A/HRC/45/5
destroyed COVID-19 screening points operated by the Kachin Independence Organization
and the Restoration Council of Shan.
Kayin State
22.
In January 2020, the resumption of construction work on a road connecting
Kyaukkyi in Bago Region with Hpapun in Kayin, and the consequent increase in the
Tatmadaw’s presence in the area, resulted in clashes with the Karen National Union, an
ethnic armed organization and signatory to the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement. Local
organizations maintained that the Tatmadaw had systematically fired artillery shells onto
civilian areas to force the population to flee. Preliminary figures indicate that over 2,000
civilians fled to a nearby forest, where they faced difficulties accessing food and services.
Reportedly, Tatmadaw soldiers killed three civilians in the area around the road
construction in 2020, allegedly burning the body of one of the victims. Armed activities
resulting in displacement continued after the Tatmadaw’s declared ceasefire in connection
with the COVID-19 crisis, with hundreds reportedly fleeing their villages. On 6 May, the
Tatmadaw reportedly destroyed at least two COVID-19 screening checkpoints operated by
the Karen National Union.
B.
Accountability
23.
Myanmar made limited progress on the fact-finding mission’s recommendations to
conduct prompt, effective, thorough, independent and impartial investigations and to hold
perpetrators accountable for crimes committed across the country. In April 2018, the
Tatmadaw announced that a court martial, whose entire proceedings remain confidential,
sentenced four officers and three soldiers to 10 years’ imprisonment with hard labour for
their participation in the killing of 10 Rohingya men in Inn Din village. In November 2018,
however, the Commander-in-Chief pardoned and released them after they had served less
than a year of their sentences. Both process and pardon highlight the lack of transparency
and independence in the military justice system in Myanmar and the Commander-inChief’s influence over cases. Similarly, on 30 June 2020, the Tatmadaw announced that a
court martial had convicted two officers and a soldier for “weakness in following
instructions” during the Gu Dar Pyin incident in Buthidaung in 2017. Consistent with
previous military proceedings, and despite the Tatmadaw’s assurances of transparency,
information on the identities and ranks of perpetrators, the crimes for which they were
prosecuted, the trial proceedings and evidence, and their respective sentences, remains
undisclosed. Secrecy and lack of independence characterize all Tatmadaw-run processes,
making court-martial proceedings inadequate to render justice for crimes committed by
military personnel against civilians. In the case of Kachin and Shan States, no
investigations or prosecutions have taken place, with the military enjoying total impunity
for crimes documented by the fact-finding mission in those areas.
24.
Consistent with previous actions aimed at providing a notion of accountability,7 on
20 January 2020 the government-established Independent Commission of Enquiry
(hereinafter referred to as the national commission) submitted its report to the President.
Except for a 14-page executive summary containing recommendations and some annexes,
the report remains unpublished. A full assessment of the factual and legal analysis
underpinning the findings and recommendations, as well as of the national commission’s
methods of work – including the type and selection of sources, access to and protection of
witnesses, and particularly the failure to interview any Rohingya victims and witnesses in
Bangladesh, is not possible on the basis of the information made available. Previous
significant concerns about the structure, mandate, timing, independence and impartiality of
this mechanism persist. As the national commission’s mandate was focused narrowly on
specific events that took place in Rakhine during a short period of 12 days, there was no
investigation of broader patterns of violation, or of crimes committed in other parts of the
country. The authorities of Myanmar remain in denial that crimes in those areas have
7
6
A/HRC/39/64, paras. 95–99; A/HRC/39/CRP.2, paras. 1601–1609; A/HRC/40/37, paras. 56–59; and
CEDAW/C/MMR/CO/EP/1, para. 9.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents