6

Burma became a party to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on 15 August 1991. The CRC affirms that every child has the right to protection, the right to life, and the right to survival and development. The CRC also specifically refers to the protection of children in armed conflict and mandates that no child under 15 should take part in hostilities; that children should not be separated from their parents except for their own well-being; that states should protect children from harm and neglect; and that all children should be entitled to the rights enshrined in the convention, without discrimination. The military regime at that time, known as the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), promulgated a new Child Law on 14 July 1993 in order to "implement the rights of the child recognized in the Convention." The child law states that "the State recognized that every child has the right to survival, development, protection and care, and to achieve active participation in the community" (Chapter 5, paragraph 8). The regime’s decision to accede to the CRC was considered a step of progress and temporarily improved its image throughout the international community. However, widespread evidence of continuing violations against children has shown that while national laws to protect children may be in place, the military regime, currently known as the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), has taken little action to enforce these laws.

In 2002, Burma published and submitted its second periodic report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, which outlined action taken by the military regime to uphold the provisions of the Convention. The report, which was already two years overdue, was reviewed by the Committee on 26 May 2004 during its thirty-sixth session. During the meeting, Professor Dr May May Yi, advisor for women’s affairs in the Prime Minister’s office and leader of the delegation of Myanmar, delivered a speech reiterating many of the points illustrated in the second periodic report. According to her speech, “the government is giving top priority to the rights of children in our national agenda.” The speech indicates that children are considered “jewels” of the society in Burma and their development is fostered by their immediate and extended families as well as their communities. Furthermore, Dr May May Yi states that the military government has made “significant achievements in promoting and protecting the rights of the children in Myanmar. We are today trying our utmost to create better opportunities for the children so that they can live in a better world enjoying full range of their rights.” (Source: Statement by Professor Dr. May May Yi, Advisor for Women’s Affairs at the Prime Minister’s Office and Leader of the Delegation of Myanmar to the Thirty-Sixth Session of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Geneva 26 May 2004)

Conversely, in its concluding observations of the review of Burma’s second periodic report, the Committee on the Rights of the Child noted that the SPDC has done little to address the concerns raised by the Committee during the first review. Moreover, the Committee noted that the 1993 Child Law does not fully uphold the principles set forth in the Convention. Various government initiatives and long term plans focusing on the development of social sectors such as health and education have had little effect or been insufficient in improving the conditions for children in Burma. Instead, the Committee expressed concern for, among other issues, the significant reduction in resources allocated to health and education, inequalities between rural and urban as well as ethnic minority and majority children, and the effects of Burma’s political instability and continued armed conflict on the development of children (source: “Concluding Observations: Myanmar,” Thirty-sixth session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 4 June 2004). Moreover, NGOs, political opposition groups, and other national governments have continued to provide clear evidence that children in Burma cannot depend on the government to protect or advocate for their rights. Instead, SPDC is at best negligent, and at worst complicit, in abuses such as the recruitment of child soldiers, the trafficking of children, and the destruction and dislocation of ethnic minority families and communities.

Years of ongoing civil war and poor governance have led to widespread poverty, low levels of education, poor healthcare, and systematic human rights abuses. Children, who comprise approximately 40% of the population, are disproportionately affected by all of these factors. Decreased government spending on education has resulted in the deterioration of standards of primary education, which have coincided with increased illiteracy and dropout rates. Likewise, lack of spending on healthcare has resulted in Burma’s healthcare system being ranked 190 out of 191 countries by the World Health Organization in 2000. According to UNICEF, of the 1.3 million children born every year in Burma, more than 92,500 will die before they reach one year of age. The majority of infant mortality has been attributed to insufficient medical knowledge and attention. As poverty has consumed the population, children are frequently required to contribute to their family’s livelihood either by participating in family businesses, seeking external employment, or fulfilling a family’s obligations to participate in government forced labor projects. Children are not exempted from serving as porters for the military or being recruited to serve in the armed forces, fighting against ethnic minority populations and forced to perpetrate human rights abuses themselves.

Ethnic minority children are often more vulnerable due to the fact that ongoing civil war is fought in ethnic minority areas. In addition to contending with the discrepancy between access to social services available to the military and civilian populations, ethnic minorities face the more direct consequences of internal conflict. Children living in ethnic minority areas, like other members of their communities, continued to be subjected to physical injury, torture, rape, murder, forced labor, and forced relocation as the government attempts to suppress any opposition, both armed and unarmed. Children in these areas are also forced to witness atrocities carried out against their family and community members; to endure separation from their families and communities; and to suffer from extremely limited access to healthcare, education, housing, and food. There can be no improvement in the situation for the children of Burma without a radical change in the government and progress towards democracy.

States Parties recognize the right of the child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall, in particular:

As a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the SPDC is obligated to work towards attaining equal access to education for all children. In addition, the SPDC is obligated to make primary education compulsory and free to all. Yet, during the concluding observations of its 36^th session, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern over Burma’s deteriorating education system, which includes high dropout rates, unqualified teachers, excessive fees, and discrepancies in access to education in urban, rural and ethnic minority areas. (Source: “Concluding Observations: Myanmar,” Thirty-sixth session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 4 June 2004)

The SPDC’s deteriorating education system and failure to fulfil all of its obligations as a signatory to the Convention are a direct result of the disproportionate amount of the national budget allocated to the armed forces leaving necessary social services, such as education, neglected. In 1998-99, 6.98% of the state budget was allocated to education while 49.93% was allocated for the military. Spending on education has continually decreased and according to the U.S. Department of State, in the 2003-2004 fiscal year, the SPDC spent 1.3% of the national budget on education. (Source: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2004, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2004)

In 2003, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions reported that there are approximately 39,000 state-run primary schools in the country, or one for every two villages. Only 46% of these schools have toilets while only 17% have running water. Children who live in remote rural areas often have to walk considerable distances in order to reach a school. UNESCO estimates that some 2,000 villages are more than 3 kilometres from the nearest school. Secondary schools pose even greater challenges to children who attempt to access them, as there are fewer than 3,000 in the whole country. UNICEF has reported that according to a joint inquiry by the Ministry of Education, the UNDP and UNESCO, 57% of schools are overpopulated due to inadequate buildings. (Source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003)

The SPDC has publicized the implementation of a short-term four-year education plan from 2000-2004 and a 30-year long-term plan from 2001-2031, both aimed at improving basic education in Burma. Specifically, the four-year plan focuses on improving basic education through the universalization of primary education, increased teacher education, revision of basic education curriculum, new assessment systems, multi-media classrooms, and greater support in general. In conjunction with the 2000-2004 four-year plan, the SPDC claims to have upgraded 1,257 basic education schools. Yet, these schools reportedly remain useless as the government has failed to provide teachers.

According to Article 20 of Burma’s 1993 Child Law, “Every child shall have the right to free basic primary education in state schools and that the Ministry of Education shall implement a system of free and compulsory primary education.” While the law stipulates that education must be free for all children, in actuality, it is not. Up to fourth standard, children are not required to pay for enrolment or monthly tuition fees but they must cover other costs for supplies, school repairs, or supplements to teacher salaries. Beyond fourth standard, students are required to cover all these costs. School fees vary in different locations, yet at the beginning of the 2004-2005 school year, enrolment fees for students in rural areas ranged from 5,000 to 8,000 kyat and from 10,000 to 14,000 kyat for students in urban areas. In 1988, the military government initiated a self-reliance program through which communities in rural areas are encouraged to raise funds and build schools by themselves. As a result, villages are often required to cover all costs of education and thus eliminating the notion of free education for all, even at the primary level. (Source: Year 2004 Education Report, ABFSU-FAC, February 2005)

Aside from enrolment and monthly tuition fees, students must also pay for textbooks, school supplies, building maintenance, uniforms, teachers’ wages, Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA) membership, and any other required donations for announced projects such as multimedia classrooms and computers. Often, students never see the realization of the projects for which they are forced to pay. The average income for a person in Burma is between 5,000 to 7,000 kyat per month, making the costs of education beyond the means of most people. (Source: Year 2004 Education Report, ABFSU-FAC, February 2005)

The high cost of education has resulted in high dropout rates from Burma’s education system. According to UNESCO, the dropout rate stands at 45% as only half of all children who enter primary school in Burma will reach fifth standard or fifth grade (source: “Asia Has the Highest Number of Children Out of School: UNESCO,” AFP, 10 February 2004). Many children do not attend school at all and of those that do, most do not complete high school. According to UN figures, 98% of all students dropout before completing high school. Yet, even at the primary level, dropout rates and lack of enrolment are extremely high as most families are unable to afford the costs of education fees. Government figures indicate that only 55% of children who register in school complete primary education.

Parents who cannot afford to send all their children to school often choose to educate their sons over their daughters. As a result, less than one third of all female students who begin primary school manage to graduate (source: CEDAW, 2002). The high drop out rate of female students stems from traditional beliefs about gender roles as well as early marriage and pregnancy of girl students. Most girls and young women are expected to manage both educational and domestic responsibilities, which often results in poor scholastic performance and leads them to dropout of the educational system.

Education in Burma is further compromised by the low wages the government provides for teachers. Government provided salaries are not adequate, causing many teachers to resort to alternative means to maintain their livelihoods. The All Burma Federation of Student Unions (ABFSU) reported that in January 2004, the monthly salaries of teachers stood at 4,500 kyat for primary level, 5,000 to 5,500 kyat for middle school, and 5,500 to 6,000 kyat for high school. Moreover, in June 2004, it was reported that the government was no longer providing government staff, including teachers, with supplementary rice. Instead, the government offered 5,000 kyat in addition to their salaries. Yet, with required donations and other obligatory fees for teachers, this additional money has made little difference. In order to sustain themselves, many teachers reduce the amount of information taught during the class period and focus only on basic theories or ideas. Only during extra tuition sessions are students able to learn all the information necessary to pass exams. At the same time, these tuition sessions require payment of additional fees ranging from US$ 2-6 a month per subject per pupil. According to the ICFTU, approximately 50-80% of students attend tuition classes outside of school hours. Children that do attend have a greater chance of passing exams either as a result of a better understanding of the material or because of favoritism. Teachers in rural areas have also been reported to engage in agricultural work or selling items in the market as a means of incurring additional income, which also reduces their hours in the classroom. (Source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003)

Lack of teacher training and experience has also contributed to erosion in the quality of education in Burma. According to the ABFSU, teachers who receive their training through the University of Education are taught teacher-centred teaching methods and rote learning that do not embrace independent, creative or critical thinking. At the same time, a large percentage of teachers based in rural or ethnic minority areas have graduated from the University for Development of National Races, which offers a masters degree in philosophy and education. These teachers are taught by members of the military to perpetuate state ideology through their lessons. When teachers are sent to teach at posts in rural areas they continue to promote state ideology through their lessons, such as the importance of the role of the military in the country. (Source: Year 2004 Education Report, ABFSU-FAC, February 2005)

State promoted teaching methods and curriculum also serve as a method of deterring students from becoming involved in political activities. As students have long played an integral role in the pro-democracy movement, the government considers student populations a potential source of political dissent. As a result, in times of political instability or social tension, schools are subject to closure. This was evident following the 1988 pro-democracy demonstrations and following the 2003 Depayin Massacre. The strict state controlled curriculum serves to thwart political dissent by incorporating negative perspectives of democracy while promoting notions of military rule. Teachers are also forced to ensure that their students do not get involved in anti-military activities. Student Unions are strictly banned and any assembly of students, regardless of whether the purpose is artistic or social, has been banned by the government. Instead, students are encouraged to conform and are frequently coerced into joining the USDA, which means joining activities organized by army officers and performing for high-ranking officials when they visit schools. Students are quickly indoctrinated in the ideals of not questioning authority or thinking critically, reinforcing military ideology and rule.

