[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
ICFTU/ETUC SUBMISSION TO EU-GSP (3/
Subject: ICFTU/ETUC SUBMISSION TO EU-GSP (3/4)
/* posted 18 Aug 6:00am 1996 by DRUNOO@xxxxxxxxxxxx in igc:reg.burma */
/* -------------" ICFTU &ETUC Report on Forced Labour (3/4) "----------- */
[ Reproduced from the submission by Australian Council of Trade Unions to
Australian Human Rights Sub-Committee, Vol 6, pp.1010-1032 -- U Ne Oo.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burma: SLORC's Private Slave Camp
Submission to the European Union Generalised System of Preferences
ICFTU. International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
155, Boulevard Emile Jacqmain, B-1210 Brussels
Tel.:224.02.11 Fax:201.58.18
ETUC. European Trade Union Confederation
155, Boulevard Emile Jacqmain, B - 1210 Brussels
Tel.:224.04.11 Fax:224.04.54
4. OTHER TYPES OF FORCED LABOUR OCCURRING IN BURMA
As seen previously, the practice of forced labour in today's Burma is best
documented in the context of military operations in or near conflict-areas,
which continue unabated at the time of writing. In addition, however,
detailed accounts of other forms and purposes of forced labour are being
reported with increased frequently. Reports cover various parts of Burma's
territory, including many areas where no guerrilla or counter-insurgency
operations take place. They include evidence of civilian-type labour for
the military, infrastructure development work, work in military-owned
commercial enterprises and work on tourist projects. These various types of
forced labour are believed to affect at least hundreds of thousands,
possibly millions of civilians of various ethnic or religious belonging.
Some of their most common forms are described below.
4.1 Military Labour
Under the authority of the SLORC, the army exacts forced labour from
civilians in the form of building, maintaining and guarding military roads and
bridges, sweeping roads for mines, and building and servicing military
camps. these installations, which include military farms and trading
grounds, are reportedly often located on land confiscated - without any
compensation - from the local people, who are thus compelled to perform
forced labour on their former property.In one example, the building of Aung
Ze Ya village, near Sedi village in Tamu township, was forcibly imposed on
an entire rural community: cleaning fields, construction roads and
uprooting trees, each house hold in the township had to contribute one
family member: the price for escaping from it was 200 Kyats. Further:
"Workers got not pay and had to find their own food. The villagers
were also forces into the construction of military barracks. The
elderly, women and children who could not afford to hire somebody
else nor pay the ransom were beaten up by the guards and kicked
with combat boots"[21]
Forced labour on military installations is in no way limited to Karen, Mon,
Shan and other victims on the Thai border. The Chins, for instance, are
also forced to build military barracks, roads and bridges. A report by the
President of the Chin National Front (CNF) at a UN meeting on Indigenous
People in July, 1994, offers an account of forced labour in this area,
along the Indian border, predominantly inhabited by an alleged severely
repressed Christian minority, the Chins. Forced labour is at present mainly
used on a railroad link to the Indian border, workers are unpaid,
malnourished, often near-starved; mistreatment by soldiers has reportedly
caused several deaths [22].
4.2 Major development and infrastructure projects
Hundreds of thousands of civilians are allegedly forced to work on
large-scale construction projects, such as roads, railways, airports,
tourist installations and hydroelectric schemes, including dams. The
projects range from the rarely-mentioned Three Pagodas Pass Motor Road to
the by-now notorious Martaban Pipeline and connected Ye-Tavoy Railway
projects. This section reports on several such projects, mainly related to
railroad construction and exploitation of gas deposits. It is focused
primarily on forced labour occurring in projects developed by major
international - including European Union - investors in the field of energy
supply. It mentions some companies which figured in a 1994 ICFTU review of
foreign firms investing or about to do so in Burma: the ICFTU report had
disclosed that there were 215 branch offices of foreign companies and 874
partnership firms operating in Burma at the time [23].
4.2.1 The Three Pagodas Pass Motor Road
This joint Thai-Burmese project, developed since 1992, is typical of scores
of major construction projects on which thousands of civilians have for
years been forced to work without compensation. In practice, regional and
local SLORC commands exact huge sums of money from local families, under
the guise of so-called "free-from-portering-charges"; when indeed paid by
the villagers, these sums are in theory used for hiring volunteer labour;
on the contrary, whenever a household or village is unable to pay the
required amount, it is forced to supply unpaid labourers to carry out the
tasks ordered by the military. The Thanbyusayat - Three Pagoda Pass road is
64 miles long and runs through Mon territory. Human rights sources report
that thousands of Mon civilians as well as prisoners detained at various
jails throughout Mon state have been forced to work on the project [24].
