[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
Amnesty Report on Burma
Received: (from strider) by igc2.igc.apc.org (8.6.9/Revision: 1.5 ) id WAA14134; Fri, 13 Jan 1995 22:55:46 -0800
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 22:55:46 -0800
************************** BurmaNet **************************
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
**************************************************************
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: MYANMAR---HUMAN RIGHTS STILL DENIED
November, 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Political developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
The National Convention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
The Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA) 3
Political detention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Recent arrests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Treatment of political prisoners in detention. . . . . 11
Releases of political prisoners. . . . . . . . . . . . 13
The death penalty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Ethnic minorities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Ceasefire agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Human rights violations against the Karen ethnic minority 15
Human rights violations against the Mon ethnic minority. 18
Human rights violations against the Shan ethnic minority 21
Government response to allegations of human rights violations 21
Myanmar and the United Nations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
AMNESTY: MYANMAR---HUMAN RIGHTS STILL DENIED
Introduction
In the sixth year of government by the ruling State Law and Order
Restoration Council (SLORC), there has been no fundamental change
in its attitude towards respecting the basic human rights of its
citizens. Whereas the SLORC took a number of tentative steps to
indicate to the international community a willingness to address
the human rights situation in Myanmar, it at the same time
reinforced its repressive hold within the country.
Amnesty International is concerned that certain well-
publicised events should not draw attention away from the ongoing
human rights violations in Myanmar. For example, although Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi was able to meet with a United States
Congressman in February, the SLORC confirmed that she would not
be released until at least 1995. In July, the Burmese Foreign
Minister announced to a press conference in Bangkok that the
SLORC had accepted an invitation for talks about "democratic
reforms and human rights" with the United Nations Secretary-
General, but added that he did not believe Myanmar had a human
rights problem. This announcement came only 24 hours after an
attack by the tatmadaw (Burmese army) on a camp inside Myanmar
housing ethnic Mon refugees, in which part of the camp was burnt
down and 16 men taken away, eight of whom are still missing. The
first meeting between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the Chairman and
the Secretary 1 of the SLORC was shown on television and widely
publicised in the Burmese press, but just two weeks later five
National League for Democracy (NLD) opposition activists,
including some of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's colleagues, were
sentenced to between seven and 15 years imprisonment, solely for
their peaceful political opposition to the SLORC. Another widely
publicised meeting took place between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and
the Secretary 1 of the SLORC and two Generals in the Armed Forces
on 28 October, yet she remained under house arrest.
While Amnesty International welcomes any steps which may
lead to the improvement of the human rights situation in Myanmar,
it is increasingly concerned that the SLORC has failed to make
any real progress or sincere attempts to address the issues
described in this report or to ensure that its citizens are able
to peacefully exercize their rights to freedom of expression and
association.
This report details continuing human rights violations in
Myanmar throughout 1994, including the arrest and detention of
prisoners of conscience, and violations against ethnic minority
groups by the tatmadaw.
Political developments
The National Convention
The National Convention initially convened in January 1993 to
agree the principles for drafting a new constitution, reconvened
on 18 January 1994, having been adjourned the previous September.
It continued its work on formulating principles closely following
the comprehensive guidelines and recommendations of the National
Convention Convening Work Committee chaired by Chief Justice U
Aung Toe. Six objectives to be adhered to in formulating the new
constitution had been agreed in earlier meetings and included the
key objective that the military must play a leading role in
politics.
When the National Convention adjourned on 9 April 1994,
Chief Justice U Aung Toe stated that agreement had been reached
on the principles for drafting the chapters on the state, the
structure of the state, and the office of the head of state.
According to these principles, the country will be governed by an
executive president and two vice presidents, elected by
presidential electoral colleges formed by all members of the two
houses of parliament. The principles further stipulate that the
president and vice-presidents may not be married to foreigners,
must not be second-generation foreigners and may receive no
support from abroad. They must have a military background and
have been living in the country without interruption for at least
20 years. It is widely believed that these attributes have been
adopted so as to exclude the possibility of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
becoming president.
Before the April 1994 adjournment, no agreement was reached on
the proposal of self-administering areas for small ethnic
minority groups. Ethnic minority groups had submitted proposals
for the right to have self-administering status within states
with another majority ethnic population. It was decided therefore
that this issue would be re-considered when the National
Convention would reconvene later in the year.
The National Convention reconvened on 2 September 1994. The
subjects on its current agenda are self-administered areas; the
legislature; the executive branch; and the judiciary. In his
opening address to the National Convention, Lieutenant General
Myo Nyunt, Chairman of the National Convention Convening
Commission, stated that delegates "have to be careful during the
discussions not to attack the results of the SLORC's efforts -
which have achieved a good basis for national unity", indicating
that delegates are still not allowed to discuss the proposed new
constitution freely.
The Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA)
On 15 September 1993 the SLORC announced the formation of the
Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA). This was
stated to be a "social organization" with local branches country-
wide. The Secretary General and the executive committee are all
civilian members of the government and it is reported that in
most local areas the USDA is headed by former officials of the
Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP). The basic aims of USDA
were stated to be:
1. Non-disintegration of the Union;
2. Non-disintegration of national unity;
3. Perpetuation of sovereignty;
4. Promotion and vitalization of national pride;
5. Emergence of a prosperous, peaceful and modern Union.
The first three aims are identical to the stated aims of the
SLORC. It is widely believed that the USDA has been established
as a pro-government organization which will be able to exercise
power and influence locally over Myanmar's citizens, and which
may eventually be used as a basis for a political party in any
future elections.
