Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and Burma/Myanmar
Websites/Multiple Documents
Description:
"Burma/Myanmar:
Ethnic and religious minorities in Burma/Myanmar, especially stateless Rohingya, continue to face the threat of mass atrocity crimes."...."Sporadic inter-communal violence in Burma/Myanmar, combined with discriminatory state policies, continues to put the Rohingya, a Muslim ethnic minority group, at risk of mass atrocity crimes. Rohingyas continue to be denied citizenship and other fundamental human rights by the government. On 29 September 2014 at the UN General Assembly, the government outlined the "Rakhine Action Plan," which would require Rohingyas to accept ethnic reclassification as "Bengali" in order to obtain citizenship or be forced into detention camps. On 31 March 2015 the government invalidated the identification cards held by many Rohingyas, forcing them to apply for citizenship as "Bengalis" by 1 June. This follows the government denying Rohingyas the ability to self-identify on the national census of March 2014, the first since 1983..."
Source/publisher:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Date of entry/update:
2015-05-15
Grouping:
Websites/Multiple Documents
Language:
English
more
Individual Documents
Description:
"...The
Rohingya
problem
has
been
referred
to
and
described
in
different
ways,
and
certainly
it
is
more
than
a
matter
of
nationality
and
discrimination,
statelessness
and
displacement,
and
the
Responsibility
to
Protect.
Yet
the
initial
two
areas
have
assumed
particular
factual
and
legal
significance
over
the
past
three
decades,
as
persecution
of
the
Rohingya
within
Myanmar
and
its
effects
regionally
have
continued
unabated.
The
third
area—not
unrelated
to
the
others—should
assume
equal
importance
and
attention,
but
thus
far
it
has
not.
All
three
issues
are
progressive
in
their
application
to
the
Rohingya:
persecutory
discrimination
and
statelessness
includes
and
leads
to
forcible
displacement,
which
combined
constitute
crimes
against
humanity
and
ethnic
cleansing
and
implicate
the
Responsibility
to
Protect.
Primary
responsibility
rests
with
the
Myanmar
government
to
protect
those
whose
right
to
a
nationality
the
country
has
long
denied,
but
its
regional
neighbors
have
legal
and
humanitarian
obligations
of
their
own
vis-?-vis
the
Rohingya,
as
does
the
international
community.
The
Rohingya
problem
begins
at
home—and
could
well
end
there
with
enough
political
will.
Failing
that,
as
has
been
the
case
since
June
2012
if
not
decades,
regional
countries
and
the
wider
world
should
act
to
address
the
displacement
and
statelessness,
and
to
stop
the
violence
and
violations."
Benjamin Zawacki
Source/publisher:
American University Washington College of Law?s Human Rights Brief,Volume 20 Issue 3, Spring 2013
Date of publication:
2013-07-23
Date of entry/update:
2013-07-24
Grouping:
Individual Documents
Category:
Discrimination against the Rohingya, Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and Burma/Myanmar, Laws, decrees, bills and regulations relating to nationality, citizenship and immigration (commentary)
Language:
English
Format :
pdf
Size:
515.88 KB
Local URL:
more
Description:
Introduction:
"The Burmese junta, its armed forces known as the ?Tatmadaw,” and other armed groups under government control are committing gross human rights violations against ethnic and religious minorities. Extrajudicial killings, torture, and forced labor are prevalent; rape and sexual abuse by the Tatmadaw are rampant; and from August 2008 through July 2009 alone, 75,000 civilians in the east, where armed conflict is ongoing, were forcibly displaced. The Tatmadaw shows a complete disregard for the principle of distinction, intentionally targeting civilians with impunity.
Reports indicate that these violations, perpetrated primarily by state actors on a widespread and systematic basis, rise to the level of crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and war crimes ‐ three of the four crimes states committed themselves to protect populations from in endorsing the responsibility to protect (R2P) at the 2005 World Summit.
All Burmese citizens are subject to government oppression. However, the above crimes appear to be targeted primarily at five ethnic groups: the Karen, Shan and Karenni in eastern Burma, and the Rohingya and Chin in western Burma. While international actors have focused on the repression of the pro‐democracy movement by the military government, crimes perpetrated against ethnic minorities for years have received little international attention and show no signs of subsiding.
This brief seeks to clarify how R2P applies to Burma and draw attention to the plight of minorities by assessing the following: whether acts perpetrated against them could constitute R2P crimes; the risk of future atrocities; and the resulting responsibility of the international community..."
Source/publisher:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Date of publication:
2010-03-00
Date of entry/update:
2010-09-01
Grouping:
Individual Documents
Language:
English
more
Description:
"The June 12 panel--?Cyclone Nargis: Whose Responsibility to Protect?”--produced sharp
disagreement not only about whether the Burmese regime?s dilatory response to the
cyclone constituted a potential ?R2P situation,” but also more broadly about the role of
this new doctrine in the aftermath of natural disasters. While none of the panelists or
audience members found much to praise in the junta?s humanitarian response, some
sought to understand the ?paranoia” that the country?s leaders bore to the outside world.
They concluded that outsiders eager to help victims of the cyclone would have to either
work around the barriers erected by the fearful and suspicious generals, or look for those
in the regime more open to engagement with outsiders. The regime, one participant
noted, was far less monolithic than it appeared from the outside.
Others felt that the regime?s state of mind mattered far less than the effect of its behavior
on its own beleaguered citizens. One participant catalogued the lethal diseases, including
HIV and malaria, which had proliferated in Burma owing to a moribund public health
system—at a time when the sale of natural resources was enriching members of the
regime. The unnecessary death of perhaps 100,000 citizens made the regime criminal
even before the cyclone struck, which meant that Burma had arguably been an R2P
situation for years. This participant and others nevertheless did not view the regime?s
neglect of its citizens in the aftermath of the cyclone as meriting the application of the
2
responsibility to protect. Another participant, however, said that the very real possibility
of mass death from neglect meant that the Security Council should have taken up the
issue and noted that the council had even rebuffed a proposed briefing by UN
humanitarian coordinator John Holmes..."
Source/publisher:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Date of publication:
2008-06-12
Date of entry/update:
2010-09-01
Grouping:
Individual Documents
Language:
English
more