[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

BURMA HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT OCT 95 (5 (r)



Subject: BURMA HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT OCT 95 (5.32-5.50)

/* posted Fri 16 Feb 6:00am 1995 by DRUNOO@xxxxxxxxxxxx(DR U NE OO) in igc:reg.burma */
/* -----------" BURMA HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT, OCT 95 (5.32 -5.50) "---------- */
Following materials are reproduction from the findings of Human Rights
Sub-Committee of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affair, Defence
and Trade of the Parliament of Australia, published in October 1995.
Anyone wishing to inquire about the document may contact Ms Margaret
Swieringa, Secretary, Human Rights Sub-Committee, Parliament House,
Canberra A.C.T. 2600, AUSTRALIA.
Best regards, U Ne Oo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER FIVE: (5.32 - 5.50)
**************************
The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia
Joint Standing Committee of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade

A REPORT ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LACK OF PROGRESS TOWARDS DEMOCRACY
IN BURMA (MYANMAR)     October 1995

CHAPTER FIVE: PROGRESS TOWARDS DEMOCRACY (5.32 - 5.50)
-----------------------------------------------------
The Decimation of the Elected Government

5.32  After  the  violent suppression of the democracy movement in 1988 and
again after the election  of  1990,  the  army  set  about  destroying  the
pro-democracy  political  forces  in Burma. Thousands who did not escape to
the border were interrogated, tortured and iprisoned. The SLORC did this so
ruthlessly that they destroyed any credibility  or  popularity  they  might
have  had  with the electorate, evidenced by their achievement of less than
10 per cent of the vote.

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

5.33 The most famous political detainee in Burma, Daw  Aung  San  Suu  Kyi,
General  Secretary and co-founder of the NLD, was released on 10 July 1995.
She is the greatest hope for democracy in Burma and now  has  the  task  of
rebuilding  the  NLD  from  the  remnants  left by six years of the SLORC's
persecution.

5.34 Aung San Suu Kyi is the daughter of  General  Aung  San  who  led  the
independence  movement  against  British rule and was assassinated in 1947.
She was educated in Burma, India and Oxford. She returned to Burma in  1988
at a time when opposition to the rule of the military junta had reached its
height. She co-founded the National League for Democracy in September 1988,
drawing together over 100 political parties. Her political impact, charisma
and  appeal  were  immediate.  She  attracted  mass  rallies at more than a
hundred meetings  in  campaigning  for  the  promised  mational  elections.
Criticism  of  the  junta  led to her being sentenced by the SLORC to house
arrest on 20 July 1989.

5.35 She was kept in virtual  isolation  for  six  years;  only  occasional
visits  by  her  family and a visit from US Senator Bill Richardson and the
Buddhist monk, Rewetta Dhamma, were permitted.  Colonel  Kyaw  Win,  Deputy
Chief of Military Intelligence, informed her of her release in JUly 1995 in
terms she described as kind and cordial. No conditions were attached.

5.36 She committed herself to reconciliation:

        We  have  to choose between dialogue and utter devastation. I would
        like to believe that the human  instanct  for  survival  alone,  if
        nothing  else, would eventually lead us to prefer dialogue. You may
        ask what are we going to talk about once we reach  the  negotiation
        table  ?  The  establishment  of certain principles, recognition of
        critical objectives and joint approaches to the ills besetting  the
        country  would  be the main items on the agenda. Extreme viewpoints
        are  not  confined  to  any  particular  group  and   it   is   the
        responsibility  of  the  leaders  to  control  such  elements  that
        threaten the spirit of reconciliation.[16]

5.37 Her release was  greeted  internationally  with  relief  and  cautious
optimism.  It was an event greatly welcomed by those who had campaigned for
her release. However, it would be odd to express gatitude  or  appreciation
for  an  event  that  should never have been necessary and, even within the
framework of the SLORC own laws, was over due. Moreover, in  some  quarters
it was seen as a cynical move on the part of the Government whose detention
of Aung San Suu Kyi had become 'legally' untenable and counterproductive to
its  interests.  The  desire  to  expand  the economic development of Burma
required greater acceptance of the regime by the regional  powers  and  the
international  financial  institutions.  The  Government wished to sign the
Treaty of Amity and Cooperation with a view to full acceptance in ASEAN and
the release was well timed to precede the July ministerial meeting of ASEAN
and the September meeting of the UN's General Assembly. From the standpoint
of the SLORC the release might be not so much a concession but a measure of
its belief in its own strength.

5.38 The Committee recommends that:

        THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT PRESS THE GOVERNMENT OF  BURMA  TO  BEGIN
        IMMEDIATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI AND THE LEADERSHIP
        OF THE NLD.

