Anybody who is an illegal migrant will be deported.”

Rijiju’s statement does not accurately reflect India’s obligations under international refugee law. While India is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, it is still bound by customary international law not to forcibly return any refugee to a place where they face a serious risk of persecution or threats to their life or freedom.

The Rohingya are largely living in the Indian states of Jammu and Kashmir, Telangana, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, and Rajasthan. Since 2016, Rohingya refugees in Jammu have been targeted by right-wing Hindu groups who have been calling for their eviction from the state, with some groups even threatening attacks if the government rejected their call.

In December 2016, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a group with links to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), demanded the eviction of Rohingya from Jammu, calling them a threat to security. Another group, the Jammu and Kashmir National Panthers Party, started a public campaign against the Rohingya, putting up billboards in the city calling on Rohingya and Bangladeshis to leave the state. In February 2017, a BJP member whose lawyer is the BJP spokesman in Jammu, filed a petition in the state high court seeking the Rohingya’s deportation, arguing that there had been a sharp increase in illegal migrants from Burma and Bangladesh.

The campaign by Hindu groups against the Rohingya in Jammu has prompted vigilante-style attacks against them. In April, unidentified assailants reportedly set on fire five huts housing Rohingya in Jammu. Four days earlier several Rohingya families living in the outskirts of Jammu alleged that unidentified people beat them up and set ablaze the scrap they collected to earn a livelihood.

Xenophobic statements by government officials about Rohingya could fuel further violence against them and Bengali-speaking Muslims.

Human Rights Watch has extensively documented the rampant and systemic violations against the ethnic Rohingya in Burma. The estimated 1.2 million Rohingya, most of whom live in Burma’s Rakhine State, have long been targets of government discrimination, facilitated by their effective denial of citizenship under the 1982 Citizenship Law. The Rohingya have faced longstanding rights abuses, including restrictions on movement, limitations on access to health care, livelihood, shelter, and education; as well as arbitrary arrests and detention, and forced labor.

An estimated 120,000 people, the vast majority Rohingya, are currently displaced in camps in Rakhine State as a result of violence in 2012 that amounted to crimes against humanity and “ethnic cleansing.” The displaced Rohingya live in squalid, prison-like conditions in these camps. An estimated 300,000 to 500,000 Rohingya are living in Bangladesh, where the vast majority have also been prevented from filing refugee claims. The Burmese government refuses to use the term “Rohingya,” with which the group self-identifies, but often uses the pejorative term “Bengali,” implying illegal migrant status in Burma.

Human Rights Watch has documented numerous abuses associated with recent military operations following attacks by alleged Rohingya militants in October 2016 in Rakhine State, including widespread arson, extrajudicial killings, systematic rape, and other forms of sexual violence. The United Nations estimates that more than 1,000 people were killed in the crackdown. A February report by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) concluded that the attacks against the Rohingya “very likely” amounted to “crimes against humanity.”

In March 2017, the UN Human Rights Council, of which India is a member, passed a resolution establishing an independent international fact-finding mission with a mandate to investigate allegations of recent human rights abuses in Burma, especially in Rakhine State. The government has stated its intention to deny the mission access to the country.

Due to Burma’s discriminatory citizenship policies, it refuses to cooperate in the repatriation of Rohingya, itself a denial of the human right of any person to return to their country.

India has in the past called upon Burma to address the issues around the Rohingya and to ensure their protection. Minister Rijiju has stated that deportations will occur only in consultation with the authorities in Bangladesh and Burma.

“Without the willingness or capacity to evaluate refugee claims, the Indian government should put an end to any plans to deport the Rohingya, and instead register them so that they can get an education and health care and find work,” Ganguly said. “Most of the Rohingya were forced to flee egregious abuse, and India should show leadership by protecting the beleaguered community and calling on the Burmese government to end the repression and atrocities causing these people to leave.”

Expand

The Burmese military’s abusive campaign against the Rohingya population was sparked by an August 25, 2017 attack by militants belonging to the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), which targeted about 30 police posts and an army base. In addition to the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, tens of thousands remain displaced within Burma. Another nearly 12,000 people, mainly ethnic Rakhine and other non-Muslims, are also displaced in Rakhine State.

“The humanitarian catastrophe that Burma’s security forces have created in Rakhine State has been multiplied by the authorities’ unwillingness to provide access to humanitarian agencies,” said Philippe Bolopion, deputy director for global advocacy at Human Rights Watch. “The United Nations, ASEAN, and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation need to ramp up the pressure on Burma and provide more assistance to Bangladesh to promptly help Rohingya and other displaced people.”

Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh told Human Rights Watch that Burmese government security forces had carried out armed attacks on villagers, inflicting bullet and shrapnel injuries, and burned down their homes. The killings, shelling, and arson in Rohingya villages have all the hallmarks of a campaign of “ethnic cleansing.” 

International aid activities in much of Rakhine State have been suspended, leaving approximately 250,000 people without food, medical care, and other vital humanitarian assistance. Refugees told Human Rights Watch that while many people from Maungdaw Township could escape to Bangladesh, tens of thousands of displaced Rohingya are still hiding in the areas surrounding Rathedaung and Buthidaung Townships.

The Rohingya in Burma

Expand

For decades, the Burmese government has considered the Rohingya, most of whom live in northern Rakhine State, to be foreign nationals from Bangladesh. Just over 1 million Rohingya live in Burma, and they make up a large portion of the country’s relatively small Muslim population. The Rohingya have long faced systematic discrimination in Burma based on their exclusion from citizenship under the 1982 Citizenship Law. As a result, the Rohingya are one of the largest stateless populations in the world.

Since the Rohingya lack citizenship, Burmese police and border guards, and local officials, systematically subject them to a barrage of rights-abusing restrictions. Government laws, policies, and practices prevent Rohingya from freedom of movement to leave their villages; restrict their right to livelihoods; interfere with their privacy rights to marry and have children; and obstruct them from access to basic health services and education.

Even before the recent violence, “[f]ood security indicators and child malnutrition rates in Maungdaw [Township] were already above emergency thresholds,” said the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Burma. As a result of official restrictions and recurrent military operations against Rohingya communities causing massive displacement, those now affected have been highly dependent on food and other aid distributed by UN agencies and international nongovernmental organizations.

Hostility against aid agencies has grown following government accusations that international aid workers supported the Rohingya militants because some high-energy biscuits distributed by the World Food Program were found in an alleged militant camp in July 2017. Some supply warehouses of international aid groups were reported looted in September, while national and international staff of the UN and international nongovernmental organizations have faced intimidation, according to the European Commission’s Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations.

The Rohingya in Bangladesh

About 34,000 officially registered Rohingya refugees are in Bangladesh, plus an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 who are unregistered. Another approximately 87,000 people arrived after fleeing military attacks in Rakhine State from October 2016 to March 2017, following ARSA attacks in October. After the state crackdown following the August 2017 ARSA attack, aid workers in Bangladesh think the number of new arrivals will swell to over 300,000.

During the current crisis, Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) officials have informally allowed Rohingya into the country. The officials told Human Rights Watch that their primary focus was helping those entering Bangladesh from the no-man’s land area, assisting people with emergency rations, providing medical care, and assisting with sanitation and water needs. They said they were unable to provide assistance to those entering Bangladesh from the many unmonitored points of entry.

Crossing the Naf River during the monsoon is dangerous, and according to border guard officials and other sources, more than two dozen people have drowned trying to cross the border. Those who make it across can only huddle in makeshift tents to seek shelter from the constant downpour of monsoon rains. Hospitals are operating well beyond capacity, and health officials say they fear disease outbreaks as a result of overcrowding and poor sanitation.

