缅甸人权状况特别报告员李艳熙女士在人权理事会第三十八届会议上口头介绍新情况

2018年6月27日

主席先生，尊敬的各位代表，女士们，先生们：

我荣幸地再次在安理会发言，根据人权理事会关于缅甸人权状况的第37/32号决议提交我的口头进度报告。该决议授权我“继续监测人权状况”和“衡量特别报告员各项建议的执行进展情况”。我注意到，该决议还呼吁缅甸政府“立即恢复与特别报告员履行任务的合作，包括为进一步访问提供便利”。首先，我要强调，我仍然希望缅甸政府将恢复与我的合作。执行安理会赋予我的任务和履行赋予我的责任极其困难，因为我继续被拒绝进入该国，这违反了安理会3月份的决议。此外，我遗憾地通知安理会，我没有收到印度政府对我要求访问新德里、米佐拉姆和查谟和克什米尔邦的答复，以便会见在印度的缅甸难民。各会员国必须尊重安理会规定的任务，并对特别程序任务负责人提出的有效履行其任务的要求作出及时和合理的答复。

主席先生，

鉴于缅甸政府拒绝与我合作，我即将前往孟加拉国访问达卡和考克斯的巴扎。我还向孟加拉国政府提出了一项具体要求，即为访问巴山查尔岛和科纳帕拉地区提供便利，这两个地区位于“无人地带”的孟加拉国一侧，缅甸罗辛亚人在那里逗留了将近一年。我要与人权事务委员会一道发言，并提醒孟加拉国注意保护罗辛亚难民的国际标准和义务。在考克斯的集市上，我将会见难民社区的成员，自2017年8月以来，已有70多万人抵达。随着这一数字的继续上升，我必须停下来考虑一下现在出现的可怕局势，它是如何可能发生的，以及前进的道路。

在这些令人深感不安的时刻，我记得人权委员会第1992/58号决议规定了缅甸问题特别报告员的任务的创始决议“呼吁缅甸政府创造必要的条件，制止缅甸难民大批逃往邻国，并便利他们早日从避难国遣返”。

历任特别报告员记录了自1992年以来对安全部队侵犯和践踏人权以及违反国际人道主义法的无数指控。尽管任务负责人发出了呼吁、发出了早期警告和作出了努力，但全国各地对族裔和宗教少数群体的暴力、迫害、歧视、统治和仇恨仍在继续。事实上，对目前流离失所数字的叙述说明了军方和历届政府，包括今天执政的政府对人权的公然无视。联合国难民署上周在其关于被迫流离失所的全球趋势报告中说，缅甸现在是世界上第四大难民生产国；这是一个可耻的事实。在我今天向各位讲话时，孟加拉国境内大约有100万罗辛亚难民，其中一些人自1990年代以来就一直在那里。我们不能忘记，2012年若开邦中部发生暴力事件后，128 000多人(多数是罗辛亚人)仍被关押在难民营中。

由于武装冲突，克钦邦和掸邦约有123 000名流离失所者，这些冲突自2011年以来一直在进行，近几个月尤为残酷。今年早些时候，克伦邦再次爆发冲突，导致25000人背井离乡，几十年来，约有12.1万人生活在泰缅边境，他们太害怕回家了。这些数字包括缅甸政府未能保护、尊重和实现其权利的大量人。

总统先生

我注意到缅甸政府、难民专员办事处和开发计划署近于6月初签署了“谅解备忘录”，以协助从孟加拉国遣返的进程。令人感到不安的是，谅解备忘录仍未公开，其条款也没有透明度。令我感到沮丧的是，谅解备忘录各方，包括参与这一进程的联合国机构，显然没有承认生活在孟加拉国的罗辛亚人是难民和罗辛亚人。可怕的仍然是，罗辛亚难民没有参加关于这一谅解备忘录的任何讨论，也没有就整个遣返进程征求过意见。我想请问各位，遣返的过程如何能够是自愿的，而这些人却被排除在遣返程序之外呢？你如何确保任何报税表是以个人知情同意为基础的？让我们停下来问问自己，“自愿的、有尊严的、安全的和可持续的”回归到底意味着什么，以及在目前的框架下这是否是可以实现的。