Throughout January rallies of the USDA were held all around the
country, where "delegates" made speeches about the National
Convention principles. These rallies were reportedly attended by
hundreds of thousands of people and were given widespread media
coverage in Myanmar. Attendance at the rallies was not
spontaneous. In the cities civil servants and students were told
by the authorities to march to the rallies, and villagers were
bussed in from surrounding areas. Sources have told Amnesty
International that a lot of people attended the rallies because
they feared the consequences if they did not, such as payment of
fines, children being dismissed from school, students failing
examinations or civil servants losing their jobs.
On 7 March 1994, General Than Shwe, Chairman of the SLORC,
addressed a training course for USDA "managers" and is reported
to have stated the reasons for the formation of the USDA:
"There are those who echo foreign claims about a lack of
democracy and human rights violations in Myanmar...the USDA was
formed specifically with the objective to fill in the role of
strengthening national unity...acts of anarchy prevailed during
the events of 1988 and that the USDA was formed to prevent
similar events in the future and to promote the observance of law
and order among the general public." (Myanmar Television, 7 March
1994)
On 2 June 1994 Myanmar Radio announced that the government had
awarded "special thanks decorations" to members of the public who
had informed on others. The awards were reportedly given to
people who had cooperated with security personnel fighting crime
or with "Law and Order Restoration networks". The recipients
reportedly included members of the USDA.
Unofficial sources told Amnesty International that in June 1994
young members of USDA were given instruction by members of
Military Intelligence on how to detect people distributing
political leaflets. Following this training, a number of arrests
were made by the police and defence services for distributing
political leaflets. On 6 July, 20 students were arrested for
allegedly distributing pamphlets in Yangon. Seventeen were
released in the evening but the remaining three were reportedly
sent to Insein Prison. On 8 July, a further seven were arrested
in Yangon for distribution of leaflets, namely: Htwe Maw, Than
Tun Oo, Nutty, Kyi Soe, Wai Moe, and Myint Soe alias Than Gyoung.
Hla Tut Soe was arrested on 11 July. Amnesty International does
not know the fate of these students and has sought further
information about their situation. To date, there is no
information on whether they are still detained.
Political detention
Despite the officially reported release of more than 2000
political prisoners since April 1992, political detention in
Myanmar continues to be a major tool of repression used by the
SLORC. Hundreds of political prisoners arrested since the
pro-democracy movement began in 1988 remain in detention,
including more than 50 prisoners of conscience. Many of the
leading figures of the opposition movement in Myanmar are still
detained, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and retired general U
Tin Oo, founding members of the National League for Democracy
(NLD), the main opposition party which won over 80% of the seats
in the May 1990 elections. Twenty-eight members of the 1990
parliament-elect, most of whom were arrested in late 1990, are
still in detention, including U Kyi Maung and U R P Thaung.
U Kyi Maung is an NLD member of parliament-elect in his 70's
arrested on 6 September 1990 and sentenced to two separate terms
of 10 years' imprisonment on charges of alleged treason.
U R P Thaung is a 70-year-old member of parliament-elect for the
Democratic Organization for Kayan National Unity (DOKNU) arrested
in February 1991 and sentenced to five years' imprisonment for
allegedly passing on information to foreign embassies. Amnesty
International believes them both to be prisoners of conscience
and is calling for their immediate and unconditional release.
Other detainees include prisoners of conscience:
Nay Min, a lawyer and journalist arrested in October 1988 for
"sending false rumours to the BBC to fan further disturbances in
the country, and for possession of anti-government literature".
He was sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment, which was reduced to
10 in an amnesty on 1 January 1993. During the early years of his
detention he suffered badly from torture and ill- treatment which
may have affected his health;
U Kyi Hla, a book distributer arrested in September 1990 and
sentenced to seven years' imprisonment by a military tribunal for
publishing and distributing material critical of the government.
In addition, Amnesty International knows of at least 60 students
arrested in December 1991 at demonstrations in Yangon (Rangoon,
the capital) supporting the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi and calling for her release. They are all
believed to be still detained. Forty-six of these students were
sentenced to prison terms ranging between six and 20 years. It is
reported that around 200 students altogether were sentenced, but
Amnesty International does not have information on all of them.
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
In July 1994, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Nobel Peace Prize laureate
and de facto leader of the pro-democracy and opposition movement
in Myanmar began her sixth year of house arrest. Earlier in the
year, for the first time since her arrest on 20 July 1989, she
was allowed to meet with people other than her family. United
States Congressman William Richardson met with her twice at her
home during his visit to Myanmar between 15 and 17 February. Also
present at the meetings were the representative of the United
Nations Development Program (UNDP) in Myanmar, a representative
from the United States Embassy, and a reporter for the American
newspaper The New York Times. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi told the
Congressman that she had already been informed by the SLORC that
her detention would continue until at least 1995. She also told
him that she thought that the National Convention was a "farce"
and said that her message for other members of the NLD was "Don't
be scared". While welcoming the fact that this meeting had been
allowed to take place, Amnesty International believed it to be an
inadequate gesture by the SLORC, and called for the immediate and
unconditional release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all other
prisoners of conscience.
Further developments took place in September and October 1994. In
September Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was shown on Burmese television
attending a meeting with Chairman of the SLORC General Than Shwe
and Secretary 1 Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt. The meeting was
the result of mediation by Dr Rewata Dhamma, a Burmese Buddhist
monk living in England who is highly respected in Myanmar. During
two visits to Myanmar in 1994 Dr Rewata Dhamma met with Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi, who he has known for many years, and also with
members of the SLORC. He urged that the two sides should meet and
negotiate.
The meeting was held at a Defence Services Guest House and
reportedly lasted for over one hour. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was
then returned to house arrest. The meeting was widely covered in
the Burmese press and caused widespread speculation that Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi may be released soon, and that the SLORC has decided
to proceed with a dialogue about the political situation in the
country. A second meeting took place at a Defence Services Guest
House on 28 October. Present at this meeting was Lieutenant
General Khin Nyunt, armed forces Judge Advocate General Brigadier
General Than Oo, and armed forces Inspector General Brigadier
General Tin Aye. This meeting received even more coverage by the
Burmese media and a report on Myanmar Television reportedly said
that the discussions were frank and cordial and that they covered
"the political and economic reforms which the SLORC is in the
process of implementing, as steps that should be taken with a
view to the long-term welfare of the nation".
So far there have been no further indications that Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi will be released and Amnesty International is concerned
that the televised meetings may be simply an attempt by the SLORC
to gain international respectability.
Recent arrests
The SLORC continues to intimidate its citizens and discourage
them from exercizing their fundamental rights to freedom of
expression and assembly by arresting anyone involved in political
opposition activities. In mid-1994 several related arrests were
made:
Khin Zaw Win
On 4 July 1994 Khin Zaw Win, also known as Kelvin, was arrested
while boarding a flight to Singapore at Yangon International
Airport. Khin Zaw Win, a qualified dentist, had received a
scholarship from the Singapore Government in June 1993 to study
for a Masters' degree in Public Policy at the University of
Singapore. His thesis topic was the political situation in
Myanmar and he had returned home to carry out academic research.
Khin Zaw Win had also worked for UNICEF in Myanmar between March
1991 and early 1993. His work with UNICEF included speech and
report-writing, interpreting on trips outside of Yangon, and in
1992 he attended the UN-sponsored conference in China on the
Rights of the Child.
Khin Zaw Win was believed to have been carrying documents
relating to the political opposition movement in Myanmar at the
time of his arrest. He is known to have had close links and
sympathy with the political opposition, and to have himself been
critical of the government. He was initially taken to a Military
Intelligence detention centre and then transferred to Insein
Prison - Myanmar's main detention centre in Yangon - in mid-
August. On 23 August, The New Light of Myanmar, the state-
controlled English-language newspaper, reported that the
allegations against him included:
"Documents against Myanmar, some computer discs with
anti-government material and facts and confidential reports
containing data on the Ministry of Energy of Myanmar were seized
from Dr Khin Zaw Win...[he] confessed and said that he had been a
consultant to the Resident Representative of UNICEF from March
1991 to December 1992. Since that time, he said, Daw San San
Nwe,...U Khin Maung Swe, and U Sein Hla Oo...contacted him. Dr
Khin Zaw Win said that they together met foreign journalists or
contacted some diplomats of foreign embassies and then sent news
comments against or critical of the government in order to make
foreign governments misunderstand the government. He said that
they made frequent contacts with...[a member of an armed
opposition group] and...[the NLD in exile], exchanged information
with him and fed news and manuscripts for the publications
brought out by the terrorist groups in the jungles. Dr Khin Zaw
Win and group met those who have opposite views on government and
the Tatmadaw [the Burmese armed forces] and made arrangements for
sending fabricated news on Myanmar to Professor Yozo Yokota,
representative of the UN Commission on Human Rights during his
visit in December 1992...Dr Khin Zaw Win testified that Ma Myat
Mo Mo Tun recorded defamatory letters and documents on computer
disc for him and made contacts with illegal political groups..."
In addition, a report broadcast on Radio Myanmar, the state-
controlled radio station on the same day (23 August), reported
allegations that Khin Zaw Win had attempted to smuggle "62 pieces
of cut rubies and sapphires" to sell to friends in Singapore. The
report said that "It has been learned that separate legal action
will be taken against him for illegally taking out precious
stones." The Myanmar authorities have in the past used alleged
criminal activities as a pretext to imprison anti-government
activists. Amnesty International is concerned that these charges
may be politically motivated.
Trial hearings reportedly began in September, and on 6 October
Khin Zaw Win was sentenced to a total of 15 years' imprisonment
by a civil court at Insein Prison. He was sentenced to seven
years' imprisonment under Section 5(e) of the 1950 Emergency
Provisions Act ("causes or intends to spread false news, knowing
beforehand that it is untrue"); three years' imprisonment under
Section 17/1 of the 1908 Unlawful Associations Act (membership or
contact with an illegal organization); three years' imprisonment
for currency and customs offenses; and two years' imprisonment
under Section 5 of the 1923 Official Secrets Act (possession or
control of secret official information).
Amnesty International believes that Khin Zaw Win is a prisoner of
conscience detained solely for carrying out peaceful political
activities critical of or in opposition to the Government of
Myanmar, and is calling for his immediate and unconditional
release.
Subsequent to Khin Zaw Win's arrest, the authorities arrested
four other people alleged to be part of Khin Zaw Win's "group":
Khin Maung Swe, Sein Hla Oo, Daw San San Nwe (f) and her daughter
Ma Myat Mo Mo Tun (f)
Khin Maung Swe, Sein Hla Oo, Daw San San Nwe and her daughter Ma
Myat Mo Mo Tun were arrested on 4 or 5 August. Khin Maung Swe, a
52-year-old geologist, and Sein Hla Oo, a 58-year-old editor and
journalist, are both former NLD members of parliament-elect. Both
were arrested previously in October 1990 and sentenced to 10
years' imprisonment in connection with meetings held by the NLD
to discuss what action to take should the SLORC continue to
refuse to hand over power. They were both released on 1 May 1992
in accordance with the SLORC's decision to release all political
prisoners not deemed a threat state security. Daw San San Nwe is
a 49-year-old journalist and well-known writer whose work has
been banned in Myanmar and who has also been imprisoned before.