A 17-year-old Rohingya refugee in a hospital in Bangladesh with a bullet wound to his arm told Human Rights Watch that he had no idea what will happen to him after he is discharged. He said he had “no family, no friends, no contacts, and no money in Bangladesh.” Border guard officers said that they had already encountered many such cases of unaccompanied children lost in the confusion of flight.

Some Bangladeshi officials have said that the Rohingya refugees are not welcome, noting the severe monsoon flooding in many parts of the country. Since 2016, authorities have proposed to relocate undocumented Rohingya residing in Bangladesh to an uninhabitable atoll in the Bay of Bengal.

Bangladesh has rebuffed international assistance in the past, out of fear that it might serve as a pull factor for Rohingya refugees. However, as is evident from thousands pouring in every day despite the lack of adequate food and shelter, people escape to save their lives. As far as Human Rights Watch is able to determine, the government has largely abstained from pushing back those fleeing Burma. However, the lack of sufficient international support for Bangladesh has contributed to appalling conditions in the border areas.

“The humanitarian situations in Burma and Bangladesh will continue to deteriorate so long as Burmese security forces are carrying out mass atrocities in Rakhine State,” Bolopion said. “The UN Security Council should publicly hold an emergency meeting and demand that the Burmese authorities stop the violence against the Rohingya population and allow aid to flow in, or face sanctions.”

Expand

While in Bangladesh to monitor the seemingly endless stream of Rohingya refugees crossing the border from Myanmar, I heard many comparisons.

Colleagues I worked with in the former Yugoslavia likened the scenes to Srebrenica, to Sarajevo, to Kosovo.

Another colleague said the scenes evoked stories her parents told of their family’s flight from Laos to Thailand. Others spoke of the crammed boats in the Mediterranean these past two years.

But what resonated most came from Bangladeshis themselves.

“This is 1971 all over again,” several told me. “We have a moral obligation.”

The reference of course is to Bangladesh’s war for independence in 1971, when millions became refugees in India. Photographs from that time show scenes similar to those I witnessed last week: Men carrying the elderly in makeshift hammocks suspended from bamboo poles; infants in baskets used by farmers to sell vegetables.

Of course, now, young boys were also charged with carrying the family’s most precious load: A solar panel.

It was heartening to see the enormous generosity extended by Bangladeshis to the “new arrivals,” as the latest group of Rohingya refugees are called.

Over a quarter of a million have poured in since the August 25 militant attack on Myanmar police outposts, and the subsequent Myanmar military campaign against the Rohingya population that has been widely condemned as “ethnic cleansing.”

Local families, even those with very little, gave what they could. Several told me that on the Muslim holiday of Eid-ul-Azha they had shared their sacrificial animal with the refugees.

Bangladesh is already hosting an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 long-term Rohingya refugees from Myanmar.

The new arrivals create an unprecedented strain on already limited resources.

Bangladeshi authorities have, by and large, not pushed the new arrivals back into Myanmar, respecting international legal prohibitions against returning people to a place where their lives or freedom are at risk.

This is not just about laws, though, but also basic humanity. As one senior Bangladeshi military official said to me: “I am a military man, but I am also a human being.”

In the past, Bangladesh has permitted refugees to endure poor humanitarian conditions for fear of creating what they describe as a “pull-factor” for other refugees, encouraging more people to come.

Many long-term refugees live in unofficial camps, strewn across hillsides all along the border. The new arrivals are doing the same. An empty hillside I passed one day was completely overtaken with tarpaulin tents the next.

Bangladesh should not be left alone to solve this humanitarian crisis. International pressure is urgently needed to compel Myanmar to end its abuses, but this will need to go hand-in-hand with greatly increased humanitarian assistance for the Rohingya in Bangladesh, as well as those still inside Myanmar.

Bangladesh’s recurring plans to relocate the Rohingya to uninhabitable islands off its coast should be dropped. Enduring obstacles to access to humanitarian aid should end.

While many Bangladeshis may feel that helping the Rohingya is what they owe to the memory of 1971, for the Bangladeshi government, helping the Rohingya is the job of a responsible world nation.

Expand

A fire in Ideal Textile Mills in Bangladesh killed at least six workers this week, reportedly after sparks from welding set ablaze inflammable chemicals stored close by.

Soon, the blame game will begin. Perhaps there’ll be a government-ordered inquiry. Maybe someone will be sent to jail. Then it will be business as usual, and the six workers will join a growing list of those who died in factory tragedies there.

Earlier this year, the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, a legally binding agreement between clothing brands and unions, was renewed. The accord covers more than 1,600 garment factories. Under the revised agreement, the accord steering committee can opt in textile mills. This means the mills could also be subject to fire and building safety inspections, and management and workers could be trained on safety measures.

Instead of rallying around the Bangladesh Accord, the Bangladesh government has protested its extension. Unhelpfully, the government also announced it will begin a “new” initiative on fire and building safety.

The Bangladesh government authorities already inspect about 1,550 garment factories not covered by the accord or the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety (another fire and building safety initiative led by American brands). In addition, government authorities inspect factories in sectors not covered by the accord or alliance, including textiles.

Over the past few years, the accord brands cut ties with 76 garment factories that failed to make their buildings safer. Similarly, the alliance brands terminated business with 158 garment factories. These factories are now the responsibility of government inspectors.

How have these terminated factories fared? Has the government ensured that the factories took steps to make the workplaces safer? Were any of these factories closed down as unsafe?

Who knows. In 2017, Human Rights Watch spoke with workers from four terminated factories. They had no knowledge about whether the government had inspected their factory and declared it safe. As one worker said, “We came to know it [the factory is not safe] only from some staff. We also asked the owner about it once. He only said that everything will be fine. ... We used to see fire drills here on the first Thursday of every month. But we haven’t seen this in the last three months – I don’t know why… I get worried when I think that our factory building is unsafe. But still I have to continue the job because I need it.”

If the government wants to be considered a credible labor inspectorate, it should at least publish reports on how factories terminated from the Accord and Alliance are faring. It’s not just an investment in transparency. It’s also a strategic investment in business.

Expand

World leaders meeting at the United Nations in New York this week will address the Myanmar government's ethnic cleansing campaign against its Rohingya population. Meanwhile, Thailand's military junta has announced a policy designed to push back desperate Rohingya seeking to escape the atrocities in Myanmar's Rakhine state, and deny them access to refugee protection.

On Aug 25 the militant Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army attacked 30 police outposts and an army base. In response, the Myanmar military carried out mass arson, killing and looting, destroying hundreds of villages and forcing nearly half a million Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh. The United Nations called it "a textbook example of ethnic cleansing".

Rather than sympathy and support for those at risk, Thailand is preparing to respond with the back of its hand. The Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc), chaired by Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha, announced authorities will enforce a three-step action plan.

First, the navy will intercept Rohingya boats that come too close to the Thai coast. Then, upon intercepting such boats, officials will provide fuel, food, water, and other supplies on the condition the occupants agree to travel onward to Malaysia or Indonesia. Lastly, any boat that somehow manages to land on Thai shores will be seized, and immigration officials will apprehend and put Rohingya men, women and children in indefinite detention.

These inhumane measures were announced shortly after the meeting between Snr Gen Min Aung Hlaing, Myanmar's army chief, responsible for the military operations against the Rohingya, and Thailand's junta leaders on Aug 31. In the past four weeks, over 420,000 Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh, and satellite imagery and heat sensors analysed by Human Rights Watch have shown more than 228 villages burned to the ground in northern Rakhine state. Those refugees are joining more than 300,000 Rohingya already in Bangladesh because of repression and abuses.

