View previous stories
	The Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar by UN Office for Human Rights   July 2021   Statement by Thomas Andrews, UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar to the United Nations Human Rights Council:   In the five months since the government of Myanmar was overthrown in an illegal coup, two interlocking patterns have emerged:   First, the military junta’s widespread, systematic attacks against the people of Myanmar, acts that amount to crimes against humanity. And second, the inability of the international community to do what is required to stop it.   The first of these patterns is painfully clear and has been accurately described by the High Commissioner in her statement.   The junta’s military forces have murdered approximately 900 people; forcibly displaced hundreds of thousands; tortured many, including torturing people in custody to death; disappeared untold numbers; and arbitrarily detained nearly 6,000.   The junta continues to stifle freedom of expression, arbitrarily detain thousands, and systematically strip away due process and fair trial rights. It is using criminal defamation charges to target journalists, human rights defenders, and civil society leaders.   It has also cut off food, water and medicine to those who have been displaced by its brutal attacks on entire villages. The junta has also taken family members hostage when its forces are unable to find those with outstanding arrest warrants.   Authorities recently imprisoned a four-year-old child, for example, when they could not locate her father for arrest. A four-year-old child… And now the junta has begun detaining lawyers for defending their detained clients.   On top of this, a third wave of COVID is taking hold in the country. Limited testing shows an alarming positivity rate of 26 percent. One in four of those tested have tested positive to this highly contagious disease.   The public health system is in tatters and many are unwilling to get vaccinated in a junta-run operation. Myanmar is at grave risk of becoming a Covid 19 super-spreader state, impacting untold numbers of people both inside and outside of its borders.   Despite facing lethal force, people across Myanmar continue to vigorously oppose the junta and demand that it end its attempted coup.   I use “attempted coup” deliberately here. The junta captured many levers of state power, the purse strings of Myanmar’s Treasury and the administrative offices, but it has not - not even close - taken control of the nation and its people.   The people of Myanmar roundly view the junta as illegitimate and, indeed, a terrorist scourge set loose upon them.   Civil servants continue en masse to refuse to work for the junta. Boycotts of military-produced goods and services continue. And support for the opposition leadership, the National Unity Government, is widespread.   The National Unity Government —established by parliamentarians whom the junta illegally denied the right to form a government—is laying the groundwork for a new, unified Myanmar. It has taken the historic step of welcoming the Rohingya ethnic minority back into the national fabric of Myanmar, assuring them justice and full citizenship rights.   The National Unity Government is helping to coordinate humanitarian assistance into the country and has committed to ensuring international justice and accountability for victims of atrocity crimes, indicating its willingness to pursue justice through the International Criminal Court. The National Unity Government deserves to be embraced as a valuable resource and partner by member states.   Some in Myanmar have lost hope that help from the international community will be forthcoming and have instead sought to defend themselves through the formation of defense forces and acts of sabotage, while some are reportedly targeting suspected junta collaborators and officials.   This trend could escalate quickly and the junta’s pattern of the use of grossly disproportionate force in response will likely lead to an even greater loss of life.   The people of Myanmar are working to save their country. But they desperately need the support of the international community before it is too late.   Which leads me back to the second pattern: the failure of those outside of Myanmar to take measures that could help end this nightmare.   Bodies of the UN, including the General Assembly, Security Council, and the Human Rights Council, have met to discuss developments and issue statements or resolutions.   Last month, 119 member nations of the General Assembly voted for a resolution calling upon the junta to “respect the will of the people” as expressed in the November 2020 elections and called upon “all Member States to prevent the flow of arms into Myanmar.”   We have watched as the junta has made a mockery of efforts by ASEAN to resolve the crisis. But we are also seeing evidence of the junta’s growing insecurity and sensitivity to world opinion.   The junta is relentlessly trying to stop the truth from emerging through social media, including the confiscation of mobile phones to search for evidence of support for the opposition; arresting journalists and even threatening those who call them what they are, a military junta.   