Monthly Reports

Introduction

This report documents instances of hate speech, discriminatory expressions, and unjust criticism disseminated through social media, online platforms, and print media. It analyzes the nature, prevalence, and societal impact of hate speech observed throughout February.

This report aims to promote safer and more respectful communication while fostering greater social harmony in online spaces. By sharing knowledge on how to identify, respond to, and protect against hate speech, we hope to contribute to a more stable and inclusive society.

Research Methodology

As hate speech is a term that comes from emotion, there is a wide spectrum in defining it, not a specific one. BHRN, therefore, standardized the definition of hate speech for this report as follows. Hate speech in this report means aggressiveness and hatred against protected characteristics of a person or a group, blaming, discriminative expression, writing, gesture, or art expression of excoriation, dehumanization.

It means attacking someone’s faith, language, gender, sexual orientation, origin, ethnicity, skin color, race, belief, citizenship and physical appearance. The monitored hate speeches were categorized as (1) Criminalizing Hate Speech, (2) Abusive Hate Speech, (3) Dehumanizing Hate Speech, (4) Violence Inciting Hate Speech, (5) Threatening Hate Speech, and (6) Hate Speech that supports prejudicial actions inspired by hate speech.

February 2025 marked a pivotal moment in Myanmar’s ongoing crisis, with significant legal and political developments, escalating armed resistance, and increasing human rights violations.

The Argentine court’s issuance of arrest warrants for Min Aung Hlaing and 24 senior military officials under universal jurisdiction represents a historic step toward accountability for the genocide against the Rohingya. This ruling follows the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor’s request for an arrest warrant in November 2024 and ongoing International Court of Justice (ICJ) proceedings in The Gambia v. Myanmar, which charges Myanmar with genocide. These cases mark a growing international effort to hold the junta accountable for atrocities committed against the Rohingya and other communities.

As hate speech is a term that comes from emotion, there is a wide spectrum in defining it, not a specific one. BHRN, therefore, standardized the definition of hate speech for this report as follows. Hate speech in this report means aggressiveness and hatred against protected characteristics of a person or a group, blaming, discriminative expression, writing, gesture, or art expression of excoriation, or dehumanization.

It means attacking someone’s faith, language, gender, sexual orientation, origin, ethnicity, skin color, race, belief, citizenship, and physical appearance. The monitored hate speeches were categorized as (1) Criminalizing Hate Speech, (2) Abusive Hate Speech, (3) Dehumanizing Hate Speech, (4) Violence Inciting Hate Speech, (5) Threatening Hate Speech, and (6) Hate Speech that supports prejudicial actions inspired by hate speech.

A deepening political crisis looms in 2025 in Myanmar as the civil war intensifies and the junta increases using airpower to stop rebel offences in several parts of the country. Without any political dialogue, which is highly unlikely to happen in the coming months and with the junta pushing for an election later this year, more violence and instabilities are expected in the coming weeks and months.

As a consequence of the ongoing conflict in the country, the United Nations warned of acute famine in Rakhine State later this year. The conflict affected food production and a blockade of supplies of food into the state imposed by the junta is likely to create additional challenges for the sustainability of food for the region’s nearly 2 million population.

The rebel groups continue to make major gains in territories across Myanmar. The Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) also known as the Kokang rebel group, a close ally of China celebrated its first Lunar New Year in Lashio, the commercial capital in Northern Shan State which it took over last August. However, its continuing control of the town is uncertain as China is putting pressure on the group to return the control of the town to the Min Aung Hlaing regime, as a part of a ceasefire deal Beijing brokered at the beginning of the year.

Hate Speech Targets and Usages

In this month’s (the month of December 2024) monitoring, hate speech targeted the most was PDF and the second most was Muslim community and the third was women. Moreover, hate speeches targeting Arakan Army, Rakhine people and Chin people were found as well. Hate speech targeted to the Rohingya community in Rakhine State were also recorded along with AA.

In addition, the most used terms of hate speeches for this month are dog, terrorists, Muslim terrorists, Kalar (a derogatory term referring to Muslim), evil and non-pork eaters.

Hate Speech targeted to the Rohingya community

During the intense fighting between the Arakan Army (AA) and the junta in Rakhine State, the Rohingya are often considered a common target of ethnic, religious, military, and political hostility. The spread of hate speech against the Rohingya, particularly those who were forcibly recruited by the military, has increased since the AA took control of almost all parts of Rakhine State.

The Rohingya in Rakhine State can be divided into two groups: those living in areas controlled by the AA and those living in areas controlled by the Myanmar military. They face significant pressure from hate speech as they are caught between both the AA and the junta. The Irrawaddy News Agency has accused and spread hate speech against Rohingya who were forcibly recruited by the military, labeling them as “Muslim Pyusawhtee,” which translates to “Muslim Militant.” This is misleading, as these individuals were compelled to serve in the military against their will. The term “Pyusawhtee” is commonly used to refer to the military's puppets; thus, applying the same term to the Rohingya community fosters a misunderstanding that they are aligned with or complicit in the military's actions. The use of this term against the Rohingya can foster animosity not only among ethnic minorities but also among the ethnic majority towards the Rohingya community.