conclusions operating within the camps. This assumption is incorrect: humanitarian organisations in the camps are unable to meet Rohingya needs. However, even if this assumption was valid, it would not legitimise restricting the human right to move freely, and, by extension, the right to self-determination–rights also repeatedly denied to the Rohingya while in Myanmar. Additionally, UNHCR and other humanitarian aid organisations have not been able to provide sufficient protection to Rohingya or to effectively advocate with the GoB to reduce/remove these restrictions or improve conditions in the camp. Although policies related to Rohingya movement are not specifically gendered, their enforcement has impacted Rohingya differently based on their gender identity. Women are more likely than men to experience SGBV by the police at checkpoints, and cannot evade checkpoints as easily (e.g., crawling under or climbing over the fences) due to reasons such as pregnancy, childcare, or not being physically strong enough. Furthermore, experiencing SGBV often causes great shame for survivors and can result in important social consequences, such as losing the ability to marry. Restrictions on movement have also exacerbated IPV among Rohingya. Many women have connected the repressive environment and distress their men experience from being unable to work with the increased domestic violence towards them and their children. Despite this, marriage is seen as one of the only ways to protect their daughters from SGBV within the camps, putting them at increased risk of child marriage and human trafficking. Our results highlight the need for aid organisations and the GoB to design programmes and policies sensitive to the gendered needs of Rohingya so that effective safeguarding can be implemented. Restricting the Rohingya people’s right to freedom of movement has caused severe humiliation and dehumanisation. In the Bangladesh camps, Rohingya describe being treated worse than animals and feeling a community-level violation of their human dignity. This has severely impacted the mental health of the population. Suicidal ideation is common and many have expressed that death would be a more humane option than what they are currently enduring. There is a pervasive loss of hope for the future of Rohingya, as many fear the effects of an entire generation growing up illiterate, without education, and without opportunity. As is true of many different peoples forced into desperate situations, resistance is increasingly being seen as their only option for liberation. 150 This study demonstrates that Rohingya-led initiatives can and do produce rigorous, high quality research. As the affected population, the Rohingya refugees themselves are best placed to not only conduct this research within their community but also to present policy recommendations to change their circumstances. In fact, due to the current restrictions, this study would not have been possible without Rohingya leadership, emphasising the need for continued efforts towards a full decolonization of humanitarian aid. The central role of Rohingya voices in this study points to the increasing need to decolonize humanitarian aid processes by supporting, funding, and facilitating refugee leadership. 150 It is crucial to note here that acts committed while resisting oppression, such as violating policies restricting movement, are not the same thing as criminal acts. Because oppression dehumanises both the oppressed and the oppressor, resistance is an act of liberation for both parties, while the persecution by the oppressor maintains violence against both. Freire. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 1970. 81