Thailand knows well that successive Myanmar governments have persecuted the Rohingya. Myanmar civilian and military officials have regularly imposed severe restrictions on the Rohingya's freedom of movement, assembly, and association. They have also levied demands for forced labour, engaged in religious persecution, and confiscated their land and resources. Despite the Rohingya having been in the country for generations, Myanmar's 1982 Citizenship Law effectively denies Rohingya citizenship, leaving them stateless. Even their right to self-identify as Rohingya is denied by a government that calls them "Bengali" and deems them immigrants from Bangladesh.

Many Thais can recall when the Thai-Malaysian border camps of human traffickers were broken up in May 2015, revealing many Rohingya had died from starvation and disease. Survivors told of a terrifying ordeal in the hands of traffickers. Still, given the lack of security and primitive camp conditions in Bangladesh, many Rohingya are expected to travel by sea starting next month, when weather conditions on the Andean Sea improve, and try to pass through Thailand to seek sanctuary in Malaysia and Indonesia.

Thai authorities have for years said they do not want to accept Rohingya refugees. However, under international law, Thailand cannot summarily reject at the border the claims of asylum seekers fleeing widespread human rights abuses or generalised violence. Thailand is obligated to allow them to enter the country and seek protection.

Thailand should help the oppressed Rohingya from Myanmar, not worsen their plight. The inhumane "push-back" policy planned for new boat arrivals should be scrapped immediately. Instead, Thailand should take the lead in efforts to set up a regional preparedness mechanism that will support search and rescue operations to help Rohingya boats at sea.

Thailand should also grant the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) unhindered access to screen all Rohingya arriving in Thailand, and permit them to identify and assist those seeking refugee status. As the UNHCR guidelines state that detention should not be used as a punitive measure or as a means of discouraging refugees from applying for asylum, Thai authorities should work closely with the United Nations refugee agency and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) to provide temporary shelters for Rohingya before they are resettled in third countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia. In this regard, it is critical for other governments to provide necessary assistance to Thailand.

One way for Thailand to help stem the flow of new arrivals would be to pressure Myanmar to stop the atrocities from which the Rohingya are fleeing. However, successive Thai governments have failed to speak up for the rights of the Rohingya, or the situation in Rakhine state. By continuing to turn a blind eye to the plight of Rohingya, Thailand's reputation will be at risk, and the government will face a continued exodus by desperate Rohingya. Thailand needs to act fast if it wants to play a leadership role in a regional solution to save lives of Rohingya facing ethnic cleansing in Burma.

When Bangladesh’s prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, spoke at the United Nations General Assembly this week, she focused on the humanitarian challenges of hosting 400,000 Rohingya Muslims from northern Rakhine State in Burma. They have arrived destitute, victims of a state-led campaign of ethnic cleansing that began after Rohingya militants attacked some 30 police outposts on August 25.

Expand

The situation of the Rohingya refugees is dire: they live in squalid conditions, crammed into a staggering sprawl of rudimentary shelters of sticks and tarps. Many lack food, medical services, and toilets. The rainy season makes everything worse.

The Bangladesh government is seeking answers on dealing with the influx. In her speech, Sheikh Hasina offered to create “safe zones” inside Burma where Rohingya refugees could return. Few details of this proposal have emerged, other than that the UN would supervise these areas.

It’s not clear whether those governments intending to assist the refugees would support this, but first a word of caution. “Safe zones” rarely if ever live up to their name, even with UN peacekeepers on patrol. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, the safe area of Srebrenica, protected by UN peacekeepers, was overrun by Bosnian Serb forces who promptly executed some 7,000 men and boys, and raped women and girls. In Sri Lanka, government-declared safe zones became kill zones: the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam refused to let civilians leave and the military shelled the areas, killing countless civilians.

And even if such zones aren’t attacked, without effective humanitarian aid supplies and freedom of movement for those inside, conditions within “safe zones” could be as bad, if not worse, than in refugee camps across the border.

Human Rights Watch has previously laid out its numerous concerns for governments and organizations when considering creating “safe zones.” Given the Burmese military’s brutal and unrelenting campaign against the Rohingya, no one should be under any illusion that it will allow a “safe zone” to actually be safe.

Expand

(New York) – Burmese security forces are committing crimes against humanity against the Rohingya population in Burma, Human Rights Watch said today. The military has committed forced deportation, murder, rape, and persecution against Rohingya Muslims in northern Rakhine State, resulting in countless deaths and mass displacement.

The United Nations Security Council and concerned countries should urgently impose targeted sanctions and an arms embargo on the Burmese military to stop further crimes against humanity, Human Rights Watch said. The Security Council should demand that Burma allow aid agencies access to people in need, permit entry to a UN fact-finding mission to investigate abuses, and ensure the safe and voluntary return of those displaced. The council should also discuss measures to bring those responsible for crimes against humanity to justice, including before the International Criminal Court.

“The Burmese military is brutally expelling the Rohingya from northern Rakhine State,” said James Ross, legal and policy director at Human Rights Watch. “The massacres of villagers and mass arson driving people from their homes are all crimes against humanity.”

Crimes against humanity are defined under international law as specified criminal acts “committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack.” Burmese military attacks on the Rohingya have been widespread and systematic. Statements by Burmese military and government officials have indicated an intent to attack this population, Human Rights Watch said.

Crimes against humanity are crimes that fall within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in The Hague and are crimes of universal jurisdiction, meaning they may be prosecuted before national courts in countries outside of Burma, even though neither victim nor perpetrator is a national of that country.

Research by Human Rights Watch in the area supported by analysis of satellite imagery has found crimes of deportation and forced population transfers, murder and attempted murder, rape and other sexual assault, and persecution. “Persecution” is defined as “the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity.” The abuses being committed also amount to ethnic cleansing, a term not defined under international law.

Since August 25, 2017, when the armed group the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) attacked about 30 police outposts in northern Rakhine State, Burmese security forces have carried out mass arson, killing, rape, and looting, destroying hundreds of villages and forcing more than 400,000 Rohingya to flee to neighboring Bangladesh. Human Rights Watch has, since 2012, found that the Burmese government has committed crimes against humanity against the Rohingya population in Rakhine State.

“Attaching a legal label to the ghastly crimes being committed by the Burmese military against Rohingya families may seem inconsequential,” Ross said. “But global recognition that crimes against humanity are taking place should stir the UN and concerned governments to action against the Burmese military to bring these crimes to an end.”

COX’S BAZAR, Bangladesh – In Bangladesh’s overflowing and squalid camps for the hundreds of thousands of Rohingya fleeing the Burmese army’s campaign of ethnic cleansing, I met three remarkable women who told me their stories of horror and survival in the village of Tu Lar To Li.

Rashida, 25, spoke so softly that she was often hard to hear because Burmese soldiers had cut her throat and left her for dead in a burning house. (I refer to Rashida and others mentioned in this article solely by their first names in order to ensure their security.)

She said the soldiers trapped her and fellow villagers at the river’s edge, separated men from women and children, and made the women and children stand in waist-deep water as the soldiers gunned down their husbands, fathers and brothers. The river that runs alongside Rashida’s village — the villagers’ only hope for an escape route from gunfire pouring in on them from security forces — was too deep to cross.

Then, as some soldiers collected and burned the men’s bodies, others began taking away the women and children in small groups.

