Myanmar security forces involved in systematic torture, UN report says
The Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM), formed in 2018 to analyse evidence of serious violations of international law, said victims were subject to beatings, electric shocks, strangulations and other forms of torture like the removal of fingernails with pliers.
"We have uncovered significant evidence, including eyewitness testimony, showing systematic torture in Myanmar detention facilities," Nicholas Koumjian, Head of the Mechanism said in a statement accompanying the 16-page report.
The torture sometimes resulted in death, the report said. Children, who are often unlawfully detained as proxies for their missing parents, were among those tortured, it said.
A spokesperson for Myanmar's military-backed government did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The military-backed government has not responded to over two dozen requests by the U.N. team for information about the alleged crimes and requests to access the country, the U.N. report said.
The military says it has a duty to ensure peace and security. It has denied atrocities have taken place and has blamed "terrorists" for causing unrest.
The findings in the report covering a one-year period through to June 30 were based on information from more than 1,300 sources, including hundreds of eyewitness testimonies as well as forensic evidence, documents and photographs.
The list of perpetrators identified so far includes high-level commanders, the report said. An IIMM spokesperson declined to name them, saying investigations are ongoing and it wanted to avoid alerting the individuals.
The report also said that both Myanmar security forces and opposition armed groups had carried out summary executions in the conflict, and it had identified those responsible.
A government spokesperson and an opposition spokesperson were not immediately available for comment.
Myanmar has been in chaos since a 2021 military coup against an elected civilian government plunged the country into civil war. Tens of thousands of people have been detained since then in an attempt to silence opponents and recruit soldiers, the United Nations says.
Junta chief Min Aung Hlaing ended a four-year state of emergency last month and announced the formation of a new government, with himself as acting president, ahead of a planned election.
The IIMM is investigating abuses in Myanmar since 2011, including both crimes committed against the mainly Muslim Rohingya minority in 2017 when hundreds of thousands were forced to flee a military crackdown and violations affecting all groups since the coup.
The IIMM said that it is supporting several jurisdictions investigating the alleged crimes, such as Britain. However, the IIMM said in its report that U.N. budget cuts are threatening its work. "These financial pressures threaten the Mechanism's ability to sustain its critical work and to continue supporting international and national justice efforts," it said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
To Americans, Britain is no longer the free country we thought it was
Every year, the US Department of State releases a report on human rights practices in other countries (CRHRP). One of my first assignments as a political officer at the US embassy was to coordinate and edit one country report. Not surprisingly, certain governments sometimes take issue with how their policies are characterised in the CRHRP. For example, South Africa claimed a recent CRHRP was 'inaccurate and deeply flawed' in criticising them for failing to 'investigate, prosecute and punish officials who committed human rights abuses … or violence against racial minorities'. President Cyril Ramaphosa seemed bewildered in May when President Trump took him to task for the murders of white farmers. His government's defence seems to be that South Africa's horrific levels of crime afflict everyone, not just white people, and that the motives are not racist but merely criminal. That is unlikely to mollify a country impoverished under an incompetent succession of ANC leaders, nor will Ramaphosa's explanation that they haven't actually used their sweeping new Land Expropriation Act inspire commercial farmers who feed the country to invest in their farms. But I digress. China doesn't just reject US criticism, they've cheekily published their own report criticising the US for 'the chronic disease of racism,' and 'basic rights and freedoms being disregarded'. Usually, the governments taking the most criticism in the CRHRP are repressive or feckless regimes, from China to Zimbabwe, that suppress free speech, stifle religious expression, or oppress women, minority groups, and political dissidents. That doesn't sound like the England in which I was born over half a century ago. But this year, the Country Report on the UK flags Britain as a risky place to speak your mind. The CRHRP claims that 'the human rights situation worsened in the United Kingdom during the year,' citing 'credible reports of serious restrictions on freedom of expression, including enforcement