Myanmar: Prosecute Dismissed Officers for Atrocities

UN Security Council Should Urgently Refer Myanmar to the ICC

(New York) – The Myanmar government should prosecute recently removed army officers for their role in atrocities against ethnic Rohingya, Human Rights Watch said today. On June 25, 2018, in a statement posted on a Myanmar military Facebook page, the military announced the dismissal of Maj. Gen. Maung Maung Soe and belatedly announced the resignation of Lt. Gen. Aung Kyaw Zaw.

Each general oversaw military operations in Rakhine State following the deadly attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) on security posts on August 25, 2017. Military forces under the command of Maung Maung Soe and Aung Kyaw Zaw carried out a campaign of killings, rape, and mass arson that forced over 700,000 Rohingya refugees to flee to Bangladesh. Human Rights Watch found that these abuses amounted to crimes against humanity. The June 25 announcement made no reference of their link to atrocities, but instead focused on the weakness of their administration and performance prior to the ARSA attacks.

“Releasing from service two generals whose forces committed ethnic cleansing is a grossly inadequate response to wide-ranging atrocities,” said Brad Adams, Asia director. “This slap on the wrist is further proof that the Myanmar military has little intention of providing accountability for grave crimes.”

Both generals have been sanctioned because of their alleged responsibility for military atrocities against the Rohingya in northern Rakhine State. On December 21, 2017, the United States sanctioned Maung Maung Soe, while on February 16, 2018, Canada did the same. On June 25, the European Union and Canada announced new sanctions that included Maung Maung Soe, Aung Kyaw Zaw, and five other members of the Myanmar security forces present in northern Rakhine State or responsible for operations there.

Releasing from service two generals whose forces committed ethnic cleansing is a grossly inadequate response to wide-ranging atrocities.

Brad Adams

Asia Director

Maj. Gen. Maung Maung Soe is the former commander of the Western Command, which oversees military deployments and operations in Rakhine State. His dismissal on June 25 followed his transfer from his position of command to “reserve” duty in November 2017, taking him out of his active role of command.

The statement points out several shortcomings of Maung Maung Soe, including his weak performance in gaining advanced information about the ARSA attacks and taking necessary actions or preparations prior to the attacks, as well as his inability to secure Rakhine State. The statement makes no reference to the atrocities carried out by the forces operating under the Western Command and within the territory for which his command was responsible.

Lt. Gen. Aung Kyaw Zaw was the former commander of the Bureau of Special Operations No. 3 (BSO-3), which oversees three regional commands, including the Western Command. Maung Maung Soe was his subordinate. The statement said that Aung Kyaw Zaw’s performance relating to the attacks in Rakhine State and implementing policies from “above” were lacking. He was reportedly transferred from his assignment in part as a consequence of a “health condition,” and was later permitted to resign from the military on May 22.

Both generals retained their positions of authority and responsibility over the military and security forces throughout the ethnic cleansing campaign that security forces began in late August in Rakhine State. Under the legal doctrine of command responsibility, commanders and other superiors are criminally responsible for crimes committed by their subordinates if they knew or should have known about such crimes and did not act to prevent them or punish those responsible.

The Myanmar government recently announced plans to establish a three-member commission of inquiry, including one international representative, to look into alleged abuses in Rakhine State. But the government has repeatedly failed to credibly investigate crimes against the Rohingya committed by government forces. A Myanmar army investigation into violence in Rakhine state in 2016, when Myanmar security forces conducted a campaign of mass arson, rape, and murder, forcing nearly 90,000 Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh, found only two minor abuses. A second investigation, led by the same army general, concluded that “there were no deaths of innocent people” during the military operations that began in August 2017.

On June 27, the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, Yanghee Lee, questioned the purpose of the government’s new commission, especially since the government continues to block the UN-mandated Fact Finding Mission. She added in her update to the Human Rights Council that the situation in Myanmar demands accountability for the crimes committed and “clearly warrants” the attention of the International Criminal Court (ICC). She further said that the Human Rights Council should establish an accountability mechanism to prepare for an eventual prosecution of criminal suspects.

The UN Security Council should refer the situation in Myanmar to the International Criminal Court. Under the ICC’s statute, the court can only act when a state is “unwilling or unable” to investigate or prosecute grave crimes in violation of international law. Because Myanmar is neither a party to the ICC nor has accepted the court’s jurisdiction, the UN Security Council needs to refer the situation to the court.

