Latter From America - Do the Rohingyas qualify as victims of genocide?

Source Asiantribune, 

By Dr. Habib Siddiqui

The Genocide Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948 and entered into force in 1951. It declares that genocide is a crime under international law.

The Genocide Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948 and entered into force in 1951. It declares that genocide is a crime under international law.

Article II of the Genocide Convention defines genocide as: any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

- Killing members of the group;

- Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

- Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

- Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

- Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Genocide is a serious crime that cannot be used lightly. It is the ultimate denial of the right to existence of an entire group of human beings. As such, it is the quintessential human rights crime because it denies its victims' very humanity.

In the last eight months, since August 2017, some 700,000 natives of Arakan (or the Rakhine state) – the Rohingya Muslims and Hindus – have been forced to leave their ancestral homes to settle in Bangladesh as refugees. They left behind everything that was once important to them and even family members – as their properties were looted before being burned down with living family members inside. The International Rescue Committee estimated that there were 75,000 victims of gender-based violence (meaning rape), and that 45% of the Rohingya women attending safe spaces in Cox's Bazar in Bangladesh had reported such attacks. Thousands of men and women were killed as part of a very sinister national campaign that was planned and executed by the Myanmar (formerly Burma) government and its partners-in-crime amongst the Buddhist people, esp. within the Rakhine (formerly Arakan) state.

Human rights activists and genocide experts have been calling the Rohingyas the victims of Genocide. For instance, Dr. Maung Zarni and Alice Cowley in their seminal work "The slow-burning genocide of Myanmar's Rohingya", noted that both the State in Myanmar and the local community have committed four out of five acts of genocide as spelled out by the 1948 Convention on the Punishment and Prevention of the Crime of Genocide.

Do the Rohingyas qualify as victims of genocide?

Genocide experts tell us that genocide is a process that usually goes through several stages. The first four of the five stages are the early warnings:

1. Classification and Symbolization
2. Dehumanization and Discrimination
3. Organization and Polarization
4. Preparation
5. Execution

1. Classification is a primary method of dividing a society or polity into heterogeneous groups and symbolization is often used to cement divisive identities between groups, which is then used to justify crimes against the targeted group.

i. Rakhine Buddhists vs. Rohingya Muslims in the Rakhine (formerly Arakan) state of Myanmar (formerly Burma) is a clear case where the Muslim minority is distinguished based on its ethnicity, race and religion. They are derogatorily called the Kala or Kalar people (synonymous to the English word 'nigger').

ii. In spite of their long history of existence in Arakan, the Rohingyas of Myanmar are accused of being "Bengalis" or "Chittagonians" (even 'terrorists' who had intruded illegally into Myanmar who want to "Islamize" the "Buddhist" Myanmar.

iii. As a high-profile refugee case highlighted the plight of the Rohingya, Ye Myint Aung, the Burmese Consulate-General in Hong Kong, wrote to foreign missions in Hong Kong in Feb. 2009 insisting that the Rohingyas should not be described as being from Burma, the South China Morning Post reported. He said that the Rohingyas are of 'dark brown' complexion and 'ugly as ogres' compared to 'fair and soft skin' people of Burma.

2. The dominant group uses either political power or muscle, laws and regulations to deny rights of the targeted group to further discriminate and persecute it. Then it robs the victim's humanity by comparing it with animals, parasites, insects, diseases or 'virus'. When a group of people is thought of as "less than human" it is easier for the dominant group to murder them. At this stage, hate propaganda in print and on hate radios is used to make the victims seem like villains. Dehumanization of the targeted group is used as the sufficient rationale to justify discriminatory laws and practices.

i. Rohingyas were declared non-citizens via the 1982 Burma Citizenship Law, effectively making them stateless. The legal experts contend that the Burmese Citizenship Law violates several fundamental principles of international customary law standards, offends the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and leaves Rohingyas exposed to no legal protection of their rights

ii. Rohingyas are denied all and everyone of the 30 basic human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). They are denied access to public schools, colleges and universities, hospitals and medical centers, government jobs, etc.; even their movement inside the country and the Rakhine state is restricted.

iii. Rakhine extremists and intellectuals (like Dr. Aye Chan) depicted the Rohingya people as 'influx viruses' – the 'illegal Muslims of Arakan' that needed to be eliminated. [Influx Viruses: The Illegal Muslims in Arakan By U Shw zan and Dr. Aye Chan]

iv. Another Buddhist extremist, Khin Maung Saw depicts Rohingyas as the camel in a Burmese fable that dislodged its owner from his tent, waring fellow Arakanese Buddhists against the Rohingyas whom he calls as "Chittagonian Bengalis" - "the guest who want to kick out the Host from his own house".

