The Hoyyar Siri massacre, also known as the Htan Shauk Khan massacre, refers to the mass killing of Rohingya civilians on 2 May 2024 in Hoyyar Siri village in Buthidaung Township, northern Arakan (Rakhine State), Myanmar. The incident occurred during intense fighting between the Arakan Army (AA) and the Myanmar military as AA forces advanced against military positions around Buthidaung. Subsequent investigations by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights documented survivor and eyewitness testimony alleging that AA fighters fired on groups of Rohingya civilians attempting to escape the area. Human Rights Watch later concluded, on the basis of witness testimony and corroborating visual and geospatial evidence, that AA forces deliberately attacked civilians. The United League of Arakan (ULA), the political organization associated with the AA, has denied that its forces massacred civilians.

The precise number of people killed remains unresolved. Human Rights Watch compiled the names of more than 170 people killed or still missing, including approximately 90 children, and stated that the actual number was probably substantially higher. Rohingya organizations, survivors and activists have reported considerably larger figures. In August 2025, the Arakan Rohingya National Council (ARNC) alleged that more than 600 Rohingya civilians had been killed. Because these figures are based on different bodies of evidence and methods of documentation, and because no independent investigation has established a definitive final death toll, Rohipedia records the figures separately rather than presenting any unresolved estimate as an established total.

Hoyyar Siri village

Hoyyar Siri was a predominantly Rohingya village in Buthidaung Township. It is known as Htan Shauk Khan in Burmese sources and has also appeared under spellings such as Hoinya Seeree and Hoinya Seeri in Rohingya reporting. Human Rights Watch described the settlement as consisting principally of two hamlets, Bor Para and Fatailla Para. Before the events of May 2024, villagers estimated that approximately 1,200 people lived there. By late April, however, hundreds of displaced Rohingya from surrounding communities had reportedly sought refuge in the village as fighting spread through Buthidaung Township.

The geography of Hoyyar Siri placed its civilian population in an exceptionally dangerous position. The village lay between two Myanmar military installations: the 15th Military Operations Command (MOC-15) to the north and Light Infantry Battalion 551 (LIB-551) to the southeast. As AA forces advanced against these positions, the village and surrounding agricultural land became part of an increasingly contested military environment. Residents who had regarded Hoyyar Siri as relatively secure found themselves caught between Myanmar military units, retreating personnel and advancing AA forces.

Military situation before the killings

The massacre occurred during a major transformation of the conflict in northern Arakan. Fighting between the Myanmar military and the Arakan Army had resumed in November 2023 following the breakdown of an informal ceasefire. During the following months, AA forces captured military positions and expanded their territorial control across much of Arakan. By April and May 2024, some of the heaviest fighting was taking place in Buthidaung Township, an area with a large Rohingya population.

The position of Rohingya civilians was further complicated by forced recruitment and the involvement of Rohingya armed groups. Human Rights Watch reported that the Myanmar military forcibly recruited Rohingya men and boys during this period. Villagers told investigators that in mid-April a Myanmar military captain demanded that Hoyyar Siri provide Rohingya men to fight against the AA and threatened consequences if the village refused. Rohingya armed actors were also operating within the broader conflict. These developments generated fears among ordinary villagers that the AA might perceive Rohingya communities as aligned with the Myanmar military, regardless of whether individual civilians had any involvement in hostilities.

Residents also received contradictory instructions as the fighting approached. According to testimony collected by investigators, AA forces had instructed civilians to evacuate, while Myanmar military personnel had at different stages told residents to remain. During the night of 1–2 May, the military situation deteriorated further as AA forces advanced on the nearby military positions and Myanmar military personnel moved through or near civilian areas. Fearing that their village would become a battlefield, large numbers of residents decided to flee on the morning of 2 May.

The flight from Hoyyar Siri

According to survivor accounts documented by Human Rights Watch and other investigators, groups of civilians began leaving Hoyyar Siri at approximately 7 a.m. on 2 May 2024. Families travelled together, including children, women, elderly people and people carrying whatever possessions they could manage. Witnesses said that some civilians carried white flags, apparently intending to demonstrate that they were civilians and posed no threat to either side.