Four soldiers took Rashida and four other women to a house. Rashida said that at the house, a soldier grabbed her 28-day-old baby, Mohammed Eukhan, from her arms and smashed him on the floor, killing him instantly. Two other women’s young infants were killed in the same way. The soldiers then began slashing at the terrified women with knives and machetes, and cut their throats.

Rashida woke up in a burning, locked house, and the first thing she saw was her dead baby next to her. She managed to crawl through a burning bamboo wall and escaped. She was the only survivor from the group of five women and their children. Satellite imagery analyzed by Human Rights Watch shows the entire village razed by fire.

Human Rights Watch has since 2012 found that the Burmese government has committed crimes against humanity against the Rohingya population in Rakhine State. Since Aug. 25, when an armed group calling itself the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army attacked about 30 police outposts in northern Rakhine State, Burmese security forces have carried out mass arson, killing, rape and looting, destroying hundreds of villages and forcing more than 400,000 Rohingya to flee to neighboring Bangladesh. Given the scale and overall context of these latest atrocities, together with evidence of intent on the part of the Burmese military, Human Rights Watch believes that these more recent crimes also constitute crimes against humanity. The fact that the powerful military is behind these acts means that there is almost no chance that the government will bring key perpetrators to justice.

Two days before I spoke with Rashida, I had met Hassina, 20, and her sister-in-law Asma, 18, who had been with the same group during the massacre. They had also witnessed the killing of the men as they were forced to stand in the water and had suffered similar horrors.

Rohingya Crisis

Human Rights Watch reporting from the ground on the Burmese military’s ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing.

Live Updates

Hassina said that while the soldiers were burning the bodies of the men they had killed, one of them noticed that she was trying to hide her year-old daughter, Sohaifa, under her robes. The soldier came over and ripped Sohaifa from Rashida’s arms, and tossed the infant alive on the fire burning the men’s bodies.

Hours later, the soldiers took Hassina, Asma, Hassina’s mother-in-law, Fatima, 35, and three of Fatima’s young children to a nearby house. They tried to rape the women, knifing Fatima to death when she resisted, and then beating Hassina and Asma unconscious. The three children were beaten to death with spades, Hassina and Asma said.

When Hassina and Asma regained consciousness, they found themselves in a burning, locked house. They managed to escape the flames, but with serious burns. Asma showed me the big gash on the back of her head from when she had been beaten unconscious. A doctor had stitched it up.

Such graphic accounts of the horrors unfolding in Burma seem too terrible to be true, but these are what Human Rights Watch researchers are hearing day after day, and they are too consistent and credible to be dismissed as fabrications or exaggerations.

Let there be no doubt: The Burmese army is engaged in horrific atrocities in its ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Rohingya. When soldiers shoot men in their custody, hack women and children to death, and burn their homes, the world needs to pay attention and act together to stop these crimes.

And although the surging river waters near Tu Lar To Li may wash away the blood and ashes of the people brutally killed and burned by the army, the nations of the world should not ignore these crimes. The U.N. Security Council and concerned governments need to take immediate action by imposing an arms embargo and targeted sanctions on military leaders and pursue all avenues to hold those responsible to account. More specifically, the council should refer the situation in Burma to the International Criminal Court. Victims such as Rashida, Hassina and Asma, who have lost almost everything, at least deserve justice.

Expand

During a recent visit to Bangladesh to revisit my years there as a student, a colleague suggested I meet Sultana Kamal, much admired for decades of work on justice as a human rights defender.

But Kamal was not making many public appearances, because of threats from militants.

The story that emerged is a tale of authorities who, while attempting to appease some hardline religious groups, ended up compromising basic human rights principles.

In May, prime minister Sheikh Hasina’s government, which has long claimed a commitment to secularism, caved to the extremist group Hefazat-e Islami’s demands to remove a statue representing “Lady Justice” in front of the Supreme Court in Dhaka because it was deemed to be an un-Islamic religious object.

On May 28, Kamal argued during a television debate that by this logic no mosques should be permitted on the court premises. That prompted the Hefazat spokesman to call for Kamal’s arrest, and threaten that if she came out on the streets they “would break every bone in her body.” Kamal has said that after the threat was made, abusive postings appeared on Facebook, including doctored images of her being lynched.

While Kamal has since received police protection, the government has yet to publicly condemn the threats. On June 18, a lawyer served legal notice seeking her arrest “for hurting religious sentiments of the Muslim majority in the country;” however, Kamal has not been arrested.

These threats and claims of hurt sentiments are not new. They follow several lethal attacks by extremist groups on bloggers and activists for promoting secularism. Rather than condemn the attacks and arrest those responsible, officials responded by warning that “hurting religious sentiments is a crime.”

All this is happening against a background of increasing attacks on free speech by the state. Over the past two years, the government has cracked down on media and civil society.

The authorities restored “Lady Justice” to another part of the Supreme Court complex. But Bangladesh is on a dangerous course. The government needs to do much more to protect rights activists like Kamal and promote an environment where they can carry out their work free from threats and attacks. Appeasing religious extremists and silencing dissent will only lead to more violence.

Expand

The BJP-led government took office with a commitment to earn global respect. However, it has stumbled after one of the biggest challenges the world is facing today: Ethnic cleansing in Myanmar. Half a million desperate Rohingyas have fled to Bangladesh to escape atrocities, joining several hundred thousand who had escaped previous abuses and government repression.

India needs to act with deft diplomacy, bolstering democracy in Myanmar by holding an abusive military to account. During a visit by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Myanmar soon after the crisis erupted, the official statement agreed that “terrorism violates human rights.” But it ignored the violations by the military under commander-in-chief Sr. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing. India should instead be seriously evaluating any exports to the Burmese army and should publicly say that no commander implicated in mass killings is welcome to visit Bodh Gaya or the land of Buddha.

Instead, in its efforts to coddle supporters in India with rhetoric around security, illegal immigrants and Muslims, the NDA has managed to draw international condemnation by threatening to deport 40,000 Rohingya refugees – a tiny fraction of the over a million now homeless in the region.

What is worse, playing to its domestic audience has muted India’s voice when one of its closest neighbours, Bangladesh, needs robust support. This is particularly shameful because Bangladeshis, many born long after the country’s independence in 1971, say that they will eat less to share their food with the Rohingya, and describe with gratitude India’s massive humanitarian response in protecting refugees escaping a brutal Pakistan military.

India needs to step up to the plate if it really wants the global leadership role that it claims for itself. It should call upon the Myanmar authorities to end the ethnic cleansing campaign, course-correct to protect the right of Rohingya refugees to safe return, and call for soldiers and officers responsible for executions, rape, looting and arson to be held to account.

India should provide generous and immediate humanitarian assistance to Bangladesh, including medical aid, to help cope with the refugee influx. And the government should stop engaging in ethnic and religious profiling by suggesting that the entire Rohingya population is a security risk. That is what Myanmar is doing. Other countries are beginning to respond to the Rohingya crisis – India undermines its global credibility by failing to do so.

Expand

1.       Members of the Rohingya ethnic group who have fled from Burma to Bangladesh are refugees and should be recognized as such. They are entitled to all rights that attach to refugee status.

More than 600,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled from Burma to Bangladesh since August 25, 2017. Counting previous flights of Rohingya refugees, including after the 2012 and 2016 violence in Rakhine State, the number of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh could reach one million.  

Not only those who fled the recent Burmese military campaign of ethnic cleansing, but Rohingya who have fled previous government crackdowns, were either directly forced to leave their homes amid killings and other assaults and destruction of their property or felt compelled to leave their homes and country to avoid persecution, including threats to their lives, physical abuse, destruction of their homes, and other severe human rights abuses. The existence of economic or personal motives does not forfeit a refugee’s claim to protection based on well-founded fears of being persecuted.