3. Genocide is a group crime. Thus, it always needs organized efforts, usually by the state and sometimes by the non-state actors. Special army units or militias are often trained and armed. Plans are made for 'final solution' or genocidal killings. Extremist hate groups drive the groups apart; they are tolerated and encouraged to polarize and terrorize the targeted victims. Laws are formulated to forbid social and economic interactions with the targeted victims. Public demonstrations are held against the targeted group.

i. The Rohingyas have been depicted as a demographic "bomb" for Myanmar.

ii. The elimination of the Rohingya and other Muslims has been a national project, since at least General Ne Win's time (1962-88).

iii. Genocidal crimes against the Rohingya people have been planned and executed by the Burmese governments since Ne Win's time, enjoying extensive support and active participation from the Buddhist community – politicians, academics, monks and the public alike, let alone the members of the state apparatus at both central (Myanmar) and local (Rakhine state) levels, esp. the police and security forces. At least 18 military operations (excluding the NaSaKa operations between 1992-2012) were carried out against the Rohingya people since Burma had won its independence from the Great Britain in 1948 in which more than a million Rohingyas were forced to become refugees in many parts of the world, esp. Bangladesh, Pakistan and the Gulf States.

iv. Scores of government-sponsored public demonstrations (including those organized by Buddhist monks) were held since the transfer of power from military regimes to Thein Sein's quasi-civilian/military regime and the current Suu Kyi's government demanding strong actions – including deportation and/or elimination of the Rohingya and other Muslims in Myanmar.

4. Preparation is made to eliminate or exterminate the targeted group. It often uses euphemisms to cloak their sinister intentions, such as referring to their goals as "isolation," 'surgical operations,' "ethnic cleansing," "purification," or "counter-terrorism." They indoctrinate the populace with fear of the victim group. Leaders often claim, "If we don't kill them, they will kill us." Attacks are often staged and blamed on targeted groups. Victims' properties are destroyed or confiscated. They are forced to leave their homes and/or encamped in concentration camps.

i. The genocidal pogroms of 2012, depicted as 'race riots' by the regime, were prompted by the false rumor – planted by the security forces - that two 'Rohingya' youths had killed a Rakhine woman – Thida Htwe - after raping her.

ii. In the so-called race riots of 2012, some 140,000 Rohingyas were displaced from their homes, which were burned down by joint operations of the security-cum-Buddhist mon-cum-Rakhine mobs in the Rakhine state. Internally displaced Rohingyas were forced to live in 'concentration-like' camps with little or no medical assistance.

iii. Thousands of Rohingyas are feared dead trying to flee Myanmar since 2012.

iv. More than two-thirds of the Rohingya (i.e., estimated at 2 million) were pushed out of Myanmar before the latest genocidal crimes of 2017.

v. Muslim owned homes, businesses and offices (including madrasa and mosques) were destroyed.

vi. The rape of Rohingya females, a crime that was to continue until now, was used as a weapon of war to terrorize the community.

5. Execution of the plan begins, and quickly becomes the mass killing or elimination of the targeted group, which is legally called "genocide." It is "extermination" to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human (see dehumanization). When it is sponsored by the government, the armed forces often work with private armies or militia to do the killing. It is always followed by denial of the crimes by the perpetrators – both during and after genocide. International press and investigative teams are barred from visiting the affected area and talk to the victims. Eye-witnesses or whistle-blowers are killed or 'disappear'. Evidences of genocide are destroyed.

i. Despite credible mounting evidences, which were termed either as 'ethnic cleansing' or 'genocidal', Suu Kyi's government denied such accusations. "I don't think there is ethnic cleaning going on," Suu Kyi told the BBC, April 2017.

ii. "It's Muslims killing Muslims as well, if they think that they are collaborating with authorities … It's a matter of people on different sides of a divide." – Suu Kyi said, ibid.

iii. "No one can fully understand the situation of our country the way we do". – Suu Kyi said

iv. Suu Kyi said the army was "not free to rape, pillage and torture".

v. Myanmar's army released a report that found "no deaths of innocent people" (11/2017)

As the short analysis shows above, there is no doubt that Rohingyas are victims of genocide. The findings from dozens of respectable institutions around our globe also concur.

