A/HRC/32/18 22. Since the 1990s, however, extremist or ultra-nationalist Buddhist organizations have actively promoted messages of hatred and intolerance against Muslims and other religious minorities. Groups including the Organization for the Protection of Race and Religion (known as MaBaTha) spread messages based on fear and hatred, compare Muslims to animals, use derogatory language and present Muslims as a threat to the “Buddhist State”.20 During a public rally in Yangon in May 2015, a politician encouraged the crowd to “kill and bury” all Rohingya; the crowd cheered and repeated his statements (A/HRC/31/79, p. 37). Such rhetoric fuels enmity and discord. Recently, ultra-nationalist Buddhist organizations also targeted moderate Buddhists, interfaith activists, women’s rights activists and the Special Rapporteur.21 23. Efforts must be made to prevent and counter acts of incitement to discrimination, violence and hatred, including through the development of a comprehensive strategy based on international human rights standards. The Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (A/HRC/22/17/Add.4, appendix) provides useful guidance. The Parliament has recently taken steps to revive discussions on the “Maintenance of Religious Harmony” bill. These should be based on broad consultations with civil society and take into account the Rabat Plan of Action. 24. Underlying root causes should also be addressed, including through preventive education and awareness-raising. Programmes conducted by interfaith and civil society actors to build a more tolerant, diverse and inclusive society should be supported and promoted. B. Violations and abuses against Rohingya in Rakhine State 25. Patterns of human rights violations against the Rohingya have been documented by successive Special Rapporteurs since 1992. Many result from national, State or local laws, policies and practices targeting the Rohingya owing to their ethnicity, race or religion, either directly or through selective, discriminatory implementation. The tightening of restrictions after the outbreak of violence in 2012 has also had a severe impact on the Kaman community, increasing their vulnerability to human rights violations and abuses. 1. Arbitrary deprivation of nationality 26. A State’s prerogative to grant or remove nationality is constrained under international law.22 The Citizenship Law of 1982 is discriminatory, and contravenes the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality. It violates the right of every child to acquire nationality,23 as it fails to protect the acquisition of citizenship for children born in Myanmar with no “genuine link” to another State (see CRC/C/MMR/CO/3-4, paras. 4142). It also gives overly broad power to the Government to revoke citizenship without due protection. It has led and continues to lead to statelessness. Myanmar has one of the largest stateless populations in the world: some 1,090,000 stateless persons, predominately 20 21 22 23 See C4ADS, Sticks and Stones: Hate Speech Narratives and Facilitators in Myanmar, 2016. See OHCHR, “Comment by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein on the abuse of the Special Rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, Yanghee Lee”, 21 January 2015. See General Assembly resolution 50/152, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art. 15(2); Convention on the Rights of the Child, arts. 7, 8; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, art. 9; Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, art 18. Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 7. 7