4.2.2 The "Death Railway" project
Since 1994, the SLORC has been severely criticised for using forced labour
on the Ye-Tavoy railway construction project [25]. Upon completion, it will
link the town of Ye, in the southern part of Mon State, to Tavoy, a large
center in Tenasserim Division. It is widely believed that the rail link is
directly connected to the SLORC's need to transport large numbers of troops
and their equipment to and from an essential pipeline, linking huge natural
gas deposits in the Gulf of Martaban with customers in Burma and Thailand
(see below). It has been alleged that an estimated 160,000 Mon and Karen
peoples have been forced to work on the railway, and that seventeen
batallions - 30,000 soldiers in all - are being brought into the region on
or in connection with the project [26].
The Ye-Tavoy railway project has been dubbed the Death Railway, according
to Sue Lloyd Roberts, a BBC correspondent who reported in January 1995 that
working conditions were "comparable to those under the Japanese occupation
during World War II", such, indeed, that hundreds of workers had contracted
cholera. One women said thousands were forced to work, "even pregnant
women. (...) I saw women being raped and beaten. I saw one woman give
birth, but she and the baby died. I couldn't stand it so I fled"[27].
The use of forced labour on the Ye-Tavoy railroad is in fact
well-documented. As its ultimate proof, copies of hundreds of written,
official, SLORC-issued requisition orders for free labour have been
obtained by human rights sources; their examination leaves no-doubt
whatsoever about their authenticity. They are mostly addressed to village
headmen; they are brutal in the demands they contain and threatening in
tone; they typically end with a sentence such as: "If you do not comply
with the order, you will suffer the most severe consequences", or:"if you
do not report for work, a bullet will come to you!"[28].
While limited examples have been reported of labour connected to the
railway being actually paid for, the opposite, i.e. individual and
collective fines for non-compliance with forced labour orders is clearly
the rule. Moreover, villages are forced under penalty of fine or
imprisonment, to provide building material, such as broken stone.
Furthermore, under a two-pronged, relatively sophisticated "contribution"
(i.e. taxation) system, which families are forced, on the one hand, to each
provide one porter or other forced labourers for a specific period each
month (sometime the whole month or more) - the rate for being excused
ranging from 2000 to 6000 Kyats - and on the other hand, they are compelled
to contribute financially (50-100 Kyats) to a "construction fund",
presumably designed for the railroad or other construction projects[29].
MOreover, photographs have recently been published of forced labour; they
could illustrate the following eye-witness account:
"Two labour camps have been set up along the line of the Ye-Tavoy
railway. The inmates are watched over against escape by armed
guards and are only allowed out to forage for food on rotation, at
intervals. As an extrahumiliation, escapees report having to
collect firewood at the end of each working day for the SLORC
guards, who then sell it back to them and surrounding
villagers"[30].
Neither would it be sensible to assume that the only problem arising from
the project is forced labour. Whether for the railroad, or the pipeline,
displacements of people and destruction of villages appear to be
widespread, and have affected thousands of people; accounts of severe
violence occurring in this process are countless; some are milder in tone,
as follows:
"Some soldiers from Batallions 408, 409 and 410 told us that the
pipeline will pass through our villages and so we have to dismantle
our temple. It is (moreover) possible that all of our fruit gardens
will be destroyed without compensation. Only now did we come to
know that the pipeline is the main reason (for this)[31]".
4.2.3 The Yadana gas field and the pipeline to Thailand
Although already well beyond the planning stage, the Yadana gas field came
to international prominence within a few days of the fall of the Karen
insurgents' base at Manerplaw in April 1995, when Thailand formally signed
a huge gas supply contract with Burma. Details of the deal had emerged in
Rangoon on 2 February 1995, when the contract had been agreed upon by
Burma, Thailand, and tow huge oil corporations: France's TOTAL and the
US-based UNOCAL. According to the Electricity Generating Authority of
Thailand (EGAT), Thailand to purchase 10,000 million bhat (over $US400
million worth of natural gas from Burma each year for 30 years [32].
Thailand should initially receive 350 million cubic feet of gas per day, to
increase eventually to 550 million cubic feet per day. The total value of
the project is estimated at over $US 12 billion.