I often question what is the basis for a nation's claim to independence or self-determination? Must a people wander in the wilderness for two millennia and suffer repeated persecution, humiliation and genocide to qualify? Until now, history's answer to the question has been pragmatic and brutal – a nation is a people tough enough to grab the land it wants and hangs onto it. Period!

How about the rights of a minority community to survive with their culture and traditions intact? Do they need to be 'children' of a 'higher' God or follow Judeo-Christian morality to qualify? What makes the children of a 'lesser' God to be forgotten and denied the same treatment and privilege that was granted hitherto to the people of East Timor and South Sudan? Could not a U.N.-sponsored plebiscite determine the fate of the Rohingyas of our time to decide for themselves what is best for them – whether they need a protected homeland of theirs or they want to remain part of Myanmar with all their alienable rights granted under the UDHR?

How will our generation be judged by our posterity for letting the genocide of the Rohingya to continue for this long? Shame on us if we fail to stop Rohingya genocide!

-Asian Tribune -

Rohingya in “Last Stages of Genocide”

Source Tricycle, 25 April

Refugees face grave danger as monsoon season threatens camps and Myanmar rewrites history, independent observers warn.

By Matthew Gindin

APR 25, 2018 

Rohingya people at a refugee camp in Bangladesh. Photo by Ashique Rushdi / USAID | https://tricy.cl/2vMlHwz 

Today, most of the world's Rohingya live in makeshift shanties built of thin bamboo and plastic sheets on the hills around Cox's Bazar in southern Bangladesh. The shanties are not built to withstand extreme weather. Last Thursday, the first major downpour of Bangladesh's monsoon season fell. With hope for repatriation to Myanmar fading and the monsoon season threatening hundreds of thousands of lives, the need for humanitarian assistance in the refugee camps is reaching critical levels.

According to the United Nations' International Organization for Migration (IOM), a staggering 898,000 Rohingya currently live in Cox's Bazar, 686,000 of whom have arrived since August of 2017, when the government of Myanmar launched a coordinated, military-led campaign of arson, murder, and sexual violence against their communities in Myanmar's Rakhine State.

On April 14, Myanmar announced that it had repatriated a family of five Rohingya refugees, a claim that was promptly denied by both the UN and Bangladesh. The move came amid a series of gestures from the Burmese government aimed at demonstrating goodwill, all of which have been met with skepticism from many members of the international community.

In late March, Myanmar, which has denied systemic wrongdoing toward the Rohingya, surprised observers by arresting and incarcerating seven soldiers who the government admitted murdered 10 Rohingya men, disfigured them with acid, and then buried them in a mass grave. On Wednesday Myanmar National Television reported that the seven soldiers had been granted amnesty, only to backtrack after the government denied the report. The murder of 10 Rohingya was being investigated by two Reuters reporters, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, whom the government arrested under the Official Secrets Act for exposing the crime. The arrest has drawn international condemnation, and prominent human rights lawyer Amal Clooney has recently joined their defense team.

Related: Who Is the Real Aung San Suu Kyi?

The family of five Rohingya who returned to Myanmar, according to Bangladesh, did not come from Rohingya refugee camps, but rather came from the "no man's land" between Myanmar and Bangladesh where thousands of Rohingya fleeing Myanmar are currently said to linger. Both the UN and the government of Bangladesh have stated that they do not believe conditions are safe enough in Myanmar to allow for Rohingya repatriation.

According to Penny Green, director of the International State Crime Initiative (ISCI) at London's Queen Mary University, the Rohingya man may have been repatriated along with his family as repayment for favors. "He was a village administrator who our sources in the camps say was an informant working for the government of Myanmar," Green told Tricycle.