One group moved in the direction of Buthidaung town. When civilians reached an area around a hill known locally as Toinna Mura, survivors told Human Rights Watch that AA fighters appeared from several directions and opened fire. Witnesses described people scattering in panic, with some attempting to return toward Hoyyar Siri, others running into fields, and families becoming separated amid the shooting.

Fortify Rights independently investigated the incident and interviewed survivors and eyewitnesses. Its investigation similarly concluded that AA forces stopped fleeing Rohingya civilians and opened fire. OHCHR later recorded accounts alleging that more than 1,000 Rohingya had fled because they feared approaching clashes and that AA elements stopped civilians, divided them into groups in paddy fields and fired upon them.

Killings at multiple locations

The available evidence indicates that the violence was not confined to a single point. Human Rights Watch reconstructed events using testimony, satellite imagery, photographs, videos and geospatial analysis and identified three principal locations associated with mass killings: the area around Toinna Mura, Fatailla Para near a pond, and the western part of Bor Para.

Survivors described relatives being shot beside them and bodies lying along roads, fields and other areas through which villagers had attempted to escape. One survivor interviewed by Human Rights Watch reported losing his wife and three young children. Other witnesses described civilians gathering or becoming trapped in paddy fields before gunfire was directed at them. The accounts describe families being separated during the chaos, with survivors often unable to determine immediately whether missing relatives had escaped, been detained or been killed.

The number of children among the documented dead and missing is particularly significant. Human Rights Watch's victim list contained approximately 90 children among more than 170 named dead or missing persons. The organization emphasized that its list was not a complete casualty count but represented people whose identities researchers were able to document through interviews and other evidence.

United Nations documentation

OHCHR subsequently documented the incident as part of its reporting on the human-rights situation of Rohingya and other minorities in Myanmar. According to the UN account, multiple sources alleged that more than 1,000 Rohingya villagers fled Htan Shauk Khan because they feared clashes. Witnesses described being stopped by AA elements, divided into three groups in paddy fields and fired upon, resulting in scores of deaths.

One survivor interviewed for the UN documentation described extensive shooting and mass killing, while another reported losing 20 relatives, including three children. The UN reporting did not establish a definitive casualty total. Its importance to the historical record lies instead in providing independent international documentation that allegations of a large-scale killing at Htan Shauk Khan were supported by multiple sources.

Human Rights Watch investigation

Human Rights Watch published an extensive investigation into the Hoyyar Siri killings on 18 May 2026, after survivors who had remained trapped or displaced in Arakan gradually reached locations where independent researchers could interview them. Researchers interviewed 41 people between September 2025 and April 2026, including men, women and children, almost all of whom had witnessed events connected to the 2 May attack. Most interviews took place after survivors reached refugee camps in Bangladesh, while other witnesses were interviewed remotely from Myanmar or Malaysia.

The investigation did not depend solely upon oral testimony. Human Rights Watch examined satellite imagery, geospatial information, photographs and videos. Researchers verified 29 photographs and seven videos supplied by survivors who had returned to Hoyyar Siri after the killings. Independent forensic experts examined visual material showing human remains and injuries. Human Rights Watch also compared the locations visible in photographs and videos with satellite imagery and survivor descriptions.

After assessing this evidence, Human Rights Watch compiled a list of more than 170 Rohingya villagers killed or missing, including approximately 90 children. The organization stated that the actual number was probably substantially higher and concluded that AA fighters deliberately attacked civilians. Human Rights Watch characterized the violations it documented as grave violations of international humanitarian law amounting to war crimes.

Discovery of human remains and delayed documentation

One of the defining features of the Hoyyar Siri case is how long it took for substantial evidence to reach international investigators. Unlike atrocities occurring in areas accessible to journalists or independent monitors, Hoyyar Siri was located in an active conflict zone that eventually came under AA control. Many survivors remained displaced within Buthidaung Township for more than a year, while others were unable to communicate safely with outside organizations.