“Myanmar’s history of atrocity denial leaves little hope that the proposed government commission will deliver credible findings,” Adams said. “Targeted sanctions by governments send a strong message of condemnation and a measure of accountability, but they are no substitute for bringing those responsible for grave crimes to justice. Concerned governments should press the UN Security Council to refer Myanmar to the ICC, and ensure that evidence is collected and preserved for prosecutions.”

Human Rights Watch

Oral update 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 and 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” and to “measure progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur”. Read more

International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, 26 June 2018

International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, 26 June 2018
Addressing the Needs of Torture Survivors
is Key to Building Peace and Democracy

Women’s League of Burma (WLB), Network for Human Rights Documentation-Burma (ND-Burma), the Assistance Association of Political Prisoners (AAPP), the Vimutti Women’s Organization (VWO) and Asia Justice and Rights (AJAR) are calling for an end to torture, and for rehabilitation of torture survivors.

WLB, ND-Burma, AAPP, VWO and AJAR are jointly organising a public event in Yangon to mark the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. The event will be held from 1:30-3:30pm at Free Funeral Service Society. At the event, participants will show their solidarity with survivors of torture and raise awareness on the needs of victims. The Burmese language version of the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT) produced by AAPP will also be distributed to the public.

Torture is not a practice of the past; it continues to be used in Myanmar by State actors, in particular in ethnic areas affected by current conflicts. Torture is still used during detention and interrogation, often in an effort to procure information or to force confessions. Villagers suspected of being affiliated with ethnic armed groups are frequently captured by military and tortured indiscriminately. Torture also includes acts of sexual violence. It is the government’s responsibility to stop and prevent torture in its jurisdiction.

The government must ratify the United Nations Convention Against Torture, and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). It would be an important first step in ending the practice of torture in Myanmar. It would also be a symbolic pledge of solidarity with survivors.

Torture survivors have a right to reparations and support. Many face ongoing and serious health problems. Access to medical care is an urgent need. Other needs include psychosocial support, vocational training, and public acknowledgement. Reparations and addressing the needs of torture survivors must be priorities of the government. They should be items for discussion in parliament and must be included in current peace process discussions.

In order to demonstrate its commitment to eliminating the practice of torture, we call on the government of Myanmar to:

  • Stop armed conflict and conduct a meaningful political dialogue in order to free civilians in conflict-affected areas from torture
  • Free civilians from torture and other human rights violations, including those that are committed by the military with impunity
  • Recognize survivors’ right to justice and provide them with legal assistance and access to a transparent justice system that will hold perpetrators accountable
  • Sign and ratify the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT), and implement it into national legislation,
  • Include the issues of reparations and support for torture survivors in peace process discussions
  • Release all remaining political prisoners unconditionally

Yangon, 26 June 2018
WLB, ND-Burma, AAPP, VWO and AJAR

Contact persons:

• Lway Poe Ngeal, WLB, 0978 132 9742
• U Aung Myo Kyaw, AAPP, 09428117348
• Khin Mi Mi Khine, VWO, 0979 543 9108

About Women’s League of Burma (WLB) www.womenofburma.org
The Women’s League of Burma (WLB) is an umbrella organization comprised of 13 women’s organizations of different ethnic backgrounds from Burma. WLB was founded on 9th December 1999. Its mission is to work for women’s empowerment and advancement of the status of women, and to work for the increased participation of women in all spheres of society in the democracy movement, and in peace and national reconciliation process through capacity building, advocacy, research and documentation.

About ND-Burma  www.nd-burma.org
ND-Burma formed in 2004 in order to provide a way for Burma human rights organizations to collaborate on the human rights documentation process. Seven member organizations and nine affiliate organizations seek to collectively use the truth of what communities in Burma have endured to challenge the regime’s power through present-day advocacy as well as prepare for justice and accountability measures in a potential transition. ND-Burma conducts fieldwork trainings; coordinates members’ input into a common database using Martus, open-source software developed by Benetech; and engages in joint-advocacy campaigns. When possible, ND-Burma also collaborates with other human rights organizations in all aspects of its work.

About Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP) www.aappb.org
AAPP was founded in 2000 by former political prisoners living in exile on the Thai/Burma border. Since then, the organization has been run by former political prisoners, and has opened offices inside Myanmar in Rangoon and Mandalay. AAPP advocates and lobbies for the release of remaining political prisoners and for the improvement of the lives of political prisoners after their release. The various assistance programs for political prisoners and their family members are aimed at ensuring they have access to education, vocational trainings, mental health counseling and healthcare.

About Vimutti Women’s Organization (VWO)
Vimutti Women’s Organization (VWO) is a community-based organization, which was created in 2009. Vimutti is a Pali word (Myanmar ancient literature), which means “freedom”. All VWO members are socially minded volunteers. VWO is very active in communities doing social work, humanitarian support, and providing educational charity to children from poverty-stricken families. VWO is directly engaging with vulnerable people to create a healthy societal environment through research, advocacy, networking, and improving their collective capacity development. VWO has a special program for strengthening women former political prisoners.

About Asia Justice And Rights (AJAR) www.asia-ajar.org
AJAR is a regional human rights organization based in Jakarta. AJAR works to increase the capacity of local and national organization in the fight against entrenched impunity and to contribute to building cultures based on accountability, justice and a willingness to learn from the root causes of mass human rights violations in Asia Pacific region.

Download Pdf

World Refugee Day

June 20, 2018

HURFOM: Today on World Refugee Day, HURFOM honors all refugees, asylum-seekers, and internally displaced people around the world.

HURFOM calls on governments, ethnic armed groups, civil society organisations, donors, and the international community to end the human rights violations which are causing people to flee their homes, and to aid all refugees, asylum-seekers and displaced people.

According to the Global Peace Index there are currently 68 million refugees and internally displaced people in the world, the most since records began following WWII.

In Burma, refugee and IDP crises are escalating across the country.

There are gross violations of human rights happening right now in Rakhine, Kachin, and Shan states in particular.

Over 700,000 ethnic Rohingya have been driven from their home in Rakhine State since August 2017. The UN described the attacks as ‘a textbook example of ethnic cleansing’. Human Rights Watch documented widespread gang rapes carried out by members of the Burmese military against Rohingya women and girls, as well as killings, arbitrary arrests, and mass arson in hundreds of Rohingya villages carried out by Burmese security forces. The Burmese military has denied all accusations. Some 40,000 Rohingya women and girls living in refugee camps in Bangladesh are pregnant and due to give birth in the coming weeks. As the monsoon rains hit, hundreds of thousands of Rohingya refugees currently living in refugee camps are in danger from flooding; several fatalities have already been reported.

In Kachin State, the conflict between the Burmese military and the Kachin Independence Army has escalated since January. A number of civilians have been reported killed, and thousands have fled their homes since the start of the year, according to the OHCHA. The UN estimates that there are now around 103,000 displaced people in camps and settlements in Kachin and northern Shan states as a result of the conflict.

HURFOM stands in solidarity with all displaced people in Burma and surrounding countries.

While these gross human rights violations are causing hundreds of thousands to flee their homes around Burma, and must be addressed as a priority, it is important also to remember the ongoing plight of people who have been displaced for years. IDP camps in Mon State – where some people have lived for decades, and to which ever more recently-displaced people continue to move – have been neglected, and their funding has been cut in recent years.

Until the government addresses the root causes of displacement, people will continue to be forced to flee their homes, and the safe, voluntary return of displaced people will be not be possible.

Land confiscation is a major reason many people leave their homes. Land confiscations have increased since government reforms started in 2011, as the government has encouraged inward investment and megaprojects. Encouragement of megaprojects and inward investment has encouraged human rights violations, as well as increasing food insecurity and forced migration.

I lost ten acres of cashew-nut plantation. They [the army] ordered the residents to move out. But the army hasn’t done anything with my land. They haven’t built any buildings. They just destroyed the cashew-nut plants. … Earlier, when a company built a road to the seaport I also lost my land [because of the construction]. I got compensation that time. But I didn’t get any compensation when the army confiscated my land.” U S—, April 2017

Many people flee their homes because of having to do forced labour for the Burma army.

Back in our village we were abused by the Burmese soldiers. They were violent and forced us to do porterage. We couldn’t make a living so we decided to leave the village. The porterage took one or two months, so poor families found it very difficult to make a living.” Daw A—, April 2017

One woman told us how the Burmese military forced even mothers with new-born babies to cut rocks for the railway, and how people were sexually abused and beaten, sometimes to death.

