Factual Inaccuracy and Historical Bias in the Detailed Report of the UN Fact-Finding Mission published on 17 September 2018. The Mission exceeded its Mandate to a Spectacular Extent.
The Report A/HRC/39/CRP.2 of the Detailed Findings of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar to the UN Human Rights Council, which readers will recall was published on 17 September 2018 and first discussed under political pressure in the UN Security Council at their 8381st Meeting on 24 October 2018 even before it had been considered in detail by the Human Rights Council itself, has in many ways been the basis for cases now under consideration in the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice.
In my Op-Ed of 7 December 2019, I took the view that the Mission in its Report had not shown the objectivity which should have been expected from a Mission appointed by the Human Rights Council to establish the facts about the recent troubles in Rakhine State.
In my further Op-Ed of 1 March 2020 I highlight a lack of intellectual rigour and curiosity, an inclination to gullibility and a readiness to put the worst possible interpretation on events by the Fact-Finding Mission.
Finally, in a TOAEP Policy Brief in April 2020 I examine the extent to which the Mission exceeded its mandate, notably in releasing a flood of recommendations to UN bodies and international institutions which have been generally and not surprisingly ignored as a guide to action.
A factual Note on the International Utilisation of the "Rohingya" Designation may be found at this link.
An informed critique, released on 9 October 2018, by Dr Raphael Bouchnik-Chen (Began-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies) of the detailed 17 September 2018 Fact-Finding Mission report may be found at this link.