III. Legal Framework and Analysis 72 While States are obligated to protect the right to freedom of movement, restrictions on that right are allowed under international law if the restriction is considered necessary to achieve certain legitimate aims—such as the protection of national security and public order—and are proportionate to achieving that aim.291 The U.N. Human Rights Committee found that States may restrict the movement of individuals who are not lawfully within the territory; however, those whose “status has been regularized, must be considered to be lawfully within the territory” and granted freedom of movement under international human rights law.292 Despite Myanmar’s claims that all Rohingya are “Bengali” or “foreigners,” the government has effectively “regularized” the status of Rohingy through various forms of recognition. For example, the government permitted Rohingya to form political parties and vote in multiparty elections in 1990 and 2010, as well as the constitutional referendum in 2008.293 The government repatriated 155,000 Rohingya refugees from Bangladesh beginning in 1992, and in 1995, Myanmar began issuing White Cards to repatriated Rohingya.294 The authorities have also maintained household lists of Rohingya families for several decades, as Myanmar does for all residents.295 All of these factors suggest the Myanmar authorities “regularized” Rohingya, despite ongoing human rights violations. However, the Government of Myanmar imposes severe restrictions on the freedom of movement of Rohingya in Rakhine State, including by confining displaced Rohingya to internment camps and blocking Rohingya travelers through more than 86 military and police checkpoints established throughout northern Rakhine State as of 2016 and through at least six new military facilities built since August 2017.296 These restrictions are neither necessary nor proportionate to a legitimate aim recognized under international law. The government-imposed restrictions on the right to exercise freedom of movement are also overtly discriminatory: they are applied only against Rohingya in Rakhine State and are guided by policies that target Rohingya on the basis of their ethno-religious identity. As such, the restrictions also violate the principle of non-discrimination. 291 ICCPR, arts. 19(3) and 21. See also, Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 31: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add. 13, May 26, 2004, para. 6; Manfred Nowak, U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary (Kehl am Rhein: N.P. Engel, 1993), p. 387. 292 Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 27, para. 4. 293 Council on Foreign Relations, “The Rohingya Crisis,” December 5, 2018, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/ rohingya-crisis (accessed August 23, 2019). 294 Advisory Commission on Rakhine State, Towards a Peaceful, Fair, and Prosperous Future, p. 30; U.S. Committee for Refugees, The Return of the Rohingya Refugees to Burma: Voluntary Repatriation of Refoulement?, p. 1. 295 Although the Myanmar authorities require household lists for all residents, the requirements and practice of maintaining the lists for Rohingya households are more comprehensive. See, textbox “Household Lists and Annual Surveys” in chapter 1 of this report. See also, for example, Benjamin Zawacki, “Defining Myanmar’s Rohingya Problem,” American University Washington College of Law Human Rights Brief, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2013, pp. 18-25. https:// digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief/vol20/iss3/2 (accessed August 23, 2019). 296 Prior to the violence in Maungdaw Township in 2016, Physicians for Human Rights identified 86 checkpoints operated by state security forces in northern Rakhine State, noting that the total number of checkpoints is likely greater. Rohingya in northern Rakhine State regularly encounter these checkpoints in carrying out daily activities, including accessing markets, schools, and clinics. Security forces do not always grant Rohingya permission to pass and Rohingya often encounter violence and humiliation at checkpoints. See, Physicians for Human Rights, Where There is Police. Furthermore, there are at least six new military facilities that have been built on Rohingya land since August 2017 in Rakhine State. See, Nathan Ruser, Elise Thomas, and Mali Walker, “Mapping Conditions in Rakhine State,” Australian Strategic Policy Institute, July 24, 2019, https://pageflow.aspi.org.au/rakhine-state/#211793 (accessed August 23, 2019).