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

FDL-AP RESOLUTION ON BURMA (SEOUL)



Immediate Release            
August 23, 1998                                      

                                    
       RESOLUTION ON BURMA ADOPTED AT THE RECENT 1998 FDL-AP YOUNG
                       LEADERS' WORKSHOP IN SEOUL
 
A Pro-democracy Burmese delegation attended to the Third FDL-AP
(Forum of Democratic Leaders in the Asia-Pacific) Young leaders
workshop which was held in Seoul, Korea during August 16-22,
1998. The workshop aimed at helping participants understand
major democratic and human rights concerns from regional
perspectives and to build up cooperative partnership among
participants and strengthen their commitment development of
democracy and human rights.

Fifty two young leaders from 17 different countries; Australia,
Burma, Cambodia, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia,
Mongolia, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippine, Sri Lanka,
Taiwan, Thailand and Singapore, participated at the workshop.  

The resolution on Burma adopted by consensus at the workshop
expressed its full recognition on the democratic victory of the
Democratic victory of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in 1990 general
elections and demanded the military regime to allow the convening
of the parliament. It further demanded to stop human rights
abuses, to release all political prisoners, to declare a nation
wide cease-fire and to reopen all Universities. (Please find the
attached full text of the resolution.)

On August 19, 1998, the participants visited to the Blue House to
give a courtesy call to the President Kim Dae-Jung, one of the
co-presidents of FDL-AP which was founded in 1994. He reiterated
that development of democracy and economic development must go
together in order to achieve sustainable economy. "The path must
preserve the political legitimacy, yet break away from the
authoritarian rule," he added.  

On August 20, 1998 the participants visited to the Kwan Ju
Mangwol National Cemetery and paid tribute to heroes who
sacrificed in democracy movement in Korea.
 
For further information, contact 01 253 9082, 01 654 4984
 
****************************************************************

           THE FORUM OF DEMOCRATIC LEADERS IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC
            Aryung Bldg., Suite 701, 506-20 Changchun-Dong, 
                        Seodaemun-ku Seoul, Korea

                  FDL-AP 1998 THIRD YOUNG LEADER'S WORKSHOP 
                           RESOLUTION ON BURMA


We the members of the third annual FDL-AP Young Leader's
Workshop, representing 17 countries in the Asian region and
abroad  declare our serious concerns in regard to the violations
of civil and political rights of the people of Burma. We

1) NOTE the four year history of FDL-AP's concern over the
humanitarian and political crisis in Burma, including the
resolutions passed by the 1996 and 1997 Young Leaders Workshops;

2) RECALL that military regimes have not allowed ethnic groups or
civil organizations to participate in government or freely
express themselves during the painful history since its (Burma's)
Independence in 1948;

3) NOTE that since 1948, ethnic groups have continued to work to
bring peaceful democratic reform and the development and
modernization of the country;

4) NOTE WITH ADMIRATION the recent cooperation between the ethnic
groups and the democratic forces lead by Daw Aung San Su Kyi to
produce reasonable proposals for dialogue with the military
authorities;

5) NOTE WITH CONCERN recent restrictions on the free movement of
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and elected legislators of the NLD;

6) NOTE WITH CONCERN the violation of the universal human right
to education by the  long-term closure of most universities;

7) ARE DISTURBED BY the violation of the rights of women,
children and refugees by the Burmese military;

8) NOTE WITH CONCERN the annual growth of opium production and
drug trafficking and the resulting HIV epidemic, which has
affected over 500,000 people; 
                                  
9) NOTE WITH CONCERN the large amount of foreign investment that
benefits the interests ill the interests of the military regime,
but not that of the general public;

Therefore we demand the Burmese government in power to:

l) RECOGNIZE the democratic victory of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and
allow Parliament to convene by the NLD recommended date of August
21, 1998;

2) STOP fundamental human rights abuses including the recent
travel restrictions on Aung San Suu Kyi and elected MP's;

3) IMMEDIATELY RELEASE all political prisoners  including
prominent student leader Min Ko Naing;

4) DECLARE a nation-wide cease-fire with all ethnic groups and
recognize all ethnic rights.

5) RE-OPEN all universities immediately;

WE CALL on the international community to join with us as we
encourage a tripartite dialogue as the best means of promoting
national reconciliation

WE CALL on the Government of Burma to take measures allowing all
citizens to participate freely in the political process, and to
accelerate the process of transition to democracy and reform of
human rights practices. 