When they were building the railway from Ye to Tavoy, the Burmese military forced us to work on the railway. We had to cut through rock to make way for the railroad. Even mothers with new-born babies had to go and work for them, and had to take their own food. If we did not go to work they would beat us. The soldiers abused the girls. They would take off their longgyis at night. All of my family were beaten by the Burmese soldiers. My father was beaten so hard he could not chew food and vomited blood. My father passed away because of that injury.” Ma K—, April 2017

Others told us how they fled because of army torture.

I’ve been living here [in Halockhani] for 16 years. In the past, I had been appointed as a village administrator by the Mon community, so when the Burmese army came to the village, they tortured me. … If I had stayed in the village I would have lost my life.” Nai K—, May 2017

Displaced people we interviewed are clear about what they want for the future.

Housing, property and land rights must be acknowledged and restored. The root causes of displacement, including the impunity for human rights violators and the lack of rule of law, must be addressed before there can be safe and voluntary return for displaced people.

The previous government confiscated our land but the incumbent government has to take responsibility. Even the parliament has to take responsibility. They should meet with the victims of land confiscation and ask they what they want to happen to them. If they do that, then people can have a chance to find truth [justice].” U S—, April 2017

As a priority, HURFOM calls on governments, aid agencies, and the international community to restore aid to the IDP camps and resettlement sites.

Aid has been cut in recent years. Daw H—  told HURFOM that she has lived in Halockhani for the past 20 years. “We were supported with rice at the beginning. But they cut the support later. They haven’t supported us for the past two years.”

Recommendations

To the Burmese government to:

  • Ensure that the voluntary return of refugees and IDPs complies with international law including the UN Principles on Housing, Land and Property Rights for Refugees and Dis­placed Persons (‘Pinheiro Principles’) and international best practices with respect to vol­untary return; and
  • Acknowledge ethnic concerns regarding land and land policy and initiate reforms to pro­vide more HLP security for small-scale farmers and villagers from eastern Burma’s ethnic regions as well as to secure the durable return of IDPs and refugees.

To the Burma army to:

  • Immediately halt all military offensives in all ethnic areas and end human rights abuses; and
  • Immediately halt all land confiscations and return the land to the people or adequately compensate them for the confiscated land.

To Ethnic Armed Organisations to:

  • Develop a comprehensive, clear and shared position on IDPs’ and refugees’ return and rehabilitation in consultation with the IDPs and refugees, local communities and CBOs;
  • Develop a comprehensive, clear and shared position on HLP rights in consultation with the local communities, CBOs, IDPs and refugees.

To the international community and donor community to:

  • Support Burma’s ethnic communities to achieve their aspirations for equality, self-determination and establishment of a genuine federal union;
  • Commit to supporting and advocating for community-led, rights-based movements;
  • Ensure local ownership and participation of ethnic communities in decision making of all aspects of planning and management of aid and protection projects targeting refugees and IDPs;
  • Continue funding EAOs peace building activities, EAO-linked service providers as well as local ethnic CSOs/CBOs along the Thailand-Burma border; and
  • Ensure that mega development projects are implemented with the full, prior and informed consent of the potentially affected communities including holding meaningful consulta­tions, being transparent, and making the information accessible in local languages for the potentially affected communities prior to the initiation of the projects.

The United States is Quitting the UN Human Rights Council. Here’s Why That’s a Bad Idea

One day after being criticized by the top UN human rights official for its policy of separating children from their parents at the border, the United States announced that it is withdrawing from the main UN human rights organ, the Human Rights Council.

The timing is eyebrow raising, but this was not an entirely surprising decision.  One year ago, Nikki Haley visited the Human Rights Council in Geneva and issued an ultimatum: unless the Council reformed to her liking, the United States would pull out.

Haley’s criticisms of the council center around two indisputable facts: that the Council frequently focuses Israel and that some members of the Council are countries with poor human rights records. But rather than remain on the Council to defend Israel and try and prevent countries with poor human rights records from influencing the work of the Council, the United States is calling it quits.