The alleged repatriation came on the heels of a visit from the Burmese Minister of Social Welfare to a refugee camp in Dhaka, where he met with 40 Rohingya and sparked anger by declaring that, in order to return to Myanmar, they would have to carry cards identifying them as migrants from Bangladesh. The Burmese government has denied that the Rohingya are a historical people of Myanmar, claiming that they are migrant Bengali workers who never left, despite well-established evidence showing the Rohingya as a distinct people in the region going back centuries.

Inside Myanmar, there is evidence of a concerted attempt on the part of the government to erase the Rohingya. "The last couple of months the government has been bulldozing the remains of the Rohingya villages they burnt, and removing other geographical and environmental features that distinguish Rohingya land areas," Green said. "They are being reduced to a state in which even the Rohingya may not recognize their land. The state has been appropriating crops, livestock, and property."

Related: Where Are the Righteous Burmese? All Over the World. 

On April 18, Green and the ISCI released a report finding the Myanmar government guilty of genocidal intent toward the Rohingya, a finding which echoed a chillingly prescient report they issued in 2015. The 2015 report claimed the Rohingya had already been subjected to four of the six stages of genocide: "stigmatisation, harassment, isolation, and systematic weakening." It warned that in Myanmar, just two stages remained for the Rohingya: "extermination, and 'symbolic enactment,'" the removal of their existence from official State history.

At the Berlin Conference on Myanmar Genocide in February, Rainer Schulze, professor of modern European history at the University of Essex in the UK and founding editor of the journal The Holocaust in History and Memory, defined genocide as the "intention to destroy in whole or in part" a distinct community. The 1948 UN Convention On The Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, Schulze explained, "binds all signatories . . . that they must respond when genocide has been identified. The Genocide Convention gives us a very clear definition, and with regards to the Rohingya it is appropriate and must be used."

However, international efforts to apply pressure to Myanmar have thus far been weak. The 2017 Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)  summit did not address the plight of the Rohingya, and this year's summit of Southeast Asian leaders appears primed to once again ignore the crisis. Canada has put the crisis on the agenda at the upcoming G7 meeting, but Canadian efforts have been criticized as largely cosmetic, consisting so far in sanctioning one member of the military and calling for more humanitarian aid while stopping short of the use of the word "genocide."

Related: Voices from Inside the Rohingya Refugee Camps

Meanwhile, the situation of the Rohingya in Bangladesh remains dire.  Myanmar's panel of international advisers on issues concerning the Rohingya reportedly warned recently that the monsoon season, which runs from June to October, could bring "enormous deaths" from a mix of mudslides and diseases brought on by the rains. As many as 200,000 people may lose their shelters, the report said. In one camp, Kutupalong, the population is five times the recommended standard for refugee camps. As result, shelters for refugees have been built on landslide-prone areas and flood zones.

While the international community's efforts have been underwhelming, there are still ways for people to help. Buddhist Global Relief is collecting donations, as well as recommending people give to the Buddhist Humanitarian Project, which was recently formed with the express purpose of giving aid to the Rohingya. The Rohingya refugees are a traumatized community lacking sufficient access to the most basic resources for life, and every bit of aid given can relieve some aspect of the suffering and help families and individuals defend themselves against the coming rains. 

Burmese dissident speaks frankly about his country’s persecution of the Rohingya

Source Mailchi, April 2018

 

On a recent Canadian tour, Maung Zarni talked about the need for truth. 

 

By Samantha Rideout

 

INTERVIEWS

 

Human rights activist Maung Zarni has been exiled from his native Myanmar (Burma) for speaking out against the military's ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims.  

Q For people from Myanmar, or Burma as you often call it, being politically active comes at a high cost. You, for instance, were unable to visit your dying father and can't return to see your mother. What values do you hold that made you willing to pay that price? 

A It was my upbringing by my parents. If I did something they disapproved of, that was bad behaviour. But if I denied what I had done, that was worse, and that's when I would be punished. I just absolutely cannot stand blatant lies.

Q How has this value influenced your activism?