*****************************************************************
                                    
           THE FORUM OF DEMOCRATIC LEADERS IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC
            Aryung Bldg., Suite 701,  506-20 Changchun-Dong, 
                        Seodaemun-ku Seoul, Korea
                                    
                                    
1988 FORUM OF DEMOCRATIC LEADERS IN ASIA-PACIFIC YOUNG LEADERS
                 WORKSHOP RESOLUTION ON DEMOCRATIC AND 
                      ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN ASIA
 

WE the members of the third FDL-AP Young Leaders Workshop have
convened in Seoul Korea to analyze the state of democracy and
economic development in the Asian region. Representing 17
countries and a wide range of civic organizations and political
movements, we present the  following resolution:

I. Causes of the Recent Asian Economic Crises

1. The Asian economic crisis has been caused both by a lack of
international and regional regulation of short-term capital
movements and by systemic problems such as structural
inefficiencies and a lack of transparency in financial sectors.

2. We therefore declare that in order to revive the affected
economies and to minimize the human costs of the current crisis: 

a) The financial sectors of Asian economies must become more
efficient and competitive;    

b) The formulation and implementation of economic policies must
be marked by greater transparency and accountability; 

c) Mechanisms to regulate and reduce the volatility of short-term
capital flows must be established at both national and regional
levels;

II. The Relationship Between Democracy and Economic Development

The recent economic crisis has highlighted the relationship
between democracy and economic development. We believe and
declare that:

1. Democracy is a pre-requisite to sustainable economic
development;

2. Economic development without democratic development will
inevitably lead to explosive inequalities and inefficiencies;

3. More, not less, democracy, is the only solution to the
inevitable social inequalities produced by economic development
without democracy, and economic crises such as the current one
affecting Asia; 

III. The Role of Civil Society in Democratization

Recognizing the role of concerned individuals, interest groups,
NGOs and all other elements of civil society in establishing and
promoting democracy, we declare that

1. Active and informed individuals constitute the foundation of
civil society;

2. Independent institutions and organizations promote democracy
by serving as the vehicles of popular mobilization and
participation. In particular, these institutions play a vital
role by: 

a) Raising and lobbying issues before government institutions and
holding as well as monitoring their accountability; 

b) Educating all communities and facilitating communication with
government institutions on domestic, regional and international
issues; 

c) Contributing to economic and social development by providing
services;      

3. While respecting state sovereignty, civil society must foster
democracy as a universal value, especially in Asia;

IV. The Role of Civil Society in the Consolidation of Democracy

I. There must be greater decentralization of political and
administrative structures for more effective self-governance at
the local level;

2. There must be increased initiatives towards participatory
democracy at the grass-roots level in the formulation of policy
and in decision-making processes;

3. There must be broader educational programs in school curricula
and mass media that emphasize respect for human rights and the
promotion of democracy;

4. There must be stronger legal frameworks to uphold the
principles of the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights, and
to implement them locally;

5. There must be expanded regional cooperation and linkages among
democratic governments and non-governmental organizations to
consolidate democracy and strengthen civil society. 

***************************************************************** 

       STRATEGY AND THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY FOR DEMOCRATISATION
                                                      
                Presented to Forum of Democratic Leaders 
                           in the Asia Pacific
                                                                  
      
                                               By Kyaw Kyaw
					       (ABSDF-Burma)
                                           18th August, 1998


* I am very pleased to have been invited to speak before such an 
esteemed audience that shares the common values of decency, 
freedom and justice. All of us reject the notion put forward by
some authoritarian regimes in our part of the world that Asians
somehow are different from the rest of mankind and that concepts
of human rights, freedom and democracy do not apply to us.

* I have searched diligently to find out what it is that causes
an Asian tyrant to think that we Asians are so different from the
rest of the world. 

The pain inflicted through torture is universal. The fear of
arrests and imprisonment without due process of law is certainly
not unique to Asians. The despair of parents whose children have
disappeared at the hands of state security officers is,
unfortunately, beyond description in any language. When beaten,
shot, or stabbed with bayonets, our blood is the same bright red
as those who suffer similar atrocities any place in the world.

* No, we are members of the human race and as human beings, we 
expect, and now demand, that we enjoy the rights universally
recognized as belonging to human beings.

* At the same time, however, we have the experience to know that 
living in a just, free and civil society is never without cost
and sacrifice. 