of or threat of criminal or civil laws in order to limit expression; and crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by anti-Semitism'. The report notes restrictions on speech – even silent meditation – near abortion clinics, and the Online Safety Act's curtailment of internet speech, policed by Ofcom. It calls out government censorship of speech deemed misinformation or 'hate speech', including in relation to migrants and crimes committed by foreign nationals. It could have gone even further. In its section on Worker Rights, the CRHRP doesn't discuss the people who have been sacked or disciplined for refusing to accept the forced speech codes of gender ideology, like prison officer David Toshack or nurse Jennifer Melle; or for social media posters who have criticised government action, like teacher Simon Pearson. Like the proverbial frog in slowly heating water, perhaps Brits can't see what is happening to their freedoms. But looking from the outside, we can, and the State Department has called it out. In reaction, I expect the British Left to be as indignant and in denial as the establishment in Washington DC is about crime. Now Donald Trump has temporarily taken over local law enforcement in the city, the Leftist establishment and the national media are claiming that violent crime is lower than in recent years. This ignores some inconvenient realities. First, unreliable numbers. The city has reportedly just settled a lawsuit from a whistleblowing police officer who had alleged that her supervisors were re-classifying serious crimes as lesser offences, to flatter the city's crime statistics. Second, even the supposedly lower murder rate puts Washington among the most dangerous cities in the nation. Like the DC establishment, the British government and much of the media are happy to ignore Lucy Connolly, who is still in prison after she made an unwise online post (and then deleted it); Hamit Coskun, who was prosecuted after he burnt a book; and the thousands of ordinary Brits who have been accused of 'Non-Crime Hate Incidents,' which is at the very least an astonishing waste of police time. The Left likes to pretend that the real villains in the fight for free speech are people like Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, and JK Rowling, who courageously state objective truth, rather than the gender ideologues trying to force women to accept men in their changing rooms, prisons, and shelters. George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, and other writers of the early 20th century predicted a future where the populace was dumbed down, repressed, and fed information by an authoritarian state. In the dystopian futures they imagined in 1984 and Brave New World, independent, critical thinking was banned and speech violators were punished. That sounds like the logical destiny of Britain if it maintains its present course. There is already a semi-official dogma on gender ideology, immigration, and crime which it is costly to challenge. Censorship and group-think get worse if not disrupted. Instead of rejecting America's criticism in high dudgeon, I hope Britain will heed the warning of its Atlantic cousins and return to the people their right to speak their minds. For the land of Magna Carta to slowly sink into repression and state control would be a great injustice to Britain's present inhabitants, and an insult to our ancestors' work of centuries. 'The Ten Woke Commandments (You Must Not Obey)' from Academica Books.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
China's Xi makes second-ever visit to Tibet as president
BEIJING, Aug 20 (Reuters) - Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa on Wednesday for his second-ever visit as China's leader to mark the 60th anniversary of Tibet's founding as an autonomous region. Six years after the 14th Dalai Lama fled into exile in India following a failed uprising, China's ruling Communist Party established the Tibet Autonomous Region in 1965, the country's fifth and final autonomous region after Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, Guangxi and Ningxia. The designation was meant to offer local ethnic minority groups such as the Tibetans greater say over policy matters, including freedom of religious belief. But international human rights groups and exiles routinely describe China's rule in Tibet as "oppressive", an accusation that Beijing rejects. "To govern, stabilise and develop Tibet, the first thing is to maintain political stability, social stability, ethnic unity and religious harmony," state media cited Xi as saying to senior Tibet officials on Wednesday. Xi last flew to Tibet in July 2021 where he urged people there to "follow the party" in a visit largely perceived by outside observers to signal the Communist Party's confidence that order had finally been established in a region with a long history of protest against Chinese rule. During a brief period following the 2008 Beijing Olympics, when China further opened its doors to the outside world, Tibet was rocked by protests by monks and nuns, and then a series