In addition to schools for civilians, the SPDC has established a primary and secondary education system exclusively for the children of high-ranking army officers that lend to maintaining the social hierarchy. These schools have more modern equipment and offer luxury amenities, such as computers and computer training, school trips, sports, etc. The best schools require registration fees that are beyond the means of ordinary people. According the ABFSU, these registration fees can range between US$ 100-US$ 200 per year. At these schools children are indoctrinated to believe that the army must always be obeyed and never criticized. The children of highest-ranking officers are occasionally able to study abroad after completion of their studies in these types of schools. (Source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003)

Aside from public schools and the SPDC’s exclusive schools, other private education institutions do exists. However this alternative is only open to Rangoon’s elite of wealthy businessmen, top-ranking officials, their close associates, and foreign diplomats. At the International Language and Business Center in Rangoon, tuition starts at around 1.1 million kyat (US$ 1,160) per year for kindergarten students and rises as students move onto higher grades. Many private schools cost even more, and only the upper echelon of society is capable of paying this. (Source: Kyaw Zwa Moe, “Educating the Elite," Irrawaddy, Vol. 11 No. 6, July 2003)

Ethnic minority children, particularly those in areas of active armed conflict, suffer disproportionately from Burma’s failing education system. Aside from the obstacles to education faced by children in other areas of Burma, children in these areas endure the obstacles posed by an environment of ongoing human rights abuses such as forced labor, sexual violence, torture, extra-judicial killing and restrictions on movement. In 1999, UNICEF reported that 84% of all children who dropout of primary school in Burma come from ethnic border areas. According to government statistics, only 1.6% of children living in ethnic border areas attends school while 32.7% of the population in these areas are under 14 years of age. Only 10% of children in Karen, Karenni, and Shan States attend school while in other areas, such as Arakan State or Wa areas of Shan State, the percentage is even lower. (Source: Year 2004 Education Report, ABFSU-FAC, February 2005)

Most schools in rural and ethnic minority areas under SPDC control are critically under funded by the government and those that exist are reportedly old and in disrepair. The Ministry of Progress and Border Areas, National Races, and Development Affairs has claimed that new schools have been constructed in ethnic minority areas. Yet, it has been reported that while these new schools may exist, they are completely lacking in resources. In Karenni State, for example, it was reported that several new school facilities were built in 2003 but as they were never supplied with teachers or resources, the schools remained useless (source: “Students Flee Burma in Pursuit of Education,” Irrawaddy, 17 June 2004). As many schools in ethnic minority areas are in rural areas, they are frequently subject to the government’s self-reliance program and forced to raise all funds for the school by themselves. As most villagers in rural ethnic areas survive on seasonal work, their income is not sufficient enough to cover all the costs of a child’s education. In addition, many families rely on the contribution of all family members to maintain their livelihood, including children. This influences many children to discontinue their education after reaching fourth standard (source: Year 2004 Education Report, ABFSU-FAC, February 2005).

Children in ethnic minority areas may be subject to relocation orders for a variety of reasons, including the suspicion of rebel activity, which poses many threats to the continuity of their education. SPDC soldiers frequently burn down villages after a relocation order has transpired and schools are not exempted from this process. Relocation sites often have little to no educational facilities and parents are forced to contend with the full costs of their children’s education. According to the Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG), Karen villages which fall under the category of “Nyein Chan Yay” or peace villages in Toungoo District, which are under SPDC control, usually have a school in which children can obtain a primary education up to fourth standard. Children from villages without any school often travel to another village in order to attend. Very few schools extend to tenth standard and teachers themselves often have comparable education levels to students having completed no more than fourth or fifth standard. Schools in these areas receive minimal government support, forcing villagers to take responsibility for the remainder of the costs. While the government may provide teachers’ salaries, villagers frequently supplement this by providing rice or other crops. Most villagers are unable to supplement salaries in any other way. (Source: Enduring Hunger and Repression: Food Scarcity, Internal Displacement, and the Continued Use of Forced Labor in Toungoo District, KHRG, September 2004)

According to government regulations, children are forced to learn in Burmese in order to obtain a formal education while the study of ethnic minority languages is prohibited, creating further barriers to education for children in ethnic minority areas. Teachers sent from Rangoon to teach in rural schools are reportedly unmotivated and unable to effectively communicate with their students. In addition, state schools teach a government designed curriculum which promotes the role of the military as a unifying force in society, does not embrace ethnic and cultural diversity, and does not allow for local history to which ethnic minority children might relate. Often, the only way for children to learn their ethnic language or history is through private schools or their parents. The government’s policy on language and curriculum has often been categorized as a method of Burmanization to eliminate ethnic minority cultural identity and prevent any ethnic resistance to the government in Rangoon. (Source: Year 2004 Education Report, ABFSU-FAC, February 2005)

Children who live on the run as internally displaced persons (IDPs) have the least access to education, healthcare, and other social services. There is an estimated 600,000 to one million IDPs living on the run in Burma in perpetual fear of the military. Like their parents, IDP children live in constant fear of an attack by government troops and must be prepared to flee to a new hiding place at any time. IDP communities often establish small make-shift schools in an attempt to continue education. Some IDP communities’ efforts are supported by cross border relief projects which provide limited amounts of rice and other supplies if the community is reachable. Otherwise, these schools often use whatever materials they can find from the jungle around them. When a community is threatened by an impending attack and forced to flee, these schools are also forced to close. Government armed forces frequently burn schools down along with other IDP shelters. When a new hiding place is secured, schools must be re-established, and communities must be prepared to flee and abandon their schools again at any time.

Karen State

Note: Dooplaya, Pa-an and Papun, as reported below, are all areas demarcated by the KNU as Karen territory. Dooplaya District falls mostly in SPDC demarcated Karen State and partially in SPDC demarcated Mon State. Dooplaya District is under the patrol of the 6th Brigade of the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA). Papun and Pa-an Districts fall entirely in SPDC demarcated Karen State. Papun District is under the patrol of the 5th Brigade of the KNLA and Pa-an is under the patrol of the 7th Brigade of the KNLA. The SPDC does not recognize these as official districts. Instead, the SPDC considers there to be 3 districts (North to South: Kawkareik, Myawaddy, and Pa-an) and 7 townships (North to South: Than Daung, Papun, Hlaing Bwe, Pa’an, Kawkareik, Myawaddy, and Kya In Seik Gyi) within Karen State. These townships do not correspond with the KNU demarcated districts and townships, even for those which share the same name.

In February 2004, it was reported that due to the offensive operation of SPDC LID 55 in the northern part of Pa-pun District, Karen State, and the Karenni border, which began in January 2004, 24 schools in north eastern Lu Thaw Township had to close. (Source: CIDKP, 2004)

Mon State

Note: Thaton District is demarcated by the KNU as part of Karen territory. Thaton District falls mostly in the SPDC demarcated area of Mon State, while the area to the east of the Donthami River lies within SPDC demarcated Karen State. Thaton District is under the patrol of the 1st Brigade of the KNLA.

In June 2004, it was reported that students in Mudon Township were forced to pay entrance fees of 4,000 kyat for the new school term. The fees had to be paid in materials as opposed to cash. The fees were for school maintenance. School fees varied according to school level and location. In Hnee Pa Dol village, all students reportedly had to pay 6,700 kyat in entrance fees. (Source: "Poor Forced to Pay for Basic Education," Kao Wao News No. 69, 15 June 2004)

Pegu Division

Note: Both Nyaunglebin District and Toungoo District are areas demarcated by the KNU as Karen territory. Toungoo falls partially in SPDC demarcated Pegu Division and partially in SPDC demarcated Karen State. Toungoo is under the patrol of the 2nd Brigade of the KNLA. Nyaunglebin falls in SPDC demarcated Pegu Division and is under the patrol of the 3rd Brigade of the KNLA. The SPDC does not recognize Nyaunglebin or Toungoo as official districts.

On 16 January 2004, Operation Command 2 Commander Tin Maung Oo ordered Column Commander Ko Ko Oo to relocate Ko-ni village, Mon Township, Nyaunglebin District, to Noe Nya Lar Kwee Thint by the deadline of 2 February 2004. Those who did not want to relocate would be put on a list which was to be sent to the office of SPDC LIB 590 and each of them had to pay 200,000 kyat. Due to the forced relocation, the village school had to be closed and villagers' paddy and bean crops were destroyed by animals in a great number. The new relocation site was a place where bricks were baked and as a result many people, especially children and elderly people, got sick. (Source: KIC, 2004)

States Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities for the treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health. States Parties shall strive to ensure that no child is deprived of his or her right of access to such healthcare services.

Children often suffer the most from the SPDC’s severe neglect of Burma’s eroding healthcare system. While the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child demands that children’s “right to life, and the right to survival and development” are protected, the SPDC has failed to make significant efforts to ensure proper healthcare and access to such care which would protect these rights. In 2004, the SPDC spent approximately 1.2% of total government expenditures on healthcare in Burma. While the budget granted to the Ministry of Health in the 2003-2004 period was reportedly doubled from the previous period, it remained inadequate in allowing for the provision of proper healthcare services and institutions throughout the country (source: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2004, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2004). During 2004, children in Burma continued to endure a healthcare system devoid of skilled health practitioners, proper medical facilities, and adequate information.

According to UNICEF statistics in 2003, the infant mortality rate in Burma was 76 per 1,000 live births and the under five mortality rate was 107 out of 1,000 children (source: The Official Summary of the State of the World’s Children 2005, UNICEF, December 2004). AIDS, diarrhea, hepatitis B, malaria, measles, pneumonia, and tuberculosis have all been cited at the main causes of death or illness among children in Burma, while lack of knowledge and insufficient medical attention have been cited as the main causes of infant mortality. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that only 52 out of 1,000 births were attended to by a skilled aid. Infant and child mortality rates are seen as a direct result of the SPDC’s poor investment in education for health workers and in healthcare facilities (source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003).

Children’s health and development has also been affected by the state of the Burmese economy. As one out of every four households lives below the poverty line, many children are unable to obtain proper nutrition. In September 2004, the World Food Program (WFP) reported that one third of all children under the age of five are malnourished (source: “UN Warns of Child Malnutrition in Myanmar,” AFP, 14 September 2004). According to UNICEF, 35% of children under the age of five are moderately to severely underweight, 8% are severely underweight, 9% suffer from wasting, and 34% suffer from stunting. In turn, malnutrition along with poor sanitation and lack of clean water put children at greater risk of contracting disease and sickness.

There is a marked discrepancy in the quality or availability of healthcare services between urban and rural areas. According to the Burmese government's figures for 1999, the public health system had 6 hospital beds, 3 doctors and 2 nurses for every 10,000 inhabitants. Yet, these facilities were not evenly distributed with rural areas having one hospital for every 132,500 persons. In addition, care or medicine received during a hospital visit is often dependent upon the financial abilities of the patients. As basic salaries for healthcare workers in government facilities are low, many require direct or additional payment as a requisite of the administration of treatment. Poor infrastructure or remote locations also create obstacles to accessing medical care for those in rural areas. (Source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003)

Children residing in ethnic border areas, specifically areas of active armed conflict, have the least access to health services. Children living in areas of active-armed conflict or on the run as IDPs may not have access to any medical services other than traditional healers or cross-border backpack medical teams. According to the Thailand-Burma Border Consortium (TBBC), the mortality rate of children under the age of five in IDP areas in eastern Burma is 286 out of 1,000, which is two to three times greater than Burma’s baseline rate. In addition, 16% of children under the age of 5 are suffering from acute malnutrition, which is twice the rate of that for the rest of Burma (source: Internal Displacement and Vulnerability in Eastern Burma, TBBC, October 2004).

The Burmese government has only recently begun to acknowledge that HIV/AIDS is a health issue that must be addressed. According to Burma’s Ministry of Health, there are 180,000 people infected with HIV/AIDS in Burma. UNAIDS estimates the figure to be somewhere between 170,000 and 420,000 people. However, researchers at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health contend that using a "conservative approach" as many as 832,100 individuals could be HIV positive (source: “AIDS in Burma 2003," Irrawaddy, December 2003). UNICEF reports that the most common mode of HIV transmission to children under 15 years of age is from their mothers, which is preventable. In 2004, only Medicines Sans Frontieres (MSF) was providing anti-retrovirals free of charge to 200 people, including some children, out of a clinic located in Hlaing Thar Yar, Rangoon Division. For those who are not receiving the free treatment, the drug costs US$ 1.53 per day, which is beyond the means of most members of the population (source: “Burma’s Neglected Aids Babies Given New Hope,” Sunday Times, 11 July 2004).

Children with HIV/AIDS not only face difficulties in obtaining adequate healthcare, but they also face difficulties accessing government services because of the social stigma associated with the disease. With rising numbers of Burmese children being trafficked into the sex industry, children are also increasingly vulnerable to contracting HIV/AIDS inside Burma and abroad. The AIDS epidemic has sadly fuelled the demand for young prostitutes who are mistakenly believed to less likely be infected. The demand in neighboring countries for young "virgin" girls increases the likelihood that children trafficked will be sold multiple times to customers who will have unprotected sex with them. (Please see section on child trafficking for more information, below. Please see chapter on situation of health and education for more information on HIV/AIDS.)