Freedom is not free. As we approach the new millenium, we find
the road to democracy very difficult because authoritarian
regimes have taken advantage of the tools of oppression that 20th
century science and technology have brought forth. Armed with
ever more violent means of suppression, the authoritarian regimes
are formidable opponents to those seeking democratic change.

* It is no longer enough to "want" democracy. It is not enough to 
"demand" change. It is not enough to demonstrate our disapproval 
with massive street demonstrations. We must learn to think 
strategically about political power, the ultimate sources of
power, and how those sources of power are made available to the
tyrants and dictatorships who oppress their own people. To be
successful, we must design our strategy to sever the sources of
power from the tyrants. It would be both foolish and disastrous
to wage a struggle for democracy today with armed conflict since
the dictatorships possess overwhelming military superiority and
are not reluctant to use violence to stay in power.

* In Burma today, the democratic forces under the leadership of
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi are waging a strategic nonviolent struggle
against the outlaw regime of the military dictatorship. We
recognize that democracy cannot exist without a civil society and
civil societies are best nurtured where nonviolent struggle is
adopted. The entire society has been enlisted in the struggle and
everyone can be an active participant in his or her own
liberation.  As members of various organizations and
institutions, each person contributes to our success through
non-cooperation.  We call this form of struggle "Political 

Defiance". Through a broad effort to educate and inform the
people about the nature of power and the role of individual and
organizational efforts in denying the regime the authority,
skills and knowledge, material resources, social acceptance, and
by overcoming the fear of sanctions, the people can confidently
defy the most brutal tyrant. If this effort of noncooperation by
the society is sustained, like a tree whose roots have been
severed, the tyrant will wither and collapse.

* It is characteristic of authoritarian regimes to destroy
independent social institutions, as they are often in the
forefront of organizing resistance to oppression. This has meant
that new and parallel social institutions need to be established,
old organizations need to struggle for a measure of independence
from stringent and confining government regulations, and that the
power of the people be expressed through these social
institutions. This is extremely important, for it is through
these social structures that democracy is founded, nurtured,
strengthen and defended. It is also through these groups that the
supply of political and social power is denied to the dictator.

* In Burma, the strategic nonviolent approach is well advanced.  
Since the May 1990 elections where there was an overwhelming 
mandate for democracy, the regime has no authority to rule. It is
an outlaw regime.

* It is also apparent that many of the skills and knowledge
required to effective administer and manage government have also
been withdrawn from the regime. The regime's incompetence in
government is readily apparent in its handling of foreign
affairs, economic policies, the collapse of the education and
health delivery systems, and its infantile approach to solving
political issues.

* Within the military, the soldiers are openly expressing their 
discontent over lack of pay, food shortages, brutality of the
officers, and their forced participation in the regime's policy
of genocide against ethnic minority groups.

* Even though labor unions are forbidden by the regime, we have 
witnessed labor demands for better pay and working conditions.
And farmers have openly voiced their opposition to the regime's
demands that the farmers subsidize the Army by selling it rice
below market prices.

* These actions also reflect that the public is becoming more 
confident in its ability to defy the regime and is moving beyond
fear as the determining factor in their actions.

* We are witnessing the collapse of the military dictatorship in 
Rangoon. On the surface, it still looks as though it is strong
and in control. But the reality is quite different. The strategic
approach to nonviolent struggle has been slowly and with
certainty, removing from the regime the power to govern
effectively. Our struggle has shown quite clearly that without
the consent and cooperation of the institutions and organizations
within our society, no one, not even a regime as brutal as that
in Rangoon, can survive. Like the Marcos regime in 1986, the
attempted coup in Thailand in 1992, the apparently sudden
collapse of the Suharto regime only a few weeks ago, the Rangoon
regime will also find it cannot survive apart from the society on
which it must rely for its power.

* The key to our continued success will be our ability to
encourage and assist in the defiance efforts of the institutions
on which the regime relies for its power and to create new and
parallel institutions in society that are dedicated to democracy.

* The fundamental truth is that power does, indeed, belong to the 
people. And strategic nonviolent struggle provides the vehicle
for expressing that power for democratic change.