They are now even using the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission to deliver their twisted version of events to the world.   Some nations have decided to act by imposing sanctions to reduce the junta’s access to revenue and weapons. While these measures are important and welcomed, they remain limited and without the coordination necessary to have significant impact.   Five months ago, before this very Council, I called for the formation of an Emergency Coalition for the People of Myanmar. I based this recommendation on the necessity for action and the idea that governments that are willing to take action should do so even if others are not.   Over the last five months, we have witnessed what happens when there is a lack of strong, coordinated international action. We therefore know with virtual certainty that if the international community continues its current course, things will continue to deteriorate for the people of Myanmar.   I believe it is time to try another way. An Emergency Coalition for the People of Myanmar – nations willing to stand with the people of Myanmar through meaningful, coordinated action – would be in a position to impose significant costs on the junta.   It could reduce the junta’s ability to attack its citizens, save the lives of those in acute crisis, and gain political leverage so that the crisis in Myanmar might come to a just and permanent conclusion.   There are viable options that such a coalition would have to achieve these goals:   First and foremost, an Emergency Coalition could significantly reduce the revenue that the junta needs to continue its reign of terror.   The junta prides itself on its large, well-equipped military. But what they see as a source of strength, indeed the only reason they are able to hold the people of Myanmar hostage, is also a vulnerability.   It takes considerable revenue to supply, equip and sustain that military. Cut off their income, and you cut off their capacity to continue their relentless attack on the people of Myanmar.   Since the coup, some countries have instituted sanctions, targeting military-controlled enterprises and revenue from gems, timber, and mining. Two countries sanctioned the so-called State Administrative Council, the junta itself.   These are important steps. But the fact remains that many nations have yet to impose any economic sanctions, and a key sector remains untouched by all: oil and gas. Oil and gas-sector revenues are a financial lifeline for the junta and are estimated to be close to what is needed for the junta to maintain the security forces that are keeping them in power. They should be stopped.   Second, an Emergency Coalition for the People of Myanmar could outlaw the export of arms to the Myanmar military, as called for in last month’s General Assembly resolution.   Third, coalition members that have universal jurisdiction laws could coordinate investigations of these ongoing crimes and make preparations to file charges against Myanmar’s senior security officials.   Fourth, coalition members could dramatically increase humanitarian aid by working with the National Unity Government to utilize non-junta channels to assure that aid goes to where it belongs – to the people of Myanmar. And, finally,   Fifth, the coalition could work together to deny any claims of legitimacy that the junta may try to assert, such as the false claim that they are recognized by the United Nations.   These actions are all possible but they require nations that are prepared to act to do so through collaboration outside of formal mechanisms that require consensus. Frankly, consensus decision-making has meant paralysis, and paralysis is lethal to the people of Myanmar.   There is no guarantee that this approach will succeed, but there is overwhelming evidence that the current path leads to even greater impunity, a humanitarian disaster, and a failed state.   Future generations may look back upon this moment and ask: “Did the people and nations of the world do all that they reasonably could to help the people of Myanmar in their hour of great peril and need?” I am afraid that the honest answer to that question, at this point, is no. The international community is failing the people of Myanmar.   There is time to set a new course and achieve a just outcome. Now, more than ever, we must summon the courage of the people of Myanmar and choose the path of meaningful and sustained action. Time is short and the stakes could not be higher.   http://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/sp/countriesmandates/mm/pages/srmyanmar.aspx http://iimm.un.org/ http://reliefweb.int/report/myanmar/report-special-rapporteur-situation-human-rights-myanmar-thomas-h-andrews-a76314 http://undocs.org/A/76/314 http://aseanmp.org/tag/myanmar-coup/ http://www.forum-asia.org/?p=35307 http://www.irrawaddy.com/ http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/whats-happening-in-myanmar/13476286 Visit the related web page
