A/HRC/42/CRP.5 return, the Mission concludes on reasonable grounds that the necessary conditions for return have not been met and, in fact, cannot be met at this time. Rohingya have repeatedly reaffirmed this when expressing both their desire to return home as soon as possible and their refusal to be forced back because the conditions are appallingly unacceptable. They are fully justified in their refusals. The Mission draws the conclusion that it is unsafe, inhumane, unsustainable and impossible for Rohingya to return on the same bases on which it draws its conclusion that the Rohingya continue to be the victims of crimes against humanity, it infers that the Government harbours genocidal intent and it concludes that the Rohingya are at serious risk of being the victims of genocide. 248. The Government is able but unwilling to change conditions in Rakhine State to ensure the Rohingya are able to enjoy all their human rights. This is perhaps the strongest indication of why Rohingya justifiably insist that they are not prepared to return at this time. 249. The Mission also takes note that Myanmar should comply with the Principles on housing and property restitution for refugees and displaced persons (Pinheiro Principles), which apply to the issue of land, home, and property restitution for people displaced due to arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of their homes, lands, properties or places of habitual residence.558 The Pinheiro Principles reflect widely accepted principles of international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law and related standards.559 Under the principles, everyone who has been arbitrarily or unlawfully deprived of housing, land and/or property should be able to submit a claim for restitution and/or compensation. 560 The notion of “arbitrariness” under international human rights law is broader than “against the law” and must be interpreted to include elements of inappropriateness, injustice, lack of predictability, due process of law, reasonableness, necessity and proportionality. 561 250. Additionally, the process, including appeals, should be independent and impartial 562 and should be just, timely, accessible, free of charge, and age and gender sensitive.563 States should also ensure that the restitution claims process is accessible for refugees and IDPs regardless of their location during displacement,564 no one should be persecuted or punished for making a restitution claim,565 and restitution programmes are carried out with adequate consultation and participation with the affected persons.566 Arbitrary and discriminatory laws, as well as statutes of limitations, should not prejudice the restitution process, 567 and States should immediately repeal laws with discriminatory effect on the enjoyment of the right to housing, land and property restitution.568 All refugees and IDPs have the right to full and effective compensation as an integral component of the restitution process. 569 10. Business and development assistance in Rakhine State 251. The Mission reiterates its view that businesses and development assistance programmes in Rakhine State should take the necessary steps to ensure their actions do not enrich the Tatmadaw or support Government efforts that reshape the demographic 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 Principles on housing and property restitution for refugees and displaced persons (Pinheiro Princples), E/CN.4/Sub.2/2005/17, 28 June 2005, principle 1.1, available at https://www.unhcr.org/protection/idps/50f94d849/principles-housing-property-restitution-refugeesdisplaced-persons-pinheiro.html. Ibid., para. 8 (Introduction). Ibid., principle 13.1.. United Nations Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 36 (2018) on article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the right to life, 30 October 2018, CCPR/C/GC/36, para. 12. Pinheiro Princples, principle 13.1. Ibid., principle 13.2. Ibid., principle 13.4. Ibid., principle 13.12. Ibid., principle 14.1. Ibid., principle 19.1. Ibid., principle 19.2. Ibid., principle 21.1. 79