罗辛亚难民一直告诉我，说他们安全、自愿、有尊严和可持续地返回是徒劳的，除非妥善解决他们外流的根源。至关重要的是，缅甸政府应废除继续存在的法律、政策和做法对罗辛亚人的歧视制度，并保障他们的基本人权，包括恢复他们的公民权利和财产。难民返回缅甸必须充分尊重国际难民法和国际人权法的规范和标准。我强调，除非若开邦乃至全国各地的条件真正安全，使回返者能够享受其权利，所有人都能获得服务，而且行动自由得到保障，否则不应返回。联合国机构必须让难民男子、妇女和儿童参与决定他们的命运。例如，需要解决男子、妇女、女孩和男孩、残疾人和老年人的需要。在缅甸没有适当协商和适当条件之前，任何仓促返回都将是不可持续的，只会导致历史悲惨地重演到未来。

事实上，流入孟加拉国的难民并没有停止，进入若开邦北部的机会有限，对那里罗辛亚人的情况知之甚少。可以说，没有证据表明，与2017年8月以前相比，他们的生活条件有所改善。当时的情况相当于有系统的歧视，不幸的是，由于行动限制加剧，缺乏获得生计、教育、保健和基本服务的机会，以及缅甸安全部队不断进行恐吓，现在情况严重恶化。

尊敬的各位代表，

尽管国际社会的注意力被罗辛亚危机所消耗，但由于和平进程明显停滞，该国其他几个地区的暴力冲突自今年年初以来急剧升级。3月，在克伦邦，军方与“全国停火协定”缔约方克伦民族解放军之间重新爆发冲突，数千名村民被迫逃离，其中一人被军方开枪打死。据报告，5月在钦邦发生的Arakan军队和军方之间的冲突导致1 000名村民流离失所。在掸邦北部，族裔武装团体之间以及与军方之间的战斗导致流离失所的平民，据报造成14人死亡，18人受伤。

军队和克钦独立军冲突七周年刚刚过去。在克钦邦的许多地区，发生了多年来激烈的一些战斗，发生了冲突，对平民地区进行了不分青红皂白的炮击和空中轰炸，摧毁了数以千计的平民。有令人痛心的报告说，逃亡的平民，包括一些儿童，据称被军方用作人肉盾牌和扫雷者。数千名村民被迫逃离，结果被困在森林中，得不到援助；据报，在一些受敌对行动影响的村庄，军队阻止他们离开。这使因克钦邦冲突而流离失所的人数自1月以来达到13 500人。人道主义援助准入仍然微不足道，我深为关切地收到报告说，克钦浸信会是向流离失所的克钦人提供支助的主要提供者，由于受到军方逮捕的威胁，它已停止在非政府控制地区的活动。我呼吁冲突各方停止敌对行动，保护平民和民用物体，并立即允许充分的人道主义准入。

我感到不安的是，缅甸政府近宣布了“关闭缅甸境内流离失所者营地的国家战略”，而且没有制定适当的计划。虽然我欢迎缅甸政府打算解决长期流离失所问题的前景，因为缅甸境内的流离失所者无法实现他们享有的所有权利，但我对缅甸政府是否有能力在冲突期间按照国际标准关闭难民营和便利他们返回原籍地感到严重担忧。继续而不解决流离失所的根源。任何返回都必须是自愿的、安全的、有尊严的和可持续的。我呼吁政府提供具体细节，说明它建议如何进行关闭进程，包括举行真正的社区协商。

各位阁下，

这使我想到缅甸的民主空间，4月和5月在几个城市举行了反对全国冲突和支持和平的示威。在仰光举行静坐示威的抗议者被警察和身份不明的便衣男子暴力驱散，这是不可接受的。对和平抗议者过度使用武力是没有道理的。大约45名活动分子在全国各地被捕，并因行使言论和集会自由权而受到起诉。