Based on the objective circumstances in Burma that have given rise to this and previous exoduses, the Rohingya who have fled Burma should be regarded presumptively as refugees unless evidence proves an individual was wrongly recognized or is excluded from refugee status under the provisions of international refugee law.   

2.      Donor governments and intergovernmental organizations should urgently provide generous support to meet the humanitarian needs of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, and internally displaced people (IDPs) of all ethnicities remaining in Burma. Humanitarian assistance should be provided based on principles of impartiality and nondiscrimination, and in consultation with the affected populations.

During the latest Rohingya crisis, Bangladesh has been generous in providing sanctuary for Rohingya facing persecution in Burma. Ordinary Bangladeshis, despite widespread poverty and the huge challenge of monsoon floods, have responded with enormous kindness. For example, despite substantial recent inflation in the cost of rice, large numbers of Bangladeshis have contributed rice for Rohingya relief.

Without prejudice to the compelling needs in many other refugee and IDP situations worldwide, donors should urgently provide generous support to meet the humanitarian needs of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh and IDPs inside Burma. Humanitarian assistance should be provided based on principles of impartiality and nondiscrimination, as articulated in the Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response (Sphere standards). All affected populations, including members of the local host communities, should be consulted to ensure assistance best meets their needs, particularly vulnerable and socially excluded people, and should be engaged to help provide such assistance.

Donors should also provide necessary bilateral support for Bangladesh, not only to allow refugees in Bangladesh to live in safety and dignity but also to ensure the Bangladeshi government keeps its borders open to asylum seekers and to respect the rights of refugees to freedom of movement and to education, health, work, and other social and economic rights.

Humanitarian assistance should incorporate protection measures, targeted services, and staff training to meet the particular needs of refugees and IDPs with special needs, such as unaccompanied children, families traveling with young children, victims of human trafficking, people who have suffered or are at risk of gender-based violence (forced marriage, domestic abuse, etc.), women traveling on their own and female heads of household, pregnant and lactating mothers, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, and persons with disabilities.

The Burmese military’s ethnic cleansing campaign against the Rohingya since late August involved widespread sexual violence. The Bangladeshi government, with the help of international partners, should create outreach programs to the Rohingya community to reduce stigma around sexual violence and inform the refugee population about available, free, and confidential medical and mental health services, including for post-rape care, and to create more accessible women-friendly spaces to help women and girls access medical services. Given the long-term impact of rape and sexual violence on health, the government and partners should prepare to provide long-term post-rape healthcare and psychosocial services. The Bangladeshi government should also support efforts to ensure accountability for sexual violence crimes by, for example, introducing protocols for clinics and other medical facilities to certify their treatment of rape survivors. 

3.      Bangladesh should keep its border open to asylum seekers.

This principle stems from article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which articulates the right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution in other countries, and from United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Executive Conclusion No. 22 (1981) on the Protection of Asylum-Seekers in Situations of Large-Scale Influx.  In such situations, the UNHCR conclusion states that asylum seekers “should be admitted to the State in which they first seek refuge and if that State is unable to admit them on a durable basis, it should always admit them at least on a temporary basis.”

4.      Bangladesh should fully respect the principle of nonrefoulement for refugees on its territory and at its border.

Bangladesh is a state party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the “Convention against Torture”). Although Bangladesh is not a party to the UN Refugee Convention, that convention’s protections for refugees are regarded as customary international law and binding on all states. Bangladesh is thus bound by both its treaty obligations and customary international law’s prohibition on refoulement not to forcibly return anyone to a place where they would face a threat to life or a real risk of persecution, torture or other ill-treatment. The principle of nonrefoulement prohibits a government forcing a person back to face these dangers in “any manner whatsoever.” This includes situations in which governments put so much direct or indirect pressure on individuals that they have little or no option but to return to a country where they face serious risk of harm. UNHCR Executive Conclusion No. 22 provides that “[i]n all cases the fundamental principle of non-refoulement including non-rejection at the frontier must be scrupulously observed.”

Article 3(1) of the Convention against Torture establishes a legal obligation on Bangladesh not to “expel, return (‘refouler’) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.” Field research by the UN, nongovernmental organizations, including Human Rights Watch, and the media has established the use of torture and other ill-treatment by Burma’s security forces against the Rohingya. Article 3(2) adds that “For the purposes of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.” Such a pattern is present in Burma. 

Although in the past Bangladeshi authorities have often pushed asylum seekers traveling by boat back out to sea, during the current crisis they have generally respected the principle of nonrefoulement and non-rejection at the border.

5.      Burma should fully respect refugees’ right to return.

The Burmese government is obligated to respect the Rohingya’s right to return. Respecting this right means ensuring that claims to return are resolved fairly and that individuals are permitted freely and, in an informed manner, to choose whether to exercise it. All returns must also proceed in a fair, safe, and orderly manner. Governments and intergovernmental organizations should press the Burmese government to ensure that the right to return is fully respected.

Although Burma is not a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states in article 12(4) that no one should be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter their own country, the principle is regarded as a customary norm of international law.

The right to return is not by itself a sufficient condition for the promotion of voluntary repatriation as a durable solution for Rohingya refugees. Voluntary repatriation in safety and dignity will be feasible only if Burma is willing and able to ensure full respect for returnees' human rights, equal access to nationality, and security among communities in Rakhine State.

Many refugees have told Human Rights Watch that they want to return home, but none interviewed believe it was safe in present circumstances or that it will be for the foreseeable future.  

6.      Refugee return must be voluntary, based on a free, informed, individual choice, in safety and dignity.

Refugees and displaced persons should be provided with complete, objective, up-to-date and accurate information about conditions in prospective areas of return, including security conditions, and availability of assistance and protection to reintegrate in Burma. There needs to be a genuine choice between staying or returning.

If in the future the Bangladeshi government does not provide a real choice or uses coercive measures, such as reducing essential services to refugees, not providing them a legal status, or subjecting them to other restrictions of their basic rights, or if humanitarian assistance is insufficient to meet basic needs, the choice to leave may not be considered an act of free will.

7.       Refugees and IDPs have the right to return to their homes or places of habitual residence, and for redress for their losses, including their lands and properties.

Refugees and IDPs who were arbitrarily or unlawfully deprived of their former homes, lands, properties or places of habitual residence have the right to return to their place of residence or of choice and the return of their property. Those unable or unwilling to return to their homes have the right to choose compensation from the government for the loss of all their homes and properties. These rights are articulated in the UN Pinheiro Principles regarding “Housing and property restitution in the context of the return of refugees and internally displaced persons.” These principles state that, “All refugees and displaced persons have the right to have restored to them any housing, land and/or property of which they were arbitrarily or unlawfully deprived, or to be compensated for any housing, land and/or property that is factually impossible to restore as determined by an independent, impartial tribunal.” Refugees and IDPs who have been arbitrarily or unlawfully deprived of their liberty, livelihoods, citizenship, family life, and identity also have the right of restitution.

8.      Bangladesh should continue and complete refugee registration.

Completing individual, biometric registration of refugees as quickly as possible after they cross the national border is vital for establishing identity and protecting rights, including preventing arbitrary arrests and refoulement, avoiding family separation, identifying extremely vulnerable individuals, enabling the fair distribution of food and humanitarian assistance, and providing for durable solutions. In accordance with UNHCR ExCom Conclusion No. 91 (2001), registration should be confidential and individual and fully respect the dignity of refugees. The confidentiality of their personal information should be strictly protected.