She was arrested in July 1989 after she had spent some time
campaigning for the NLD, including travelling around the country
and making anti-government speeches. She was released in April
1990. Ma Myat Mo Mo Tun is believed to be Daw San San Nwe's
eldest daughter.
As part of Khin Zaw Win's "group", Khin Maung Swe, Sein Hla Oo
and Daw San San Nwe are alleged to have taken part in the same
activities as Khin Zaw Win (see above) and, according to the
report in The New Light of Myanmar of 23 August, to have:
"...told some diplomats of foreign missions and some broadcasting
stations and newsmen who came to Myanmar about fabricated news
and distributed documents of expatriate groups to cause
misunderstanding of the government and documents were seized from
their houses.
"Daw San San Nwe secretly met former members of DPNS [a banned
political party] to cause disturbances and sent manuscripts to
journals published by the expatriate groups. She also informed
one-sided opposite views on Myanmar to two French reporters...who
arrived as tourists on 21 April 1993. They taped with her back to
the camera for adverse propaganda abroad."
The report goes on to say that:
"On the days they were released, they were told not to be
involved in the movement with intent to disrupt national economy,
create disturbances and undermine the maintenance of law and
prevalence of peace and tranquillity and were repeatedly warned
to control themselves lest they should step on the wrong track.
"However, as they make contacts with the armed groups and their
acts are aimed at instigating internal and external machinations
against national economy and politics, and the Government's
efforts for emergence of a modern nation, legal action will be
taken against them under the existing laws, it is reported."
Ma Myat Mo Mo Tun is alleged to have: "recorded defamatory
letters and documents on computer disc for him [Khin Zaw Win] and
made contacts with illegal political groups. Moreover, she sent
anti-government articles to `Khit Pyaing' Journal published by
the expatriate group." Khin Maung Swe, Sein Hla Oo, Daw San San
Nwe and Ma Myat Mo Mo Tun were sentenced at the same time as Khin
Zaw Win on 6 October. All four were sentenced to seven years'
imprisonment each under Section 5(e) of the 1950 Emergency
Provisions Act (spreading false information). Daw San San Nwe
was sentenced to an additional three years' imprisonment under
Section 17(1) of the Unlawful Associations Act (membership or
contact with illegal organizations). Amnesty International
believes them to be prisoners of conscience and is calling for
their immediate and unconditional release.
Two other people, Dr Htun Myat Aye and Soe Thein, a former leader
of the NLD (Youth), were arrested at the same time as Khin Maung
Swe and the others. However, Dr Htun Myat Aye was apparently only
detained for a few days. It is not known if Soe Thein, who is
thought to still be in detention, has been charged with any
offences or tried.
Treatment of political prisoners in detention
Amnesty International has learnt of two more deaths in custody
which took place in 1990. Than Win, a 33-year-old member of the
NLD (Youth), died in Tharawaddy General Hospital, Bago Division
in February 1990 after being moved there from Tharawaddy Prison.
He had been beaten by officials during a protest by prisoners
against the use of "hard labour". Maung Maung Aye was also a
member of the NLD (Youth) who died at Tharawaddy General Hospital
in early 1990. He had been previously detained in Insein Prison
where he was beaten in November 1989. He was moved to Tharawaddy
Prison where he was reportedly beaten twice during protests
against "hard labour".
During his visit to Myanmar in February 1994, United States
Congressman William Richardson was allowed to meet with four
political prisoners in Insein Prison, as well as with Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi. The state of health of all four prisoners, as
described by the Congressman, reflects the lack of adequate
medical treatment available to prisoners. Although there is a
doctor in the prison, many prisoners do not get proper medical
attention and the prison infirmary is said to be very poorly
equipped, and prisoners are reliant on what their families are
able to provide.
Prisoner of conscience Win Htein is a former army captain serving
a seven year sentence. He was arrested in July 1989 when he was
in charge of the headquarters of the NLD. He suffers from
hypertension and complains of headaches and sweating. Min Ko
Naing, former chairperson of the All Burma Federation of Student
Unions (ABFSU), was arrested in March 1989 and sentenced to 15
years' imprisonment. Amnesty International believes that he may
be a prisoner of conscience, but does not have sufficient
information at this time to judge. He has a nervous tremor and
appears to have suffered emotionally from torture and ill-
treatment inflicted during the early stages of his detention,
further exacerbated by his continued detention in solitary
confinement. Prisoner of conscience Win Tin, a 64-year-old
journalist and editor and senior member of the NLD arrested in
early 1989 and sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment, appears to
have suffered from poor health for several years without
receiving adequate medical care. He has spondylitis for which he
has to wear a neck-brace. He is totally dependent on his family
to bring him the necessary medication and supplementary food
which he needs.
Dr Ma Thida is a hospital doctor and writer arrested in August
1993 and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment. She is a prominent
political activist for the NLD and had been a campaign assistant
to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in 1988/89. She suffers from a gastric
ulcer and endometriosis. Amnesty International believes she is
also a prisoner of conscience. All four prisoners were being held
in solitary confinement in cells with little light. They were not
allowed any reading or writing material. Family visits are
limited to 15 minutes every fortnight.
Amnesty International is calling on the Myanmar Government to
ensure that prisoners are provided with proper medical attention
and any treatment they require in accordance with international
standards, and also for a halt to the practice of detaining
prisoners in solitary confinement.