Some survivors later returned secretly to the abandoned village and photographed or filmed human remains at locations where they said relatives and neighbors had been killed. These images became important pieces of corroborating evidence when survivors eventually reached Bangladesh and Malaysia. Human Rights Watch geolocated photographs and videos depicting human remains in Fatailla Para and Bor Para and compared them with testimony and satellite imagery.

The delayed emergence of evidence helps explain why the scale and circumstances of the massacre remained contested for so long. The absence of immediate independent access did not itself establish which competing account was correct. Later investigations therefore attempted to reconstruct events by combining multiple forms of evidence rather than relying on a single source.

Destruction of Hoyyar Siri

The killings were followed by the near-total destruction of the village. Satellite imagery examined by Human Rights Watch showed extensive damage to Hoyyar Siri, with almost the entire settlement eventually destroyed. By early June 2024, fewer than a dozen structures reportedly remained, and later imagery showed vegetation reclaiming areas where houses had once stood.

The cause and timing of all of the destruction remain disputed. The ULA has attributed destruction in and around the village to intense combat involving Myanmar military shelling, airstrikes and crossfire. Human Rights Watch, however, reported that satellite imagery and testimony from people who returned to the village indicated that additional destruction occurred after AA forces had established control. Survivors also alleged that houses had been looted and livestock and personal possessions taken.

The destruction had lasting consequences beyond the immediate loss of life. Hoyyar Siri ceased to function as the community that had existed before May 2024. Survivors lost not only relatives but homes, farmland, livestock, possessions and the physical environment around which village life had been organized.

Casualty figures and why they differ

No universally established final death toll currently exists for the Hoyyar Siri massacre. Human Rights Watch identified more than 170 killed or missing people by name and said the true number was probably substantially higher. This figure should therefore be understood as a documented minimum or victim list rather than a final count of everyone who died.

Rohingya survivors, activists and organizations have reported higher casualty estimates. On 4 August 2025, the Arakan Rohingya National Council stated that more than 600 Rohingya civilians had been killed. ARNC said newly surfaced photographs and eyewitness testimony supported its allegation and described victims as including children, women, pregnant women, elderly people and persons with disabilities. It called for an independent international investigation and international accountability.

The difference between more than 170 named dead or missing and an allegation of more than 600 deaths does not necessarily mean that one figure represents a direct revision of the other. They reflect different evidentiary standards and methods. Human Rights Watch's figure represents people its researchers were able to identify by name, while the larger figure reported by ARNC is an organizational estimate. Independent investigations have not established more than 600 deaths as a verified final casualty total. For that reason, Rohipedia records more than 170 identified dead or missing separately from ARNC's allegation of more than 600 killed.

Fortify Rights investigation

Fortify Rights announced the findings of its own investigation on 9 April 2026. Between March and November 2025, the organization interviewed 15 Rohingya survivors, eyewitnesses and other people with direct knowledge of the events, including individuals in Myanmar and people who had escaped to Bangladesh and Malaysia. Investigators also reviewed photographic evidence of the aftermath.

Fortify Rights concluded that AA forces killed scores of Rohingya civilians at Hoyyar Siri on 2 May 2024. Its findings independently reinforced key elements of the survivor accounts subsequently documented in greater detail by Human Rights Watch. Fortify Rights called on the International Criminal Court to expand its Myanmar investigation to include the incident and called for accountability for commanders implicated in serious violations.

The Fortify Rights investigation is particularly important because it preceded the detailed Human Rights Watch report and was conducted independently. Together with OHCHR's earlier documentation, the investigations created several separate bodies of evidence concerning the same incident.

BROUK and international accountability efforts

The Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK (BROUK) has also cited the Htan Shauk Khan killings in its international accountability work. BROUK has argued that alleged crimes committed by the Arakan Army against Rohingya should be investigated alongside crimes attributed to the Myanmar military and other actors.

In September 2025, BROUK sought to expand proceedings pursued under universal jurisdiction in Argentina to include alleged atrocity crimes committed by the AA, including the Hoyyar Siri killings. Such advocacy does not constitute a judicial determination that the alleged crimes occurred in precisely the manner asserted. Its historical significance is that Rohingya civil-society organizations increasingly sought accountability for alleged abuses by multiple armed actors rather than limiting international legal efforts to crimes committed by Myanmar's military authorities.