According to the 1993 Child Law, the minimum age a child can be held accountable for criminal activity in Burma is 7 years-old. The 1993 Child Law also defines children between the ages of 16 and 18 as “youth” and not “children”. As a result, “youth” are subject to treatment as adults under the penal code. According to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Burma has made minimal progress in creating an adequate juvenile justice system equipped with trained professionals. In addition, the Child Law makes no provisions for guaranteeing legal assistance for juvenile offenders or those accused of such an offense. Like adults, children who are held in detention are often subject to prolonged periods of detention in poor conditions prior to their trials. (Source: “Concluding Observations: Myanmar,” Thirty-sixth session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 4 June 2004)

Juvenile Prison Laborers

There are an unknown number of juveniles serving time for petty offences in prison labor camps. Conditions in prison labor camps are notoriously difficult, and there are no special provisions made for underage prisoners. Children are sentenced for different reasons, such as not registering with local authorities or fleeing the army after forced conscription. Ethnic children are particularly targeted in certain areas. The situation in labor camps is dire, with many adults and children dying due to the extremely harsh conditions of the work environment. Long hours with no breaks while performing dangerous work, combined with inadequate food, physical abuse, exposure to infectious diseases and a total lack of healthcare, results in an especially vulnerable position for such children. There are no figures available for the number of child deaths in labor camps.

Child Soldiers in Prison

If a young boy is caught trying to escape serving in the army he is given a choice; either return to the army to face further abuse, or serve time in prison, after which they will be free to leave. Many child soldiers choose the second option, believing that life away from the army can only be an improvement. However, former child soldiers in prison often face further abuses at the hands of criminal prisoners. With minimal or no protection from the prison authorities, former child soldiers have reported that rape and physical abuse occur regularly.

“Because of the malnutrition and lack of proper healthcare, many children died in prison. When a female warden left the women’s ward carrying a big plastic bag, we understand a child was also dead.”

– Myat Mo Mo Htun, former political prisoner in Insein Prison. (Source: Women Political Prisoners in Burma, AAPP & BWU, September 2004)

Children who are either born in prison or imprisoned with their mothers endure the same poor treatment and living conditions as their mothers, despite the fact that they are innocent of any criminal charges. When a mother is arrested in Burma, it is common for her young children to stay with her inside her prison cell so that she can continue to care for them. Women and their children face extreme difficulties and suffer from diseases while in Burmese prisons due to the inadequate healthcare, unsanitary conditions and lack of nutritious food that all prisoners must endure.

Pregnant women who are imprisoned are denied access to proper pre-natal care and during birth they are usually only assisted by a midwife, who is a fellow prisoner, or simply a fellow prisoner who has little skills to contribute. As a result, a high number of children born in prison die during childbirth due to complications. After giving birth, female prisoners are forced to care for their new born babies under the same restrictions and harsh living conditions, such as limitations on the amount of water they are allowed to use, which adversely effects the health of both mother and child. Daw Khin San Nwe is a former political prisoner who was arrested and imprisoned in 1989 while she was pregnant and later gave birth in prison: “After I gave birth to my baby, they didn’t give me enough water. It was very difficult to wash my baby and the nappies. If I used clean water, they beat me up. I could have used dirty bath water but I didn’t like to do it. I had to let them beat me up so that I could wash my baby. I was not allowed to dry my baby clothing for three consecutive days when the official came to visit the prison. There were TB sufferers in the prison. The children were affected badly. Babies suffered from TB and skin diseases. The food was very poor for the mothers. They only gave us small boiled eggs sometimes.” (Source: “The Youngest Political Prisoner in Burma," DVB, 14 October 2003)

Children in prison have no access to medicine, besides that provided by family members. The majority of these children suffer from malnutrition. Children’s health in prison is also affected by the lack of nutritious foods provided to their mothers by the prisons. Another former political prisoner, Yu Yu Hlaing, who gave birth while imprisoned in Mergui Prison reported, “After delivering, I did not breast feed my baby for three days. I tried to allow myself to breast feed my child by drinking a lot of nutritious soup. I requested that I be allowed to cook soup for myself because we were not allowed to cook in the prison, but I was refused. I had only the soup provided by the jail.” Another former political prisoner, Myat Mo Mo Htun, reported, “One day, a female prisoner with a skinny child came to the female warden officer. She told the officer she could not breast feed her child. She could not afford milk powder for her baby because nobody came to visit her. Therefore, her once fat son had become a skeleton. The pathetic child was so thin and gaunt; his face resembled a monkey’s. The mother didn’t demand food for her child that she couldn’t get. She only demanded to carry her child out of the prison to spare his life…Soon after, I heard the child had passed away.” (Source: Women Political Prisoners in Burma, AAPP & BWU, September 2004)

No provisions are made for children’s development; there are no books or toys, and children’s movements are restricted to inside the cells. According to one former political prisoner, “Children who lived in prison with their mothers knew nothing of the world. Sometimes we met children who did not know what dogs were. They were the children who did not know what a motorcar was, and didn’t know people outside of the wall were free” (source: Women Political Prisoners in Burma, AAPP & BWU, September 2004). Upon reaching the age of five, children are taken away from their mothers and put into the care of social services if there are no relatives to take responsibility for them. Some reports indicate that children are sent to orphanages, while others are sent to military training camps and are later forced to become child soldiers (source: “The Youngest Political Prisoner in Burma," DVB, 14 October 2003).

States Parties recognize the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child's education, or to be harmful to the child's health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development.

As Burma’s economy has steadily deteriorated, many families have become increasingly reliant upon all members of the family, including young children, to obtain sources of income for the family’s livelihood. While children in Burma have traditionally contributed labor for their family farms or household duties, they can be increasingly found engaged in labor in a variety of industries both inside and outside of their family agriculture projects or small businesses. Seeking employment may often result in children leaving their homes in rural areas to live in urban areas as well as relinquishing their educational opportunities. While the 1993 Child Law prohibits the employment of children under the age of 13, the restrictions are rarely enforced. In addition, Burma has not ratified ILO Convention 138 regarding minimum age for labor and ILO Convention 182 regarding the worst forms of child labor. According to the U.S. Department of State, children’s presence in the work force has become “increasingly prevalent and visible”. Statistics from 2002 indicate that 6% of children in urban areas worked while only 4% were able to procure salaries (source: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2004, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2005).

Children can be found employed in the agricultural, fishing, service, domestic, manufacturing, sex and construction sectors. Many children are forced to work long hours for little pay while often losing their opportunity to obtain a basic education. According to the Human Rights Foundation of Monland (HURFOM), children are often paid lower salaries than adults for the same work, which is a motivation for shop owners to employ them. HURFOM reported that a child working in a teashop from 5:00 am to 10:00 pm would receive a monthly salary of approximately 3,000 kyat while an adult in the same position would receive 6,000 kyat. At the same time, employers do not always provide accommodation, leaving children in a precarious situation to maintain a livelihood with minimal funds (source: “Widespread Exploitation of Child Labour in Burma,” The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 31 March 2004). Children employed in factories contend with the same lack of protection as adult factory workers due to the ban on trade unions, lack of workers’ rights, and little regulation of workplace standards. During its 36^th session in June 2004, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concerned that “economic exploitation is extremely widespread in Myanmar and that children may be working long hours at young ages, with very negative impact on their school attendance” (source: “Concluding Observations: Myanmar,” Thirty-sixth session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 4 June 2004).

In March 2004, HURFOM reported that child beggars have become increasingly prevalent on the streets, teashops and public transportation centers. Moreover, many children are pressed into gangs of beggars where leaders coordinate their begging. Children are reportedly encouraged to engage in delinquent behavior such as theft. Children who are unable to beg a certain quota of money are reportedly beaten or denied food by the gangs. At the same time, child beggars are often treated harshly by proprietors of establishments where they beg (source: “Widespread Exploitation of Child Labor in Burma,” The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 31 March 2004).

The poor state of the economy has also led more women and girls to turn to prostitution as a means of securing an income. According to the U.S. Department of State, in Rangoon and Mandalay, there was a noticeable presence of prostitutes during 2004, “who appeared to be in their early teens and for whom there was reportedly a high demand” (source: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2004, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2005). In November 2004, Mizzima News reported the story of Lian, a 15 year old Chin girl, who started working as a sex-worker when she was 13 years old in order to support her family. Each day, she travels across the border from Chin State, Burma, to Champhai, Mizoram State, India. She earns approximately 50 to 100 rupees per day from Indian customers. Lian is one of many young Chin girls who engage in prostitution along the border in order to support their impoverished families in Burma. In Moreh, another border town, girls from Tamy, Kabaw Valley and Namphalang cross the border daily to engage in sex-work. Young female sex workers are vulnerable to HIV infection and other STDs. In addition, they must contend with the dangers of ongoing crackdowns and security threats on both sides of the border. (Source: Surajit Khaund, “The Opposite Side of Border Fence,” Mizzima, 18 November 2004)

Children and Forced Labor

Children are also subject to conscription for forced labor projects including portering, road construction, sanitation and building maintenance for military camps, building construction, acting as messengers, conscription into the military and various other chores for military personnel. Although Burma passed Order 1/99 in 2000 banning the use of forced labor, incidents of forced labor continued to emerge from all over the country in 2004. Moreover, there are no specific provisions in the law against the use of children in forced labor. The U.S. Department of State reported that “forced child labor remained a serious problem” in 2004 (source: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2004, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2005). On 5 August 2004, it was reported that the Ms Kyoko Yonizu, the UNHCR field officer based in Arakan State, protested the pervasive use of child labor in Maungdaw Township, Arakan State. The UNHCR field officer appealed to Nasaka Border Force Acting Commander Myint Oo to assist in reducing the rate of child labor. Sending children in place of their parents for labor projects was reportedly extremely common, particularly in the rainy season (source: “UNHCR Field Officer Complains to Nasaka for Child Labor Use,” Narinjara News, 5 August 2004).

Children often participate in forced labor projects in place of their parents who may be out working on their family farms or unable to afford to lose a day of work. This is particularly true during harvest periods. In other cases, a request for laborers may not provide enough time to call adults back from their farms or there simply may not be enough people in the village to fulfill the requested number of laborers. Children are usually unable to attend school while they perform forced labor. In March 2004, HURFOM reported that No. 3 Tactical Command in Ye Township engaged in a project to repair the Ye-Khawza motor road, which resulted in the call for 10 to 20 villagers from each of four villages. Women and children were included in those who were forced to contribute labor for one to three days at a time (source: “Continuous Conscription of Forced Labor in Mon Areas,” The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 31 August 2004).

Men are usually called for portering duty, as they are the most able bodied for the job. Yet, when men are unavailable, women must often go in their place. For mothers of small children, they are faced with the choice of leaving the child unaccompanied or taking him or her along for the portering duties. Children may also be obliged to engage in portering duties if there is no one else in the village to do so. According to KHRG, children as young as eight years old have been forced to porter, carrying loads ranging from 16kgs/36 lbs. to 33 kgs/72 lbs. for long distances and extended periods of time. Children are also subject to acting as human shields or human mine sweepers by being forced to walk in front of troops. As porters, children are exposed to the same harsh treatment as adult porters, which includes beatings, lack of food, and exposure to the elements. (Source: Enduring Hunger and Repression: Food Scarcity, Internal Displacement, and the Continued Use of Forced Labor in Toungoo District, KHRG, September 2004)

Chin State

On 2 November 2004, Corporal Tin Thun of SPDC LIB 274, led by Sergeant Hlah Thun, gave Salai Bi Ram, a student, and his friends 20,000 kyat and ordered them to buy foreign liquor in Chinletwa village, Paletwa Township, Chin State. The students were ordered to go and buy the liquor on the day of their high school final exams. They attended High School of Lailenpi sub-Township. The students returned with the liquor on 6 November and were not provided with any compensation for their traveling costs. Liquor is banned in the area but SPDC soldiers reportedly force villages to go to other places to buy it for them. (Source: "High School Students As A Liquor Carrier," Khonumthung News Group, 4 December 2004)

Mon State

In the first week of September 2004, troops from SPDC LIB 343 forced villagers from Singu and Toe-tat Ywa-thit to perform labor for a road construction project from Khawza village to Magyi village, approximately 10 miles long. It was reported that children as young as 10 to 12 years old also contributed labor as their parents were not free as they had to work on their farms. The laborers were monitored by Colonel Nyi Nyi Htwe who reportedly opened fire when workers arrived late. If this happened, the workers were required to pay him 7,000 kyat for each bullet that he fired. (Source: "Gross Human Rights Violations in Ye Township, Southern Part of Mon State," The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 30 September 2004)

Pegu Division

On 17 May 2004, troops from SPDC IB 39 led by Battalion Commander Win Oo came to Kaw Soe Kho village, Tantabin Township, Toungoo District. As they could not find a sufficient number of male villagers, they seized four women villagers, together with their young children. The women were:

The troops also seized the village heads, Saw Ta Htoo and Saw Law Der, and took them to Baw Gali village. On 18 May 2004, the police station demanded 9 villagers from Kaw Soe Kho village to replace the villagers who had been seized. However, the women villagers were not released. The 9 villagers for replacement were:

They were forced to carry food supplies from Tha Aye Hta camp to Koe Day. (Source: KIC, 2004)

As a signatory to the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, Burma is obligated to “ensure that persons who have not attained the age of fifteen years do not take a direct part in hostilities.” Moreover, Burma is obligated to “refrain from recruiting any person who has not attained the age of fifteen years into their armed forces. In recruiting among those persons who have attained the age of fifteen years but who have not attained the age of eighteen years, States Parties shall endeavor to give priority to those who are oldest” (source: Article 38, Paragraph 2 and 3, UN Convention on the Rights of the Child). In 2000, the United Nations General Assembly adopted an optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child that raised the minimum age for participation in armed conflict to 18, and prohibited all forced recruitment of children below the age of 18. Burma has not yet signed the optional protocol. Yet, according to the Myanmar Defense Services Act of 1974 and War Office Council Instruction 13/73 “a person cannot be enlisted into the armed forced unless he has attained the age of 18” (source: Statement by Professor Dr May May Yi at the Thirty-Sixth Session of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 26 May 2004). Despite both international and national law prohibiting their use, Burma has been well documented as a perpetrator of forced recruitment, training, and deployment of child soldiers as young as age 12 in the national armed forces. According to Human Rights Watch, child soldiers account for 20% or 70,000 of the 350,000 people in the armed forces of Burma. At least 19 armed-opposition groups have also been documented to have child soldiers among their ranks. Moreover, of the estimated 300,000 child soldiers around the world, 25% are in the armed forces of Burma. According to Human Rights Watch, Burma has more children serving in its armed forces that any other country in the world (source: World Report 2005, Human Rights Watch, 13 January 2005).