By withdrawing from the Human Rights Council, the United States is ceding yet another tool of American global leadership

Haley’s criticisms of the Human Rights Council are as old as the Council itself. When the Council was created in 2005, then UN ambassador John Bolton lobbied successfully against the Bush administration joining it. After the 2008 elections, the United States opted to join, concluding that it could better steer the work of the Council from the inside, including defending Israel, rather than from the sidelines.

Evidence suggests that this approach tangibly advanced American interests at the Council.

report last year by the Council on Foreign Relations examined the work of the Council in years in which the United States served as a member and the years in which it did not. It found that Israel-specific resolutions decreased by more than half once the US joined the Council.

 

The CFR report also shows how country-specific mandates were added to the Council’s to-do list when the US was on the council, compared to the years in which it was not.

 

In other words, when the United States was an active participant at the Council, the Council reduced its focus on Israel and expanded its focus on other countries with problematic human rights records. This suggests that the stated reasons for the US withdrawal from the Council will become something of a fulfilling prophecy: with the US indifferent to the Council, the Council is more likely to adopt resolutions and measures that the United States finds contrary to its interests.

This move by the US is intended to discredit the UN Human Rights Council. In fact, the Council has a decent record of upholding human rights around the world.

Israel and Palestine are not the sum of the work of the Human Rights Council. Rather, in its 12 years of existence, the Council has amassed a decent track record, both of investigating specific human rights abuses and global norm setting.

In 2011, with strong support from the United States, the Human Rights Council passed an historic resolution that equated LGBT rights with human rights. This had the effect of mainstreaming LGBT rights into the broader UN human rights portfolio. This included giving then-secretary general Ban Ki Moon the breathing room he needed to more robustly engage in LGBT rights issues, even though some more conservative UN member states remained adamantly opposed. (In 2015, he was awarded the Harvey Milk award for his work on behalf of LGBT rights).

Just last year, the Human Rights Council approved the creation of a new special human rights “rapporteur” whose work focuses on rights issues around sexual orientation and gender identity.

The Human Rights Council has also been a platform for constructive engagement on issues that are otherwise paralyzed by big power rivalries at the Security Council. Syria is a good example here. With the Security Council unable to take any action, the Human Rights Council approved creating a commission of inquiry to document human rights abuses committed in the context of the Syria conflict. Every six months, the Commission of Inquiry releases a new report detailing abuses and identifying perpetrators. This obviously has not stopped the slaughter in Syria–but it has created robust documentary evidence of crimes committed in Syria that could be used in future war crimes proceedings. It is also a demonstration that, despite inaction at the Security Council, the United Nations can still be a player on these key global issues.

The Council has also routinely shined a spotlight on neglected human rights issues, such as regime abuses against its citizens in Eritrea and Belarus. It is the only UN entity that consistently maintains focus on human rights abuses by regimes that are not on the radar of the news media or are of particular interest to powerful forces at the UN.  In these situations it does its job–and does its job well. Again, to quote the CFR report:

“Two successive terms of U.S. membership on the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), before the mandatory one-year hiatus, have improved the body’s performance in several ways. These improvements include strengthening the council’s commitment to country-level action, fortifying norms that underpin fundamental freedoms and assist at-risk populations, rebalancing the human rights agenda, and building momentum for the defense of civil society.”

To the extent that US withdrawal from the council serves to undermine the council itself, the people who will suffer will end up being Eritreans and Belarusians who are being oppressed by their government.

US and International Human Rights Groups Do Not Support this Move

The American decision to leave the Human Rights Council is being criticized by human rights and humanitarian groups that have long standing commitments to upholding human dignity around the world.

Forfeiting the U.S. seat on the UN Human Rights Council only serves to empower actors on the Council, like Russia and China, that do not share American values on the preeminence of universal human rights – an assertion backed up by evidence from the 2006 U.S. Council withdrawal. Further, no other likeminded country seeking to occupy the United States’ former seat can realistically match Washington’s global diplomatic and political footprint. In short, without strategic U.S. engagement at the Council as a member, the U.S. loses a platform to influence the course of human rights globally for the better and the victims of human rights abuse globally will fall prey to the machinations of governments that will take advantage of this strategic vacuum.

That statement was signed by The Better World Campaign, CARE, Council for Global Equality, Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (HRNK), Freedom House, Human Rights Campaign, Human Rights First, Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights, PEN America, Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, Save the Children and United Nations Association – USA.

These groups work day in, day out to promote human rights around the world and they argue that the US withdrawal is harmful to their cause.