	Three men found guilty of murdering 298 people in shooting down of MH17 by NOS, AFP, Reuters, agencies Netherlands   12 May 2025   The Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) today voted that the Russian Federation failed to uphold its obligations under international air law in the 2014 downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17.   This represents the first time in ICAO’s history that its Council has made a determination on the merits of a dispute between Member States under the Organization’s dispute settlement mechanism.   The Council agreed that the claims brought by Australia and the Netherlands as a result of the shooting down of Flight MH17 on 17 July 2014, were well founded in fact and in law.   The case centered on allegations that the conduct of the Russian Federation in the downing of the aircraft by a surface-to-air missile over eastern Ukraine constitutes a breach of Article 3 bis of the Convention on International Civil Aviation, which requires that States "refrain from resorting to the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight."   The proceedings involved written submissions and oral hearings spanning multiple Council sessions. A formal decision document setting out the reasons of fact and law leading to the Council’s conclusions will be issued at a future meeting.   http://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/Insert-Subject-Here.aspx   * Flight MH17 was travelling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur when it was shot down by a Russian surface-to-air missile while flying over eastern Ukraine in 2014 as fighting raged between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian forces. Among the victims were 196 Dutch citizens and 38 Australian citizens or residents.   May 2025   Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization rules Russia responsible for downing of flight MH17 prompting calls for compensation. (Reuters, agencies)   The governments of Australia and the Netherlands said the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) would in the coming weeks consider what form of reparation was in order.   Australia’s foreign minister, Penny Wong, said her government welcomed the decision and urged the ICAO to move swiftly to determine remedies.   “We call upon Russia to finally face up to its responsibility for this horrific act of violence and make reparations for its egregious conduct, as required under international law,” Wong said in a statement.   The Netherlands and Australia want the ICAO Council to order Russia to enter into negotiations over reparations, the Dutch foreign minister said.   “The decision is an important step towards establishing the truth and achieving justice and accountability for all victims of Flight MH17, and their families and loved ones,” Caspar Veldkamp said in a statement.   “This decision also sends a clear message to the international community: states cannot violate international law with impunity.”   Australia and the Netherlands have been seeking compensation and an apology, however Russia, which has denied involvement despite the findings of an international investigation, unilaterally withdrew from negotiations with the two countries in October 2020. The case with the ICAO was launched in 2022 by Australia and the Netherlands.   In November 2022, Dutch judges convicted two Russian men and a Ukrainian man in absentia of murder for their role in the attack.   http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/05/un-experts-demand-accountability-flight-mh17-tragedy   17 Nov. 2022 (AFP, AP, Reuters)   A Dutch court has delivered its long-awaited verdict over the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17. The plane was blown out of the sky in July 2014 over eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 people on board.   The Dutch court on Thursday found three of the four main suspects in the MH17 trial guilty of murder for taking part in the 2014 downing of Malaysian Airlines flight. All three were sentenced to life in prison in absentia. The fourth suspect was acquitted.   Family members of people killed in the disaster gathered to hear the verdict at the high-security courtroom at Schiphol Airport where The Hague District Court sat.   The ruling is also taking place amid a tense geopolitical backdrop of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has resulted in nine-months of war and widespread human suffering.   None of the four suspects on trial were present for the proceedings, as they had not been arrested and were being tried in their absence. This means they are unlikely to serve any time in prison.   What did the court rule?   Two of the convicted are Russian, including Igor Girkin, the former "defense minister" of the self-declared "People's Republic of Donetsk." The 51-year-old is a former colonel in Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB), and is reportedly involved in Russia's current war in Ukraine. The second Russian convicted was one of Girkin's subordinates, Major General Sergey Dubinsky.   