housing at the same locations, including coercion to accept the NVC.lxi These developments raised the prospect of permanent segregation and detention of the Rohingya in the camps. In its analysis HRW noted that, ‘Severe limitations on access to livelihoods, education, health care, and adequate food or shelter have been compounded by increasing government constraints on humanitarian aid, which Rohingya are dependent on for survival… These conditions are a direct cause of increased morbidity and mortality in the camps. Rohingya face higher rates of malnutrition, waterborne illnesses, and child and maternal deaths than their Rakhine neighbors…. …The term “detention camps” [rather than the commonly used “internally displaced persons camps”] more accurately reflects the extreme movement restrictions imposed on the Rohingya since 2012 that amount to arbitrary and indefinite detention and severe deprivation of liberty [emphasis added]’.lxii HRW found that the authorities’ creation of squalid and oppressive conditions amounted to the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution perpetrated against the Rohingya and called for prosecution of the State officials responsible.lxiii A decade after the violence and more than two years after the ICJ’s provisional measures order, the Rohingya remain confined in dire conditions in the camps described in detail below. (iii) Conditions of life inflicted on the Rohingya in the camps The genocidal act of ‘deliberately inflicting conditions of life on the group intended to bring about its physical destruction’ addresses situations in which the perpetrator does not immediately kill the members of the group, but uses other methods intended to ultimately bring about their physical destruction. Examples of possible means by which this underlying act can be carried out have been well-established by the case law in the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ICTY and ICTR): ‘Examples of such acts include, but are not limited to, subjecting the group to a subsistence diet; failing to provide adequate medical care; systematically expelling members of the group from their homes; and generally creating circumstances that would lead to a slow death such as the lack of proper food, water, shelter, clothing, sanitation, or subjecting members of the group to excessive work or physical exertion [emphasis added].’lxiv The false narrative that the 2012 violence which drove tens of thousands of Rohingya from their homes was ‘intercommunal’ has unfortunately prevailed, both within Myanmar and internationally. BROUK has long maintained that the violence was State-orchestrated, based on reports from the ground at the time.lxv The UNFFM concluded, ‘The 2012 and 2013 violence in Rakhine State was pre-planned and instigated…the Myanmar security forces were actively involved and complicit. They participated in acts of violence… … [This] Actively instigated violence between the ethnic Rakhine and the Rohingya, with the involvement of State institutions and other figures of authority, result[ed] in mass arrests of Rohingya, policies of segregation and the mass displacement and confinement of Rohingya into squalid and barb-wired “displacement” sites and camps in central Rakhine, where they have been arbitrarily detained.’ lxvi Although best understood as detention camps, they are officially classified as temporary camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) and as such international minimum humanitarian standards apply. The Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response (known as the Sphere Handbook) also provides guidance to humanitarian actors for setting targets for humanitarian response in protracted crises.lxvii The publicly available data for the 21 camps and camp-like settings for displaced Rohingya in Central Rakhine State from the past six months demonstrates that humanitarian actors are struggling to meet the 10