A/HRC/42/50 B. Contextual and linkage information 22. The mission also focused on consolidating and collecting additional contextual and linkage information from Rakhine, Kachin and Shan States, which may assist the Mechanism in its assessment of potential individual liability for crimes under international law. 1. Rakhine 23. The mission’s further investigations have strengthened its findings that the circumstances and context of the “clearance operations” against the Rohingya that began on 25 August 2017 gave rise to an inference of genocidal intent, and that those attacks were preplanned and reflected a well-developed and State-endorsed policy aimed at the Rohingya. 24. The mission affirms its finding that, prior to the “clearance operations” conducted in 2017, government officials threatened Rohingya villagers to force them to accept national verification cards. The said officials called meetings, instructed Rohingya village representatives to attend and told them to accept the cards, or else face violent consequences, in a manner that indicated genocidal intent. The fact that the officials were addressing the participants as Rohingya village representatives and not as individuals indicates that the officials were issuing their threats against the Rohingya people as such, based on their ethnicity, religion or race, or a combination thereof. 25. The mission conducted interviews with non-Rohingya, including ethnic Rakhine, Mro and Khumi, to obtain new information about the “clearance operations”. These non-Rohingya sources substantiated the mission’s findings about the targeted and violent nature of the “clearance operations”. They strengthen the mission’s conclusion that these groups of nonRohingya villagers fell under the effective control of the Tatmadaw. The Tatmadaw commanders therefore had command responsibility obligations in relation to them under international law (see A/HRC/39/64).4 26. As part of its consolidation activities, the mission also copied and archived online government materials that reflected statements and decisions of government officials, including both military and civilian authorities, relevant to the crimes under international law that the mission documented. The mission was also able to consolidate findings regarding attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army against non-Rohingya communities. 27. In its previous investigation, the mission concluded on reasonable grounds that beatings, sexual violence, including rape, burning of genitals and nudity, and other egregious acts of violence, some of which resulted in death, had been committed against Rohingya prisoners detained in Buthidaung prison following the 2012 violence and that these acts amounted to the crimes against humanity of torture, inhumane acts and persecution.5 The mission now concludes on reasonable grounds that those crimes committed in Buthidaung prison continued until at least 2018. 28. The mission has found that the acts of violence committed against Rohingya prisoners also amount to torture pursuant to customary international law. 6 The prison guards who perpetrated acts of violence against the Rohingya detainees are public officials, and the mission also found that the ethnic Rakhine detainees who inflicted severe pain or suffering on Rohingya detainees acted with the consent or acquiescence of the prison authorities. 29. The mission collected information concerning the identity of potential individual perpetrators, namely authorities present at Buthidaung prison. They have been added to the confidential list of suspected perpetrators. The mission notes, in particular, that States that are parties to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment have an obligation to extradite or prosecute alleged perpetrators of torture. 4 5 6 6 See also A/HRC/39/CRP.2. Ibid. Myanmar is not a State party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; article 1 of the Convention, however, reflects customary international law.