Written evidence from CSW (MYA0019)

This is a submission of written evidence by CSW,[1] a human rights organisation specialising in the right to freedom of religion or belief (FoRB). CSW's team of specialist advocates work on over 20 countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. CSW monitors and reports on the FoRB situation in Myanmar/Burma, and maintains contact with representatives of Myanmar’s exiled National Unity Government (NUG) and ethnic and religious communities there.

The coup

Events leading to the coup

       Since 2011, some positive political developments occurred in Myanmar. These began with a series of political reforms in 2011, and culminated in the victory of Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), in 2015 in the country’s first democratic elections in 25 years. However, the military remained powerful, retaining 25% of seats in parliament and control of three key ministries: home affairs, border affairs and defence.

       In November 2020, Myanmar held another general election. The National League of Democracy (NLD) won the majority of seats and was able to form a government. However, the military-backed opposition contested the election results, though it offered little evidence of purported irregularities.[2]

The Coup

       On 1 February 2021 Myanmar’s army seized power in a coup, declaring a year-long state of emergency and placing the country’s leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, and other civilian leaders under house arrest.

       The coup ended a decade of political reform which saw some limited positive political developments. Political power is now held by the commander-in-chief of the Myanmar army, General Min Aung Hlaing.

What was the situation for religious and ethnic minorities in Myanmar/Burma prior to the coup?

The years leading up to the coup had already seen very grave setbacks, with the fragile democratisation process increasingly undermined. There is evidence of significant regression in some areas, particularly freedom of the press, freedom of expression and FoRB. Meanwhile a movement of militant Buddhist nationalism has arisen which preaches hatred, principally of Muslims, but also threatens Christians and other non-Buddhists, and indeed affects Buddhists who attempt to oppose it.

The Rohingya crisis

       In August 2017 Myanmar’s army launched attacks on Rohingya villages and civilians which resulted in over 700,000 people fleeing to Bangladesh, thousands killed, and hundreds of villages burned. Reports of the atrocities of mass violence perpetrated during this period include the burning of homes, schools and mosques, the deliberate burning of people to death inside their homes, mass rape, torture, execution without trial, and the blocking of aid.

       The UN Special Rapporteur for human rights in Myanmar has said that the violence against the Rohingya has the “hallmarks” of genocide; the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission established by the UN Human Rights Council claims to have documented evidence of genocide; and in January 2020 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a ruling ordering the government of Myanmar to take immediate “provisional measures” to prevent genocide against the Rohingya.

       The crisis follows decades of severe persecution of the Rohingyas. The state has continued to deny Rohingyas their citizenship rights, rendering them stateless, as the 1982 Citizenship Law remains in force even though the Rohingyas have existed in Myanmar for several centuries. The law has a serious impact on the country’s Rohingya population who continue to live in the country without citizenship rights including the right to vote, to move freely, or to access basic services.

Ethnic conflict

       In recent years violations of FoRB and other human rights have also been observed in several states in northern Myanmar, notably in Kachin and northern Shan states, perpetrated against the majority Christian Kachin and Chin ethnic groups. Widespread conflict between the Myanmar Army and the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) has led to thousands of civilian deaths, and the displacement of over 120,000 people. In September 2018 the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar declared that the violations documented in Kachin and Shan states amounted to crimes against humanity and war crimes.

What is the situation for religious and ethnic minorities in Myanmar/Burma since the coup?

       The situation for religious and ethnic minorities in Myanmar has deteriorated further following the coup, and internal conflicts have been exacerbated by violent crackdowns on protestors. While Aung San Suu Kyi’s government faced heavy international criticism for their failure to stop the human rights violations against the Rohingya by Myanmar’s military, it seems likely that they were exercising at least some moderating influence on the military, which has now been removed.

       Within hours of the coup, CSW confirmed that at least three Buddhist monks had been arrested, a concerning indicator of the coup’s potential implications for the right to FoRB.

       The day after the coup, the USCIRF Vice Chair Anurima Bhargava said: “Given the history of brutal atrocities by the Myanmar military, our fear is that violence could quickly escalate, especially towards religious and ethnic communities, such as the Rohingya and other Muslims.”[3]

       On 8 February the Joint Strategy Team, a group of local humanitarian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) providing assistance to people affected by armed conflict in Kachin and northern Shan States, said that “the military coup is severely affecting the IDPs communities in Kachin and Northern Shan states. The military are taking more positions with armed troops and artillery, even in towns; and it has impacted on the transportation and movement of local people including IDPs. The civilian population is very worried, fearing that armed clashes will occur.”

       In March the Free Burma Rangers stated that over 7,000 people had been displaced in Karen State over the previous two months due to attacks by the Myanmar Army, despite a ceasefire, while over 70,000 people were displaced in Arakan State, and 100,000 remained displaced in Kachin State and northern Shan State.

       On May 11 a BBC article stated that more than 700 people have been killed by security forces and thousands have been detained in Myanmar. There have also been multiple reports of detainees being tortured while in custody, with some dying from their injuries.[4] The Free Burma Rangers reported that at least 40,000 people are internally displaced in Karen State.[5]

On May 17 the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners in Burma (AAPP) reported that 802 people had been killed, 5210 arrested and 4120 are currently in prison.[6] The military also took control of the town of Mindat, Chinland. Responding to the attacks in Mindat, the British embassy said: “Attacks on civilians are illegal and cannot be justified."[7]

How can the UK Government leverage its global position to alleviate the human rights crisis in Myanmar/Burma?

The UK government must:

       Lead the call for a global arms embargo on Myanmar in discussions with allies, after the UN Security Council resolution on the issue was blocked by China and Russia.

       Take a coordinated approach with other UN member states, agencies, international institutions including the EU, and Special Envoys to ensure that in all dialogues and exchanges with Myanmar human rights are raised and demands made that Myanmar fulfils its human rights obligations.

       Urge other countries, including Japan, India, Thailand and Vietnam, to cease all training of the Myanmar military.

       Increase international pressure on the Myanmar military to remove blocks to humanitarian access in the ethnic states.

       Provide cross-border humanitarian aid to those in most need in the ethnic conflict areas.

       Urge the Indian government to allow humanitarian actors to deliver aid along the Myanmar/Indian border, including to the Myanmar refugees in makeshift camps along the Indian border

       Urge the Indian and Thai governments not to deport Myanmar refugees back to Myanmar.

• 100 Myanmar refugees were allegedly deported from the Indian border village of Farkawn in late March.[8]
• This month, three journalists and two activists who fled Myanmar are set to be tried in Thailand on charges of illegally entering the country. If deported back to Myanmar, their lives will be in serious danger.

       Engage with and consider supporting initiatives driven by civil society organisations and legal experts that seek to analyse evidence indicating crimes against humanity.

       Support efforts to strengthen and better resource the UNHCR to accelerate applications for Myanmar nationals in countries where they are at risk of deportation to Myanmar.

       Consider funding support, through the FCDO’s Magna Carta fund or other funds, for  Myanmar’s National Unity Government and the diaspora community to advocate for a return to democratic rule in Myanmar.

Where these actions prove ineffective, what international laws and agreements can be used effectively for atrocity prevention?

CSW urges the UK government to:

       Consider states’ responsibilities under the General Assembly resolution on the 2005 World Summit Outcome (A/RES/60/1),[9] which was adopted without a vote, and to especially take into account paragraphs 138 and 139. While not legally binding, the resolution affirms states’ responsibility to protect against genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleaning and crimes against humanity – including incitement - and reinforces existing legally binding instruments to which states are party. The international community has a responsibility to support states in fulfilling their obligations and to act in a timely and decisive manner where states carry out such violations, including through diplomatic means as indicated in Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter of the United Nations and through the Security Council, in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter. 

       Take the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) seriously and together with its commitments under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, fulfil its obligations to support independent, impartial investigations and robust accountability mechanisms for violations carried out in Myanmar.

       Seek a co-ordinated approach to action on freedom of religion or belief violations against ethnic and religious minorities in Myanmar. The UK should encourage the UK Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief to work in concert with Special Envoys and Ambassadors with the same mandate representing the UN, EU, US and other countries.

       Engage with and consider supporting initiatives driven by civil society organisations and legal experts that seek to analyse evidence indicating crimes against humanity and the possibility of genocide, including continuing to support the OHCHR Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar.

How can the UK government support Myanmar’s National Unity Government and members of the Myanmar diaspora?

       Consider funding support, through the FCDO’s Magna Carta fund or other funds, for the Myanmar National Unity Government and the diaspora community to advocate for a return to democratic rule in Myanmar.

       Offer support to and fast-track victims of human rights abuses in Myanmar who are seeking asylum in the UK and are at risk of deportation to Myanmar. The UK Government should also support efforts to strengthen and better resource the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to accelerate asylum applications for Myanmar nationals in countries where they are at risk of deportation to Myanmar.

       When using the global human rights sanctions established in 2020, it is imperative that the UK Government actively seeks to involve and consult both civil society and the Myanmar diaspora community when considering and introducing further designations against perpetrators of the human rights violations in Myanmar under the Sanctions Act. The government should do so in a way which prioritises the safety of survivors and witnesses and take account of any confidentiality requirements.

May 2021