That is because this decision is antithetical to US interests and serves to undermine an already fragile global human rights regime. The United States doesn’t stand to gain much from leaving the Human Rights Council and the Trump administration is committing yet another unforced error by ceding this platform for upholding human rights around the world.

www.undispatch.com

Human rights are not a luxury

June 15

Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein is the U.N. high commissioner for human rights.

Four years as the U.N. high commissioner for human rights have brought me many luminous encounters and desperate struggles, much painful and shocking information, and some profound lessons that may take many years to fully assimilate.

I have constantly circled back to the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rightsin 1948, where this story truly began. It was a time of slaughter and terrible suffering, with broken economies and nations emerging from the ashes of two global wars, an immense genocide, atomic destruction and the Great Depression. Finding solutions that could ensure global — and national — peace was a matter of the starkest kind of survival. Committing to the U.N. Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was crucial. They were not philosophical goals: This was life or death.

There could be no peace without justice. There could be no durable development without promotion of broad social progress and better standards of life, for all, in larger freedom. The men and women who survived the two world wars understood this utterly. It was in their bones.

Treaty by treaty, world leaders built a great body of laws and covenants and committed to upholding them. Today there is a great cynicism about the global order they constructed — never fully global, never very orderly — but although it may have been partial, the progress they ensured was immense.

But that generation is departing quickly, and with them the living memory of the lessons that were so painfully clear to them. Now, rather than advancing toward greater freedom, justice and peace, the world is going backward — to a landscape of increasingly strident, zero-sum nationalism, where the jealously guarded, short-term interests of individual leaders supplant and destroy efforts to find common solutions.

0:03 / 2:37
Deputy editorial page editor Jackson Diehl says the best way to negotiate with North Korea on nuclear weapons is to bring up human rights. 

We are moving backward to an era of contempt for the rights of people who have been forced to flee their homes, because the threats they face there are more dangerous even than the perils of their voyage. Backward to a time when military operations could deliberately target civilians and civilian sites such as hospitals, and chemical gases were openly used for military purposes and against innocent families.

We are moving backward to an era when racists and xenophobes deliberately inflamed hatred and discrimination among the public, while carefully cloaking themselves in the guise of democracy and the rule of law. Backward to an era when women were not permitted to control their own choices and their own bodies — when criticism was criminalized and human rights activism brought jail, or worse.

This is the way that wars are made: with the snarl of belligerence and the smirk of dehumanization; the lash of injustice and the incremental erosion of old and seemingly wearisome checks. The path of violence is made up of the unreckoned consequences of banal, incidental brutality seeping into the political landscape.

Here is one lesson: Intolerance is an insatiable machine. Its wheels, once they begin to function at a certain amplitude, become uncontrollable — grinding deeper, more cruelly and widely. First one group of people is singled out for hatred; next it will be more, and then more, as the machine for exclusion accelerates into violence, and into civil or international warfare — feeding always on its own rage, a growing frenzy of grievance and blaming. As that tension begins to peak, no obvious mechanism exists that is capable of decompressing and controlling its intensity, because the machine functions on an emotional level that has very little contact with reason. Release may come only after tremendous violence. This is something those of us who work for human rights have witnessed time and again.

We are at a pivotal moment in history, now, as contempt for human rights spreads. Xenophobes and racists have emerged from the shadows. A backlash is growing against advances made in women’s rights and many others. The space for civic activism is shrinking. The legitimacy of human rights principles is attacked, and the practice of human rights norms is in retreat.

What we are destroying is, quite simply, the structures that ensure our safety.

The destruction of Syria is a murderous parable, written in blood, that brings home yet again that horrific spiraling of incremental human rights violations into absolute destruction.

The organized campaigns of violence against the Rohingya in Myanmar – Southeast Asia’s fastest-growing economy in 2016 — yet again reminds us that economic growth will never maintain peace and security in the face of biting discrimination. In 2017 — 2017! — we once again saw the specter of genocide, and once again, we did very, very little to stop it from happening.

So, in a sentence, what is the one core lesson that has been brought home to me by this extraordinary, privileged, crushing mandate as high commissioner?

It is that in every circumstance, the safety of humanity will be secured only through vision, energy and generosity of spirit; through activism; through the struggle for greater freedom, in equality; and through justice.

Sources