Observations on the Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on Myanmar

Posted on by Nyein Chan Zaw
  1. The report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights contained in document A/HRC/60/20 has been submitted to the 60th regular session of the Human Rights Council under agenda item 2 of the Council. In addition to two oral updates, this report marks as fourth written report for the second Enhanced Interactive Dialogues, combining the fifth and sixth Interactive Dialogues on Myanmar. A decade ago, there was no country–specific discussion under Item 2. Item 4 exists as “Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention” and conducts country-specific discussions against the principle of universality and non-selectivity. The question of the rationality of the Council has been raised increasingly, while now both items 2 and 4 are conducting country-specific discussions, and countries, including Myanmar, under the two agendas are almost the same. Such significant evidence of the proliferation and duplication of country-specific discussions deserves review, as the Council has been working on the process of rationalization and efficiency of the Human Rights Council.
  2. Reference is made to paragraphs 5, 6, and 9. The way the report has verified the number of alleged civilian deaths comes from the so-called Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP), which has been mentioned as a credible source. The so-called AAPP list lacks fundamental facts, such as addresses or ID card numbers of the alleged victims, in addition to missing other verifiable data, including age, locations, and dates of the incidents. Such misleading narratives of the unreliable organization should not be labelled as a product of the UN. The report admits the negligence to verify the media reports in paragraph 9, which stated that “Although their claims have not yet been verified, media sources reported that—”.  However, death toll figures are mentioned as if the Office holds concrete facts. The intention of incorporating fabricated allegations questions the integrity and professionalism of the author of the report.
  3. Reference is made to paragraph 7. Countries near and far expressed solidarity with the people of Myanmar when the central part of the country was struck by a devastating earthquake on 28 March 2025, and extended valuable support through sending rescue and medical teams and relief items. Between 28 March 2025 to 8 May 2025, Myanmar mobilized a total of 100,160 persons, including 84,282 military personnel, 9,347 members of police, 6,311 firefighters, and 220 volunteers for earthquake response. The Government not only mobilizes its own resources in responding to the earthquake, but also facilitates and smoothens the assistance, including travel of assisting nations and organizations. While such efforts have been well-received, it is inappropriate that only fictitious and distorted narratives from the armed opposition groups were presented.
  4. Reference is made to paragraphs 11 to 13. Concerning the Budalin incident, security forces launched an operation over suspicious movements of terrorists in Sipar village on 17 October 2024, and the terrorists fled from the village. After security forces had left, the terrorists returned to the village on 18 October 2024 and brutally killed six villagers. They further dismembered victims and placed body parts on the top of a fence by terrorizing the villagers as so-called punishment for being alleged informers to security forces.
  5. Reference is made to paragraphs 14 to 16. On 14 March 2025, a reconnaissance aircraft was deployed over the area near Lapanhla village in Singu township, Mandalay region, following intelligence reports of terrorists gathering in the vicinity. While conducting aerial surveillance, the pilot observed armed individuals congregating in the area and firing tracer rounds to the aircraft from the ground. Based on the observation, the site was confirmed as a military target and took necessary measures. After terrorists fled into a village, security forces withdrew as civilians could be harmed, and there were no airstrikes on civilian assets.
  6. Reference is made to paragraphs 17 to 19. The report further alleges an airstrike struck a school in Ohhteinkwin village in Dabayin Township, Sagaing Region, on 12 May 2025. In Myanmar, the month of May falls within the summer break, and the reported presence of teachers and students in the school is unreasonable. The pictures of the incident show that all four walls of the school are still intact, the cupboard, wall posters, and even vases were not affected. The relevant security personnel stated that no airstrike had taken place. Findings indicate that the explosion was not caused by the airstrike, while a video file of terrorists making homemade explosives at the said school was available online before the incident. Instead of reflecting different observations impartially, paragraph 18 indicates how the author has taken sides by incorporating narratives of unreliable sources to discredit the Government forces.
  7. Reference is made to paragraphs 20 to 22. The Office requested information for an alleged incident on 5 September 2024 at the so-called IDP camp near La Ei village in Pekon Township, Shan State. The report then incorporated other incidents that were not verified previously. Due to time constraints, Myanmar is not in a position to provide information in connection with the allegations.
  8. Reference is made to paragraphs 23, 24 and 25. The report waters down the actual figures of those killed by armed terrorist groups. For example, the report mentions that “OHCHR recorded 169 reports of killings of administrators, their family members and other civilians, including religious personnel”. The accurate number of administrators killed by the terrorists stands at 1,253 as of July 2025.  From 1 February 2021 to 31 July 2025, the terrorist groups have claimed the lives of 9,193 innocent civilians, including 357 children, 119 teachers, and 24 healthcare workers.