A In Burma, we're dealing with the type of lies that destroy millions of lives. For me, speaking out on the Rohingya issue wasn't as difficult as getting involved politically in the first place, three decades ago. In those days, I had concerns about whether the Burmese embassy knew about the activism I was doing as a student at the University of California. Would they harass my parents? I was living with those concerns for a long time. Gradually, I found myself doing more daring things. Then, finally, you cross a line and oppose the regime publicly, and you cannot go back.

Q You founded the Free Burma coalition in 1995 to oppose the military dictatorship. There have been significant, nominally democratic political reforms in recent years, but the military continues to hold tremendous sway. How do you feel about Myanmar's leadership today? 

A There was a period [beginning around 2004] when it seemed to me that there were good elements within the military who wanted the same things as I did for the country. For a window of three or four years, I attempted to work with the generals. I helped them meet foreign diplomats and officials [to start normalizing Burma's relations with the rest of the world], but I expected something in return. For instance, they would need to remove the restrictions on the internet — a little indication that they were prepared to allow the people a greater degree of freedom. I saw few gifts from them; it was just take, take, take. I finally knew it wasn't going to work after they blocked emergency aid to cyclone victims in 2008. The Americans, the British and others had sanctions on Burma at the time, and the Burmese suspected that the Americans would launch an attack if their aircraft were allowed in. An estimated 140,000 people died. When that happened, I stopped interacting with the military. The contacts I had at that time are now shoo-ins for the number-one positions in the administration.

Q So you personally know a lot of the people in power in Myanmar?

A I do, and on the civilian side, I also know the people who write articles justifying the atrocities against the Rohingya. Some of them were like younger brothers to me when we were studying together in the United States. They were activists, like me.

Q How exactly are people justifying the military atrocities, which include killings, widespread rape and razed villages? Apparently they're using Buddhism to do so?

A There are very elaborate justifications drawn from Buddhist theology and philosophy. [Last October], one of the most influential monks gave a three-hour sermon, about 20 minutes of which he devoted to justifying the killing of infidels. This monk would say that non-believers are only half-human, so even if you kill them by the millions in defence of your faith, that does not amount to bad karma. The venue and audience for his sermon were significant: it was to a group of hundreds of special commanders at a military training school, in a massive hangar.

Q Isn't Buddhism supposed to be a peaceful religion?

A Westerners are often disturbed when they hear that Buddhists are doing this, and that's because of Orientalism. There are two versions of Orientalism: one of them romanticizes the Other, and one demonizes and dehumanizes the Other. We Buddhists are subject to what I call "positive Orientalism." Religion is both an individual and a social practice. When something becomes social, it always has latent political potential.

Q Since the violent military crackdown began last August, more than 600,000 Rohingya civilians have fled to refugee camps in Bangladesh. When you went there to meet with refugees, one man burst into tears to see a Burmese Buddhist who cared about Rohingya Muslims. Is it important to you to build religious bridges like this?

A Of course, although I actually just use Buddhism as a marker [of my ethnicity]. I'm essentially a humanist.

Q Do you see any role for interfaith activists in helping with the situation?

A I don't know. Interfaith activism sounds rather soft, but actually, I think we're talking about intellectual revolutionaries, people who can think across civilizational or faith lines. If Buddhist monks or Christian or Muslim clergy come with an attitude of "We want to have interfaith dialogue, but we're still the best," then that's not going to work, because you've got to be able see through to the essence of the other person.

Q You don't have much hope in the United Nations Security Council, which you've called "paralyzed." Do you see hope anywhere? 

A I have hope in people in general. I think that institutions can only mobilize through individuals. There are so many people with something to contribute. Maybe they can mobilize wider public opinion as church communities or filmmakers or whatever their background may be. At the same time, I'm not romantic about the prospect of seeing this resolved. I mean, we've got over 40 foreign ambassadors sitting in the capital of Burma where all the genocidal decisions are made, and no one is able to bring themselves to confront the government. No one is saying, "This must stop, and here's how we think it could be done." And many of the embassies, instead of talking about the survivors and the victims, refer to the region. They talk about "the crisis in Rakhine State" rather than "the Rohingya people." They comply with the Burmese government's demand that these people not be addressed by their own name.

Q Because to call them "Rohingya" would give them legitimacy? 

