Dossier: The Stateless Rohingya—Practical Consequences of Expulsion Fiza Lee-Winter Ruhr-Universität Bochum Bochum, Germany Tonny Kirabira University of Portsmouth Portsmouth, England Introduction1 In October 2013, the UN High Commissioner of Refugees called for the “total commitment of the international community to end statelessness,” with the ultimate goal of ending statelessness within 10 years, thus resulting in the establishment of Global Action Plan to End Statelessness: 2014–2024, providing states with a guiding framework of 10 Actions in a worldwide effort to ultimately end statelessness. Action 7 of the Global Action Plan calls on States to “ensure birth registration for the prevention of statelessness,”2 as birth certi cates provide key information that assists children to con rm or acquire nationality.3 This dossier presents the practical consequences of expulsion and discusses the imperative need for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) states—collectively as a region—to take steps in ful lling Action 7 of the Global Action Plan as part of their existing efforts in order to enhance the protection of refugee children.4 The focus on ASEAN is imperative due to its orthodox practice of collective-based decision making, but also evolving approaches towards atrocity prevention and integration of human rights norms within member states.5 Referring to the Rohingya refugee crisis in particular, this dossier also explores ways in which birth registration impacts the status of Rohingya refugee children in this region, without which these stateless children are placed at greater risk of becoming victims to child traf cking With over one million Rohingya refugees escaping persecution in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, and many more having been displaced since the 2012—according to UNHCR, 741,947 Rohingya refugees have ed their homes in Rakhine state in Myanmar into neighboring Bangladesh since August 20176—this issue merits special attention. As victims of collective violence, the Rohingyas not only face direct attacks to their persons (bodily harm) and their properties;7 the effects from experiencing such violence can be far-reaching and with adverse 1 The views expressed in this Dossier belong solely to the authors. Due to their ongoing nature, Dossiers do not undergo the double-blind peer review process. 2 UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), “Global Action Plan to End Statelessness: 2014–2024,” (Geneva: Division of International Protection, UNCHR, 2017), 2, accessed 30 August 2021, https://www.unhcr.org/ 54621bf49.html. 3 UNHCR, “Ensuring Birth Registration for the Prevention of Statelessness,” (UNCHR, 2017), 1, accessed August 30, 2021, https://www.unhcr.org/ke/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/11/Good-Practices-Paper-on-EnsuringBirth-Registration-for-the-Prevention-of-Statelessness.pdf. 4 ASEAN is an intergovernmental economic union established on August 8, 1967, comprising 10 member states in Southeast Asia, namely Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. See “About ASEAN,” ASEAN, n.d., accessed October 8, 2021, https://asean.org/about-us. 5 David A. Frank, “The Reduction of Mass Atrocity Crimes in East Asia: The Evolving Norms of ASEAN's Prevention Mechanisms,” Genocide Studies and Prevention 11, no. 3 (2018), 105. 6 For a more elaborate analysis, see UNHCR, “Refugee Movements in South-East Asia 2018–June 2019,” (UNHCR, October 1, 2019) 2, accessed 30 August 2021, https://www.unhcr.org/5d91e2564.pdf. 7 Ibid. fi fi . fi fl fi Fiza Lee-Winter and Tonny Kirabira. “Dossier: The Stateless Rohingya—Practical Consequences of Expulsion.” Genocide Studies and Prevention 15, no. 2, 3–9. https://doi.org/10.5038/1911-9933.15.2.1863. © 2021 Genocide Studies and Prevention.