of self-immolations. Tibetan Buddhism must be guided to adapt to China's socialist system, Xi said. Prior to 2021, the last Chinese leader to visit Tibet was Jiang Zemin in 1990. More broadly, Tibet is a highly strategic region for China due to its border with India. Troops from both sides had clashed at their border over the years. The Himalayan region also possesses abundant natural resources including immense hydropower potential. Xi's arrival in Tibet coincided with a rare trip this week by China's top diplomat Wang Yi to India, where both countries pledged to rebuild ties damaged by a deadly 2020 border skirmish. China's latest mega hydropower project in Tibet has also unsettled India downstream. Xi said the project must be "vigorously" pursued as part of China's carbon reduction goals while protecting Asia's "water tower". Xi was accompanied by Wang Huning and Cai Qi, the party's fourth and fifth-ranked leaders. In 2015, the party sent the now retired Yu Zhengsheng, who held the equivalent rank of Wang at the time, to Tibet for the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Tibet Autonomous Region.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Met Police's use of live facial recognition is 'unlawful', equality watchdog warns
The use of live facial recognition by Britain's biggest police force is 'unlawful' and not compatible with human rights laws, the equalities watchdog has said. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has claimed Scotland Yard's rules and safeguards fall short of standards and could have a 'chilling effect' on individuals' rights when deployed at protests. Live facial recognition (LFR) is set to be deployed by the force at Notting Hill Carnival over the August bank holiday weekend. More than one million people are expected to converge on the streets of west London for the annual celebration. And Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has already sought to reassure campaign groups that the technology will be used without bias. And a spokesman from the force said it believes its use of the tool is 'both lawful and proportionate, playing a key role in keeping Londoners safe.' The EHRC has been given permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review over LFR, brought by privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo and anti-knife crime community worker Shaun Thompson. They are seeking the legal challenge claiming Mr Thompson was 'grossly mistreated' after LFR wrongly identified him as a criminal last year. EHRC chief executive John Kirkpatrick said the technology, when used responsibly, can help combat serious crime and keep people safe, but the biometric data being processed is 'deeply personal'. 'The law is clear: everyone has the right to privacy, to freedom of expression and to freedom of assembly. These rights are vital for any democratic society,' he said. 'As such, there must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate and constrained by appropriate safeguards. 'We believe that the Metropolitan Police's current policy falls short of this standard. The Met, and other forces using this technology, need to ensure they deploy it in ways which are consistent with the law and with human rights.' The watchdog said it believes the Met's policy is 'unlawful' because it is 'incompatible' with Articles 8, right to privacy, 10, freedom of expression, and 11, freedom of assembly and association of the European Convention on Human Rights. Big Brother Watch interim director Rebecca Vincent said the involvement of EHRC in the judicial review was hugely welcome in the 'landmark legal challenge'. 'The rapid proliferation of invasive live facial recognition technology without any legislation governing its use is one of the most pressing human rights concerns in the UK today,' she said. 'Live facial recognition surveillance turns our faces into barcodes and makes us a nation of suspects who, as we've seen in Shaun's case, can be falsely accused, grossly mistreated and forced to prove our innocence to authorities.' 'Given this crucial ongoing legal action, the Home Office and police's investment in this dangerous and discriminatory technology is wholly inappropriate and must stop.' It comes as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defended plans to expand LFR across the country to catch 'high-harm' offenders last week. Last month, the Metropolitan Police announced plans to expand its use of the technology across the capital. Police bosses said LFR will now be used up to ten times per week across five days, up from the current four times per week across two days. A Met spokesman said the force welcomes the EHRC's recognition of the technology's potential in policing, and that the Court of Appeal has confirmed police can use LFR under common law powers. 'As part of this model, we have strong safeguards in place, with biometric data automatically deleted unless there is a match," they said. 'Independent research from the National Physical Laboratory has also helped us configure the technology in a way that avoids discrimination.'