To date, the Bangladesh government has completed biometric registration of over 300,000 refugees. International aid agencies have been registering refugees by households to enable the targeted delivery of humanitarian assistance and to ensure protection issues are identified.  

9.      Refugee camps are not sustainable and the protracted housing of refugees in camps should be avoided.

While refugee camps may be necessary for providing assistance during a refugee emergency, they do not constitute a sustainable model for protracted refugee situations. The Bangladeshi government and its humanitarian partners should regard refugee camps as a temporary expedient during the Rohingya crisis and should transition as soon as practically possible to accommodations that are conducive to free movement and that promote dignified self-sufficiency.

Construction of a large refugee camp has been underway in the Cox’s Bazar district of Bangladesh and Bangladeshi officials have said they plan to surround camps with barbed wire. Bangladeshi authorities have previously suggested that Rohingya refugees could be relocated from the Cox’s Bazar area to Thengar Char island, an uninhabited, undeveloped coastal island that is highly susceptible to flooding. This would deprive refugees of their rights to freedom of movement, livelihood, food, and education, in violation of Bangladesh’s obligations under international human rights law.

10.   IDP camps and “safe zones” in Burma are not an acceptable solution for returnees.

The Burmese government has indicated that Rohingya who wish to return to the country should live in IDP camps. As with the internment of Rohingya IDPs after the 2012 anti-Rohingya violence in Rakhine State, any such camps would invariably limit basic rights, segregate returning Rohingya refugees and IDPs from other Burmese, and exacerbate ethnic and religious discrimination. Moving returning refugees to camps or designated zones would restrict their movements, reduce returnees’ ability to reconstruct their homes, work their land, regain livelihoods, and reintegrate into Burmese society. Such camps also run the risk of overcrowding, poor sanitation, increased illness, and creating dependency on aid.

Establishing “safe zones” on the Burmese side of the border, as proposed by the Bangladeshi government, would likely be used as a pretext for the forced return of refugees and would infringe on the right to seek asylum by effectively preventing further flight from northern Rakhine State.

Many of the principles and concerns Human Rights Watch has voiced with respect to “safe zones” in Syria and other countries apply to Burma.

Expand

Since late August 2017, more than 600,000 Rohingya refugees have fled to Bangladesh while hundreds of thousands of internally displaced people remain in Burma’s Rakhine State. Rohingya refugees have the right to return to their homes in Burma, but all returns must be voluntary and safe with full respect for returnees’ human rights. World leaders need to press Burma to end its abusive operations, prevent future atrocities, and create the conditions necessary for Rohingya to choose to return home in safety and dignity, Human Rights Watch said.

“The Rohingya crisis is of gargantuan proportions and needs to be treated with utmost urgency,” said Bill Frelick, refugee rights director at Human Rights Watch. “Leaders at the upcoming APEC and ASEAN summits should be putting the rights of the Rohingya at the top of their agenda.”

The “Ten Principles” are intended to guide governments and humanitarian agencies as they address the Rohingya refugee crisis. They include an urgent call on donor governments to provide generous support to meet the humanitarian needs of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh and internally displaced people of all ethnicities remaining in Burma.

The Bangladeshi government should keep its border open to asylum seekers and not coerce returns, respecting the principle of nonrefoulment, which prohibits the return of refugees to places where they would be persecuted or face a real risk of torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Many refugees have told Human Rights Watch that they want to return home, but none interviewed believe it’s safe now or will be for the foreseeable future.

Refugee camps in Bangladesh are not a sustainable solution, Human Rights Watch said. The Bangladeshi government and its humanitarian partners should regard refugee camps as a temporary fix during this crisis and should transition as soon as practically possible to accommodations that are conducive to free movement and that promote dignified self-sufficiency.

Expand

“The Bangladeshi government has responded generously to the current crisis, keeping its borders open to Rohingya fleeing Burma,” Frelick said. “But close monitoring is needed to ensure that Bangladesh keeps its borders open to asylum seekers while respecting the rights of refugees to education, health, and work.”

The Burmese government has indicated that Rohingya who wish to return to the country should live in camps for internally displaced people. Camps for displaced people and “safe zones” in Burma are not an acceptable solution for returnees, Human Rights Watch said. Refugees and internally displaced people who were arbitrarily or unlawfully deprived of their former homes, lands, properties, or places of habitual residence have the right to return to their place of residence or choice, and the to the return of their property. Burma should respect the right of those who are unable or unwilling to return to their homes to choose compensation for the loss of their homes and properties.

As with the internment of Rohingya internally displaced people after the 2012 anti-Rohingya violence in Rakhine State, any such camps would invariably limit basic rights, segregate returning Rohingya refugees and internally displaced people from other Burmese, and exacerbate ethnic and religious discrimination. Such camps could become permanent, and act as a barrier for returning refugees and internally displaced people to reconstruct their homes, work their land, regain livelihoods, and reintegrate into Burmese society.

The Rohingya refugee population in Bangladesh consists not only of those who have fled the recent ethnic cleansing campaign, which Human Rights Watch has determined amounts to crimes against humanity, but also hundreds of thousands who have fled previous Burmese government repression and violence. In all, as many as one million Rohingya refugees may be in Bangladesh.

Exacerbating the Rohingya’s dire situation in Burma is the Burmese government’s effective denial of citizenship for Rohingya under the discriminatory 1982 Citizenship Law. This has facilitated enduring rights violations, including restrictions on movement; limitations on access to health care, livelihood, shelter, and education; and arbitrary arrests and detention.

“At every high-level meeting where this crisis is being discussed, leaders should call Rohingya refugees what they are: ‘Rohingya refugees,’” Frelick said. “Governments should not use euphemisms or otherwise mince words to suggest that these are not refugees deserving of all their rights as refugees or to deny their ethnic identity and nationality ties to Burma.”

November 16, 2017Report

“All of My Body Was Pain”

Sexual Violence against Rohingya Women and Girls in Burma

• Download the full report in English

“Rape has been a prominent and devastating feature of the Burmese military’s campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Rohingya,” said Skye Wheeler, women’s rights emergencies researcher at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. “The Burmese military’s barbaric acts of violence have left countless women and girls brutally harmed and traumatized.” 

Expand

Burmese soldiers raped women and girls both during major attacks on villages and in the weeks prior to these attacks after repeated harassment, Human Rights Watch found. In every case described to Human Rights Watch, the rapists were uniformed members of Burmese security forces, almost all military personnel. Ethnic Rakhine villagers, acting in apparent coordination with Burmese military, sexually harassed Rohingya women and girls, often in connection with looting.

Fifteen-year-old Hala Sadak, from Hathi Para village in Maungdaw Township, said soldiers had stripped her naked and then dragged her from her home to a nearby tree where, she estimates, about 10 men raped her from behind. She said, “They left me where I was…when my brother and sister came to get me, I was lying there on the ground, they thought I was dead.”

Rohingya Crisis

Human Rights Watch reporting on the Burmese military’s ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing.

Read More

All but one of the rapes reported to Human Rights Watch were gang rapes. In six reported cases of “mass rape,” survivors said that soldiers gathered Rohingya women and girls into groups and then gang raped or raped them. Many of those interviewed also said that witnessing soldiers killing their family members was the most traumatic part of the attacks. They described soldiers bashing the heads of their young children against trees, throwing children and elderly parents into burning houses, and shooting their husbands.

