international minimum humanitarian standards and the targets they have set.lxviii Analysis of the data illustrates the squalid conditions in all of the camps, where more than half of those confined are children.lxix While access for all humanitarian actors – including UN agencies – has been increasingly restricted across Myanmar since the military coup, the SAC maintains obstacles which are unique to Rakhine State. In its April 2022 humanitarian update, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) in Myanmar noted that, ‘In Rakhine, cumbersome bureaucratic processes, delays and denials of TAs [travel authorisations] remain major challenges…In Central Rakhine, protection support is needed for IDPs and nondisplaced Rohingya communities to address ongoing rights violations and restrictions on accessing basic services, livelihoods, and humanitarian assistance.’lxx These restrictions have a profound impact. Within the camp settings, the military authorities in Myanmar are responsible for numerous examples of ‘creating circumstances that would lead to a slow death’, set out below. The conditions in the officially ‘closed’ camps of Kyein Ni Pyin in Pauktaw, Taung Paw in Myebon, Nidin in Kyauktaw and Kyauk Ta Lone in Kyaukpyu (earmarked for imminent ‘closure’) are of particular concern, as the segregation and confinement of Rohingya seems intended to be permanent. ‘Lack of proper shelter’ Over the past decade, overcrowding in the camps has been a significant issue. The camps fall far short of the international minimum standard of 45m2 of camp area per person. On average, there is just 23m2 per person across the 21 camps and camp-like settings. In Thae Chaung village, one of the largest camp-like settings which was fenced off and transformed into a militarized displacement site after the 2012 violence, there is just 7m2 of camp area per person.lxxi The vast majority of Rohingya in the camps continue to be housed in shared temporary shelters known as longhouses. Each longhouse contains 8-10 single room units with one family living in each room. The units are separated by thin bamboo partitions which afford little privacy.lxxii Humanitarian actors established a target of six persons or less in each of the units. In practice, 45 percent of the single-room units house more than six persons. A separate target of repairing or reconstructing all of the longhouses over the past two years has also not been met. On average, just 43 percent of the longhouses across all the Rohingya camps have been repaired over the past two years. lxxiii In its April 2022 update, UNOCHA noted that, ‘In Rakhine State...[t]here is now an additional bureaucratic layer for agencies to conduct construction and renovation activities of temporary longhouses/shelters and other humanitarian infrastructure in camps. Partners are required to obtain a written letter of land use clearance from the village administrator or authorities for work to proceed.’lxxiv The agency also issued a stark warning: ‘551 longhouses, sheltering more than 28,000 [Rohingya and Kaman] IDPs, are structurally unsound and require immediate action to ensure the safety of the residents… Of particular urgency are 140 longhouses in Say Tha Mar Gyi camp in Sittwe township, where IDPs are living in undignified conditions. These shelters are in extreme disrepair and pose life-threatening risks to the inhabitants [emphasis added].’lxxv In camps that have been declared ‘closed’, such as Kyein Ni Pyin, Taung Paw and Nidin camps, the authorities have not allowed any repairs to individual houses since they were constructed in 2018. According to information received by BROUK, some individual houses in Kyein Ni Pyin have collapsed completely. Rohingya IDPs have reported that roofing materials for both individual and longhouses are of very low quality, resulting in leaks during the rainy season and overheating in the hot season. The military authorities are pressing ahead with their plans to ‘close’ Kyauk Ta Lone in Kyaukpyu in violation of international law. While residents want to return to their places of origin, the military authorities have constructed individual housing immediately to the west of the same site, in effect creating a permanent detention camp designated as a ‘relocation’ site. In March, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights described the military authorities’ engagement with affected communities as ‘cursory’.lxxvi In April, UNOCHA warned that the new site was prone to flooding. According to information received by BROUK, by 11 May - early in the rainy season - the site had already flooded. UNOCHA also noted, 11