5.39  Given  the  number  of  problems  within Burma, the illegality of the
government, the record of violence  and  brutality  against  citizens,  the
aggression  against  ethnic  minorities, the continuing detention of people
whose only fault was peaceful political activity,  the  lack  of  standard,
agreed-to  freedoms  of  speech,  assembly  and  political association, the
release of Aung San Suu Kyi is the most limited concession possible.

Political Prisoners

5.40 There remain many political prisoners in goal. The arrest of  students
at  the  funeral  of  U Nu is a matter of great concern. No progress can be
made until all political detainees are released and their right  to  futhre
political  participation  is restored. Discussion with Aung San Suu Kyi and
the  Members  of  the  NLD  and  their  inclusion  in  the   constitutional
development process are essential.

5.41 Perosnal testimonies presented to the Committee give some insight into
the  political  violence  of the regime. One student who had worked ofr the
democracy movement described his treatment at the  hands  of  the  military
intellegence force. He was taken from his house at midnight, beaten, kicked
and  placed  in  a  confined space under a mosquito infested urinal. He was
interrogated by drunken military intelligence  police  who  beat  him  with
canes,  applied  electric  shocks,  suffocated him by placing a plastic bag
over his head and burnt his hand with an electric iron. His parents paid  a
large  bribe to get his a lighter sentence and a civil trial but even so he
spent two years in detention including a period working  from  4am  to  6pm
breadking  rocks to build a 16 kilometer road. On his release he was unable
to obtain work. He experienced further detention in 1994 and witnessed  the
beating  of  other  political  disidents.  He has since been given entry to
Australia [17].

5.42 Although a large number of political and  other  detainees  have  been
released  since  1992,  the IPU remains gravely concerned about the fate of
individual members of  parliament  still  being  held.  Teh  IPU  has  been
monitoring  the  cases  of 83 members of parliament who were arrested after
the 20 May 1990 elections. The allegations include the death in  prison  in
1991  of one parliementarian, U Tin Manug Win, and the assassination of tow
other outside Burma, one in China, U Win Ko, and one in Thailand, U Hla Pe.
Many others have been detained, allegedly without charge or trial  or  have
received  heavy  sentences  after summary trials [18]. The list provided by
the IPU to this Committee  still  contains  the  names  of  15  members  of
parliament in detention [19]. Two members of parliament, Khin maung Swe and
Sein  Hla  Oo were rearrested in August 1994. Other parliamentarians, U Kyi
Maung and six others were rearrested and detained for  a  week  on  1  June
1995.

5.43  The  response  of the Government of Burma to the IPU is that 'reports
according to which  political  activists  opposing  the  Government  become
victims  of  torture  and  ill-treatment in detention are totally unfounded
[20]'. On the  specific  question  of  the  detention  of  the  members  of
parliament the Government claimed:

        Should  there  be  legal  action  taken against an individual it is
        because that individual has violated the  prevailing  laws  of  the
        state but not on the grounds of his political beliefs [21].

5.44  The  problem  lies  in  the  nature  of  the  'prevailing  laws'. The
'prevailing law' most often used to convict members of parliament in  Burma
has  been the '1950 Emergency Provision Act', especially section 5 (e)[22].
However, other convictions have been attained under the '1962 Printers  and
PUblishers  Registration  Act  [23]',  the  '1957 Unlawful Associations Act
[24]' and the '1975 State Protection Law [25]'. A further decree which  has
prevented  political activity is Decree 2/88 which bans gathering, walking,
marching in procession, chanting slogans,  delivering  speeches,  agitating
and  creating disturbances in the streets by a group of five or more people
regardless  of  whether  the  act  is  with  the  intention   of   creating
disturbances  or  of  committing a crime or not. The offences are variously
described by the Government as against the security of the state, involving
the  illegal  distribution  of  'seditious'   papers   or   as   'spreading
misinformation'  through  contact  with  foreigners,  dissidents  or the UN
Special Rapporteur.

5.45 A matter of great concern, especially given the doubtful nature of the
laws being used to detain parliamentarians-elect  and  countless  political
activists,  is the prohibition on their future participation in politics as
a result of their 'convictions [26]'. It is important that these provisions
be revoked and rights to free and full political participation  be  assured
to those who wish to be involved in the futhre democracy of Burma.

5.46 The Committee recommends that:

    23. THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT URGE THE GOVERNMENT OF BURMA TO:

        (A) RELEASE IMMEDIATELY ALL POLITICAL DETAINEES;

        (B)  COMPLY  WITH  THE REQUEST OF THE INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION FOR
        INFORMATION ON THE NAMES AND NUMBERS OF ALL POLITICAL DETAINEES;

        (C) ALLOW PRIVATE ACCESS TO DELEGATES OF THE IPU  OR  THE  ICRC  TO
        THESE DETAINEES; AND

        (D)  REPEAL  THOSE  LAWS WHICH INCLUDE ILL-DEFINED OFFENCES AGAINST
        NATIONAL SECURITY (SEE PARAGRAPH 5.44) WHICH HAVE BEEN USED OFR THE
        PURPOSE OF ELIMINATING OPPOSITION.