The SPDC has consistently refuted criticisms of the use of child soldiers by highlighting that national law sets the minimum age for voluntary enlistment at 18 years. Along with denying the use of child soldiers, the SPDC has continually attempted to convince the UN Security Council the armed conflict transpiring in the country is an internal matter. Yet in 2003, the Security Council requested a progress report on governments and groups known to recruit and use child soldiers from the UN Secretary General. In doing so, the Security Council aimed to identify countries responsible for the use of child soldiers, thereby creating pressure for these countries to implement reforms and find remedy to the situation. Moreover, additional measure such as imposing sanctions were reported as possible steps the Council would take in the event that identified countries made no progress in ameliorating the situation (source: Becker, Jo, “A Gun as Tall as Me," from Human Rights Watch, Asian Wall Street Journal, 20 January 2004). Burma was placed on a list of 15 countries in violation of international law due to the use of child soldiers. In January 2004, the SPDC refuted the report claiming the information was provided by NGOs and insurgent groups and remained unverified (source: “Myanmar Rejects UN Claims on Child Soldiers in Army,” AFP, 21 January 2004). At the same time, the SPDC sent a letter to the Security Council in January 2004 stating, “The Myanmar Armed Forces is an all volunteer force and those entering military service do so of their own free will…There is neither a draft system nor forced conscription by the Government of Myanmar. Forced conscription by the Government is strictly prohibited throughout the country” (source: Child Soldiers Global Report 2004: Myanmar, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 17 November 2004).

On 5 January 2004, the SPDC created the Committee for the Prevention of the Recruitment of Child Soldiers. The Committee is chaired by SPDC Secretary 2 Lt Gen Then Sein and includes “the Ministers for Foreign Affairs, Labour, and Social Welfare and the Home Minister, the Judge Advocate-General and two high-ranking military officials from the Ministry of Defence.” On 16 January, the Committee met for the first time, focusing on adopting “resolutions on prevention of the recruitment of minors for military service,” which resulted in the creation of a task force (source: “Interim Report of the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar,” Fifty-ninth session of the UN General Assembly, Item 107 (c) of the provisional agenda, 30 August 2004). In October, the Committee adopted a Plan of Action for the Implementation of the Objectives of that Committee. The concerns revealed in the plan included: “strengthened control of the recruitment process to ensure that no one under 18 years of age enters the armed forces; the discharge from military service and return to their parents or guardians of those found to be under 18 while training or in service; the provision of vocational training or other educational options and livelihood support, in particular for orphans, vulnerable children and those without guardians; an improved birth registration system; and the dissemination of information to recruitment centres and the general public on the prohibition of recruitment of persons under 18 years.” Yet as of December, no implementation of the intentions set forth in the Plan of Action were apparent. (Source: “Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar,” Sixty-first session of the UN Commission on Human Rights, United Nations Economic and Social Council, 2 December 2004)

While the UN Special Rapporteur, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, and advocates for child rights have recognized the SPDC’s creation of the Committee for the Prevention of the Recruitment of Child Soldiers, doubts remain as there are no formal disarmament, demobilization, or reintegration programs in place. By creating the Committee, the SPDC has been given credit for acknowledging the issue of child soldiers. Concurrently, the SPDC continues to deny that recruitment is systematic. Yet, child rights advocate from Human Rights Watch, Jo Becker, has contended that the SPDC’s formation of the Committee is an attempt to deflect international criticisms while real action has yet to be taken to demobilize active child soldiers and to eliminate incentives for their recruitment (source: “Burma: Demobilize Child Soldiers,” Human Rights Watch, 4 June 2004). At the same time, during the concluding observations of its 36^th session, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed extreme concern for the continued “use of children below the age of 15 years as soldiers by both the governmental armed forces and the armed groups….” (source: “Concluding Observations: Myanmar,” Thirty-sixth session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 4 June 2004).

In May 2003, the International Labor Organization (ILO) and SPDC agreed upon a joint Plan of Action regarding forced labor. Signed in June 2003, the plan included an independent mechanism to which complaints of forced labor, including forced conscription of child soldiers, could be made. As of the end of 2004, it had yet to be implemented. Yet, during 2004, it was reported that several parents were able to retrieve their children from soldier training centers with the assistance of the ILO. The U.S. Department of State reported that in March and April, the ILO informed the SPDC of nine cases of forced recruitment of children. After an investigation, the SPDC reported that eight of the nine recruits mentioned had not been forcibly recruited while one was not found. Two boys were discharged from the military while five remained with military authorities claiming their age to be above 18 years (source: Country Reports on the Situation of Human Rights- 2004, Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2005).

"They would beat or swear at children who are unmanageable when climbing mountains. There were children who couldn't climb the mountains. They beat them and made them climb," Than Naing said. "Some died because of their health conditions. Some became ill and died. Some caught malaria. Malaria was really bad. They were buried when they died... But what difference is it going to make for the parents? They're already dead," he said.

- Than Naing, former child soldier recruited at age 16. (Source: “The Yearbook of Experts, Authorities and Spokespersons: Burmese Deserters Describe Lives of Child Soldiers,” RFA, 21 January 2004)

"They took me to the army camp in Tamwe and punched me," Yan Paing Soe said. "There were about two people in front of me. They had also been punched that way. There was bleeding, so I got scared and said I would join them."

- Yan Paing Soe, former child soldier. (Source: “The Yearbook of Experts, Authorities and Spokespersons: Burmese Deserters Describe Lives of Child Soldiers,” RFA, 21 January 2004)

Since 1988, Burma has doubled the size of its armed forces and children serve as easily coerced and intimidated recruits. Throughout 2004, reports of kidnapping and forcible recruitment of children from all over Burma, some as young as 11 years-old, continued to emerge with orphans and street children as one of the most vulnerable groups. Children are frequently arrested while others are deceived by recruiters with promises of access to education and a secure life. Children are frequently kidnapped while on the way home from school, in teashops, bus stations, train stations, markets, festivals or other public places. One former child soldiers reported, “At the end of school, students would take pocket money from their parents and go to the teashop. The SPDC government was lying in wait for that. As soon as the classes were dismissed, they would run to snatch the students. They would go and drag them away” (source: “The Yearbook of Experts, Authorities and Spokespersons Burmese Deserters Describe Lives of Child Soldiers,” RFA, 21 January 2004). In rural areas, children are often recruited when a village does not have enough adults to fulfill a conscription order. In ethnic minority areas, the Tatmadaw systematically sets quotas for the recruitment of new soldiers and porters, and prior to launching new offensives there is great pressure to increase troop numbers.

The law in Burma stipulates that recruiters are subject to imprisonment for up to seven years for recruiting children. In practice, the law is routinely ignored and recruiters receive incentives in the form of cash and bags of rice for every recruit -regardless of age- that they deliver to recruitment centers. There is no evidence of any recruiters actually being sanctioned or punished for recruiting children. In February 2004, it was reported that the SPDC had issued an order for the Tatmadaw to focus on the recruitment of ethnic minority youth. A recruiter would receive 20,000 kyat for each ethnic minority youth recruited which was an increase from the previous 5,000 kyat payment. Other incentives were also offered to military officers who were successful in recruiting children (source: “Burmese Government Urges Army to Recruit More Minority Youths,” DVB, 4 February 2004).

Children are often confronted with the option of joining the army or serving jail time for a possibly fabricated or extremely simple offence. Several former child soldiers have reported being arrested for not having their national identity card. Others that had their ID cards have reported that recruiters destroyed their cards and maintained that they do not have them, presenting them with the option of jail time or enlisting in the army. One former child soldier, Than Naing, who was forced to enlist in the army at age 16 when found without his national identity card, reported, “They would interrogate the children: ‘Do you have your national registration card?’ If they didn’t have it, they would hit and beat them. Only after that did they send them away to the army” (source: “The Yearbook of Experts, Authorities and Spokespersons, Burmese Deserters Describe Lives of Child Solders,” RFA, 21 January 2004).

Orphan and street children are often recruited into the army through the Ye Nyunt or “new leaf” system, which was reported to be a system of camps where these children were trained until they were of proper age for enlistment in the army. In 2004, the SPDC reported that the Ye Nyunt system no longer existed. Instead, children who attended were given the opportunity to attend the Nationalities Youth Development Training School where children of various ethnic backgrounds reportedly receive a free education. There was no evidence available to support the SPDC’s report of these schools. (Source: Child Soldiers Global Report 2004: Myanmar, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 17 November 2004)

Once recruited, children are usually sent to one of two main recruitment centers outside of Rangoon and Mandalay. Other recruitment centers are located in Mingaladon, Pyin Oo Lwin and Toungoo. According to reports of former soldiers who were trained in the last four years, 35% to 45% of new recruits at the two largest recruitment centers near Mandalay and Rangoon were under the age of 18. Moreover, an estimated 15% to 20% were under the age of 15 (source: Child Soldiers Global Report 2004: Myanmar, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 17 November 2004). In some instances, former child soldiers have reported that their names were changed by military authorities as a measure to prevent their families from finding them. In addition, many former child soldiers have reported being forced to sign documents indicating that they are 18 years of age when they are not. Child soldiers are not allowed to have any contact with their family, although some former child soldiers have reported that higher ranking officers informed them that they could send letters to their families, but they never received replies; “They did say that we could contact our parents and that we would get a reply if we wrote them a letter. We did write them letters but we never got a reply” (source: “The Yearbook of Experts, Authorities and Spokespersons, Burmese Deserters Describe Lives of Child Solders,” RFA, 21 January 2004).

During training, child recruits receive harsh treatment where they are beaten, receive insufficient or poor quality food, and often have their money taken by higher-ranking officers. Maung Myo, who was recruited at the age of 11 in 1999, was sent to a child soldier training camp in Mingaladon. There he was trained for nearly six months while living in a room with approximately 80 other children. At the Mingaladon training center, “the children were regularly beaten with canes or whips when they failed to carry out orders correctly. Victims were regularly hospitalized.” According to Maung Myo, several children died during the course of his training as a result of the harsh treatment (source: “Deserting From the Rape Commanders,” Irrawaddy, 14 August 2004). Children who attempt to escape and are caught receive severe punishment which often includes beatings or detention. In 2003, a 14 year old boy revealed to the Coalition to Stop Child Soldiers, “other trainees, if they were caught trying to run away, had their hands and feet beaten with a bamboo stick, and were then put in shackles and beaten and poked again and again, and then they were taken to the lock-up.” In March 2004, a 16 year old boy reported that he was shackled and forced to sign a document indicating that he was 18 years old when he did not comply with remaining in the recruitment center (source: Child Soldiers Global Report 2004: Myanmar, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 17 November 2004).