The third person convicted is Ukrainian national Leonid Kharchenko, who allegedly led a pro-Russian rebel combat unit and took orders directly from Dubinsky.   Girkin, Dubinsky and Kharchenko were subsequently sentenced to life in prison. The men remain fugitives and are believed to be in Russia, which is unlikely to extradite them.   Girkin, Dubinskiy and Kharchenko, the three men who were found guilty, were said by the judge to have shown a “disrespectful and unnecessarily hurtful” attitude to the relatives by their comments on the legal process.   "Only the most severe punishment is fitting to retaliate for what the suspects have done, which has caused so much suffering to so many victims and so many surviving relatives," Presiding Judge Hendrik Steenhuis said.   All three have also been ordered to pay at least $16.5 million to the relatives of the victims.   The fourth suspect, Russian national Oleg Pulatov, was acquitted due to a lack of evidence.   In another significant development, the judges ruled that MH17 crashed due to being hit by a Russian-made missile that was fired from a field in eastern Ukraine. The ruling confirms the findings by international investigators. The judges further found that Russia had "control" over separatists in eastern Ukraine in 2014.   Piter Ploeg, spokesman for the families of the victims of the tragedy, told DW that "every 68 session days, we have waited eight years for the verdict. For me and everybody else, it is very important."   "The trial is important internationally because the world gets to know what the role of Russia was in the downing of MH17," he said. "It would be the best solution to have an international tribunal, but that was not possible. The Dutch government took the initiative," Ploeg said.   The victims came from 17 countries and included 198 Dutch nationals, 43 Malaysians, 38 Australians and 10 from the UK. They were from all walks of life: families with children, young couples, retirees, teenagers celebrating the end of exams, professionals heading to conferences. Eighty of the victims were children.   The Dutch prime minister, Mark Rutte, said: “This is yet another step in the pursuit of truth and justice for the victims and their loved ones. And important as this verdict is, it is not the final conclusion … It is not the end. All parties will have the right to appeal, so the judgment is not yet final. But to reiterate, an important step has been taken today.”   During the trial, relatives of the victims gave testimony to the court, in person and through video link, of their overwhelming grief and how their lives changed for ever when they found out their loved ones had been onboard MH17.   What happened to flight MH17?   On July 17, 2014, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 set off from Amsterdam en route to Kuala Lumpur. The Boeing 777 plane then crashed in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, amid a conflict between pro-Russia rebels and Ukrainian forces. All of the 298 people on board were killed.   An international team of investigators — the so-called Joint Investigation Team (JIT) — concluded that the aircraft was hit by an anti-aircraft missile of the Soviet-era "BUK" type.   The investigation team said the missile was launched from an area of Donbas controlled by pro-Russian rebels. The missile system had been transported to the area from Russia and was taken back over the border shortly after the disaster.   The Netherlands launched a trial in March 2020 according to its own national laws after efforts failed to launch an international tribunal to deal with the case. The majority of the victims, 193 altogether, came from the Netherlands.   Girkin, Dubinsky, Kharchenko and Pulatov were not accused of firing the missile themselves, but of working together to get the missile launcher to the field where it was fired.   Phone call intercepts were some of the key pieces of evidence examined in the case against the men. The calls suggested they believed they were targeting a Ukrainian fighter jet instead of a passenger plane.   All four have denied their guilt. Girkin, who at the time was one of the leading politicians in Donbas, remained in the public eye after withdrawing from the combat zone. In one interview, he said that he felt a "moral responsibility" for the death of the passengers.   None of the accused have been present for the proceedings. Prosecutors and suspects have two weeks to file an appeal against the Dutch ruling.   http://www.courtmh17.com/en/news/2022/summary-of-the-day-in-court-17-november-2022---judgment.html http://www.courtmh17.com/ http://www.prosecutionservice.nl/topics/m/mh17-plane-crash http://nos.nl/collectie/13835/artikel/2452816-geen-hoerastemming-onder-nabestaanden-mh17-wel-opluchting http://nos.nl/collectie/13835-strafproces-mh17-ramp http://www.dw.com/en/mh17-trial-what-you-need-to-know/a-52681068   Mar. 2020   The trial of three Russians and a Ukrainian accused of murdering 298 people in the shooting down of flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine has begun in the Netherlands.   