A/HRC/39/CRP.2 676. Rohingya men and boys were also subjected to sexual humiliation, often in the presence of other inmates. Detainees experienced the degrading treatment of being forced to walk naked from their cell to the shower and showering in groups of up to 20 to 30 persons in front of one another, including family members, which was particularly uncomfortable and considered shameful.1461 Detainees reportedly had to wait outside their cells naked until they dried.1462 Another detainee described how guards burned the genitals of Rohingya detainees.1463 677. A significant number of Rohingya detainees died because of mistreatment in Buthidaung prison. Some were beaten to death and corpses were dragged out of the cells. 1464 One former detainee described seeing four people killed in his cell: “They were beaten to death by the guards in front of me. Three others, who were beaten a lot, died a few months later.”1465 678. Detainees also suffered serious injuries, including broken bones, infected wounds and other life-changing injuries.1466 One former detainee described the impact of his regular beatings, for more than a month, by both ethnic Rakhine and guards: My back was injured, and I can no longer carry things on my back. They beat me on my toes and ankle and my little finger was broken. I have scars on my hands and feet and suffer pain on my back and waist.1467 679. Corruption was also prevalent within Buthidaung prison. Prison guards demanded bribes to reduce or end the beatings or to provide preferential treatment. 1468 Relatives or friends had to pay a fee to visit detainees. 1469 Large payments could also get prisoners released.1470 4. (a) Government response to the 2012 violence Curfews and prohibition of meetings of more than five people 680. One of the first responses of the Government to the violence in Maungdaw was the imposition by the Maungdaw Township Administrator on 8 June of a curfew and prohibition of public gatherings of more than five people.1471 Similar 2012 orders were imposed in Buthidaung, Kyaukpyu, Ramree, Sittwe and Thandwe townships. 1472 According to the law, such orders should only remain in force for two months, unless the President directs 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 CI-130, CI-136, DI-037, QI-105, QI-106, QI-108; KI-076.3, KI-076.4, KI-076.5. KI-076.3, KI-076.4. DI-037. CI-136, DI-037, QI-105, QI-106, QI-107, QI-108, RI-011; KI-076.2, KI-076.4, KI-076.5. QI-106. CI-136, DI-037, QI-107. CI-136. CI-082, CI-175, DI-037, QI-104, QI-107. CI-082, CI-136, QI-104, QI-107. DI-010, DI-037; K-076.4. Township General Administration Department, Curfew Order No. 1/2012 (8 June 2012), available at: http://www.myanmargeneva.org/pressrelease/2.%20Preventive%20measures%20and%20actions%20t aken%20by%20the%20government.pdf. See page 7. The power to impose such curfew orders appears to have been increasingly used by the General Administration Department, through township administrators. It is viewed as an indirect way for the Tatmadaw to exercise control. See: M. Crouch, “The Everyday Emergency: Between the Constitution and the Code of Criminal Procedure”, in Constitutional Change and Legal Reform in Myanmar, A. Harding, Khin Khin Oo, eds. (Hart Publishing/Bloomsbury, 2017), p. 165. See presentation posted by the Permanent Mission of the Union of Myanmar to the United Nations and other international organizations in Geneva on “Preventive measures and actions taken by the Government”, p. 2, available at: http://www.myanmargeneva.org/pressrelease/2.%20Preventive%20measures%20and%20actions%20t aken%20by%20the%20government.pdf 159