Releases of political prisoners
Since the beginning of 1994, the authorities have announced the
release of 21 men and 12 women political prisoners from Pathein
and Maubin prisons in Ayeyarwady Division, 33 men from Myaungmya
prison also in Ayeyarwady Division, and seven men from Insein
prison, Yangon. These prisoners have not been identified by name.
In addition, Amnesty International has learnt of the release of
prisoners of conscience Zargana and Nai Tun Thein. Zargana is a
popular satirist who was arrested in May 1990 after he reportedly
impersonated General Saw Maung, the former head of the SLORC, in
front of thousands of spectators at Yankin Teachers' Training
College Stadium. He had been previously arrested in October 1988
for ridiculing the then interim government and was then detained
until April 1989. Zargana was released in March 1994. Nai Tun
Thein is a member of parliament-elect for the Mon National
Democratic Front (MNDF). He was arrested in December 1991 after
being asked his views by Military Intelligence on the award of
the Nobel Peace Prize to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and was sentenced
to 14 years' imprisonment. Nai Tun Thein was released in August
1994 under Declaration No 11/92.
Although Amnesty International welcomes these releases, the
organization is calling on the Myanmar Government to make public
a list of all political prisoners who have been released since
April 1992 when Declaration No 11/92 came into effect.
The death penalty
In Myanmar the death penalty is mandatory for high treason and
premeditated murder. It is optional for the manufacturing of
drugs and drug-trafficking. The last reported executions took
place in early 1988. On 1 January 1993, all death sentences
imposed between 18 September 1988 and 31 December 1992 were
commuted to life imprisonment.
On 3 January 1994 the District Court in Lashio, Shan State,
sentenced Li Kum Shin alias Li Vik Shin to death after he was
found guilty of murdering an immigration officer, possession of
heroin and possession of uncut rubies. It is not known if Li Kum
Shin has been executed.
On 10 January four other people were also sentenced to death
after what appears to have been an unfair trial. According to a
report in The New Light of Myanmar newspaper on 11 January 1994,
Khin Maung Oo, Tin Kyu, Myint Kyaw alias Nagabat and Hla Tun were
sentenced to death by the Special Court of Yangon West District
after being found guilty of murdering a student at the Institute
of Economics, Maung Naing Win, on 8 January. According to the
report, on the evening of 8 January Maung Naing Win and three
friends were travelling on a commuter bus. When the bus stopped
at Station Road bus stop in Hline Township Maung Naing Win
noticed that his wallet had been stolen. He got off the bus and
went after the alleged pickpockets. When he confronted them and
asked for his wallet, the pickpockets attacked him. Maung Naing
Win died later in hospital from multiple stab wounds. The report
stated that the four alleged to have committed the crime were
arrested overnight and then sentenced the next day. It stated
"Prompt action was taken to prevent recurrence". Amnesty
International believes that the four may not have had a fair
trial, and that action was taken quickly by the authorities in
order to pre-empt any protests by Maung Naing Win's fellow
students. In 1988 there had been large-scale public unrest
following the stabbing of a student in a tea-shop. It is not
known if the four sentenced to death have been executed.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases and
is calling on the Myanmar Government to commute all existing
death sentences to terms of imprisonment and to cease the
practice of imposing the death penalty. It also urges the
government to consider abolition of the death penalty as a
punishment.
Ethnic minorities
Human rights violations against members of ethnic minorities
continue not only in the context of counter-insurgency operations
against armed opposition groups, but also in the context of work
on large construction projects. Such human rights violations
include extrajudicial killings, torture and ill-treatment,
forced porter duty for the tatmadaw, forced unpaid labour on
construction projects, and forced relocation of villages.
Ceasefire agreements
The Myanmar Government's policy of pursuing peace negotiations
with armed opposition groups representing several ethnic
minorities who have been fighting the tatmadaw for autonomy for
more than 40 years, has meant a decrease in offensives in most
areas except for the Shan State, where the tatmadaw launched an
offensive against the Muang Tai Army of Khun Sa in May 1994 and
is currently reportedly preparing to begin another offensive.
Since 1989 13 ceasefire agreements have been signed, the most
recent with the Shan State Nationalities Liberation Organization
in October. Groups who have yet to agree to a ceasefire are the
Karen National Union (KNU), the New Mon State Party (NMSP), the
Muang Tai Army of Khun Sa, as well as Muslim armed groups such as
the Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) and the Arakan
Rohingya Islamic Front (ARIF). The KNU have agreed in principle
to talks with the Myanmar Government but these have yet to take
place, although officials of the KNU have had preliminary talks
with an anglican archbishop acting as an intermediary for the
government. The NMSP have already had talks with the government
but these are stalled because of disagreements over the size of
the area the NMSP would be able to control under a ceasefire
agreement.
Human rights violations against the Karen ethnic minority
In April and May 1994 Amnesty International interviewed dozens of
Karen refugees, mainly from Hlaingbwe district in Karen State,
who had crossed into Thailand to escape human rights violations
committed by the tatmadaw, including arbitrary seizure for forced
porter duty and unpaid labour on construction projects such as
building roads and military barracks, and some forced relocation
of villages. In the material that follows Amnesty International
has left out details that would identify its sources, including
names of victims and of villages where violations took place.