***************************************************************** 
                      
               THE RECENT ASIAN ECONOMIC CRISIS AND BURMA
                                    
                                                    by Win Min
                                                               
                                                                  
The public became aware of the pending economic crisis in Asia
Just after last year's Association of South East Asian Nations'
(ASEAN) meeting in which Burma and Laos were integrated into the
regional group. Since then the economic crisis has became a very
significant issue internationally. The crisis is critical for all
of us in Asia, and has had a huge impact on the lives of people
throughout the region. Clearly, Asia's economic growth has now
slowed down, resulting in a sizable increase in unemployment in
the region. Impacts have also been felt in the rest of the world
Where economies have already experienced similar slow-downs.
Thailand was the first country to confront the economic crisis
With the floating of the Thai Baht in July 1997. Since then all
currencies across Asia have experienced falls, in particular the
Indonesian Rupiah. Despite the International Monetary Fund (IF)
and the World Bank funding multi-million dollar rescue
packages,the economic crisis is far from over and continues to
shake even the dragon economies of South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong
and even Japan.

Many questions have been raised as to why this economic crisis
happened in the first place. ASEAN governments initially
Attempted to find a scapegoat by accusing international financier
George Sores of speculating and manipulating the markets.
However, the World Bank and the IF have pointed out that the
Problems in Asia are a result of mismanagement, corruption and
too little and too late in the way of liberalization policies.
ASEAN and the so-called Asian tiger economies have stated that
economic growth should come first and political development
later.  However, this spurious argument has been used by the
region's authoritarian regimes to maintain a repressive hold over
their fellow citizens. Shortly before the crisis, ASEAN
governments over confident with their apparent  economic success. 
As a result, critical, independent debate on potential economic
problems in the region was not given the appropriate attention. 
Consequently, the lack of transparency and accountability of
governments in Asia is the main reason why they were not prepared
for the current economic crisis and why they were unable to take
preventative measures. 

Burma has been facing an economic crisis since the military
seized power in 1962. Under Ne Win, the policies of isolationism
and centralisation of economic power have led to entrenched
corruption among the military elite and mismanagement of Burma's
economy. Burma's economic problems were aggravated in 1997 when
the US announced a new investment boycott as a result of the
regime's atrocious human rights record and refusal to bring
democratic change to the country. 

Nevertheless, there was an increase in international investment
into Burma in the beginning of 1990s. However, the ruling State
Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) requires compulsory
joint ventures with the Myanmar Economic Holding Company Limited
which is controlled by the generals and their immediate family
members. This control has prevented development of the open
market economy and liberalization, and is an obstacle to economic
recovery. That's why the military's control over the economy is
viewed as the main cause of Burma's economic crisis, with
International and local companies totally dependent on a corrupt
Military. 

The current Asian economic crisis has brought further problems to
an already crippled Burmese economy. Meat is now rarely seen on
the table of ordinary Burmese. The middle class is fading out and
the gap between the elite and the rest of the population is
growing daily.  I would like to cite one recent example. One of
my friends recently visited Burma after being away for 10 years.
He had dinner with a previously middle class family who could
once afford to eat meat every day. The children of the family
were not allowed to eat with him at the table and after the meal
they rushed to the table to eat shouting that they had been
starving for chicken for such a  long time. My friend saw that
many businesses had closed down and that many people were
unemployed and moving to the cities to find jobs. He told me that
with the current economic crisis, the situation in Burma was the
worst he had ever seen. 

More than 50% of the national budget is used for military
expenditure, while education and health are allocated only 3% in
total. This huge military expenditure retards the economic
development of Burma. State loans have also been poured into
sectors which are not profitable, such as construction and  real
estate belonging to the military.

Burma is crippled by an unsustainable government exchange rate,
ever growing inflation, the laundering of huge amounts of drug
money, uncontrolled printing of money and random demonetisations.
The official exchange rate for the Burmese currency the Kyat to
the US dollar is 6.5, while it is currently 370 Kyat to the US
Dollar on the black market. The military has kept a blind eye on
Money laundering from the drug trade because it helps their huge
military budget. Whenever the country faces economic problems the
Military responds with demonetisations, such as in 1964, 1985 and
1987. The effect of this has been to shut down the export and
import industries and a retreat to isolationism. Moreover, these
demonetisations have impoverished thousands of families that were
prevented from converting their savings to the new currencies.
The printing of new notes in Burma is always kept confidential
and went uncontrolled following 1988.