Aung Ko Htwe在监狱中，3月底被判犯有告诉记者他在军队指控下被起诉后作为缅军童兵的经历的罪行。他应立即无条件释放。

此外，Kyaw Soe Oo和WA Lone是两位勇敢的路透社记者，他们发现了InstinDin屠杀事件，他们仍然在监狱里苦苦挣扎。一名警察的证词表明，他们面临的指控是虚假的，他作证说，他们是根据上级官员的命令逮捕他们的。他因与记者会面而面临纪律处分程序而被定罪和监禁。我再次呼吁立即释放这两名发表言论的记者和警察，并撤销对他们的指控。

我还对文化和宗教事务部本周发出的关于限制伊斯兰和阿拉伯语教学以及建造新的“圣经”和“古兰经”礼拜场所的指示感到严重关切。据报告，宗教教义只能在部级批准的清真寺和宗教学校使用该部批准的教科书进行，禁止在家中教学。缅甸政府必须尊重所有人以自己选择的语言自由教授和学习其宗教的权利。

女士们先生们：

安理会充分意识到，迫使罗辛亚人离开缅甸的暴力事件已经发生十多个月了。自那时以来，我一直在报告存在侵犯人权行为的可信证据，包括安全部队对罗辛亚人社区的广泛和有系统的攻击，可能构成危害人类罪，我还报告了安全部队可能在包括克钦在内的其他边境地区犯下战争罪和危害人类罪的情况。掸邦，自1948年缅甸独立后不久，那里的少数民族就经历了旷日持久的冲突。大赦国际和路透社近发表的报告详细叙述了军方参与若开邦“排雷行动”和其他可怕侵犯人权行为的情况。

如果不采取具体行动，国际社会对安全部队侵犯和践踏人权以及违反国际人道主义法的悲惨和空前程度的谴责是远远不够的。犯下指控的罪行实在太多，而且记录在案和报告甚少，而肇事者所面临的后果却很少。权力不应是的；权力必须负责。关于确保追究缅甸境内严重侵犯人权和严重违反国际人道主义法行为的责任，我们必须承认，迄今为止，联合国和国际社会再次失败。

我充分意识到，调查严重侵犯人权和违反国际人道主义法的指控以及确保受害者得到公正和补救的首要责任完全在于有关国家。然而，就缅甸而言，政府和军方过去开展的调查和调查没有一项符合国际法的要求，即这些调查和调查必须是可信、迅速、彻底、独立和公正的，能够导致对缅甸司法系统下的责任人进行刑事起诉。这尤其是因为缅甸司法机构缺乏独立性和能力。

我还知道，政府近设立了一个“独立调查委员会”，以“处理若开邦的和解、和平、稳定和事态发展”。我不知道调查委员会在调查中将适用什么法律和方法标准，而且似乎也没有寻求追究责任和解决局势的根源。鉴于我了解过去的调查、继续否认可能的不当行为以及缺乏强有力的政治意愿，我怀疑该委员会是否又一次试图分散国际社会的注意力，消除政府面临的压力，并消除结束有罪不罚现象的呼吁。对安全部队的侵权指控进行可信的调查和起诉，对于打破暴力循环、结束有罪不罚现象和推进问责至关重要，缅甸迄今一直没有开展这种调查，这是昂山素季领导的政府将开展的第六次国内调查，自那时以来，还开展了其他调查，以调查若开邦。2012年，还没有进行有效的调查，追究肇事者的责任。我必须问，为何政府寻求设立更多调查机构，而取得公正、可信和独立调查结果的方法，是让我和本局成立的事实调查团接触，以及设立一个人权事务高级专员公署，并赋予其充分的职权。

主席先生，

近要求根据“罗马规约”第十九条第三款就国际刑事法院(国际刑院)检察官将罗辛亚人从缅甸驱逐回孟加拉国的指控作出裁决，这是一项值得欢迎的努力。然而，这一请求仅限于缅甸各地几十年来普遍和公然侵犯人权和违反国际人道主义法的行为中的一项具体罪行，而且这一罪行仍在继续。因此，它不足以为缅甸全体人民伸张正义。

虽然缅甸的局势显然值得国际刑事法院注意，但我对联合国安全理事会显然无法联合起来处理这一局势深表关切。我强烈建议国际刑事法院或一个可信的国际机制调查和起诉据称对这些罪行负有责任的人。我坚信，追究所犯罪行的责任是结束缅甸人民面临的暴力循环的途径。

为了准备国际刑事法院或可信的调查和起诉，并为了终结束几十年的此类罪行，并采取有效措施伸张正义，我建议安理会毫不拖延地在联合国主持下建立一个问责机制。我在3月份提交本局的报告中，曾建议在考克斯市政厅设立一个架构。鉴于安全部队在全国各地侵犯和践踏人权以及违反国际人道主义法的指控的规模和严重性，该结构还应致力于促进所有受害者的正义和权利。因此，现在必须考虑建立一个超出我建议范围的可信的国际问责机制。

问责机制的细节应由国际社会决定。不过，我建议问责机制应包括三个部分：

，该机制应与受害者面谈，调查侵犯和虐待行为，记录关于侵犯和践踏人权以及违反国际人道主义法的指控，并合并其他机制和联合国机构，包括实况调查团所进行的调查。鉴于与这么多受害者的距离，它应该有调查员和专家驻扎在考克斯的Bazar。然而，对指称的侵犯和虐待行为的调查不应仅限于若开邦，而应涵盖整个缅甸，特别是若开邦、克钦邦和掸邦，调查人员和专家前往缅甸和该区域其他国家与受害者和利益攸关方交谈。

第二，该机制应当有法律和司法专家，他们将审查缅甸境内侵犯和践踏人权以及违反国际人道主义法的模式和趋势，确定所犯罪行的要素、方式和责任，并确定个人的参与和责任，储存证据和资料，并建立符合国际刑法标准的案件，供今后的检察和司法机制使用。

后，该机制应制定受害者支助、和解和重返社会框架，以确保以受害者的名义伸张正义，确保受害者在伸张正义的过程中始终得到支持。

后，与缅甸政府的建设性接触是我的优先事项。我重申，在与我的任务有关的所有事项上，我将继续利用我的援助和咨询意见，并克服缅甸民主化进程中的挑战。

Oral by Ms. Yanghee Lee, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar at the 38th session of the Human Rights Council

27 June 2018

Mr President, distinguished representatives, ladies gentlemen,

I am honoured to once again address this Council to present my oral progress report pursuant to the HRC resolution 37/32 on the situation of human rights in Myanmar. The resolution mandates me to “continue to monitor the situation of human rights” to “measure progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur”. I note that the resolution also called on the Government of Myanmar “to resume without delay its cooperation with the Special Rapporteur in the exercise of the mandate, including by facilitating further visits”. From the outset, I would like emphasize that I still hope that the Government of Myanmar will resume its cooperation with me. Execution of the mandate fulfilling the responsibilities entrusted to me by the Council have been extremely difficult due to the continued denial of my access to the country, contrary to the Council’s March resolution. Additionally, I regret to inform the Council that I received no reply from the Government of India to my request to visit New Delhi, Mizoram the State of Jammu Kashmir in order to meet the refugees from Myanmar who are present in India. It is imperative that member states respect the mandates established by this Council provide timely reasonable answers to requests made by Special Procedures mandate holders to effectively discharge their mandates.

Mr President,                                      

In light of the Myanmar Government’s refusal to cooperate with me, I am about to undertake my mission to Bangladesh where I will visit Dhaka Cox’s Bazar. I have also made a specific request to the Government of Bangladesh to facilitate a visit to Bashan Char islthe Konarpara area, on the Bangladesh side of “no man’s land” where Rohingya from Myanmar have been staying nearly a year. I would like to add my voice to that of the Human Rights Committee remind Bangladesh about international standards obligations for the protection of Rohingya refugees. In Cox’s Bazar, I will meet members of the refugee community, with over 700,000 having arrived since August 2017. As that number continues to rise, I must give pause to consider the terrible situation that now presents itself, how it was possible that it occurred, the way forward.

In these deeply troubling times, I am reminded that the founding resolution that established the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar established by Commission on Human rights resolution 1992/58 [quote starts] “calls upon the Government of Myanmar to create necessary conditions that would end the exodus of Myanmar refugees to neighbouring countries as well as to facilitate their early repatriation from their countries of refuge” [quote ends].