When children are deployed as soldiers in the Tatmadaw and assigned to duty with various military units, they are treated as adults while forced to engage in armed conflict and to perpetrate human rights abuses against ethnic minority civilians. Maung Myo, mentioned above, reported that soldiers had little choice but to participate in the perpetration of human rights violations or face punishment themselves: “When we arrived at a village we would tell the villagers to give us chickens, pigs and other food. If people didn’t want to give us what we wanted, we would beat them and take it anyway…I took part in the beatings- my superiors would order me to. If I didn’t, I would be punished myself. But I was disciplined more than 20 times anyway for not following orders.” Moreover, Maung Myo’s experience, like other child soldiers, included witnessing the perpetration of human rights abuses by higher ranking officers or other members of the military, including rape. While on patrol in Karen State, led by Lt Soe Naing, Maung Myo observed rape for the first time when his unit encountered a Karen woman fishing in a river. Lt Soe Naing attempted to communicate with the women to tell her that he wanted her in Burmese. When Lt Soe Naing discovered that the woman could not understand him because she only spoke Karen, he became angry and proceeded to beat her. Thereafter, he took her into the bushes and raped her. Maung Myo reported that during his time on the frontline he observed at least 10 incidents which were comparable in nature (source: “Deserting From the Rape Commanders,” Irrawaddy, 14 August 2004).

Like adult soldiers, child soldiers are not provided with adequate food, money or supplies. They are subject to harsh conditions, frequently sent to the frontlines, and treated badly by commanding officers. Many child soldiers attempt to desert the army but have few choices of where to go. If they return to their homes or remain in Burma, they fear arrest, punishment and being forcibly re-recruited. Others fear approaching ethnic opposition groups, like the Karen National Union (KNU), believing that they will be turned away or punished due to their participation with government forces fighting against the ethnic opposition groups. Despite this, many child soldiers have been able to desert and find protection with groups such as the KNU. In addition, many have fled across the border to Thailand in search of refuge or to work as migrant laborers.

According to Human Rights Watch, approximately 7,000 children were included in the ranks of the various ethnic armed resistance groups in 2004, both ceasefire and non-ceasefire. As the size and strength of the armed opposition groups has waned over the years, the number of child soldiers has also decreased. Ethnic minority children often join armed resistance groups as a result of the ongoing-armed conflict within their regions. Ethnic minority children are often motivated to enlist as a direct result of the human rights abuses they, their families, or communities have suffered at the hands of the Tatmadaw. Children who have lost their families and homes join for a sense of protection and community or in search of revenge. Conversely, many of the ethnic armies train children to be the new generation for the revolutionary forces and future leaders. While progress has been made, many of these armed groups lack political will or resources to actually demobilize child soldiers from their ranks. Even if soldiers are demobilized, they have little opportunity to obtain an education and may have no other existing “family”.

According to a former soldier, approximately half of all recruits to the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) are under the age of 18. The United Wa State Army (UWSA) is estimated to have approximately 2,000 children among its ranks. Both the DKBA and UWSA have signed ceasefires and are supported by the SPDC. Despite its claims of no child soldiers, the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), another ceasefire group, reportedly conscripts both boys and girls to provide labor for infrastructure and military projects. The Mon National Liberation Army (MNLA), the armed wing of the New Mon State Party (NMSP), is also reported to have child soldiers serving in its forces. In 2002, the Karenni Army (KnA) reported that approximately 1,200 soldiers served in its forces. It has been estimated that nearly 20% of these soldiers are below the age of 18. In addition, the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA), the armed wing of the Karen National Union (KNU), has approximately 500 child soldiers serving. According to the KNU, these children willingly enlisted to participate in combat. In March 2004, KNU General Secretary Padoh Mahn Sha reported that KNU policy is to recruit no one under the age of 18. Despite this policy, many displaced children remain in the ranks but reportedly have been assigned to administrative duties. (Source: Child Soldiers Global Report 2004: Myanmar, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 17 November 2004)

On 16 January 2004, Min Zaw (age 16) was recaptured when he tried to run away from Phaunggyi Soldier Training School to which he had been forcibly recruited. On 6 November 2003, he had been captured and forced to enlist in the Navy by Sergeant Hla Myint and Private Mya Shaung. On 8 November 2003, he had been sent to the soldier training school. Min Zaw had been living with his parents in Dawpone Township, Rangoon, and was working at View Point Amusement Park, Thaketa Township, Rangoon, when he was captured. (Source: “Child Soldier Attempts to Escape But Is Recaptured,” Yoma3, 16 January 2004)

On 29 January 2004, Sak Thi Aung (age 16) was hospitalized after stepping on a landmine serving as a soldier for the Burma Army. As a result of being hospitalized in No. 1 Military Hospital in Mingaladone Township, Rangoon Division, Sak Thi Aung was able to make contact with his family in February 2004. This was the first time he was able to make contact since he was abducted and forcibly conscripted by SPDC authorities on 16 April 2002. At the time of his abduction, he was 14 years old and living with his parents in Rangoon. He was taken to Da Nyin Kone Soldier Collection Point and by the end of April 2002 he was sent to No. 9 Basic Training School in Thaton Township, Mon State. Upon completion of his training, he served in SPDC LIB 340. On 23 April 2002, his parents had gone to Da Nyin Kone Soldier Collection Point to try and find him but the authorities had denied that he was there. Despite his attempts to send letters to his family, they never received them. As a result of stepping on the landmine, his right leg was amputated. (Source: “An Abducted Child Soldier Reunites With His Parents From A Hospital Bed,” Yoma3, 29 January 2004)

On 30 January 2004, military authorities released Naing Lin Aung (age 16) from the army due to pressure from the ILO. Originally from Hlaing Thaya Township, Naing Lin Aung was forcibly conscripted when he went to Rangoon to visit his grandmother. His abductors took his watch, clothing and money. He was sent to No. 3 Basic Training School in Ya Myi Thin Township, Mandalay Division. When he disappeared, his father, U Soe Naing, searched for Naing Lin Aung with police, hospitals, and local officials. On 16 September, U Soe Naing went to Da Nyin Kone Soldier Collection Point in search of his son. He was able to meet Naing Lin Aung while he was training at No. 3 Army Basic Training School. The training was reportedly due to finish on 30 January, the same day he was released. (Source: "SPDC Abducts and Forces Military Enlistment of 16 Year Old” & “SPDC Releases Two Underage Soldiers,” Yoma3, 20 February 2004)

In February 2004, Chit Ko (aka Chi Po, age 17) secretly made contact with his family for the first time after being kidnapped and forced to join the army in 2002. Chit Ko had been abducted by SPDC authorities at age 15 when he was in the railway station on the way to his parent’s house in Twante Township, Rangoon Division. When they took him, the authorities indicated that he would only be gone for approximately a month for portering duties. Yet, he was forcibly conscripted and at the time of this report, he was a soldier in LIB 328 in Mie Sat Town, Shan State. He was able to secretly contact his family with the assistance of a private in his unit. (Source: “A Child Soldier Finally Contacts His Family After Two Years,” Yoma3, March 2004)

On 6 February 2004, military authorities released Khin Maung Than (age 15) from the army due to pressure from the ILO. Khin Maung Than had been abducted and forcibly conscripted on 17 September 2003. On that day, he had gone back to his school, No.2 Basic High School, where he attended 9^th Standard, because he had forgotten his umbrella. While he was on his way, he was abducted by 2 men at the Mee Kwet Market junction in Hlaing Thaya Township, Rangoon. First, he was sent to Da Nyin Kone Soldier Collection Point and then sent to No. 5 Basic Training School (La-Ka-Ya) in Yani Township, Pyinmana District, Mandalay Division. Unaware of Khin Maung Than’s whereabouts, his father, U Khin Maung, bribed officials at the Mingaladon Army Record Office to find out where he was. As a result, they were able to meet at the training camp. On 24 January, U Khin Maung appealed to the ILO for their assistance in procuring Khin Maung Than’s discharge from the army. The ILO’s efforts proved successful. (Sources: "SPDC Abducts and Forces Military Enlistment of 16 Year Old” & “SPDC Releases Two Underage Soldiers,” Yoma3, 20 February 2004)

On 16 February 2004, Thaw Zin Oo (age 15), a 10^th standard student at No. 4 Basic Education High School in Sanchaung, was recruited to join the military and sent to Da-Nyin-Gone Soldier Collection Point by Second Corporal Tun Min Soe. On 16 February, his aunt, with whom he had been living, received news of his new military status. When she attempted to visit him 2 days later, the authorities denied her access. The following day, she reported the case to The Committee for the Prevention of the Use of Child Soldiers, an SPDC child soldier monitoring and prevention committee, and to the International Committee of the Red Cross. (Source: “Fifteen Year Old in Sanchaung is Enlisted into the Burmese Army,” Yoma3, 16 February 2004)

In March 2004, it was reported that Htay Kyi Aung, who was forcibly conscripted into the army at age 16, was serving in SPDC LIB 283 in Kyai In Seik Kyi Township, Karen State. Htay Kyi Aung had lived in Khayan, Rangoon Division. On 18 February 2002, soldiers from SPDC IB 90 came to his home and kidnapped him. He was able to contact his family through a private in his unit. (Source: “After Two Years An Abducted Child Soldiers Sends Word Home,” Yoma3, 2004)

On 14 March 2004, military officials abducted and enlisted the following children from Hlaing-Tha-Ya Township, Rangoon Division:

When the 4 teenagers disappeared, their parents requested the assistance of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in attaining their release. It was reported that as a result of the ICRC’s assistance, the 4 children were released on 23 March 2004 at 2:00 am. (Source: “International Committee of the Red Cross Helps in the Release of Four Child Soldiers,” Yoma3, 2 April 2004)

On 17 March 2004, Daw Hla Aye, mother of Chit Min Oo (age 17), appealed to ILO representatives to assist with securing the discharge of her son who was forcibly conscripted into the army on 9 November 2003. Chit Min Oo had been abducted while his mother was out working as a street seller. His captors left a note indicating that she must query the Da Nyin Gone Soldier Collection Point to learn the whereabouts of her son. On 10 November, she inquired to no avail as the authorities denied having any information about Chit Min Oo. Chit Min Oo was from Waryong village, Kyi Myin Dine Township, Rangoon Division, where soldiers from SPDC Division 77 were reportedly stationed at the time of his disappearance. (Source: “Teenager Abducted and Forcibly Enlisted From Kyin-Myin-Dine Township,” Yoma3, 17 March 2004)

On 19 March 2004, Aung Phyo Oo (age 16) completed training at No. 1 Phaunggyi Soldier Training School. He was placed in IB 273 in Tavoy, Tenasserim Division. He had been recruited into the army around 3 November 2003 when he was an 8^th standard student and was living in Dagon Myothit, Rangoon Division. His parents reported that he just disappeared on that day. He was sent to Da-Nyin-Gone Soldier Collection Point. It was reported that Sergeant Zaw Htoo and Private Zaw Tun, both from LIB 342 in Kawthaung, Tenasserim Division, were paid for recruiting Aung Phyo Oo. (Source: “Underage Soldier Recruitment in Dagon, Rangoon Division,” Yoma3, 25 March 2004)

On 28 March 2004, it was reported that Myo Zaw Oo (age 14) and Kyaw San Win (age 15) were still serving as soldiers in SPDC LIB 327 in Mie Khat, Shan State. The 2 were abducted on 24 November 2002 in Alhone Township, Rangoon Division, where they lived and worked. Their abductor sent them to a soldier collection point where they were forcibly conscripted. They were trained at No. 3 Soldier Training School in Yamethin, Mandalay Division. Their training was completed on 9 May 2003. While the army does not usually allow child soldiers contact with their families, a private in their unit assisted them in doing so. (Source: “Abducted Two Years Ago Two Child with Their Families Soldiers Make Contact,” Yoma3, 28 March 2004)

On 5 April 2004, the parents of Wai Zin (age 16) appealed to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to help retrieve their son from the army. At age 13, Wai Zin was captured and taken from his parents’ house in Hlaing Thaya Township, Rangoon Division, in December 2000. His captor was his cousin, Sien Kalar, who was reportedly a deserter and was required to secure 2 new recruits in his place. Sien Kalar turned Wai Zin over to Sergeant Kyaw Win who sent him to Da Nyin Gone Soldier Collection Point and changed his name to prevent his family from finding him. Next, he was sent to No. 9 Soldier Training School in Thaton, Mon State. Upon completion of his training in May 2002, he was sent to serve with LIB 215. Wai Zin tried to desert and run away in 2002, in early 2003 and again in December 2003. The first 2 times, he was caught and sent back to the army along with jail time as punishment. The 3^rd time he was afraid to return home believing that he would most certainly be caught again. In the beginning of 2004, he was caught again. (Source: “A Deserting Child Soldier Is Recaptured on His Third Attempt,” & “A Deserting Child Soldier Remains At Large,” Yoma3, 2004)

On 28 September 2004, Min Chan Myet (age 16) from Hlaing Thaya Township, Rangoon, was re-recruited into the army. He was initially forcibly conscripted in 2002 but ran away after a few months. Unfortunately, he was found by military authorities and charged with deserting. In May 2004, a military tribunal court sentenced him to 6 months of hard labor in prison. On 23 September, he was released. On 28 September, an officer from SPDC LID 19 based in Pegu Division came to Min Chan Myet's home and took him to a military base. Despite his parents' contesting on the grounds that he is not yet 18 years old, he was not released. (Source: "Sixteen Year-Old Boy Recruited to Burma's Army Twice," DVB, 28 September 2004)

On 17 December 2004, soldiers from the Tatmadaw’s Danyin-kone soldier recruit corps in Mingaladon Township, Rangoon Division, abducted 5 school children to be trained to serve as soldiers in the armed forces. The 5 children were all from Sae-ywa village, Thonekhwa Township. Despite appeals from their parents, the recruiting officers, led by Lt. Aung Myint, took the children after a recruiting meeting and sent them to No. 6 Bassein Township Military School for combat training. Both local authorities and military authorities at the Mingaladon military base were notified of the abduction of the children but had taken no action as of the time of this report, January 2005. The parents were reportedly composing letters to appeal to the ICRC and the ILO for assistance. The names of three of the students were:

States Parties shall take measures to combat the illicit transfer and non-return of children abroad.