Democracy in Burma

5.47 This Committee rejects the proposition that any  of  the  actions  for
which  these  people have been detained could be constructed as a threat to
national security. In reality it would appear that the laws are simply used
against people exercising their legitimate  rights  to  free  speech,  free
association and peaceful political action - criticism of the actions of teh
SLORC,  rightful  protest  about  the  failure  of the SLORC to respect the
election victory of the NLD, criticism of the  dubious  procedures  of  the
National  Convention  and  free  dialogue  and cooperation with the Special
Rapporteur as agreed to by the Government. Teh laws are vague and at  times
amemdments  have  been  made  by  decree  and punishments ahve been applied
retrospectively. Procedures have not been open and the Government  has  not
produced the concrete evidence upon which the judgements have been made. No
distinction  is made between the security of the State and the 'Security of
SLORC'. Consequently procedures  have  not  been  in  accord  with  natural
justice  and  the  'prevailing  laws'  not in accord with the international
obligations of Burma, as a member of the United Nations, to observe Article
11, 19, 20 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of HUman Rights.

5.48 This Committee deplores the deliberate and systematic  destruction  of
political  parties  under  the  guise  of  legal  process.  It deplores the
manipulation  of  the  National  Convention  in   order   to   produce   an
anti-democratic constitution which, if not modified, will entrench in power
a military regime which has usurped power and denied the will of the people
of Burma clearly expressed at a free and fair election.

5.49  In Burma, there is a long history of authoritarian rule and isolation
from international contact and international  scrutiny.  Today,  since  the
SLORC deprive the elected government of power in 1990, the most gross human
rights  abuses  committed  by  the  Government  result  from  that  act  of
illegality, the opposition it has engendered and the systematic attempts of
the SLORC to destroy the National League for Democracy  and  any  political
opposition  to  its  rule. The Government lacks accountability. Its rule is
arbitrary; it has dispensed with a rule of law and has resorted to rule  by
decree. There has been little progress towards democracy.

5.50 The Committee recommends that:

    24. THE  AUSTRALIAN  GOVERNMENT  URGE  THE GOVERNMENT OF BURMA TO ENACT
        LAWS WHICH WOULD ENSURE FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND INFORMATION SO THAT
        ALL CITIZENS OF  BURMA  MAY  PARTICIPATE  FULLY  IN  THE  POLITICAL
        PROCESS.

Footnotes:
---------
[16] Reported on AFP, 11 July 1995.

[17] Australia-Burma Council submission, pp. S404-15.

[18] ibid. p. 85. See also Appendix 8 for full list of parliamentarians who
have  been  detained  and  their  current  status  as  far  as  the IPU can
ascertain.

[19] The list as of July 1995 is as follows: Case Nos - MYN/01 Ohn  Kyaing;
MYN/08  Tin  Htut; MYN/10 Win Hlaing; MYN/13 Naing Naing; MYN/26 U Hla Tun;
MYN/28 Tin Aung Aung; MYN/36 Myint Naing; MYN/41 Zaw Myint; MYN/42 Mya Win;
MYN/50 Wan Maung; MYN/53 Hla Tan; MYN/60 Zaw Myint Maung; MYN/71 Kyi Myint;
MYN/72 SAw Win; MYN/73 Fazal Ahmed.

[20] Exhibit No 29, 'Committee on the Human  Rights  of  Parliamentarians',
op.cit.p.87.

[21] ibid.,p.87.

[22]  For  '[causing  the] the disintegration of the moral character of the
people' and for writing and distributing false news that  could  jeopardise
the security of the state'.

[23]  For  the  publication  of material which 'oppose the SLORC ... or ...
insults, slanders or attempts to divide the Defence Forces'

[24] For membership of an association which 'encourages or aids persons  to
commit acts of violence or intimidation or which has been declared unlawful
by the President.'

[25]  'The Government may order up to three years detention or house arrest
without charge or trial for anyone the authorities believe will do,  or  is
doing,  an  act  which endangers the peace of most citizens or the security
and sovereignty of the State'. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and 40 other members of
parliament were detained under this law.

[26] SLORC Order 4/91 states that anyone convicted of 'moral turpitude'  or
offences  relationg  to  law  and order 'ha[s] no right to continue to be a
Peoples' Assembly representative' and such people 'shall have no  right  to
stand for election as a Peoples' Assembly candidade in elections to be held
in the future.' Cited from Human Rights Watch/Asia, op.cit.p.10.

ENDS(5.32 - 5.50)\