ARNC's position

The Arakan Rohingya National Council has described the incident as a massacre in which more than 600 Rohingya civilians were killed and has characterized the alleged acts as genocide and war crimes. ARNC called for an independent international investigation and for international judicial mechanisms, including the International Criminal Court, to address the allegations.

ARNC's August 2025 statement helped draw renewed attention to the incident more than a year after it occurred, at a time when photographs, survivor accounts and other information were beginning to circulate more widely. Its casualty estimate is substantially higher than the number of victims Human Rights Watch later identified individually. Rohipedia therefore preserves ARNC's statement as an important part of the documentary history while distinguishing its claims from casualty figures independently established through named victim documentation.

ULA and Arakan Army response

The United League of Arakan and Arakan Army have denied responsibility for massacring Rohingya civilians at Hoyyar Siri. In correspondence reported by Human Rights Watch, the ULA maintained that AA forces had complied with international humanitarian law and disputed allegations that its fighters deliberately killed Rohingya civilians. It has presented the events around Hoyyar Siri within the context of intense fighting against Myanmar military forces and associated armed actors.

An investigation associated with a Rakhine civil-society group also presented a substantially different account of what occurred. That report argued that many of those killed were combatants connected to the Myanmar military or Rohingya armed groups and disputed claims of a large-scale massacre of civilians. Human Rights Watch considered competing explanations during its investigation and concluded that the evidence it gathered did not support that interpretation.

The competing narratives are therefore materially different and should remain visible in the historical record. The ULA/AA denies carrying out a massacre of Rohingya civilians. OHCHR documented multiple-source testimony alleging that AA elements stopped and fired upon fleeing civilians. Fortify Rights concluded from its investigation that AA forces killed scores of Rohingya civilians. Human Rights Watch subsequently concluded, after a larger investigation incorporating witness testimony and visual and geospatial evidence, that AA fighters deliberately attacked civilians. Rohipedia records these positions separately so readers can distinguish denials, allegations and investigative findings.

Responsibility of the Myanmar military and the wider conflict

The circumstances surrounding Hoyyar Siri cannot be understood solely through the actions attributed to the Arakan Army. Myanmar's military had long subjected Rohingya to severe restrictions and abuses and, during the renewed conflict with the AA, forcibly recruited Rohingya men and boys. Human Rights Watch documented allegations that military personnel pressured Hoyyar Siri to provide recruits and that military forces were positioned around the village as AA troops advanced.

Witnesses also alleged that Myanmar military personnel prevented or discouraged civilians from leaving at earlier stages even as fighting approached. Retreating military personnel subsequently moved through the area as AA forces advanced. These circumstances placed civilians at exceptional risk by bringing armed forces and military operations into close proximity to a populated Rohingya community.

Human Rights Watch stated that the Myanmar military's conduct also warranted investigation under the laws of war, including whether it failed to take feasible precautions to protect civilians or unnecessarily exposed them to military danger. Responsibility for violations by one party does not remove the obligations of another party. International humanitarian law requires all parties to an armed conflict to distinguish civilians from combatants and to protect civilians regardless of alleged abuses committed by their opponents.

Survivors after the massacre

Survivors of the killings scattered across Buthidaung Township. Some attempted to find shelter in neighbouring communities, while others remained displaced for prolonged periods. Human Rights Watch reported allegations that some Rohingya attempting to reach safety were subsequently detained by AA forces and that cash and jewelry were taken from them. Other witnesses described detention, beatings and mistreatment. These allegations extended the documented experience of survivors beyond the shootings themselves and illustrate the insecurity that continued after people had escaped the immediate killing sites.

Many former Hoyyar Siri residents were eventually moved to a settlement at Nassawr Para, known in Burmese as Hnget Thay, several kilometres south of their former village. Former residents interviewed by Human Rights Watch described severe restrictions on movement, inadequate access to food and medical care, surveillance and forced labor. The ULA has described the settlement differently, presenting it as a newly constructed village established for displaced residents. These differing accounts are significant because independent access to the area has remained restricted, making it difficult for outside observers to independently assess living conditions and the extent to which residents have been able to move freely or make decisions about where they live.