  9. Reference is made to paragraphs 26, 27, 28, and 58 (c). Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) largely depend on unlawful activities such as narcotic trade, human trafficking and smuggling, online scamming, and illegal extraction and exporting of rare natural resources of the country. Anyone who knows forced recruitment can file a complaint to the Central Body for Summoning People’s Military Servants, and actions have been taken in case of non-compliance with the Law. The Central Body has issued Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), orders, instructions, and rules to ensure that the military service recruitment and recruitment process is in accordance with the law and is systematic.
  10. Reference is made to paragraphs 30 to 34. In the 2024-2025 financial year, Myanmar’s GDP was recorded at USD 76.4 billion. For the 2025-2026 financial year, it is projected to reach USD 81.6 billion, with a target increase of approximately USD 5.2 billion. Myanmar currently has a national rice self-sufficiency rate of around 170 per cent. During the 2022-2023 period, the total rice cultivation area was 17 million acres, including 15 million acres of primary cultivation, 2.24 million acres of multi-cropping and 28,000 acres of intercropping. Support is being provided to micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) with the objectives of encouraging goods production, strengthening the domestic economy, producing high-quality products for export, and generating foreign income. The rise in domestic commodity prices is partly due to sanctions imposed by certain countries, which bring about delayed payments, higher costs, including bank charges, limited ability to integrate in the global market, decreased trade value, higher price of essential imports, including medicine and fuel, and higher import costs affecting domestic manufacturing. While the Government has been making sure food and commodities reach the local people, armed terrorist groups have been blocking the transportation and trade routes and collecting money forcibly from cargo trucks, traders, and passers-by.
  11. Reference is made to paragraph 35. In connection with the Byaing Phyu village incident in May 2024, AA terrorists circulated fabricated news that people were killed by security forces. On 29 May 2024, while security forces were interrogating the suspected non-residents in the Byaing Phyu village, three of them attempted to grab the rifle of a member of the security forces and were shot dead in the incident. Although Myanmar provided this information to the Office, it was omitted in the report. As the report also fails to include a full account of the Kyauk Ni Maw incident provided by the Government, Myanmar provides details of the incident once again. The Kyauk Ni Maw village is located within the area temporarily controlled by the AA terrorist group, which used it as a recruitment center and training camps for the AA terrorist group. Additionally, this village acts as a transit point for sending newly trained AA terrorists to their designated places. Furthermore, this location is known to be an illicit gathering point for transporting fuel and supplies to the AA terrorist group, and it is also believed to be a storage site for weapons/ammunition. On 8 January 2025, an aircraft was deployed. While performing a reconnaissance pass to confirm the target, the aircraft observed fire flashes from the target area’s building, confirming the presence of military activity. Based on these observations, which were also confirmed by the ground troops, the target was confirmed as a military object and took necessary measures.
  12. Reference is made to paragraphs 39 and 41. With regard to the incident in Htan Shauk Khan village, the true account of the incident has been published through daily newspapers. On 2 May 2024, at the time of the incident in Htan Shauk Khan village, there was no presence of security personnel. Such brutal crimes against civilians by the armed groups are not limited to Rakhine State. Other armed groups also launched indiscriminate attacks against villages and towns and triggered civilian casualties, while many residents have had to abandon their places. Information related to the incident in Pan Taw Pyin village was not requested by the Office, and it is not possible to provide information due to time constraints.
  13. Reference is made to paragraphs 35 to 53 (Rakhine). Myanmar has been experiencing violence and armed attacks committed by PDF terrorists who took arms instead of addressing the 2020 electoral irregularities lawfully. In addition to the terrorist acts committed by the PDF, certain armed groups have taken advantage of political instability to control areas rich in natural resources. The Tatmadaw has been taking necessary countermeasures under the Rules of Engagement to restore peace and stability in remote areas of Myanmar, including Rakhine State, to ensure all communities can live in peace and security with access to basic services. As a result, security forces take control over areas temporarily seized by armed groups.  The return of residents to such areas highlights faith they have entrusted in state security forces.
  14. Reference is made to paragraphs 7, 55, 56, and 58 (b). In connection with access, the Government imposes no restriction on access, while certain organizations have made relocation requests for their own security concerns. The Government has been facilitating such requests and providing humanitarian assistance and support to the Bengalis from the affected areas in Sittwe and Yangon. It is worth mentioning that Myanmar experiences many instances of aid diversion, including aid reaching the wrong hands. The Government has notified such instances to the relevant agencies and advised them to take necessary measures. Such aid diversion is confirmed by the UN Geneva Press Briefing held on 2 September 2025, which stated that armed groups were hurting due to dwindling humanitarian assistance.
  15. Myanmar reiterates its position that it does not recognize the invented term “Rohingya,” which has never existed in legal and historical records of the country.
  16. In light of the principled position of Myanmar, which opposes country-specific mandates and the nature of the misleading report, the Government categorically rejects the whole report contained in document no. A/HRC/60/20, along with its intrusive conclusions and recommendations.

Permanent Mission of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar to the United Nations Office and other International Organizations

Geneva

8 September 2025