The decrease in exports comes from a backward agricultural
sector.  Policies such as forcing farmers to sell rice to the
military at a set low price and forced selection of crops have
meant farmers have lost their incentive to work, and as a result
product ion rate have fallen.  A lack of technological
development in agriculture has also retarded growth in this
sector. Deforestation has also led to more frequent flooding in
many areas and subsequent damage to areas of agriculture. 
The military regard students and educated people as the enemy, so
whenever students demand their democratic rights the military
responds with arrests, sometimes violence, and also shuts down
universities.  The military has sacrificed education in order to
keep the student movement under tight control. Curricula are
focussed on the indoctrination of the military's views in order
to perpetuate military rule. Teaching facilities are poor and
such poor education has resulted in a largely unskilled work
force with a lack of technical know-how that is vital for
economic development.

The military made no attempt to plan a transition to
industrialization. However, it has implemented short-term plans
for tackling day to day problems. In response to this unstable
situation, all investment coming into the country has been
short-term, except for companies UNOCAL and TOTAL. 
Poor infrastructure is also a major constraint to economic
development in Burma. It is impossible to change this situation
without huge loans from world financial organizations which have
refused to provide loans to Burma due to the country's unstable
economy and the military's human rights abuses. The military in
turn force people to work for no pay on the construction of
roads. This widespread and inhumane practice has resulted in
thousands of deaths from brutal treatment, poor food and
inadequate medication. 

There has been a lack of rural development as a result of the
bias on urban development. Construction industries have only
emphasized development in the urban parts of Burma for the
military is worried about the unsolved ethnic resistance
movements in other parts of the country. For example, a glass
factory was supposed to be set up in Tenessarim Division, south
of Rangoon, where the sand is also located for the manufacturing
process. However the area was declared too unsafe for the
factory, and instead it was established in Bassein, west of
Rangoon. Now the sand has to be transported some 300 kilometers
to the factory.

There is also no freedom even for small businesses to operate.
For instance, the Union Solidarity and Development Association
(USDA), a pro-military mass organization, controls township motor
car transportation. The Myanmar Food and Beverage Corporation is
controlled by a veteran's organization and all small businessmen
need to seek permission from these military-related organizations
if they want to do business. You also need permission from the
military to operate telephone and fax lines making it difficult
for people to set up their own enterprises. In addition, anyone
found with an unregistered modem, used for connection to the
internet, can be jailed for up to seven years.

The cozy link between government, business and banks has ruined
the efficient workings of the market. Corruption is widespread
and institutionalized in Burma. For instance, if you're a company
you must have a good relationship with the military in order to
operate in Burma. If you want to do business you must meet and
talk with the Investment Minister and a large amount of money -
US dollars, not Kyat - must change hands for you to begin
operations. 

In one case, Saw Yan Naing, a Burmese-Malaysian citizen, wanted
to set up a range of businesses including a recording studio, a
night club and a bank, but he needed to pay a bribe of 12 million
Kyat to SLORC officials. However, he was eventually charged with
promoting so-called decadent Western culture and imprisoned for
four years. The reason for this was that his proposed night club
would be in competition with that owned by the former dictator Ne
Win's daughter.

There have so far been no independent economic organizations and
institutions but only the military ones. In the long run, rapid
economic growth is not just a matter of investment and
innovations nor it is just a question of the market system versus
government regulations. It is even more a question of the
institutions prevailing in the economy. Institutions must be
developed to improve the working of markets and the behavior of
government.

CONCLUSION

The Burmese economy was already a "basket case" well before the
Asian economic melt-down. It was able to temporarily hide the
debacle created by corruption, mis-management, and incompetence
only by offering the opportunity for quick and massive profits to
foreign investors.  The natural resources of our nation were sold
off to line the pockets of the generals. Following the example
set by General Ne Win of unbounded greed, the generals in Rangoon
have left the nation bankrupt. Because of systemic corruption,
our economy cannot be fixed or reformed without first removing
the dictatorship. We have seen other governments in Asia take the
first step in reconstructing their economies by replacing the
leadership. The second step has been new regulations to limit
corrupt practices. These two steps are essential.  For Burma,
this means nothing less than removing the generals and replacing
them with the leaders who were elected by the people and who will
bring democracy and justice to a very troubled land.

****************************************************************

BACKGROUND OF THE FDL-AP

FDL_AP is a nonprofit organisation established in December 1994
with the mission to promote democracy, including all its
necessary prerequisite conditions and institutions, within the
Asia-Pacific and beyond.

One of the FDL-AP 1998 Proposed Initiatives is Promoting Democracy
in Burma.

The FDL-AP will continue to focus on supporting democracy in
Burma. We will closely monitor developments and push towards a
dialogue between NLD led democratic forces, SLORC/SPDC and
representatives of different ethnic nationalities. 