Extrajudicial killings
Amnesty International received information from two independent
sources about the deliberate killing of three young men by
soldiers of the 99th Division in March 1994. A 25-year-old
cultivator, a 13 or 14-year-old boy and another young man were
grinding sugar cane when soldiers from the 99th Division came to
their village. One source explained that usually when the
soldiers come to the village, everybody runs away to avoid being
captured. The three were taken by the soldiers, together with
three girls who were later released. One source said:
"...he did not know the soldiers had come and they captured
him...The three girls saw the men killed and were very
frightened. They said that before the men were killed they were
tortured. The soldiers put them in the water and hit them..."
The villagers had to go and fetch the bodies:
"When we went to see the body we had to dig them up as they had
buried them. Only one had his throat slit, the other two were
just stabbed." The same source believed that the young
man may have been killed because he was suspected of being a
"rebel" because he was a young man. The aunt of the boy said she
thought that all three were killed because the soldiers wanted to
steal the money they were making by grinding sugar cane. She
said:
"...the army killed them to steal the money, more than 20,000
kyats...I heard my nephew's throat was slit...the boy had no
parents, so his uncle buried him."
Nobody was brought to justice for the killings, and the families
did not receive any compensation.
A farmer described the killing of his brother in March 1994 by
soldiers of the 339th Regiment because they suspected he was a
member of the KNU as he could not understand Burmese:
"...They wanted porters and my brother and I were captured. My
brother couldn't answer them properly because he was afraid so
they ill-treated him. They tied us by a rope. I escaped but they
killed my brother. They slit his throat, he couldn't understand
Burmese...This was one hour after we were captured in our fields
by seven soldiers...They accused us of being from the KNU but we
weren't. Some KNU in our area. They shot me as I ran away, but
they missed. I saw my brother killed and then I was scared and
ran away. They shot my brother twice and then they slit his
throat."
Ill-treatment
Some refugees told Amnesty International that they had been
beaten or kicked when they were too tired to carry loads as
porters, or to work on the roads. One man described why he left
Myanmar:
"I got here five days ago. I came because you have to go as a
porter or give money. I went 10 times in one year. Five days
before I came here I was a porter. I had to carry food for the
soldiers, but I didn't get any food myself...When you lag behind
you get beaten. They beat me with a stick...bamboo or wood
stick...They hit me on the back."
Another man described what happened when he was taken as a
porter:
"I arrived in Thailand in April 1994. I came because we have to
go as porters. In one month I had to go two to three times,
six-seven days each. Sometimes for 10 days. Two or three times
they kicked me in the back if I couldn't go fast at night - we
weren't allowed to use a light, so we couldn't see to walk
fast...My back still hurts. I can't carry heavy loads."
Forced labour and portering
Most of those interviewed had been forced to act as porters or to
undertake unpaid labour themselves, or if not had family members
who had. Often they had fled to Thailand because, due to the
constant demands for their labour by the tatmadaw, they could no
longer make a living in Myanmar. The only way to avoid porter
duty is to pay a tax, which many interviewees told Amnesty
International they could not afford to pay. Some said they had to
take their own food with them when they went to work on road
building, or when they had to keep watch at the road-side for
insurgents belonging to the KNU. Often they did not know how long
they would be away from their homes, and they were never paid.
One man interviewed in May 1994 said that he had recently left
for Thailand because he had been required to work on building a
road between Hlaingbwe and Mauthaing. He said that since March he
had had to carry 40 buckets of stones a day for two or three days
at a time, then have five days off, and then start again. One
woman told how she and her family left Myanmar because her
husband had been taken as a porter "very often" even though he
had tuberculosis.
A farmer described how he had to work for no pay:
"I got here about two months ago. The 8th, 9th and 28th regiments
came to Hlaingbwe and asked us to build the road and barracks, so
we weren't free to farm...They didn't feed us or pay us. When we
were very tired carrying and working they kicked us...Every day
they ask us to do work so we don't have time to do our own work.
Other villagers joined with us working on the road. Three hundred
to 400 from five villages..."
Forced relocation of villages
Amnesty International opposes the relocation of people to a
particular area where they have to remain, when it is on account
of their ethnic origin. One woman rice cultivator told how the
tatmadaw said her village had to move:
"Our village had to move - that's why I came here...They ask us
to go or would burn our house. They burned my house. They gave us
two days' notice to move. No compensation. New place was 20 miles
away. Twenty houses had to move. Ten each went to two new
places..."
Another female farmer said:
"I came two weeks ago. I came because I had to move
from...village to [another village] and then to [another village]
and then back to [the first village]. One year in each place then
told to move back to [the first village] in April this year. If
we don't move we'll be beaten."
Villages are usually forced to relocate in order to change the
ethnic mix of an area. This applies particularly to villages
close to areas of possible counter-insurgency operations, in
order to deprive insurgents of any logistical support, such as
food and other supplies.
Human rights violations against the Mon ethnic minority
Although the Mon State is not an area in which there have
recently been large counter-insurgency operations, mainly because
of SLORC attempts to negotiate a ceasefire agreement with the
NMSP, thousands of ethnic Mon people have in the last year fled
to Thailand to escape human rights violations occurring in the
context of being forced to undertake unpaid labour on the
construction of a 100-mile long railway between Ye in the Mon
State and Dawei in Tanintharyi Division. This large construction
project began in the first week of December 1993 and tens of
thousands of villagers living locally have since reportedly been
required to "contribute voluntary labour" (The New Light of
Myanmar, 20 January 1994).
