Pro-democracy activists and human rights defenders
Cases- Case status
- Unknown
- Location of case in SG report
- 2021-077-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2021
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 21.916221
Longitude: 95.955974
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Myanmar (Burma)
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Country
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- UN Human Rights Council: UN Human Rights Council - General
- Dates of prior UN action
- March 2021
- Type of record
- Unnamed individual/group/organization
- Gender
- Gender unclear
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
pro-democracy activists and human rights defenders
- Type of rights defended
- Accountability & impunity
- Civil/political rights
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
reporting violations to the UN after the military takeover of 1 February 2021
- Engagement with UN body
- Unclear
- Dates of engagement
- February 2021
- Type of attempted engagement
- Unclear
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- February 2021
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Myanmar
- Reprisal information
Multiple UN actors, including the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Myanmar, received information about pro-democracy activists and human rights defenders that faced reprisals for reporting violations to the UN after the military takeover of 1 February 2021, in the context of their documentation and advocacy of the conflict. OHCHR received reports alleging that Myanmar security forces targeted individuals involved in opposition movements during public civil disobedience demonstrations and for online activism, many of whom have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and detention, prosecution, as well as ill- treatment, harassment and intimidation (see also MMR 1/2021).51 78. The Tatmadaw has reportedly used defamation charges in an attempt to silence those speaking out, including those providing information to the UN and other international organizations. Some individuals reported to OHCHR that they have declined to provide information to the UN or give consent to have their case addressed by UN entities due to the risks involved. Others have fled their homes, went into hiding or sought asylum outside of Myanmar. Names and further details are withheld due to fear of further reprisals.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Charge/Investigation/Prosecution: Charge/Investigation/Prosecution - General
- Charge/Investigation/Prosecution: Conviction
- Charge/Investigation/Prosecution: Trial
- Detention/Imprisonment: Detention/Imprisonment - General
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Physical attack: Torture/Cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Yes
- Further case development
In its March 2021 resolution, the Human Rights Council “Call[ed] for immediate, full, unrestricted and unmonitored access for all United Nations mandate holders and human rights mechanisms, including the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, the Special Envoy of the Secretary- General on Myanmar, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and relevant United Nations agencies and international and regional courts, tribunals and human rights bodies to independently monitor the situation of human rights, and to ensure that civil society organizations, human rights defenders, lawyers, victims, survivors, witnesses and other individuals have unhindered access to and can communicate with the United Nations and other human rights entities without fear of reprisals, intimidation or attack” (A/HRC/RES/46/21, para. 25).
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- No
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- Yes
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0