The destruction of Hoyyar Siri also meant that displacement was not simply a temporary consequence of the fighting. Satellite imagery examined by Human Rights Watch showed that almost the entire settlement had been destroyed, leaving former residents without the homes and community infrastructure to which they might otherwise have returned. Survivors therefore faced not only the loss of relatives but also the destruction of the physical community in which their families had lived. For many, the events of 2 May marked the beginning of prolonged displacement rather than the end of their ordeal.

Over time, some survivors succeeded in leaving Arakan. By 2026, Human Rights Watch reported that more than 100 survivors had escaped to Bangladesh, while some former residents had reached Malaysia. Their arrival outside Myanmar was important to the documentation of the massacre because it allowed survivors to speak more extensively with international investigators and provide testimony, photographs, videos and information concerning relatives who had been killed or remained missing. Many other former residents, however, remained displaced inside Arakan.

The delayed movement of survivors out of the region also helps explain why the Hoyyar Siri massacre remained poorly understood internationally for more than a year. Immediately after the killings, independent investigators could not freely enter the area, communications were severely constrained, and many witnesses remained within territory affected by the conflict. As survivors gradually reached Bangladesh and other countries, investigators were able to compare separate eyewitness accounts and examine visual and satellite evidence connected with the locations described by witnesses.

For survivors, the consequences extended far beyond the question of casualty numbers. Families had been separated, children had lost parents and siblings, parents had lost children, and many survivors did not initially know whether missing relatives had been killed, detained or displaced elsewhere. The distinction between confirmed dead and missing persons therefore remained important to subsequent investigations. Human Rights Watch's list of more than 170 killed or missing villagers should be understood within this context: it represents people investigators were able to identify individually, while the complete fate of everyone who was present in and around Hoyyar Siri on 2 May has not been conclusively established.

By 2026, Hoyyar Siri itself remained largely uninhabited. The destruction of the village, continuing displacement of its residents and unresolved fate of some missing people transformed what had once been a functioning Rohingya community into one of the principal documented sites of alleged mass killing during the renewed conflict in northern Arakan. The testimony of survivors who eventually reached places where they could speak with investigators has consequently become central to reconstructing what happened on 2 May 2024 and preserving the names and experiences of victims whose deaths might otherwise have remained undocumented.

Evidence, verification and unresolved questions

The Hoyyar Siri case also illustrates the exceptional difficulty of documenting alleged atrocities in areas that are largely inaccessible to independent investigators. International researchers were unable to freely inspect the village immediately after the incident, survivors were dispersed across different locations, and some remained in areas affected by armed conflict for more than a year. As a result, important evidence emerged gradually rather than through an immediate investigation at the scene.

This delay does not by itself invalidate survivor testimony, but it makes corroboration particularly important. Later investigations therefore relied on multiple forms of evidence, including separate eyewitness accounts, victim identification, satellite imagery, geolocation, photographs, videos and forensic examination of visual material. Where these different forms of evidence independently corresponded—for example, where survivor descriptions of particular locations could be compared with geolocated imagery—the evidentiary record became considerably stronger.

Important questions nevertheless remain unresolved. A definitive number of people killed has not been established, the fate of some missing residents remains uncertain, and investigators have not had unrestricted access to all relevant locations, witnesses or records. There are also sharply conflicting accounts concerning responsibility and the circumstances in which civilians died. The ULA/AA denies carrying out a massacre, while OHCHR recorded testimony alleging that AA elements fired on fleeing Rohingya civilians and investigations by Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights attributed mass civilian killings to AA forces.

For these reasons, the historical record should distinguish carefully between what has been independently corroborated, what witnesses have alleged, what organizations have concluded from their investigations, and what remains disputed or unknown. Future investigations, additional survivor testimony, documentary evidence, forensic examination or judicial proceedings may establish further details and may revise the known casualty figures. Rohipedia should therefore preserve the evidence currently available while allowing the record to be updated as new verifiable information emerges.