The Martaban gas fields were reportedly discovered by Total. The gas is to
be transported by pipeline from the Yadana natural gas deposit, in the Gulf
of Mataban, through Burma's Tenessarim Division into Thailand. The pipeline
( which is to be buried eight feet inside the ground for fear of sabotage)
is to be constructed by Total and UNOCAL. Concerns have been voiced by
ethnic and political opposition organisations as well as human rights
groups since the very beginning of the project; they focus on three main
areas; the environmental damage, the forced relocation of scores of
thousands of villagers have already been coerced into forced labour in
order to clear the way for the pipeline[33]. They were reportedly confirmed
as early as mid-1994 by the UN High Commissioner's for Refugees'
representative in Thailand. Mr Ruprecht von Arnim, according to whom it was
"likely that forced labour will be used on the pipeline'[34].
Grave violations have been levelled by human rights sources at TOTAL,
including that the company may have provided the SLORC with logistical and
intelligence support during the regime's offensive earlier this year
against Karen strogholds near the site of the pipeline. (Frequent
helicopter flights were observed at the time over the zone in question,
although there is as of yet no firm evidence available to link these to the
army's offensive). Some sources believe that the killing of five Burmese
Total employees on 7 and 8 March 1995 in the Kanbauk are may have been in
retribution for this alleged assistance to SLORC. According to unconfirmed
reports, security arrangements for the protection of expatriate have been
stepped up after this incident, and two French military-type personnel have
been active in coordinating these arrangements, presumably with SLORC's
Strategic Command in Tavoy, headed by a Col. Zaw Tun. Small groups of
foreign specialists, including geophysicists, anthropoligists and medical
staff are being signalled in the area as carrying out surveys or other
preliminary activities under TOTAL's auspices. IN general however, it is
believed that most foreign personnel will not reach the area until the
forced labour ( the term "slave-labour" is occurring with increasing
frequency) phase of the pipeline's construction is completed and actual
engineering work can begin. "That way, say Kevin Heppner, A Canadian human
rights activist with in-depth knowledge of the area, the white guys say
with a straight face that they didn't see anything[35]".
Groups opposed to the project insist that neither TOTAL nor UNOCAL have
made any serious attempts at discussing the project with the traditional
residents of the area, the Karen and Mon. They fear that Karen villagers
living near the proposed route might be forcefully relocated and submitted
to other human rights abuses [36].
In a January 4, 1995 interview [37], UNOCAL's president, John Imle,
stressed that UNOCAL would not allow forced labour to be used on its part
of the project, nor did he accept the notion that any villagers were being
harmed in any way by the proposed gas pipeline. He refused also to even
consider the possibility of suspending the project's implementation until
an independent human rights survey could be carried out along the
pipeline's projected route [38]. Such statements should be seen in the
context of developments on the ground: according to reports received at the
time of finalising this document, over 3000 people from at least 19
villages have been relocated in whole or in part in the Ye-Byu township
alone.
Meanwhile, it is being reported by some sources that UNOCAL managers have
in fact admitted the reality of forced labour being used on the project. On
22 May 1995, Reuters reported that UNOCAL's management had come under
strong criticism for its Burma projects at a shareholder's meeting in Sugar
Land (Texas). It said the company's Chairman, Richard Stegemere, had
acknowledged allegations (that) slave labour may have been used for the
(Ye-Tavoy) railroad, but that the company had "not observed for (itself)
any human rights violations in the areas in which we work [39]". A proxy
proposal to conceal UNOCAL's projects in Burma was rejected by
shareholders, but is likely to come up for discussion again in 1996, as it
obtained over 4% of votes at the meeting (in fact, 5.8%).
4.2.4. The Yetagon gas fields in the Gulf of Martaban
Another international consortium, grouping three foreign companies, is
presently searching for natural gas deposits in the Gulf of martaban. The
lead operator is the US' TEXACO (50% through its wholly-owned subsidiary,
TExaco Exploration Myanmar), while Britain's PREMIER CONSOLIDATED OILFIELDS
and Japan's NIPPON OIL hold30 and 20% respectively. Burma's "Myanmar Oil
and Gas Enterprise co."(MOGE) retains the right to acquire an equity
interest of up to 15%.
The Yetagon field, a high-quality gas deposit (reportedly containing better
gas than that of the Yadana field) is located over the Tenasserim Shelf
directly of the Burmese Coast, approx. 260 miles south of Rangoon, the
capital. While Texaco claims to be still assessing the "commercialty" (the
profitability of the find, it is also on the record as saying that "first
commercial production ... could occur by 1998, with anticipated production
of 200 million cubic feet a day", and it is reported that the Yetagon field
estimated reserves range from 1 trillion to 1.5 trillion cubic feet [40].