States Parties shall take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent the abduction of, the sale of or traffic in children for any purpose or in any form.

Throughout 2004, children in Burma continued to fall into the hands of human traffickers. There is no law in Burma that specifically prohibits the trafficking of persons, although the Penal Code prohibits kidnapping and the Suppression of Prostitution Act and the Child Law include provisions against the sale, abuse or exploitation of children. However, these laws are not effectively enforced. The exact number of children trafficked from Burma each year is unknown as the military government heavily restricts the transfer of information and has not allowed an independent investigation to be made. In 2004, Burma remained ranked as a Tier 3 country, the lowest of the U.S. government’s standards, for its failure to comply with the minimum standards of the 2000 Trafficking Victims Protection Act and for failing to address the ongoing trafficking of citizens into forced labor (source: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2004, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2005). In addition, in its 36^th session in June 2004, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern “at the large number of children being trafficked for their exploitation to neighboring countries, notably Thailand” (source: “Concluding Observations: Myanmar,” Thirty-sixth session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 4 June 2004).

During the late 1990s, the trafficking of women and girls from Burma into the sex industry received increased international attention and concern. As a result, the military government imposed greater restrictions on the movement of woman both domestically and internationally under the pretense of fighting human trafficking. These restrictions particularly target the movement of young people. Women below the age of 25 are prohibited from traveling abroad without the accompaniment of a guardian. In some areas of the country, women below the age of 25 are restricted from traveling domestically without special passes or a guardian. At the end of 2002, the SPDC formed “Human Trafficking Prevention Committees” to monitor the movements of young people between the ages of 16 to 25. The SPDC contends that these committees are to prevent the trafficking of women into the sex industry of neighboring countries. However, concern has been expressed that these committees and restrictions have done little more than to restrict the freedom of movement of young people and to increase the cost and dangers of traveling.

In 2004, the SPDC claimed to have arrested and prosecuted 335 traffickers from July 2002 to July 2004. At the same time, the SPDC continued to engage in activities seemingly for the purpose of combating trafficking in persons. In September, the SPDC announced the drafting of the Suppression of Trafficking in Persons Law in consultation with UN and regional trafficking experts. According to SPDC representatives, the law would place Burma in line with its obligations under the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and international human rights standards (source: “Myanmar to Introduce Human Trafficking Law,” Kyodo News, 7 September 2004). In October, Rangoon was host to the Coordinated Mekong Ministerial Initiative against Trafficking which included government representatives from Cambodia, China, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam and Burma. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for further cooperation and the development of related future plans was signed at the end of the meeting. Despite these meetings and stated intentions for action, the SPDC made “limited progress” in actually combating trafficking as hundreds of thousands of men, women and children were trafficked throughout the year. In addition, the activities or positions taken by national level officials are often negated by the actions of local level government officials. It has been reported that local level officials remain complicit as they allow traffickers to continue after receiving bribes (source: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2004, Bureau of Human Rights, Democracy, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2005).

Children from Burma are most frequently trafficked to neighboring Thailand but also to Malaysia, Bangladesh, China, Japan, Macao, Taiwan, India, Singapore and countries in the Middle East. As many children are forced to seek employment either to support themselves or to contribute to their family’s livelihood, they become easy targets for traffickers who promise good salaries and jobs. Friends or family members may also be responsible for selling children to traffickers. In turn, children may be sold as slave laborers for factories, domestic servants, prostitutes or beggars. Concurrently, children are often trafficked domestically from rural areas to urban areas or to areas where prostitution is prevalent such as trucking routes, military bases and mining areas. Recruiters reportedly travel around rural areas, particularly in northern Burma, to procure children as domestic laborers in urban areas (source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003).

Young girls who fall into the hands of traffickers are particularly vulnerable to being sold into the sex industry within Burma and in other countries. Young boys are also vulnerable to the same fate. As the infection rate and fear of HIV/AIDS has increased in the region, the demand for virgin girls in the sex industry has also increased as they are viewed as safe and disease free. In 2004, it was reported that some customers in Thailand would pay as much as 30,000 baht (US$ 750) for a virgin. In turn, this creates a greater demand for young girls (source: Vyas, Karishma, “Asia Takes Aim at Growing Child Sex Trafficking,” Reuters, 8 November 2004).

Thailand is one of the main destinations for children trafficked into the sex industry. According to the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW), 60% of women and girls trafficked from Burma arrive in the sex industry in Thailand. As with other locations, children who are trafficked often are unaware of it and must work for several months without salary to earn back the amount of money for which their employer purchased them. In addition, many children are deceived into believing that they will be connected to different jobs but find themselves in brothels upon arrival to their destination country. Unfamiliar with the country they have arrived in, unable to speak the local language, and without legal identification, many children are easily frightened into remaining in exploitative working environments. In other cases, children may be trafficked into a different employment situation but turn to prostitution due to pressure from their employers or in an attempt to procure a better salary (source: “Report No. 1: Women and Children Trafficking in Burma,” The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 30 June 2004).

Burmese children living either in the regions close to Thailand, or in Thailand itself, run the risk of being trafficked into Thailand's major cities where they are forced to beg in the streets. In some cases, their parents receive a sum of money (anywhere between US$ 25-50) in exchange for selling their children to brokers. In other cases, children who are already vulnerable due to their life circumstances (such as orphans, street children, or children of divorced parents) are promised a better life by brokers if they go to Bangkok. A researcher for the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) explained, “The desire to discover new horizons and, above all, a large city such as the Thai capital, helps the intermediaries to convince the children to go with them. On arrival, they are sold to people who force them to beg. The children often have to walk the hundreds of kilometers between the Burmese border and Bangkok, off the beaten track, to avoid police controls.” (Source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003)

According to the ICFTU, while a child begging in Bangkok may potentially earn up to US$ 80 a day by begging, their "owners" receive the profits and may not take adequate care of the children. Most child beggars live in dirty overcrowded conditions with many other children. They are provided little food, and often no medicine or treatment when they are ill. These children have no opportunity to obtain an education, and are at an increased risk of becoming drug users. Children are also regularly beaten if they do not earn sufficient money and have little or no contact with their families. (Source: Grumiau, Samuel, Growing Up Under the Burmese Dictatorship, ICFTU, August 2003)

States Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for rules of international humanitarian law applicable to them in armed conflicts which are relevant to the child.

In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict.

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to promote physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of a child victim of: any form of neglect, exploitation, or abuse; torture or any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; or armed conflicts. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the child.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child specifically refers to the protection of children in armed conflict and provides that every child has the right to life, survival and development; that no child under 15 should take part in hostilities; that children should not be separated from their parents except for their own well-being and protection; that states should protect children from harm and neglect; and that children of minority and indigenous populations should freely enjoy their own culture, religion and language, as well as all other rights enshrined in the convention, without discrimination. During the concluding observations of its 36^th session, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child noted that political instability and ongoing armed conflict “have continued to pose a negative impact on the situation of children in Myanmar” (source: “Concluding Observations: Myanmar,” Thirty-sixth session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 4 June 2004).

Children living in conflict areas in Burma are routinely deprived of most of the rights prescribed in the Convention; violence committed against children being the most blatant breach of these rights. Children are murdered by the army and security forces, and are victims of rape, torture, and landmines. Girls under the age of 18, and sometimes boys, are routinely raped by SPDC troops operating in their communities. Children are not exempted from forced labor, particularly clearing roads and forced portering, and are often forced to act as human minesweepers and human shields. In "free fire" zones, known as "Black Areas," troops regularly shoot at villagers and into homes, regardless of whether there are children present. Children of internally displaced persons (IDPs) are forced "to live on the run" and are particularly vulnerable to such violence.

Even when a child is not a direct target of violence, children living in areas of armed conflict are subjected to numerous hardships resulting from an environment of conflict. Family, community and cultural life in these areas is continually disrupted by violence and insecurity. Children witness killing, torture, rape and other forms of violence directed against their own family, neighbors and community members. The emotional and mental toll that this will take over a lifetime is incalculable. These children are denied the right to grow up in an environment that nurtures and promotes their development.

Karen State

On 10 May 2004, SPDC LIB 548 led by Maung Oo saw 9 youngsters, frightened them, and demanded money from each of them in Shway Poe Ha (Ywar Thit) village, Kya In Township, Dooplaya District, Karen State. The following youngsters paid the listed amounts of money to the soldiers:

On 9 June 2004, SPDC IB 106 led by Bo Mu Than Win came to Bila Mai village, Win Yin Township, Dooplaya District, Karen State. Bo Mu Than accused Naw Ka Re and her family of being KNU terrorists. He then arrested the family and sent them to the headquarters in Mor Ka Nay area. Naw Ka Re's daughter, Naw San Way (age 14), was unable to attend school because she was arrested. (Source: BI, 2004)

On 16 September 2004 at 4:00 pm, troops from DKBA 999 fired an M-72 round in Ta Krai Ni village, Pa-an District, wounding the following 3 villagers:

On 4 June 2004, 80 KNPLF troops led by Poe Reh, (the SPDC-backed ceasefire armed group) came to Shadaw relocation camp. The troops arrested Khu Plyar Reh, his wife, Baw Meh, and their 2 children without giving any reason. The troops threatened to kill the family, which scared them. When the troops left, the family ran away and hid in the jungle. Soon after, the KNPLF troops made a second visit to the relocation camp and inquired about Khu Plyar Reh's family to learn that they had run away. Unexpectedly, the family members were found by troops and Khu Plyar Reh was shot and killed on the spot. Nobody knows the whereabouts of his wife, Baw Meh, and their 2 children to this day. (Source: KNAHR, 2004)

On 10 September 2004, about 100 troops from SPDC LIB 530 and IB 72 and its alliance, the Karenni Nationalities People’s Liberation Front (KNPLF), divided into 2 columns and came to Daw Tahe village, Loikaw Township. The troops arrested 16 males, females and children without giving a reason. The arrested villagers were brought to Loikaw and detained at the Central Control Command Quarters. (Source: KNAHR, 2004)

Pegu Division

On 15 November 2004, many IDPs, including women and children, had to flee into Hsaw Htee Township, Nyaunglebin District, Karen State, when soldiers from SPDC LIB 589, 350 and 20 as well as IB 57 commenced attacking. All of the IDPs were worried about staying alive because all of the food they could not take with them was burnt by Burma Army troops. They expressed that they did not know how or where to get medicine, blankets and clothing or how to treat the IDPs who were sick. In addition, they could only cook between 6:00 pm and 4:00 am out of fear that SPDC troops would see the smoke from their fires during the day. (Source: FBR, 2004)

Toungoo District

On 7 January 2004, at about 9:00 pm, Sergeant Tin Shwe and one of his friends, under the command of Bo Aung Naing Oo of SPDC LIB 124, abducted a woman, Naw Thay Po (age 36) of Kaw Soe Kho village, Tantabin Township, and 1 of her young children. At a place between Kaw Soe Kho and Kler Ler village, these SPDC troops raped her. The village headman followed them and brought her home at about 1:00 am. Although she was brought back home, she could not speak normally until the time of this report, as she was still in shock. On that night, sergeant Tin Shwe went to Maw Pa Doe village, summoned a girl named Naw Htee Ye and looted from her a pair of earrings and a gold ring. (Source: CIDKP, 2004)