Humanitarian organizations working with refugees in Bangladesh have reported hundreds of rape cases. These most likely only represent a small proportion of the actual number because of the significant number of reported cases of rape victims being killed and the deep stigma that makes victims reluctant to report sexual violence, especially in crowded emergency health clinics with little privacy. Two-thirds of rape survivors interviewed had not reported their rape to authorities or humanitarian organizations.

Many reported symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder or depression, and untreated injuries, including vaginal tears and bleeding, and infections.

“One tragic dimension of this horrific crisis is that Rohingya women and girls are suffering profound physical and mental trauma without getting needed health care,” Wheeler said. “Bangladeshi authorities and aid agencies need to do more community outreach among the Rohingya to provide confidential spaces to report abuse and reduce stigma around sexual violence.”

Burmese authorities have rejected the growing documentation of sexual violence by the military.  In September, the Rakhine state border security minister denied the reports. “Where is the proof?” he said. “Look at those women who are making these claims – would anyone want to rape them?”

Human Rights Watch previously documented widespread rape of women and girls during military “clearance operations” in late 2016 in northern Rakhine State, allegations the Burmese government crudely rejected as “fake rape.” In general, the government and military have failed to hold military personnel accountable for grave abuses against ethnic minority populations.  Multiple biased and poorly conducted investigations in Rakhine State largely dismissed the allegations of these abuses.

Burma’s government should end the violations against the Rohingya immediately, cooperate fully with international investigators, including the Fact-Finding Mission established by the UN Human Rights Council, and allow humanitarian aid organizations unimpeded access to Rakhine State.

Bangladesh and international donors have acted quickly to provide relief for the refugees, and are expanding assistance for rape survivors. Concerned governments should also impose travel bans and asset freezes on Burmese military officials implicated in human rights abuses; expand existing arms embargoes to include all military sales, assistance, and cooperation; and ban financial transactions with key Burmese military-owned enterprises.

The UN Security Council should impose a full arms embargo on Burma and individual sanctions against military leaders responsible for grave violations of human rights, including sexual violence. The council should also refer the situation in Rakhine State to the International Criminal Court. It should request a public briefing from the UN special representative of the secretary-general for sexual violence in conflict, who just returned from the Rohingya camps in Bangladesh.

“UN bodies and member countries need to work together to press Burma to end the atrocities, ensure that those responsible are held to account, and address the massive problems facing the Rohingya, including victims of sexual violence,” Wheeler said. “The time for consequences is now, otherwise future Burmese military attacks on the Rohingya community appear inevitable.”

Selected accounts from Human Rights Watch interviews

• Fatima Begum, 33, was raped one day before she fled a major attack on her village of Chut Pyin in Rathedaung Township during which dozens of people were massacred. She said: “I was held down by six men and raped by five of them. First, they [shot and] killed my brother … then they threw me to the side and one man tore my lungi [sarong], grabbed me by the mouth and held me still. He stuck a knife into my side and kept it there while the men were raping me. That was how they kept me in place. … I was trying to move and [the wound] was bleeding more. They were threatening to shoot me.”
• Shaju Hosin, 30, saw one of her children killed when she fled their home village of Tin May, Buthiduang Township. She said: “I have three kids now. I had another one – Khadija – she was 5-years-old. When we were running from the village she was killed, in the attack. She was running last, less fast, trying to catch up with us. A soldier swung at her with his gun and bashed her head in, after that she fell down. We kept running.”
• After her village was attacked, Mamtaz, Yunis, 33, and other women and men fled to the hills. Burmese soldiers trapped her and about 20 other women for a night and two days without food or shelter on the side of a hill. She said the soldiers raped women in front of the gathered women, or took individual women away, and then returned the women, silent and ashamed, to the group. She said, “The men in uniform, they were grabbing the women, pulling a lot of women, they pulled my clothes off and tore them off…. There were so many women … we were weeping but there was nothing we could do.” 
• Isharhat Islam, 40, was raped by soldiers during military operations in her village Hathi Para (Sin Thay Pyin) in October 2016 and then again during the recent military operations. She described the stigma she faces, saying, “I have had to deal with disgust, others looking away from me.”
• Three of Toyuba Yahya’s six children were killed just outside her house in Hathi Para (Sin Thay Pyin) village in Maungdaw Township. Then seven men in military uniform raped her. She said that soldiers killed two of her sons, ages 2 and 3. by beating their heads against the trunk of a tree outside her home. The soldiers then killed her 5-year-old daughter. She said: “My baby … I wanted him to be alive but he slowly died afterward … My daughter, they picked her high up and then smashed her against the ground. She was killed. I do not know why they did that. [Now] I can’t eat, I can’t sleep. Instead: thoughts, thoughts, thoughts, thoughts. I can’t rest. My child wants to go home. He doesn't understand that everything has been lost.”

Expand

In a humanitarian act praised around the world, Bangladesh opened its borders, assisting the frightened, injured, and starving multitudes that have arrived. Ordinary Bangladeshis have also responded with kindness, collecting and distributing clothes and food. People on both sides of the border know this is not about a “pull factor” in Bangladesh — this is about refugees having the chance to simply survive. Long denied citizenship in Myanmar, the Rohingya have faced repression, discrimination, violence, and displacement for decades.

However, the Bangladeshi government wants the Rohingya to return home. Host communities are feeling the pressure of so many new arrivals. Bangladesh and Myanmar are planning an accord to determine terms for the return of the refugees.

If they had safe homes to return to, most Rohingya — like most refugee communities around the world — say they want to go back. But the conditions for safe and voluntary returns do not yet exist — in fact more refugees are still arriving.

To guide governments and humanitarian agencies as they address the Rohingya refugee crisis, Human Rights Watch has published “10 Principles for Protecting Refugees and Internally Displaced People Arising from Myanmar’s Rohingya Crisis.”

The principles include an urgent call on donor governments to provide generous support to meet the humanitarian needs of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh and internally displaced people of all ethnicities remaining in Myanmar. Rohingya refugees absolutely have the right to return to their homes, but all returns must be voluntary and safe, with full respect for human rights. World leaders need to press the Myanmar government to end its abusive operations, prevent future atrocities, and create the conditions necessary for Rohingya to return voluntarily in safety and dignity.

While it is premature to discuss the repatriation of Rohingya refugees, the UN and all governments — including the UK, US, and India — should be clear that Myanmar has to stop current attacks against the Rohingya population.

The Bangladeshi government should keep its border open to asylum-seekers and not coerce returns, respecting the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits the return of refugees to places where they would be persecuted or face a real risk of torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

While refugee camps in Bangladesh may be necessary for providing assistance during a refugee emergency, they are not a sustainable solution. The Bangladeshi government and its humanitarian partners should regard refugee camps as a temporary fix during this crisis and should transition as soon as practically possible to accommodations that are conducive to free movement and that promote dignified self-sufficiency.

Bangladeshi authorities have previously suggested that Rohingya refugees could be relocated from the Cox’s Bazar area to Thengar Char island, an uninhabited, undeveloped coastal island that is highly susceptible to flooding.

Doing so would put Rohingya refugees at greater risk.

Moreover, Bangladesh has obligations under international human rights law to ensure refugees’ rights to freedom of movement, livelihood, food, and education.

The Myanmar government has indicated that Rohingya allowed to return to the country would live in camps for internally displaced people or in a designated area, and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has also spoken positively about setting up “safe zones” inside Myanmar. Establishing “safe zones” on the Myanmar side of the border would restrict their movements, reduce their ability to reconstruct their homes, work their land, regain livelihoods, and reintegrate into Myanmar society. Such camps also run the risk of overcrowding, poor sanitation, increased illness, and creating dependency on aid.

