Forced Displacement

Article 7 of the Rome Statute; forcible transfer of a population means the forced displacement of persons by expulsion, or other coercive acts, from where they are lawfully present, is a crime against humanity.

The evidence available strongly suggests that the military forces perpetration of prohibited acts of forced displacement in Burma constitute crimes against humanity prohibited by Articles 7 and/or war crimes prohibited by Article 8 of the Rome Statute.

For the forced displacement to constitute a crime against humanity there must be a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population. The Myanmar Rapporteur documentation that forced displacement was “part of a deliberate strategy” provides evidence of a “systematic” violation…widespread levels of the prohibited act the military’s Four Cuts Policy (which cuts funding to the armed ethnic groups)

The war crime of displacing civilians under Article 8(2) of the Rome Statute requires that the perpetrator ordered the displacement of a civilian population, and that this order was not justified by the security of the civilians or by military necessity.

The Rome Statute indicates that war crimes that are committed as part of a “plan” or “policy” or part of a “large-scale commission” of prohibited acts are to receive particular attention.

Since 1992, the Myanmar Rapporteur, General Assembly, and Commission of Human Rights repeatedly noted the occurrence of such violence and the long-term pattern of forced displacement.

UN documents note the Burmese army’s attacks of villages in Karen, Mon, Shan,  Karenni States and Eastern Pegu division. The Myanmar Rapporteur documented 3,077 separate incidents of destruction, relocation, or abandonment of villages in eastern Burma between 1996 and 2006. It was “understood that over a million people were displaced.” Such forced displacement fits within a long-term pattern documented in eastern Burma:

In 2006, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, (Executions Rapporteur) provided similar forced displacement in a letter to the Burmese authorities regarding northern Karen and Eastern Pegu areas. Homes had been demolished with no provision no alternate housing, no compensation.

Prohibitions are put in place for returning to their villages. If they get caught the army may exercise a shoot-on-sight policy against those who attempt to return to their home areas.

Noted are the types of force used, such as the military issuing direct orders to civilians to flee their homes, burning or destroying their homes as a result of a “deliberate strategy” aimed at separating “ethnic armed groups from the civilian populations.” The Myanmar Rapporteur noted that it “has been considered by various observers to be a concerted policy aimed at denying people their livelihoods and food or forcing them to risk their lives when they attempt to return to their villages after having been forcibly evicted.”

The purposeful impoverishment and deprivation of civilians is exercised through severe travel restrictions, forced evictions, expropriation, the imposition of arbitrary taxes and the destruction of villages.

The Myanmar Rapporteur concluded saying the situation was deteriorating in eastern Burma; “the number of communities in need, such as villagers facing food shortage, internally displaced villagers and refugees significantly increased in 2006.” The junta’s strategy of targeting civilians represents an abrogation of their  responsibility under international humanitarian law.

None of the UN actors suggest that there is accountability for the reported violations of forced displacement. Forced displacement, “shoot on sight” policy, occur in what is described as a “culture of impunity” in Burma. UN documents create a strong prima facie case that the reported violations do constitute international crimes.

Burma 101 - Crimes Against Humanity