From mid-December 2003 until the time of this report, 15 January 2004, battalions led by No. 3 Tactical Command were responsible for killing at lest 6 men. Those killed included Mehm Ye Myint Paing (age 16) from Khaw- za village as well as a 15 year old whose name was not known at the time of the report. It was reported that the victims were all accused of being rebels. (Source: "Serious Human Rights Violations: Crimes against Humanity!," The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 15 January 2004)

In February 2004, it was reported that many villagers, including women and children, who went outside of their villages were killed during the SPDC military offensives against the Mon splinter group in Ye Township, Mon State. Approximately 2000 soldiers from 5 battalions were sent to the area. The battalions, under the command of the Southeast Command No. 3 Tactical Command, were IB 97, 61, and 31 as well as LIB 586 and 591. The troops reportedly ordered all villagers to stay inside their villages. Those who went outside were accused of being rebels or rebel supporters. (Source: "Terror in Southern Part of Ye Township –Part II," The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 29 February 2004)

On 29 August 2004, fighting broke out between Mon rebel groups and SPDC LIB 273 in Ye Township, southern Mon State. Four SPDC soldiers and a 14 year old school boy were killed in the fighting. (Source: "Gross Human Rights Violations in Ye Township, Southern Part of Mon State," The Mon Forum, HURFOM, 30 September 2004)

On 24 September 2004, a group of approximately 30 soldiers from SPDC LIB 515 led by Commander Kyaw Win Naing were patrolling in Lai-Kha Township, Shan State, when they encountered 28 villagers working on their rice farms. The group of villagers was comprised of 13 men, 11 women and 4 children from Wan Paang village, Wan Heng village tract. The soldiers claimed they had seen Shan rebels going in that direction and inquired as to whether or not the villagers had seen them. When the villagers replied that they had not, the soldiers accused them of lying and of supporting the Shan rebels. The troops proceeded to beat the men in the group with sticks. In addition, the soldiers questioned and slapped each woman in the group. (Source: "Farming Villagers Severely Beaten, One of Them Close to Death, in Lai-Kha," SHRF Monthly Report, SHRF, February 2005)

On 3 May 2004, a group of approximately 30 soldiers from SPDC IB 43 led by Commander Myint Hla were patrolling near Paang Hok village, Murng Pu Awn village tract, Murng-Paeng Township, when they encountered 3 young villagers. The 3 villagers were siblings and were returning from their rice farm outside their village. The soldiers shot and killed the 3 siblings without warning. The victims were:

(Source: "Brother and Sisters Shot Dead in A Group in Murng-Paeng," SHRF Monthly Report, SHRF, October 2004)

Murng-Ton Township

On 9 October 2004, a Lahu couple, Ja Mu and his wife, Na-Kha, and their 10-year old son, were in their farm hut when a column of about 30 Wa soldiers from United Wa State Army (UWSA) passed through their farm. The soldiers were some distance away, did not come closer, and shot at the hut without warning. The 10 year old son ran out of the hut to the forest and back to their village when the shooting commenced. Ja Mu and Na-Kha were both shot several times and died before they were able to get out of the hut. The son was able to relay the details of the situation to relatives who went to the hut accompanied by other Lahu villagers. The Lahu villagers reportedly believe that the Wa soldiers were part of a drug convoy and perhaps believed that the couple in the hut were spying on them and therefore killed them. (Source: "A Lahu Couple Shot Dead by Wa Soldiers in Murng-Ton," SHRF Monthly Report, SHRF, February 2005)

On 2 July 2004, a group of SPDC soldiers stole 2 oxen from and beat a 13 year old boy to death near Murng Kaao village, Murng Kaao village tract, Tang-Yarn Township, Shan State. The boy, Zaai Khaw Law, had been grazing his family's 2 oxen when the soldiers found him and took away the oxen. When Zaai Khaw Law ran after them in an attempt to retrieve his oxen, the soldiers beat and kicked him into a ditch. Zaai Leak, a friend of Zaai Khaw Law, saw the incident and ran back to inform the villagers. When a group of villagers went to the area, they found Zaai Khaw Laek dead and the soldiers were too far away to be identified. (Source: “A Boy Beaten to Death and Robbed of His Oxen in Tang-Yarn,” SHRF Monthly Report, SHRF, November 2004)

Note: Mergui-Tavoy District is an area demarcated by the KNU as part of Karen territory. Mergui-Tavoy falls into SPDC demarcated Tenasserim Division and is under the patrol of the 4th Brigade of the KNLA. The SPDC does not recognize Mergui-Tavoy as an official district.

On 9 February 2004, Burmese troops from IB 224 led by Battalion Commander Lt. Col. Myint Naing burnt down 8 houses in Pawa area 60 miles southeast of Mergui. These troops captured 23 internally displaced persons (including 12 children) and killed 1 named Saw Hpo Pe. (Source: Monthly Human Rights Situation Report; Tenasserim Division, Mergui-Tavoy District Information Department, KNU, February 2004)

On 25 February 2004, Saw Wah Lay's son, age 8, was playing beside his village in Htee Seh Baw Htee Hta, Tenasserim Township, Mergui District, when he stepped on a landmine which was planted by the Burmese army. He survived but lost his left foot. (Source: Monthly Human Rights Situation Report: Tenasserim Division, Mergui-Tavoy District Information Department, KNU, February 2004)

On 28 February 2004, Burmese troops from LIB 558 Column 1 led by Lt. Col. Than Daing killed villager Saw Rotex (age 18), son of Saw Rayner, from Panwepoklo, Palaw Township, Mergui District. A villager found the corpse of Saw Rotex with a broken leg and 1 empty eye near his hiding place in Tah Meh Lor. His friend, Saw Ne Thaw (age 16), son of Saw Ni San, was wounded in the knee after he managed to escape. (Source: Monthly Human Rights Situation Report; Tenasserim Division, Mergui-Tavoy District Information Department, KNU, February 2004)

On 11 June 2004 at 7:40 am, troops for SPDC LIB 385 Column-2 led by Lt. Col. Htin Maung Htun fired on the villagers without reasons at Htee Thitka Hkee in Kerser Doh Township. The shooting killed 2 men and 1 woman, and injured a child. (Source: KIC, 2004)

States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.

States Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. For these purposes, States Parties shall in particular take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent:

(a) The inducement or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawful sexual activity;

(b) The exploitative use of children in prostitution or other unlawful sexual practices;

The perpetration of sexual violence against women and girls by members of the military and other state-sanctioned actors has been well documented by a range of human rights organizations. Throughout 2004, reports of sexual violence continued to emerge in conjunction with the government’s efforts to eliminate all opposition activities and establish control over all parts of Burma. In addition, multiple human rights and women’s organizations have argued that rape is systematically used by the military as a weapon targeting women and girls in order to terrorize and dominate ethnic minority populations.

In May 2002, the Shan Women’s Action Network (SWAN) and the Shan Human Rights Foundation (SHRF) released a report entitled License to Rape, which documented widespread and systematic rape of at least 625 girls and women in Shan State by Burmese soldiers. Not only were the women and girls raped, some were tortured over a period of months or gang raped. One in four of the rapes ended in murder. The youngest rape victim whose case was included in the report was a five-year old girl. (Source: Varner, Lynne K., “Myanmar's Campaign Against Women and Children” Seattle Times, 19 March 2003)

In April 2003, Refugees International (RI) released a report, No Safe Place, independently confirming License to Rape and providing further evidence that larger numbers of women and girls from other ethnic minority groups are also targeted and raped by SPDC soldiers. In April 2004, a report published by the Karen Women's Organization (KWO), Shattering Silences, documented 125 cases of rape of Karen women and girls perpetrated by soldiers from 1988 until the time the report was released. Most recently, in September 2004, the Women’s League of Burma (WLB) released System of Impunity documenting 26 incidents of sexual violence, which occurred throughout the country. Fifteen of the 26 cases documented in the report involved girls below the age of 18. The incidents included rape, gang rape, torture, and extra-judicial killing perpetrated by soldiers or other military authorities (source: System of Impunity, WLB, September 2004). (Please see chapter on women for more information.)

Despite the overwhelming evidence, the SPDC has continually denied the occurrence of rape. Moreover, the authorities have been reported to actively take measures to prevent information about the pervasive human rights abuses perpetrated in ethnic minority areas from being revealed. The efforts have included forcing villagers to sign affidavits indicating that rapes did not occur and conducting trainings to instruct villagers how to lie to international monitoring institutions about the situation of human rights (please see chapter on freedom of expression for more information). The frequent rape of girls and young women is particularly demoralizing to ethnic minority communities, as it conveys the notion that the community is unable to protect even its most vulnerable members. While several cases from 2004 are recorded here, it is important to note that the vast majority of rape cases go unreported and undocumented.

On 27 April 2004, a Nasaka officer from Nasaka Headquarters in Kyi Kan Pyin reportedly raped and killed Shajeeda (age 12), daughter of Noor Kalam from Kyi Kan Pyin village, Maungdaw Township. The girl had been out grazing her cattle on a nearby hillside with a friend when a plain-clothes Nasaka officer encountered her and dragged her away. This occurred around 4:00 pm and when she did not return, her friend went and informed her parents. Shajeeda’s father reportedly went to the Nasaka Headquaters to report the incident but was turned away. He then went to the village chairman and, together, they went to the Nasaka Headquarters the next day, who refuted any connection with the event. Shajeeda’s father commenced searching for his daughter in the area where she had been taken and found her dead body face down and hidden under some bushes. He then took the dead body to the Nasaka office where they denied any connection with the event and ordered him to bury her immediately. While the incident was reported to both the police and military intelligence, action had yet to be taken. (Source: “Nasaka Raped a 12-Year Old Girl and Strangled,” Kaladan News, 12 May 2004)

On 3 September 2004 at about 2:00 pm, 3 Nasaka personnel, including sub-inspector Rang Aung, Camp- in-Charge of Myawadi out-post Hla Myo, and one more, were going to an out-post in Aung Zu village of Nasaka Sector Command Area No. 2 when they encountered Amina Khatun (age 13). The daughter of Nzir Hussain, Thet Kain Nyar village, Maungdaw Township, the girl had been grazing her cattle when the Nasaka took her and raped her. Nearby villagers heard her screams, came to the location, and chased away the rapists. Rang Aung was too tired to run and fired 5 rounds of bullets at the villagers, killing Shfi Alam (age 26), the victim’s older brother. Hla Myo was caught and beaten, It was reported that villagers later caught Rang Aung and beat him to death. (Source: “Two Killed Over the Rape of a Teenage Girl in Maungdaw Township,” Kaladan News, 12 September 2004)

On 5 September 2004 at night, troops from SPDC IB 51 led by Battalion Commander Zaw Min who were guarding Operation Command 3 Commander, Tin Aye, under SPDC South West Command Headquarters, slept at the monastery of Anam Gwin village, Win Yae Township, Dooplaya District. During the night, a group of soldiers made 3 attempts to rape 6 nuns from the nuns' dormitory in the monastery compound at 12:00 midnight, 1:00 am and 2:00 am respectively. The 6 nuns were:

Mon State

On 17 February 2004, soldiers from SPDC LIB 586 led by Captain Hla Khaing raped Mi Za Tile (age 17) from Sin Gu village, Mon State. The soldiers raped her while she was in her house. As she was being raped, she cried out for help and later she felt very ashamed for doing so. When other villagers learned of the rape, they ostracized her. As a result, she ran away and according to people who knew her, she went into hiding in northern Ye Town, Mon State. (Source: System of Impunity, HURFOM, WLB, September 2004)

On 19 February 2004, Corporal Naing Naing of the military training center in Wae Ka Li village, Thanbyuzayat Township, pretended to be in love with Mi Mya Htay (age 17) from Kyoun Ka Dat village of the same township and arranged to meet her that night. When she went to meet him, he raped her. After he raped her, Mi Mya Htay asked Corporal Naing Naing to marry her. He refused, threatened her, and abandoned her. Villagers collecting rubber sap from a plantation nearby heard her crying and took her to her home after midnight. When her father reported the rape to the commander of the Southern Command Military Training Center, they were told that action would be taken. Instead, her father was forced to sign papers withdrawing the report and no compensation was provided. (Source: System of Impunity, HURFOM, WLB, September 2004)

On 4 May 2004, a group of 30 soldiers from SPDC IB 43 were patrolling near Naa Khaw village, Murng Pu Awn village tract, Murng-Peng Township, when they encountered 2 sisters working on their rice farm. The troops abducted Naang Poi (age 16) and Naang Aam (age 21). The soldiers gang-raped the girls. During the incident, Naang Poi reportedly lost consciousness for some time. After she regained consciousness, Naang Poi and Naang Aam returned to their village, approximately 2 miles away. (Source: "2 Sisters Gang-Raped in Murng-Paeng," SHRF Monthly Report, SHRF, October 2004)

On 31 July 2004, a group of soldiers from SPDC LIB 516 and 517 found 3 Palaung women working on their farms in Naung War village, which is near Mat Mon Long village, Nam San Township, southern Shan State. The soldiers approached the women pointing their guns and proceeded to rape them. One of the women was a 12 year old girl. Local villagers reported that the soldiers are based at the Namk Oo stone production camp under the authority of the Southeastern Military Operation Management Zone 2, Mile No. 9. At the time, the camp was supplying rock and sand for the Aung Lan/Wat Saya highway road construction project. Villagers also reported that these soldiers regularly patrol around the area with their guns. (Source: PYAN, 2004)

On 14 August 2004, 3 soldiers from SPDC IB 66 led by a sergeant known as "Sara Kalaa" raped 3 Palaung women, including a 12 year old girl. The incident occurred near Maak Mong Lao village, Nam-Zarng Township, Shan State. The 3 victims were E Oo (age 12), E Suay (age 25) and Me Zoi (age 40). The village heads filed complaints with the local military authorities in Kho Lam village in Nam-Zarng Township but at the time of this report, October 2004, no action had been taken. (Source: SHRF, November 2004)

A. I lived in Yangon, Hlaing Thar Yar Township. My parents are U Aung Zaw (not real name) and Daw Shwe Zin (not real name).