The FDL-AP plans to organise a Burma advisory committee made up
of scholars specializing in Burmese issues which would suggest
effective ways to help promote democratisation of Burma within
the context of Burma's admission to ASEAN. 


HONORARY SENIOR ADVISORS:

1. Aung San Suu Kyi, Burmese democratic leader, National League   
   for Democracy
2. Desmond Tutu, Anglican Archbishop of South Africa 
3. Mikhail Goverchev, Former President of the Soviet Union 
4. Richard Von Weizsaecker, Former President of Germany

CO-PRESIDENTS:

1. Kim Dae-jung, President of the Republic of Korea 
2. Corazon Aquino, former President of the Philippines 
3. Oscar Arias Sanchez, Former president of Costa Rica 
4. Sonia Gandi, Chair person of Rajiv Gandhi Foundation

GENERAL ASSEMBLY:

Chair: Raul Manglapus, Former Foreign Minister, Philippines 
Vice Chairs:Aitzaz Ahsan, Senator, Pakistan
            Den Hideo, Senator, Japan
            Kamal Hossain, Former Foreign Minister, Bangladesh
            Ra Jong-il, Professor, Korea
            M. Rasgotra, Vice Chairman, Ragiv Gandi Foundation
            Geoffery Thompson, President, New Zealand National      
            Party, Newzeland


D. BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Korea:

     Son Se-li (Member of Parliament)
     Hong Sa-duk (Member of Parliament)
     Lee Oo-chung (Member of Parliament)
     Hahn Hwa-kap (Member of Parliament)
     Oh Kee-pyung (Graduate School of Public Policy, Seogang      
                       
     Uni., Dean)
     Ra Jong-il (Kyunghee University, Professor)
     Han Sang-jin (Seoul National University, Professor)
     Kim Sang Woo (Member of Parliament)

Philippines:

     Heherson Alvarez (Senator)
     Bonifacio H. Gillego (Member of Parliament)
     Amado S. Lagdameo (CEO, Public Estate Authority)

Japan:

     Den Hideo (Senator)
     Mushakoji Kinhide (Professor)
     Sasaki Hidenori (Deputy Minister of Law)
     
Thailand: 

     Gothom Arya (professor, Chulalongkorn University)
     Surin Pitsuwan (Foreign Minister)

Russia:

     Vitali Savitski (Co-Chairman, Russian Duma)
     Nikolai Koroteev (Vice Rector, Moscow Sate University)

Others:

     Kamal Hossain (Former Foreign Minister, Bangladesh)
     Harn Yawnghwe (Associates to Develop a Democratic Burma,     
                  
     Burma)
     Son Soubert (National Assembly Vice President, Cambodia)
     Emily Lau (Legislative Councilor, Hong Kong)
     B.M. Oza (Former Deputy Prime Minster, Malaysia)
     R. Gonchigdorj (Chairman of parliament, Mongolia)
     Devendra Raj Panday (Former Finance Minster, Cambodia)
     Geoffery Thompson (President, National Party, New Zealand)
     Roger Miranda Gomez (Advisor to the President, Nicaragua)
     Aitzaz Ahsan (Senator, Pakistan)
     James Lilley (Former Ambassador to Korea, USA)

E. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

     Raul S. Manglapus (Chair, Philippines)
     Chang Heng-Hoon (Vice Chair, Korea)
     Amado Lagdameo (Philippines)
     B.M. Oza (India)
     Son Se-il (Korea)
     Hahn Hwa-kap (Korea)
     Den Hideo (Japan)
     Gothom Arya (Thailand)

F. AUDITOR

     Chang Che-shik (Member of Parliament, Korea)
     Russel Sobrepena (Undersecretary, Department of Tourism,     
     Philippines)

Dr. Kim Dae-Jung was elected as President of Republic of Korea
six months ago. President Kim Dae-Jung was persecuted for his
commitment to democracy through out his struggle. There were five
times attempts against his life by a succession of military
regimes in Korea. Under Park Jung Hee's rule in 1973 he was
kidnapped and an attempt was made by the agents of that regime to
drown him in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Japan. And in the
early 1980's when He was sentenced to death it was largely the
international support which saved him from execution by the
military regime. He have been incarcerated for 6 years and spent
10 years in exile and under house arrest. In September 1995, he
visited UN to ask top-ranking leaders of the UN and the US
government for their support in concerting their efforts to
democratize Burma in accordance with the UN resolution.

*****************************************************************