On 19 January Major General Ket Sein, Chairman of Mon State Law
and Order Restoration Council, Commander of Southeast Military
Command and one of the Patrons of the USDA, visited parts of the
construction site and "gave encouragement to those contributing
voluntary labour in laying the Ye-Dawei railroad as a gesture
hailing the mass rallies of the USDA" (The New Light of Myanmar,
20 January 1994). On 10 March Lieutenant General Maung Aye,
Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Defense Services, and Lieutenant
General Khin Nyunt, Secretary 1 of the SLORC inspected the
railway in Dawei. Lieutenant General Maung Aye "expressed his
satisfaction at seeing local people willingly and competitively
participate in the project in order to bring about developments
in their respective areas. He said the state is providing vast
sums of money, both in local and foreign currencies, for the
railway construction projects. He urged the departmental
authorities and local people to participate actively and
cooperate in the project." (Myanmar Radio, 10 March 1994)
Despite these statements by senior government officials,
unofficial reports and testimonies confirm that local people have
been forced to work on the project in poor conditions. Village
headmen are responsible for supplying labourers and every
household is required to contribute one person, male or female.
People who do not want to do the work have to pay a fine or
"hire" somebody else to do the work for them. The labourers are
not paid and are not told how long they will have to work on the
project. Labourers have to supply their own food and medicines,
or buy them at high prices from government shops on site. The
military supervising the project set work quotas which have to be
completed before labourers can go home.
One Mon refugee who had been a farmer in Myanmar told Amnesty
International why he fled to Thailand:
"I came because I didn't want to work on the railway. I had to do
a heavy job on the railway. Fifty days I worked there. I carried
sand. Twelve hours a day. Each household had to give one man to
work. It was 12 miles from the village to the railway. I slept at
the railway, there was a temporary shelter. The army gave us no
money, and charged us for food...I saw some people beaten by
military because they worked slowly...About 50 people were
working with me. There was a work quota the military told us we
had to fill, so we had to work until we finished. I didn't know
what the quota was. The section I worked was 360 yards long."
A Mon monk told Amnesty International that in his village in the
Mon State those who didn't go to work on the railway were fined
3000 kyats and were imprisoned for one month in Mawlamyine
Prison. He said that the villagers worked in rotation on the
project, 50 households at one time. He also said that the
military had a bulldozer that villagers could hire if they could
afford the charge of 3000 kyats an hour.
Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the government
persists in claiming that such forced unpaid labour is voluntary.
According to a report in The Nation, a Thai newspaper, on 23
August 1994, Thein Oo Po Saw, director of the Scientific and
Technology Research Department of the Ministry of Industry,
responded to allegations that Myanmar would use forced labour to
build a proposed gas pipeline:
"It is voluntary labour. Myanmar has a long tradition of
voluntary labour, extending back to the old kings. People don't
have to do it, but they do it because it is good for their
villages and towns."
The report goes on to say:
"He said refugees from Burma who had fled to Thailand with tales
of human rights abuses while being forced to work on construction
of the Ye-Tavoy [Dawei] railway were either `insurgents, misfits
or dacoits [robbers]'".
Many of the Mon people fleeing Myanmar since the beginning of the
year have joined others taking refuge at Halockhanie refugee camp
which is situated in a disputed area straddling the border
between Myanmar and Thailand. Prior to this the Mon refugees were
located in Loh Loe camp several kilometres inside Thailand, but
the Thai authorities forced them to relocate to Halockhanie in
March and April 1994, in spite of protests by the Mon National
Relief Committee which runs the camp, and international voluntary
organizations providing relief.
On 21 July 1994, 360 soldiers from the 62nd Infantry Battalion of
the tatmadaw entered Plat Hon Pai section of Halockhanie refugee
camp, which is located in Myanmar. The troops called a meeting of
the 500 residents, and later in the day attempted to enter the
main section of the camp. Amnesty International has received
reports that some of the refugees were forced to walk in front of
the troops as they advanced. The tatmadaw soldiers were driven
back from the main section of Halockanie camp by soldiers from
the NMSP who had arrived in the area on hearing of the tatmadaw
presence in the camp. The tatmadaw soldiers then returned to Plat
Hon Pai section, and torched half of the 120 houses there. They
left, taking with them 16 men, eight of whom were handcuffed.
Over 2000 refugees then fled and took refuge on the Thai side of
the border. They have since returned to Halockhanie under
pressure from the Thai authorities.
According to most recent information, of the 16 men who were
taken by the tatmadaw, five escaped and returned to Halockhanie,
three were released, but eight are still believed to be in the
custody of the tatmadaw. Only 24 hours after the attack on
Halockhanie camp by the tatmadaw Myanmar's Foreign Minister U Ohn
Gyaw told a press conference in Bangkok, Thailand, that he did
"not believe Myanmar has a human rights problem" (see below,
Government response to allegations of human rights violations).
Human rights violations against the Shan ethnic minority
In May 1994 hundreds of Shan people began to flee from the Shan
State in Myanmar to Thailand to escape being taken as porters by
the tatmadaw. The tatmadaw rounded up hundreds of Shan and other
Burmese civilians in the Tachilek area of Shan State to act as
porters and to build military barracks during a large-scale
military offensive against the Muang Tai Army of Khun Sa. People
were literally taken off the streets, or their homes were raided
by the military in the middle of the night. Unofficial sources
say that the tatmadaw in this area refer to porters as "ghosts".
According to reports, porters were typically provided with very
little food and were beaten if they were not able to carry their
loads. Some porters made to work on the front lines were caught
up in the fighting between the tatmadaw and the Muang Tai Army
and were killed by mortars.
Amnesty International is concerned that as the tatmadaw prepare
for a new offensive against the Muang Tai Army, more porters will
be recruited in the Shan State and face the now common pattern of
human rights violations.