A Yes. The Rohingya were officially recognized as part of the Burmese ethnic tapestry, with full citizenship rights, from the time of independence from the British in 1948, well into the 1960s. What we are hearing today from the Burmese government, including [State Counsellor] Aung San Suu Kyi, is that they're actually illegal Bengali migrants and that there is no such group as the Rohingya.

Q Like other minorities in Myanmar, the Rohingya have some antigovernment militants among them. You've argued that Myanmar's leaders are trying to use this to pull the wool over the eyes of the international community, by claiming to target an organized terrorist threat. What makes this narrative effective?

A They're saying they're defending a sovereign state, and everybody understands that, especially their main audience of sovereign governments. Throw in "national security" or "anti-terror effort," and they're given a huge benefit of the doubt. But look at the facts on the ground. If the militants were really linked to any major terrorist network, they would be carrying AK-47s or better, not machetes and bamboo spears.

Q It sounds as though all of this offends the sense of truth your parents instilled in you. 

A It's an insult to common sense. 

This interview has been edited and condensed.

This story first appeared in The Observer's April 2018 edition with the title "Burmese dissident speaks frankly about his country's persecution of the Rohingya."

Myanmar Armed Forces Blacklisted By UN For Committing Sexual Violence Against Rohingya

Source undispatch, 17 April

For the first time ever, the UN secretary-general is including Myanmar Armed Forces on an annual blacklist of groups that are "credibly suspected" of carrying out sexual violence during conflict.

The report, presented Monday to the Security Council, says the acts were allegedly perpetrated during military "clearance" operations in October 2016 and August 2017, after a spate of insurgent attacks by members of the ethnic minority Rohingya community. The UN has since described the security operations as "ethnic cleansing."

Although the Myanmar Armed Forces, known as the  Tatmadaw, has been called out in previous UN reports for abuses against other ethnic minority groups, it now joins 51 other government and rebel groups on the conflict-related sexual violence "list of shame," as Human Rights Watch called it.

For generations, Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar's northern Rakhine state have struggled for citizenship and rights. But the Buddhist-majority population and government do not recognize Rohingya as an ethnic minority. Instead, they are called "Bengalis" and considered illegal migrants from neighboring Bangladesh. Tensions have flared into bloodbaths throughout the years.

Since the security operations began, nearly 700,000 Rohingya have fled across the border to Bangladesh. And according to the UN report, international medical staff and aid workers have reported that many of them "bear the physical and psychological scars of brutal sexual assault."

"The widespread threat and use of sexual violence was integral to their strategy, humiliating, terrorizing and collectively punishing the Rohingya community and serving as a calculated tool to force them to flee their homelands and prevent their return," UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres wrote.

The report describes what it calls "specific and indicative" cases of sexual violence against Rohingya women and girls.

The United Nations verified the following specific and indicative cases of conflict-related sexual violence perpetrated during the military "clearance" operations in northern Rakhine: seven rapes reportedly perpetr ated by Tatmadaw elements in Buthidaung on 4 and 5 May; the rape of 32 Rohingya women and one girl, allegedly by the Tatmadaw and border guard police, also in Buthidaung, as part of perceived "punitive operations"; the rape of a girl by a Tatmadaw soldier in Maungdaw in January; 30 girls subjected to sexual violence by Government forces during military operations; and one girl allegedly raped by a member of the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army. In early 2017, Tatmadaw soldiers allegedly raped a 16-year-old girl and her 20-year-old sister during operations in Maungdaw. After mentioning the incident to visiting journalists, she was arrested and forced to undergo a medical examination. On 30 August, a report was received of the alleged arbitrary detention and rape of several women in the village of Maung Nu in Buthidaung township. Three girls who reported sexual violence were provided with case management services in northern Rakhine, as well as four children who were victims of sexual assault, in central Rakhine. The prevailing security environment precludes more complete documentation, given the climate of impunity, intimidation, reprisals and access restrictions.

In November, UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict Pramila Patten visited Rohingya camps in Bangladesh, where she heard accounts from "almost every woman and girl" of rape, gang rape, invasive body searches, forced nudity, sexual harassment and abduction for sex slavery. As security forces looted and burned down their villages, many Rohingya women who were impregnated by their rapists then set off by foot on a long and dangerous journey across the border.