Concern has been expressed that, if commercial production is started in
Yetagun, a pipeline will be necessary to transport the gas to prospective
buyers in Burma and Thailand. Human rights sources fear that TEXACO'S
Yetagun supplies could tie into the TOTAL/UNOCAL pipeline being build
between the Burmese towns of Ye and Tavoy: in view of the above-mentioned
evidence of forced labour and other human rights violations on the pipeline
and on the (most probably) connected Ye-Tavoy railroad construction
project, the danger of their repetition on infrastructure projects
servicing the Yetagun deposits is all to real.
Meanwhile, a concerned group of Texaco's shareholders have recently called
on the company to review its investment in the Martaban pipeline, on
account of the grave human rights situation prevailing in Burma and/or
likely to occur on the project, as well as in view of the public image
projected by Texaco's association with the SLORC regime. "That the ruling
military junta in Burma is unacceptably repressive is beyond dispute", say
the proponents of Proxy Statement Proposal no6, registered on 10 March
1994, ahead of a September 1995 meeting of Texaco shareholders in New York.
The proposal in the proxy statement is to "revise the corporate code of
conduct to include human rights provisions", and is motivated by the
proponent's concern "in particular about a Texaco exploration project in
Burma". While commending the company for its "Corporate Conduct
Guidelines", the proponents "see the lack of explicit human rights
provisions as a critical shortcoming that at times allows the company to be
in direct conflict with (its) own guidelines".
4.3 Tourism development projects.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:
[21] see: Dawn Newsletter, August-September 1992, in "Supporting Documents"
2/10a.
[22] see:"Supporting Documents", 2/55.
[23] see: Burma Human Rights: Foreign Trade, Aid and Investments,
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, Brussels, January 1994.
[24] see: Newsletter, Committee for Publicity of People's Struggle in
Monland, Vol 1, No 2, May 1993.
[25] Maps of the Ye-Tavoy railway link and connected Gulf of Martaban
pipeline projects are included as Appendix E: their examination may be
helpful in assessing the information that follows.
[26] see "Supporting Documents". 3/45.
[27] see:"Burma using slave labour to build tourist infrastructure: BBC
report", AFP, LOndon, 21 January 1995.("Supporting Documents", 4/11)
[28] For obvious security reasons, and even though indications allowing the
identification of the victims have been erased, the above-mentioned human
rights sources are unwilling to risk the accidental communication of this
material to SLORC or its representations abroad; for access to these
documents, please refer to "Supporting Documents", INtroduction, p. 14
(Appendix G).
[29] see:"Information for Tavoy District regarding forced labour and
collection of monies by SLORC officials", Mergui-Tavoy Information Dept., 9
February 1995, in "Supporting Documents", 3/40.
[30] see: "The development and the cry of the people", Karen National
Union, Mergui-Tavoy District, December 1994.
[31] see: Human lives for natural resources, oil & natural gas, Southeast
Asian INformation Network, 1994.
[32] see: Bangkok Post, 17 April 1995.
[33] idem, 7 May, 1997.
[34] "Supporting Documents", 3/45
[35] see:"Slave labour in Burma", Bangkokpost, 7 May 1995.
[36] The pipeline is due to pass through Karen villages in laydoozoo
District, Mergui Tawau province and in various Mon villages in Ye-Tawai
province. At least 11 villages had already been cleared by mid-April 1995,
according to a paid advertisement published by EGAT in the Bangkok Post on
17 April 1995.
[37] quoted by Burma Issues, Bangkok, Vol.5 No 5, May 1995, p.3.
[38] Burma Issues adds that, while it is probable that SLORC would not
authorise such a survey to take place on its territory, UNOCAL could, if it
were genuinely interested, send a survey team to the Thai-Burma border in
order to interview refugees from the areas concerned. Moreover, it is
reported that, in "UNOCAL in myanmar: report to Stock holders", by Unocal's
CEO Roger C. Beach, the company claims to have "visited the area and
discovered no human rights abuses". According to Burma Issues, the "visit"
was conducted by helocopter...(source idem, p.7).
[39] see: "UNOCAL Shareholders BAck Controversial Projects", by James
Pierpoint, Reuters, 22 May, 1995, in :"Supporting Documents", 3/46.
[40] All quotes and figures in this sub-section from: Appendix F:"Texaco
Inc.. US Business and Human Rights Guidelines", Proxy Statement Proposal
no.6, by INvestor Responsibility Research Centre (IRRC), Washington, DC,
April 1995, also included in: "Supporting Documents", no 3/44.
/* Endpart 3/4 */