Successive Special Rapporteurs have documented innumerable allegations of human rights violations abuses, violations of international humanitarian law committed by the security forces since 1992. Despite the calls, early warnings efforts made by mandate holders, violence, persecution, discrimination, domination hatred against ethnic religious minority communities continue across the country. Indeed, a recounting of the current displacement figures is illustrative of the flagrant disregard for human rights held by the military successive Governments, including the one in office today. UNHCR said last week in its global trends on forced displacement report that Myanmar is now the world’s fourth largest refugee producing state; this is a shameful fact. As I address you today, there are around a million Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, some of whom have been there since the 1990s. We must not forget that over 128,000 mostly Rohingya people remain interned in camps following violence in central Rakhine in 2012.

There are approximately 123,000 displaced people in Kachin Shan States as a result of armed conflict that has been waged since 2011 been particularly brutal in recent months. Renewed conflict in Kayin State drove two a half thouspeople from their homes earlier this year, around 121,000 people have been living on the Thai-Myanmar border for decades, too fearful to return home. These figures comprise an enormous number of people whose rights the Myanmar Government has failed to protect, respect fulfil. 

Mr. President,

I note the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) recently signed between the Myanmar Government, UNHCR UNDP in early June to assist the process of repatriation from Bangladesh. It is disconcerting that the MoU remains not publicly available there has not been transparency about its terms. I am dismayed about the fact that the parties to the MoU, including the United Nations agencies involved in this process, have apparently failed to recognise Rohingya living in Bangladesh as refugees as Rohingya. Most frightful still is the fact that the Rohingya refugees have not been included in any of the discussions around this MoU nor consulted in relation to the repatriation process as a whole. I would like to ask your Excellencies, how can the process of repatriation be voluntary with the people who the process is for excluded from it? How can you be sure that any return is based on individual informed consent? Let’s stop for a moment ask ourselves what “voluntary, dignified, safe, sustainable” returns really mean, whether that is achievable in the current framework.

I have been consistently informed by Rohingya refugees that it is futile to speak about their safe, voluntary, dignified sustainable return unless the root causes of their exodus are properly addressed. It is paramount that the Myanmar Government dismantle the system of discrimination against the Rohingya by law, policy practice that continues to exist, guarantee fundamental human rights to them, including by restoring their citizenship rights property. The refugees’ return to Myanmar must occur in full respect of the norms standards of international refugee law international human rights law. I emphasise that no return should take place unless the conditions in Rakhine State, indeed across the country, are truly safe, enable returnees to enjoy their rights, services are accessible for all, freedom of movement is guaranteed. UN agencies must involve refugee men, women children in decisions about their fate. The needs of men, women, girls boys, persons with disabilities the elderly, for example, need to be addressed. Any hasty return without adequate consultation before the appropriate conditions are in place in Myanmar will not be sustainable, will only lead to history tragically repeating itself into the future.

Indeed, the flow of refugees to Bangladesh has not stopped with limited access to northern Rakhine, little is known about the situation of the Rohingya there. Suffice to say, there is no evidence that the conditions under which they live have improved compared to how they were before August 2017. The conditions then amounted to systematic discrimination, unfortunately are reportedly significantly worse now as a result of heightened movement restrictions, lack of access to livelihoods, education, health basic services, ongoing intimidation by Myanmar’s security forces.

Distinguished Representatives,

While the international community’s attention is consumed by the Rohingya crisis, violent conflict has sharply escalated in several other areas of the country since the beginning of the year, amid the evident stalling of the peace process. In March in Kayin State, conflict resumed between the military the Karen National Liberation Army, a party to the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement, thousands of villagers were forced to flee while one was shot dead by the military. Clashes between the Arakan Army the military in May in Chin State reportedly led to 1,000 villagers being displaced. In northern Shan State, fighting between ethnic armed groups as well as with the military has led to displaced civilians reportedly the death of 14 injury of 18 civilians.