The report linked the acts of sexual violence to a circulating narrative that high fertility rates among the Rohingya posed an existential threat to the majority population. Therefore, violence was carried out against women – including pregnant women – in an attempt to extinguish the Rohingya ethnic identity, and on young children, who represent the group's future.

So far, according to the report, 2,756 survivors of sexual and gender-based violence have received help in Bangladesh, but nearly half of the refugee settlement areas still lack basic sexual and reproductive health care and services for rape survivors.

Guterres also made note of alleged sexual violence against other ethnic minority groups amid escalating clashes that have not received as much international media attention in regions in such as Kachin, northern Shan and parts of the southeast.

Among many recommendations, he called on the Security Council to consider recognizing conflict-related sexual violence as grounds for refugee status and to address funding shortfalls for sexual and gender-based violence programs and for sexual and reproductive health care.

His report comes just as the Myanmar government announced it had repatriated the first group of Rohingya refugees – a family of five – according to a two-year deal signed by Bangladesh and Myanmar in November. But Bangladesh's Refugee Relief and Repatriation Commissioner Abul Kalam called the announcement "propaganda," while the UN Refugee agency said it had no prior knowledge of the case.

On Monday, the Security Council also heard from Rohingya lawyer Razia Sultana, who urged the council to refer the situation in Myanmar to the International Criminal Court for crimes against the Rohingya and other minority groups.

"The listing of the Tatmadaw is an overdue and welcome step," Joan Timoney, senior director of advocacy and external relations at the Women's Refugee Commission, said in a statement. "Impunity, discrimination and denial of citizenship lie at the heart of this world's fastest-growing refugee crisis."

ICC prosecutor requests ruling on jurisdiction over Rohingya deportations

Source jurist, 10 April

©  WikiMedia (UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office)

[JURIST] International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] prosecutor Fatou Bensouda on Monday filed a motion [PDF] with the president of the Court's Pre-Trial Division seeking a ruling on whether the Court may exercise jurisdiction over the alleged deportation of the Rohingya people from Myanmar to Bangladesh, which Bensouda contends is actionable under Article 7(1)(d) of the Rome Statute [text].

Noting that 670,000 Rohingya lawfully present in Myanmar have been intentionally deported across the border to Bangladesh since August 2017, Bensouda's office argued that the Court has the necessary jurisdiction under Article 12(2)(a) of the statute "because an essential legal element of the crime—crossing an international border—occurred on the territory of a State which is a party to the Rome Statute (Bangladesh)."

Bensouda further highlighted the characterization of the situation by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein and the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar Yanghee Lee [official profiles] as "a textbook example of ethnic cleansing" potentially bearing the "hallmarks of a genocide."

Article 7(1) of the statute defines "crime against humanity" as including, among other things, 1) murder; 2) torture; 3) enforced disappearance; 4) rape, sexual slavery, and enforced prostitution; 5) persecution against any identifiable group on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, and/or gender grounds; 6) extermination; and 7) "deportation or forcible transfer of population." 

Much discussion in the motion focused on the distinction between deportation, which involves a cross-border element, and forcible displacement within a nation's borders. The motion notes that such a distinction is vital to the issue of jurisdiction because "[w]hile both safeguard the right of individuals to 'live in their communities' and homes, deportation also protects a further set of important rights: the right of individuals to live in the particular State in which they were lawfully present."

Emphasizing the broad scope of Article 19(3) empowering the prosecutor to "seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility," Bensouda stated:

The Prosecution is mindful that this is the first occasion on which it has sought a ruling under article 19(3). This course of action is justified by the exceptional circumstances at hand and it has been decided by the Prosecutor based on the discretion and independence vested in her by article 42 of the Statute. ... In the particular circumstances of this situation, and considering the unique nature of the issue in question, the Prosecutor therefore considers it appropriate to seek an article 19(3) ruling.

The motion was submitted to Judge Antoine Kesia-Mbe Mindua [official profile] who is now expected to assign it to a Pre-Trial Chamber based on a pre-established roster, unless its subject matter "'falls outside the competence of the Pre-Trial Chamber' or is 'manifestly frivolous.'"