The presiding judge, Hendrik Steenhuis, said 'the loss of so many lives and the manner in which they so abruptly ended is barely conceivable' as he opened the case on Monday at the Schiphol judicial complex, close to the airport from where the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 took off for Kuala Lumpur on 17 July 2014.   The aircraft was shot down over the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine by a Buk anti-aircraft missile, killing everyone onboard. The victims came from 17 countries. Most of the 193 people were Dutch nationals, others were Malaysian, Australian, Indonesian and British.   "Especially for next of kin this will be a very painful and emotional period', Steenhuis said as he opened proceedings by describing how Dutch criminal law treats defendants and victims. Prosecutor Dedy Woei-A-Tsoi read the names of all those killed. It took nearly 20 minutes to name every victim.   Australian Federal Police Commander Jennifer Hurst said the moment was incredibly moving. "You could have almost heard a pin drop in that room. I think what was significant for us was the amount of time it took to read the names out. That gives a real indication of the significant and absolute atrocity that happened on that day," she said.   After a painstaking international investigation, Dutch prosecutors allege that four men had responsibility for the missile launch: the Russians Igor Girkin, Sergey Dubinskiy and Oleg Pulatov, and the Ukrainian Leonid Kharchenko. All were senior commanders fighting Ukrainian forces in the Russian-backed Donetsk People's Republic.   Russia does not allow extradition of its citizens, and none of the men appeared in court on Monday. Pulatov has appointed two Dutch lawyers, who first presented to the court in January. 'They have had but a brief space of time to prepare for this hearing', Steenhuis said.   Nine lawyers have been hired to represent some of the victims and their families They also have the right to speak in court, alongside public prosecutors and the defence.   The trial, which will also include testimony from the family of the victims, is expected to last several months. Lawyers will pore over a case file that already stands at 36,000 pages, and many digital pieces of evidence. Forty-nine relatives have said they wish to address the court and 82 will give written statements on how the death of their loved ones has affected their lives. More may decide to give written or oral statements.   Liz Mayne has written a statement describing how the death of her son Richard, a 20-year student at Leeds University on his way to Australia, has completely broken her family.   Richard's father, Simon, said Monday's court session was the beginning of a process that could last 30 years. He said the political state of Russia a decade in the future was unknowable. 'It is important to establish the facts now. The trial will reveal the chain of command right back to the Kremlin. That may one day become important', he said.   Eighty-four relatives have exercised their right under Dutch law to seek compensation.   The prosecutor Ward Ferdinandusse said the four defendants had 'noted with delight' that a plane had been shot down. We do not think that these defendants pressed the button that launched the Buk missile', he said.   'However we do think that they played a significant coordinating role in the transportation and positioning of the Buk-Telar and its removal back to Russia, making them so closely involved that they can be held responsible under criminal law for the downing of flight MH17'.   Ferdinandusse said it was perfectly conceivable the men had intended to shoot down a Ukrainian military jet, but that did not exclude prosecution or entitle them to claim combat immunity because they were not regular military personnel. 'Whoever systematically violates humanitarian law cannot invoke it to their benefit in a criminal trial', he said.   Russia has always denied any involvement in the shooting down of the plane.   The Dutch-led joint investigation team (JIT) said in 2016 that it had found irrefutable evidence the Buk missile had been fired from a village under the control of pro-Russia rebels. The court is also expected to hear details of intercepted phone calls that reveal separatist leaders requesting help from senior Kremlin advisers shortly before MH17 was shot down.   The opening sessions will not get into these details, but will be devoted to what Steenhuis called 'mapping out the current state of play'.   In a statement before the opening session, the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, described the trial as 'an important milestone in the efforts to ensure justice for the 298 victims and their families'.   The EU foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, struck a similar tone, reflecting on a tragedy that caused the death of 298 innocent civilians and calling on Russia to cooperate fully with the investigation.   http://www.reuters.com/world/families-mh17-airline-crash-victims-speak-court-2021-09-06/ http://www.prosecutionservice.nl/topics/mh17-plane-crash/news/2021/09/02/mh17-investigation-requests-russian-military-to-share-information Visit the related web page
	View more stories