Government response to allegations of human rights violations
On 26 April 1994 Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt, Secretary 1 of
the SLORC, addressed officers and staff of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs in his capacity as chairperson of the Foreign
Affairs Policy Committee. His remarks about allegations of human
rights violations and international relations were broadcast in a
report on Myanmar Television:
"...Myanmar has constantly opposed allegations based on the
original fixed standard of human rights, which is without any
regard to a country's significant historical, cultural, religious
and traditional backgrounds. Khin Nyunt explained that Myanmar
has already accepted human rights standards in accordance with
its own cultural and traditional background and these standards
are the main consideration for the Myanmar people. He noted that,
although the contribution of labour is a noble deed in Myanmar
tradition, western tradition eyes it as forced labour and a
violation of human rights...he observed that Myanmar is working
together with United Nations human rights organizations to show
Myanmar's sincere desire to cooperate with international
organizations concerning human rights..."
Myanmar was invited by Thailand, as the host country, to attend a
meeting of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN)
held in Bangkok in July 1994. At a press conference on 22 July,
Myanmar's Foreign Minister U Ohn Gyaw announced that his
government had agreed to hold talks with the United Nations about
"democratic reforms and human rights". U Ohn Gyaw said that he
had been nominated to hold talks with UN Secretary General
Boutros Boutros-Gali, and that dates of any meetings had yet to
be worked out. At the same time he said "I don't believe we have
a human rights problem".
Amnesty International believes that human rights standards are
universal. It calls on the Myanmar Government to show a sincere
commitment to upholding the fundamental human rights of its
citizens by acceding to international human rights instruments
including the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights and its two optional Protocols and the Convention against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment.
Myanmar and the United Nations
On 24 November 1993 Professor Yozo Yokota, the Special Rapporteur
on Myanmar, made an oral statement to the Third Committee of the
United Nations General Assembly reporting on his recent visit to
Myanmar. While welcoming certain improvements, he also said that
"...many serious restrictions and grave violations of human
rights and fundamental freedoms [remain]". On 6 December 1993 the
United Nations General Assembly adopted without a vote a
resolution which "deplores the continued violations of human
rights in Myanmar" and welcomes improvements as outlined by the
Special Rapporteur on Myanmar. It expresses regret at "the recent
harsh sentences meted out to a number of dissidents" and calls on
the SLORC "to put an end to violations of the right to life and
integrity of the human being..." In conclusion the resolution
decided to reconsider the issue of human rights in Myanmar at the
General Assembly's 49th session in late 1994.
The Special Rapporteur presented his report on the situation of
human rights in Myanmar to the United Nations Commission on Human
Rights in February 1994. This included details about his visit to
Myanmar in November 1993 and a set of recommendations to the
government. Subsequently, on 4 March 1994, the Commission adopted
without a vote a resolution which expressed grave concern at
"the violations of human rights in Myanmar which remain extremely
serious, in particular the practice of torture, summary and
arbitrary executions, forced labour, including forced portering
for the military, abuse of women, politically motivated arrests
and detention, forced displacement of the population, the
existence of important restrictions on the exercise of
fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of expression and
association, and the imposition of oppressive measures directed,
particular, at minority groups"
The resolution called on the Government of Myanmar to release Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi immediately and unconditionally as well as other
detained political leaders and all political prisoners, amongst
other measures. It extended the mandate of the Special Rapporteur
for one year who should "establish or continue direct contacts
with the Government and People of Myanmar, including political
leaders deprived of their liberty..." and requested him to report
to the 49th session of the General Assembly in late 1994 and to
the 51st session of the Commission on Human Rights in early 1995.
The resolution particularly urges that the Special Rapporteur
should be given access to meet with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and
finally requests the UN Secretary-General to provide the Special
Rapporteur with all necessary assistance.
It is believed that the Special Rapporteur will be visiting
Myanmar in November, prior to being required to report on the
human rights situation to the General Assembly.
Recommendations
Detailed and comprehensive recommendations to the SLORC for the
protection of human rights in Myanmar are set out in Myanmar: "No
law at all" (AI Index ASA 16/11/92, October 1992) and Myanmar:
The climate of fear continues (AI Index ASA 16/06/93, October
1993) including human rights safeguards to be incorporated into
the Constitution. In addition, Amnesty International believes
that the following recommendations would address the particular
human rights violations described in this report:
1.
Release all prisoners of conscience immediately and
unconditionally, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and Khin Zaw
Win, Khin Maung Swe, Sein Hla Oo, Daw San San Nwe and Ma Myat Mo
Mo Tun recently arrested and sentenced in October 1994 to terms
of imprisonment ranging from seven to 15 years.
2.
Ensure that all prisoners are provided with proper medical
attention and any treatment they require in accordance with
international standards, and halt the practice of detaining
prisoners in solitary confinement.
3.
Make public a list of all political prisoners who have been
released since April 1992 when Declaration No 11/92 came into
effect.
4.
Commute all existing death sentences to terms of imprisonment and
to cease the practice of imposing the death penalty, with a view
to its total abolition.
5.
Immediately release all civilians who have been arbitrarily
seized against their will by the military for forced portering
and unpaid labour.
6.
Put an end to the forced relocation of villages in circumstances
when people are forced to remain in another area, because of
their ethnic origin.
7.
Permit international human rights and humanitarian bodies such as
the UN Commission on Human Rights and the International Committee
of the Red Cross (ICRC), and representatives of the
Interparliamentary Union (IPU) access to Myanmar, including full
and free access to all prisons and other places of detention, and
to areas where ethnic minorities live.
*****
END OF REPORT
*****