The seven-year anniversary of conflict between the military Kachin Independence Army has just passed. Across many parts of Kachin State, some of the most intense fighting in years has been seen, with clashes indiscriminate shelling air bombardments of civilian areas devastating thousands of civilians. There are distressing reports that fleeing civilians, including a number of children, were allegedly used by the military as human shields mine sweepers. Thousands of villagers were forced to flee only to be trapped in the forest without assistance, in some villages affected by hostilities they were reportedly blocked from leaving by the military. This brings the number of people who have been displaced by conflict in Kachin to 13,500 since January. Humanitarian access remains negligible I am deeply concerned to receive reports that the Kachin Baptist Convention, a key provider of support to the displaced Kachin, has halted its activities in non-government controlled areas as a result of being threatened with arrest by the military. I call on all parties to the conflicts to end hostilities, to protect civilians civilian objects, to allow full humanitarian access immediately.

I am disturbed by the Government’s recent announcement of the “National Strategy for the closure of the IDP camps in Myanmar” that it does not entail a proper plan. While I welcome the prospect that the Government intends to deal with the problem of protracted displacement given that displaced people in Myanmar are unable to realise all the rights to which they are entitled, I have serious misgivings about the Government’s ability to close the camps facilitate people returning to their places of origin in accordance with international standards while conflict continues without addressing the root causes of displacement. Any return must be voluntary, safe, dignified sustainable. I call on the Government to share concrete details about how it proposes to carry out the closure process, including holding genuine community consultations.

Excellencies,

This brings me to Myanmar’s democratic space. Demonstrations against the conflict around the country in support of peace took place in several cities in April May. It is unacceptable that protestors in Yangon who staged a sit-in were violently dispersed by the police unidentified plain clothed men. Excessive use of force against peaceful protestors is unwarranted. Some 45 activists were arrested around the country are being prosecuted for exercising their rights of freedom of expression assembly.

Aung Ko Htwe is in prison, convicted at the end of March of the crime of telling journalists of his experiences as a child recruit of the Tatmadaw after being prosecuted under charges brought by the military. He should be released unconditionally without delay.

Additionally, Kyaw Soe Oo Wa Lone, the two brave Reuters journalists who uncovered the Inn Din massacre, still languish in jail. The charges they are facing have been shown to be spurious by the statement of a policeman who testified that their arrest had been set up on the orders of his superior officer. He has been convicted imprisoned following facing disciplinary proceedings for meeting with the journalists. I reiterate my call for the immediate release of these two journalists the policeman who spoke out for the charges against them to be dropped.  

I am further seriously concerned about the instruction issued just this week by the Ministry of Cultural Religious Affairs that restricts Islamic Arabic teaching, as well as building new places of worship of the Bible the Quran. Reportedly, religious teachings may only be carried out at Ministry approved mosques madrasas in Myanmar language using Ministry approved textbooks, teaching at home is prohibited. The Myanmar Government must respect the rights of all people to freely teach study their religion in their chosen tongue.

Ladies Gentlemen,

As the Council is fully aware, it has been more than ten months since the start of the violence that forced the Rohingya to leave Myanmar. Since that time, I have been consistently reporting of the credible evidence that exists of violations of human rights including the widespread systematic attacks by security forces against the Rohingya community, possibly amounting to crimes against humanity. I have also been reporting on possible commission of war crimes crimes against humanity by security forces in the other border areas of Myanmar, including Kachin Shan States, where ethnic populations have endured protracted conflicts since shortly after Myanmar gained independence in 1948. Recent reports issued by Amnesty International Reuters  provide detailed acof the involvement of military  in the “clearance operations” in Rakhine State in other horrific violations of human rights.

Without concrete action, condemnation by the international community of the tragic unprecedented level of human rights violations abuses violations of international humanitarian law by security forces is simply not enough. Far too many alleged crimes have been committed, have been documented reported with scant consequences faced by those who perpetrated them. Power should not be absolute; power must be accountable. On ensuring accountability for gross violations of human rights serious violations of international humanitarian law in Myanmar, we must admit that so far the United Nations the international community have failed – once again.