A. Yes, I was studying in 9th grade at that time. I entered the military in 2002.

A. A Sergeant from the military abducted me by asking me, “Will you enlist? If you enlist, I hope, you could be an officer due to your competence.” So, I followed him without informing my parents.

A. I was abducted and taken to the Infantry Battalion 305 near Danyinkone. I had to stay in his (the Sgt) house for 3 days. The following day, I had to go to No.1 Soldier Collection Point in Danyinkone. And then I was sent to No.9 Basic Soldier Training School in Zayitchaung village, Thaton Township, Mon State. The Sgt. gave me 1,000 kyat (45 baht). Later, I discovered that the sergeant was given a pack of rice and 6,000 kyat as a reward for recruiting me.

A. When I entered the military, I was 14. But I was forced to lie and say that I was 18 when filling out the medical check up form.

Q. What is your soldier identification number (ID) and what is the number of your training rotation period?

A. The number of my training rotation is 11/2003 and my soldier identification is Ta/ 263120.

A. I had to attend 4 months of training. I met so many child soldiers like me when I was there. When training was finished, Captain Tun Hla and vice-warrant official, Kyaw Aung, took me to the Infantry Battalion 592 in San Thida military area, Kawthoung.

A. Being in the military was horrible. We could never live without work. We had to cut down bamboo and sell it to raise funds for the army. We had to bring each wooden pillar from the mountain. And then we had to tow the pillars to a saw mill, which was two miles away.

If you couldn’t drag the pillars, you had to carry tenth bamboo trees. After dragging the pillars down to the foot of the hillside, we had to scribble our name on the pillars with an iron stick which we used to tow the pillars.

If you finished working but had not signed your name on the pillars yet, you would not be allowed to eat. So, if you forgot to scribble your name on the pillar, they (army officials) would act as if you hadn’t carried the pillars yet and you were not given food for lunch or for dinner.

We had to do different kinds of work such as constructing sheds for army families, farming, reaping thatch and collecting household equipment. We also had to hoe the garden owned by the army. In Sunday, we were allowed half day as rest time.

A. After I was in the army for 5 months, I was dispatched to the frontlines. We left from Myithar village and headed to I-One which was the KNU’s former encampment. From I-One, we walked at least 42 days to get to Htee Hta camp.

Q. What did you have to bring with you to the frontlines and what problem did you encounter there?

A. I had to carry equipment such as three 60mm mortars, four 40mm mortars, an M-A gun, 120 bullets, three grenades and some provisions.

I had so many difficulties on the way. During the march to I-One camp, we passed over a bridge and some landmines blew up immediately. After we had just passed over the bridge, an military officer stepped on a landmine and lost his right leg.

As soon as I saw that happen, I felt shocked and trembled. I didn’t want to go forward any more and I almost tried to commit suicide on the spot with my gun.

Q. Did you have enough food or receive equipment from the military during the period that you were on the frontline?

A. No, we were not provided with enough food during the period that we were on the front lines. Once we ran out of provisions and we didn’t have any rice for a week. So we had to harvest yams from the ground and use them for food. There were no villages along our route. When we got the Htee Hta camp, we were able to bring some food in a powered schooner which we were able to survive on.

The military equipment we were provided with was also not enough. My boots were destroyed and I had to walk without boots.

A. After two months, I got back to the battalion camp. The vice military warrant officer was there. His name is Shwe Manna and he was suffering from Malaria. He was taken to Mingaladon Military Hospital in Yangon for medical treatment. I had to accompany him to Yangon in order to take care of him while he was in the hospital. We arrived in Yangon on 28 February 2004. I bought some medical supplies for him and then I went back home without informing him or the doctor.

I didn’t go out and I was able to stay in my house peacefully for a month. But I also know that I would be captured by military intelligence if I continued to take shelter in my home. In April, I moved to monastery as a monk. And then I fled to Thailand in June.

A. Now, I am studying English. In the future, I want to be an educated person. After I become an educated person, I want to go back to my family.

Interview # 2

Q. Can you tell me your name? How old are you and what part of Burma did you live in?

A. I’m Phyo Lwin Naing and 16. I’m from Yangon Division, Thakata Township, Dagon Myothit. My parents are U Lin Lin (not real name) and Daw Thin Khaing (not real name).

Q. Are you a student? In what grade were you studying when you entered the military?

A. Yes, sure, I was a student when I was in Burma and I studied in No. 1 Basic Education High School in Dagon Myothit. In 2003, after I had passed 8th grade and was preparing to attend 9th grade, I was abducted into the military.

A. My family was so poor and I wanted to be a captain in the military so that I could support my family. I thought if I became a captain I would be able to save a lot of money for them. At that time, there was a soldier named Zaw Tun who was our neighbor. His soldier identification number (ID) is Ta/280 229, he had joined the military after he had stolen things from other people. He fled to the military in order to avoid being prosecuted by the people that he stole from.

He visited me and solicited me to join the military: “Will you enlist? If you join the military you can live better than here (with Aung Phyo Oo’s family)”. At first, I refused to enlist. But he repeatedly asked me, saying “if you will enlist, you can do what you want. The situation is better than your current situation and you can also eat what you want”. At that time, he abducted me into military.

A. I was sent to Sergeant Aung Htoo. They let me stay in the military for 3 days and offered me special food during those 3 days. And then Sgt. Aung Htoo gave me 1,000 kyat (45 baht), left me alone and went back home. Later, I discovered that he was given a pack of rice and 3,000 kyat (120 baht) as a reward for recruiting me.

A. After 3 days, I was sent to Insein-Da Nyin Kone Soldier Collection Point. When I arrived there, I had to undergo a medical health check up.

A.I was 15. But, the military authorities forced me to lie and indicate that I was 18 when I filled out the medical check forms.

After having my blood group checked, I was brought to meet with a captain for an interview.

“If the Captain asks questions regarding your enlistment, you must answer that you really want to enlist. If you refuse, he will hit you with a big fist,” Sgt. Aung Htoo said. When I met with Captain, he asked me “Did you really choose to enlist by yourself? Did someone abduct you for enlistment?” Once in a while, I remembered what Sgt. Aung Htoo had told me already and I answered “Yes, sure I really want to enlist”.

A. I started to attend the training in No. 1 Soldier Basic Training School which is located in Minm Khone village, Paungyi Township. On every Sunday off, we all had to work for a military officer's family by cleaning their house, bringing water, and chopping firewood for them. After working, some of the officer’s wives who took pity on us give some curries for dinner.

A. During training, we always received a cup of so-called tea with a lot of water and a little bit of milk, an egg and very little fried rice early every morning at 6:00 am. We had brownish rice and mostly rotten fish curry for lunch. For dinner, we got vegetables and fish paste. Occasionally, we were offered special curries like eggs.

Q. What was your soldier identification number and your training rotation period number?

A. The number of my training rotation period is 10/2004 and my soldier identification number is Ta/290794.

A. I was there for four months. After completing training, we were allowed a day to rest. And then I and a group consisting of 9 soldiers were placed in Infantry Battalion 273 Tanintharyi (Tenasserim) Division in Kanpyok village, Yepyu Township, by Sgt. Kyin Si and Corp. Aung Myint.

A. We had to cut down trees from the mountains and pull them down in order to build sheds for soldiers’ families, pigsties and poultry farms. And then we had to chop the tree up for firewood (length 2 and a half-yards and 3 spans around) and do work such as hoeing for farming and watering plants. We received corporal punishment when we failed to water the plants.

A. After I was in Tavoy for a month, I was sent to the frontlines. We had to go to Mi Htaw Hla Gyi and Mi Htaw Hla Lay, which are both in the Tavoy area.

Q. On the frontlines, were you responsible for any particular duty and what kind of enemies did the officials command you to fight?

A. On the frontlines, I had to bring food and some ammunition along with me. I had to patrol. And then we were commanded to shot anyone we see who might be wearing guerilla uniforms on the spot or if someone was holding a weapon like and M-16 or an M-A.

A. Although we were provided with some peas, oil, rice, sugar and milk, it was not enough for us. If we ran out of food, we begged from villagers where we made our camp. I had many difficulties because of inadequate equipment, especially with my boots. I had only one pair of boots provided during the frontline period. My boots were destroyed from crossing the river and walking in the mud during rainy season. So, I had to walk without boots and my feet because black and blue and I got a skin disease.

One guy in my company, San Oo, sympathized for me and stole a pair of sandals from the villagers without asking. Since then I felt comfortable and relieved from the serious pain of my feet. As a matter of fact, I didn’t want to accept things that had been stolen from others. But, as I said, I was in a difficult situation at that time. I also know that it is very bad to steal things form other people but I had to make the best of every thing.

A. Above all, we begged for rice, salt and fish paste. Some villagers took pity on us and they offered some food. Some villagers were afraid of us and although they don’t want to give us any food, they had to. Sometimes, they offered us their poultry which was infected by unknown diseases.

But all of the soldiers stole a lot of vegetables when they went through the villagers’ farms and gardens without asking.

Ah-one day, we ran out of food and we had to ask the Buddhist monastery for food. We were faced with a lot of problems within the four-month period on the frontlines.

A. My mother and her sister, my aunt, arrived to the Infantry Battalion 273 base in Kanpyok village in order to call me.

So, I was allowed to visit my mother. When I got back to the battalion camp, I met with my mother. She and my aunt told me that they wanted to take me back home from the military.

But the major, his name’s Ye Myint, told me, “You mustn’t try to escape from the military. If you try to escape, you will be captured and put in jail. Your family also might be faced with trouble.”

And then I asked him if I could take my mother to the train station to say good-bye to her. Fortunately, I was allowed to go to the train station with my mother. When we arrived at the station, I also bought a ticket for me and come back to Yangon.

When I got back to Yangon, I didn’t dare to stay at home. So, I was hiding from the military intelligence and stayed in monastery. At the end of June, I fled to the Thai-Burma border in Mae Sot.

Q. How about your situation in Thailand? Are you having a good time here?

A. Sure, I am having a good time here. I think, I have been able to escape from my nightmare and I won’t have to be faced with distressing situations anymore. Now I’m studying English and I can eat what I want as well. But I want to get a job and save some money. You know, my mother who is still in Burma has been so poor since my father passed away. If I get a job, I can support my mother with all of my wages.

Interview #3

In March to April 2004, villagers in XXX village, Pa-an District, Karen State were ordered to labor on the road. Thi Thi San went in place of her grandmother because she is old and cannot work every day. At the same time, Thi Thi San’s grandmother must work for their survival.

I have missed a lot of school because I went to do forced labor. Sometimes, I fail exams and other times, I pass. When I am absent in class, I fail. My school fee is 6,000 kyat for one year. I must work in order to make money to pay this fee.

It is hard to do the work (forced labor) and it is very tiring. The sun is very hot. When I was working, I fell down. When I fell, I tried to protect myself and put my arm down. But the weight of my body was too heavy and I hurt myself.

I had to carry both stones and earth. Sometimes, we have to carry very big stones. Sometimes, we use basins to carry them.

Many students from my school have gone to do forced labor. Sometimes 10 students and other times more. Other students who have had to do forced labor have had trouble in school because when they went to do the forced labor, they could not attend class.