Refugees and internally displaced people who were arbitrarily or unlawfully deprived of their homes, lands, properties, or places of habitual residence have the right to return to their place of residence or choice, and the return of their property. Myanmar should respect the rights of those who are unable or unwilling to return to their homes to choose compensation for the loss of their homes and properties.

Crucially, governments, including Bangladesh, should not shy away from calling the Rohingya fleeing for their lives what they are: Refugees. The word is important and using it acknowledges their particular legal rights. The fact that some might also have personal or economic reasons for going to Bangladesh does not forfeit their need for protection and other rights as refugees.

While it is premature to discuss the repatriation of Rohingya refugees, the UN and all governments — including the UK, US, and India — should be clear that Myanmar has to stop current attacks and prevent any future attacks against the Rohingya population.

The Myanmar authorities need to provide justice and accountability for the victims, end the suffering and statelessness of the Rohingya, establish security among all communities in Rakhine state, and ensure the Rohingya’s eventual repatriation in a manner that fully respects their rights and dignity.

Expand

(New York) – The Bangladesh government should agree to new trials meeting international standards for members of the former Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) accused of mutiny and murder, including 139 whose death sentences were upheld on November 27, 2017, by the High Court, Human Rights Watch said today. The court also upheld life sentences for another 146 people.

On February 25 and 26, 2009, members of the BDR mutinied against their commanding officers at the central Dhaka headquarters, killing 74 people, including 57 army officers. A number of women relatives of the officers were sexually assaulted. Human Rights Watch research has found that many of the accused were tortured in custody and most were denied access to proper representation.

“We have long said that the atrocities that took place during the mutiny need to be investigated and prosecuted, but this should not be done through unfair mass trials after the use of torture,” said Brad Adams, Asia director. “Particularly when the death penalty is involved, expediency cannot take priority over justice.”

July 4, 2012Report

“The Fear Never Leaves Me”

Torture, Custodial Deaths, and Unfair Trials after the 2009 Mutiny of the Bangladesh Rifles

• Download the full report
• Download the report in Bengali

The BDR mutiny took place soon after the new Awami League government led by Sheikh Hasina won elections in December 2008. Under great pressure from the army and amid fears of a coup, the government responded to the mutiny by rounding up nearly 6,000 members of the BDR. Many were tried in mass trials before closed military courts. A separate civilian prosecution team chose to try nearly 850 members of the BDR in a single mass trial in one courtroom.

In July 2012, Human Rights Watch released a report, “‘The Fear Never Leaves Me’: Torture, Custodial Deaths, and Unfair Trials after the 2009 Mutiny of the Bangladesh Rifles,” which provided a detailed account of the mutiny and the authorities’ response. Human Rights Watch documented serious abuses by the authorities in the aftermath, including at least 47 custodial deaths and widespread torture of BDR members by the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and other security forces. The government has claimed that all deaths in custody were due to natural causes.

Human Rights Watch documented how the mass trials of hundreds of the accused left most without adequate counsel, adequate time to prepare a defense, or notice of the charges or evidence against them. Crucially, many made confessions under torture. The chief prosecutor claimed that no confession obtained under duress would be used in court, but legal teams eventually assigned to some of the cases showed Human Rights Watch documentation demonstrating that coerced confessions had been used as evidence.

“Families of those killed and injured in the mutiny need justice and closure, but the answer is not through flawed trials,” Adams said. “True justice comes only through sound procedures that comply with the rule of law, and the families of the victims deserve better answers than this mass roundup.”

The Bangladeshi authorities should establish an independent investigative and prosecutorial task force with sufficient expertise, authority, and resources to rigorously investigate allegations of human rights abuses after the mutiny. All those subject to unfair trials should be given a new trial.

The November 27 judgment was in response to an appeal of the trial judgment. As with those sentenced to death, the trials against the mutineers sentenced to life in prison were rife with due process concerns, including coerced confessions. Similarly, few of the accused sentenced to life in prison had access to lawyers or information about the case against them.

“The death penalty is a cruel and irreversible punishment that should never be used,” Adams said. “Bangladesh should join the international movement to abolish it, particularly in cases like these in which suspects were tortured, nearly 50 died in custody, and due process failed.”

Expand

(New York) – An agreement by Bangladesh and Burma to begin returning Rohingya refugees to Burma by January 23, 2018, creates an impossible timetable for safe and voluntary returns and should be shelved, Human Rights Watch today said in a letter to the two governments. International donors, who would be needed to fund the massive repatriation effort, should insist that Burma and Bangladesh invite the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to join in drafting a new tripartite agreement that ensures adherence to international standards.

Since late August 2017, more than 645,000 ethnic Rohingya have fled a campaign of ethnic cleansing by Burma’s security forces and sought asylum in Bangladesh. Human Rights Watch has interviewed more than 200 of the refugees. Many said that they wish to eventually return home, but that they do not believe it is safe to return to Burma for the foreseeable future and until their security, land, and livelihoods can be ensured.

“Burma has yet to end its military abuses against the Rohingya, let alone create conditions that would allow them to return home safely,” said Bill Frelick, refugee rights director at Human Rights Watch. “This agreement looks more like a public relations effort by Burma to quickly close this ugly chapter than a serious effort to restore the rights of Rohingya and allow them to voluntarily return in safety and dignity.”

On November 23, Bangladesh and Burma signed an “Arrangement on Return of Displaced Persons from Rakhine State” on behalf of “residents of Rakhine State” who crossed from Burma into Bangladesh after October 9, 2016 and August 25, 2017. The agreement makes no reference to the cause of most of the forced displacement: a campaign of killings, widespread rape, and mass arson carried out by Burmese security forces that amounted to crimes against humanity. The agreement also fails to identify the displaced either as Rohingya or as refugees.

Voluntary repatriation in safety and dignity as required by international law will not be feasible until the Burmese government demonstrates its willingness and ability to ensure full respect for returnees’ human rights, equal access to nationality, and security, Human Rights Watch said.

The agreement expresses Burma’s commitment to “take necessary measures to halt the outflow of Myanmar residents to Bangladesh” – which raises grave concerns since everyone has a right to flee persecution in their own country. The agreement also makes no direct reference to nonrefoulement, the principle of international refugee law that prohibits the forcible return of refugees to places where their lives or freedom would be threatened. And the agreement restricts returnees’ freedom of movement to Rakhine State in “conformity with existing laws and regulations,” many of which discriminate against the Rohingya.

Several Burmese officials have spoken about putting Rohingya in “camps.” This would be an unacceptable approach to their return as camps set up after previous anti-Rohingya violence have led to de facto detention and segregation.

While the agreement says that Bangladesh will immediately seek assistance from UNHCR to carry out safe and voluntary returns, Burma agrees only “that the services of the UNHCR could be drawn upon as needed and at the appropriate time.”

“After the widespread atrocities, safe and voluntary return of Rohingya will require international monitors on the ground in Burma,” Frelick said. “This means a central role for the UNHCR, the only UN agency with a statutory mandate to facilitate the voluntary repatriation of refugees.”

Given the critical flaws in the agreement, Burma and Bangladesh should invite UNHCR to join in the drafting of a new tripartite agreement, Human Rights Watch said. This should include some existing provisions, such as encouraging refugees “to return voluntarily and safely to their own households and original places of residence or to a safe and secure place nearest to it or their choice.” The current agreement also commits Burma “to see that the returnees will not be settled in temporary places for a long time.”