I am fully aware that the primary responsibility for investigating allegations of gross violations of human rights international humanitarian law, for ensuring that the victims receive justice redress, squarely rests with the State concerned. However, in the case of Myanmar, none of the investigations inquiries established by the Government the military in the past have met the requirements of international law that they are credible, prompt, thorough, independent impartial, capable of leading to the criminal prosecution of those responsible under Myanmar’s justice system. This is particularly because the Myanmar judiciary is lacking in independence capacity.

I am also aware that the Government has recently established “an independent commission of enquiry” in order to “address reconciliation, peace, stability developments in Rakhine.” I am not aware what legal methodological standards the commission of enquiry will be applying in its investigation, it does not appear to seek to secure accountability address the root causes of the situation. Given my knowledge of the investigations of the past, the continued denial of possible wrongdoing, lack of strong political will, I query whether the commission is possibly another attempt to distract the international community, diffuse the pressure the Government is facing, neutralise the calls to end impunity. Credible investigation prosecution of allegations of violations by security forces abuses are critical to break the cycle of violence, end impunity advance accountability, which has so far been absent from Myanmar. This is the sixth domestic inquiry to be set up under the Aung San Suu Kyi-led Government, with other inquiries having been set up to look into Rakhine State since 2012, no inquiry yet effectively holding perpetrators to account. I must ask why the Government seeks to create more investigative bodies when the best way to obtain impartial, credible, independent findings would be to allow access to me the Fact Finding Mission which this Council established, to set up an OHCHR office with a fully-fledged mandate.

Mr President,

The recent request for a ruling on jurisdiction under Article 19(3) of the Rome Statute over the alleged deportation of the Rohingya people from Myanmar to Bangladesh by the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor is a welcome effort. However the request is limited to one specific crime among the widespread flagrant violations of human rights international humanitarian law that have occurred for decades across Myanmar, are continuing. It is therefore insufficient to achieve justice for all the people of Myanmar.

While the situation of Myanmar clearly warrants the attention of the ICC, I express deep concern about the apparent inability of the UN Security Council to unite to refer the situation. I strongly recommend the persons allegedly responsible for the crimes be investigated prosecuted by the ICC or a credible international mechanism. I firmly believe that accountability for the crimes committed is the only way to end the cycles of violence faced by the people of Myanmar.

To prepare for ICC or a credible investigation prosecution, in order to finally put an end to decades of such crimes to take effective measures to bring justice, I recommend that the Council establish an accountability mechanism under the auspices of the United Nations without delay. In my March report to this Council, I made a proposal to establish a structure based in Cox’s Bazar. In view of the scale gravity of the allegations of security forces’ human rights violations abuses, violations of international humanitarian law across the country, the structure should also look to advance justice rights of all victims. It is therefore imperative to now consider a credible international accountability mechanism going beyond my recommendation.

The details of the accountability mechanism should be determined by the international community. However, I recommend that the accountability mechanism should have three components:

Firstly, the mechanism should interview victims, investigate violations abuses, document allegations of human rights violations abuses violations of international humanitarian law, consolidate the investigations undertaken by other mechanisms United Nations bodies, including the Fact Finding Mission. It should have investigators experts based in Cox’s Bazar given the proximity to so many victims. However investigation of the alleged violations abuses should not be limited to Rakhine State but should cover the whole of Myanmar, particularly Rakhine, Kachin Shan States, with investigators experts traveling to Myanmar other countries in the region to speak to victims stakeholders.

Secondly, the mechanism should have legal judicial experts, who would examine patterns trends of human rights violations abuses violations of international humanitarian law in Myanmar, establish elements, modes liabilities of the crimes committed, also determine participation responsibility of individual perpetrators, store evidence information, build cases consistent to international criminal law standards that can be used by future prosecutorial judicial mechanisms.

lastly, the mechanism should develop a framework for victim support, reconciliation reintegration to ensure that justice in the name of victims not operate in vacuum victims are supported throughout in their pursuance of justice.

In closing, constructive engagement with the Government of Myanmar is my utmost priority. I reiterate that I will continue to avail my assistance advice in all matters pertaining to my mandate overcoming challenges in Myanmar’s journey to democratization.

I thank you for your attention.

谢谢你的关注。