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

The BurmaNet News, June 23, 1997




------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------     
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"     
----------------------------------------------------------     
 
The BurmaNet News: June 23, 1997        
Issue #756

HEADLINES:        
==========   
BKK POST: EU TO TAKE US STATE LAW ON BURMA TO WTO
REUTER: G7 URGES ASEAN TO PRESS FOR DEMOCRACY 
THE NATION: TAIWAN STARTS BURMA ROUTE
THE NATION: ENCOURAGING SLORC TO STAY IN POWER
BKK POST: FISHING RIGHTS IN BURMESE WATERS 
TT: SLORC APPROVES IDEA OF TRANS-ASIAN HIGHWAY
ILO STATEMENTS: FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION - BURMA
----------------------------------------------------------------- 

BKK POST: EU TO TAKE US STATE LAW ON BURMA BAN TO WTO
June 22, 1997
Washington, AFP

Barshefsky surprised and disappointed

Setting the stage for another sanctions battle, the European Union has
decided to take its complaint about a US state sanctions law aimed at Burma
to the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The decision follows a series of barbed exchanges and months of efforts to
patch up US-European discord over the federal Helms-Burton law, which aims
to stop international investment in Cuba.

In delaying its WTO appeal on the Burma law in March, EU Trade Commissioner
Sir Leon Brittan said in a June 19 letter to US Trade Representative
Charlene Barshefsky, "We expected tangible progress."

"On this issue, it would not appear that progress has been made, and there
are no indications that Massachusetts is considering amending this law, in
spite of the efforts you have been making," he wrote.

Europe "now considers that it has no option but to pursue this matter
formally through the WTO," Brittan wrote.

At issue is a 1996 Massachusetts law that bars state-owned entities from
buying goods from companies doing business in military-ruled Burma. That has
led to the black-listing of roughly 150 foreign companies.

Barshefsky said in a statement she was "surprised and very disappointed" at
the European move, given the shared US and European interest in improving
the human rights situation in Burma.

"The decision to take this matter to the WTO will not help the situation at
all," she said, adding that USTR would continue consulting with
Massachusetts and European officials to resolve the standoff.

A USTR statement also noted testily that "at least one EC member state has
encouraged similar measures by state governments" - apparently referring to
Portugal's efforts to sanction Indonesia over East Timor.

In January, the EU formally complained about the Massachusetts law, while
Japan registered its objections more quietly.

US-EU disagreement over the matter is a source of annoyance to the EU, which
claims the law violates a WTO provision committing most states to open all
government contracts to international competition.

It is also a source of embarrassment to the United States, which would
prefer to avoid another clash with its allies so soon after it calmed an
outcry over the Helms-Burton law that tightens the US embargo against Cuba.

But the matter is getting close attention here because of the precedent it
may set and the bind in which it places the Clinton administration.

Fighting the measure too hard could make the White House -fending off
charges of coddling China look hostile to human rights. Not fighting it at
all would enrage US trading partners and the powerful business lobby.

And all the while, more states and towns are considering or passing laws to
restrict trade with Burma, while activists in Massachusetts may win passage
of another state law barring contracts with companies operating in Indonesia.

Other, similar laws aimed at Nigeria and Tibet have also surfaced around the
country.

The EU "will be prepared to suspend proceedings in the WTO as soon as the US
administration takes the appropriate steps to secure amendment of the
Massachusetts law so that it conforms with US international obligations,"
Brittan wrote.

"We would, of course, terminate the proceedings once the legislation is
suitably amended."

In the case of the Massachusetts bill aimed at Indonesia, legislators have
amended the provision to avoid inciting Europe further. On May 29, a state
legislative panel added two exemptions.

Those cover state purchasing contracts worth more than $500,000 and
construction contracts worth more than seven million dollars to sidestep
possible violations of the WTO Government Procurement Act.

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

REUTER: G7 URGES ASEAN TO PRESS FOR DEMOCRACY IN BURMA
June 21, 1997

DENVER, June 21 (Reuter) - The world's leading industrial countries on
Saturday urged southeast Asian nations which recently accepted Burma into
the ASEAN economic group to pressure Rangoon's military rulers to restore
democracy.

A report by the Group of Seven foreign ministers, meeting here with Russia's
foreign minister, also made a direct call to the military to start a
``meaningful, political dialogue'' with the democratic opposition.

``Concerned by the continuing violations of human rights by the regime (in
Burma), we call on the SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council) to
enter into a meaningful political dialogue with leaders of the democratic
opposition and ethnic minorities aimed at national reconciliation and the
restoration of democracy,'' the report said.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which groups Brunei, Indonesia,
Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, decided to admit
Burma next month.

``We...hope that the members of ASEAN will use their influence to encourage
an early return to democracy in Myanmar (Burma),'' the report said.

The G7 also said the international community held the SLORC accountable for
the safey of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who has spent much of the
last eight years under house arrest.

Suu Kyi has strongly opposed Burma's entry into ASEAN, saying if it went
ahead it would give the SLORC a license to repress the opposition movement
and suppress human rights.

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

THE NATION: TAIWAN STARTS BURMA ROUTE
June 22, 1997
AP

TAIPEI - A jetliner of China Airlines, Taiwan's largest airline, flew to
Burma yesterday, inaugurating direct flights between the two countries.

The 737-400 jet carried 131 passengers, mostly travel agents, to Rangoon to
tap the market for Taiwanese tourists, the airline said.

Burma, which has close relations with China, has refused to sign a regular
air service agreement with Taiwan, but agreed to the twice-weekly chartered
flights from Taipei, officials said.

China, which considers Taiwan a renegade province, has opposed the island's
signing air service agreements with countries that recognise Beijing.

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

THE NATION: ENCOURAGING SLORC TO STAY IN POWER
June 22, 1997
Khin Maung Win

By allowing Burma to join Asean, the grouping's other members are hindering
the democracy movement in the country, writes Khin Maung Win.

Although individual members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(Asean) may have had different reasons for admitting Burma, it was important
for all members to defend the State Law and Order Restoration Council
(Slorc). Their reasons may range from the need to strengthen their own
existing political systems to simple economic interests.

Asean leaders such as Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir Mohammad seem intent on
elevating their status to that of regional leaders. Rejecting Western
pressure to improve human rights in the region, Mahathir has argued that the
concept of "Asian values" is eminently suitable for Asian society.

As long as no alternative philosophy emerges in the region to challenge the
assumptions underlying the Asian value doctrine, Asean leaders can continue
to rule with impunity.

Although Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is Asian, it is clear that her version of
Asian values includes a respect for human rights and democracy - ideals that
are often dismissed as Western concepts by Asean leaders.

Welcoming Burma, which is currently ruled by an authoritarian/dictatorial
regime, is likely to prevent the Western concepts of human rights and
democracy from entering the region.

Slorc has found a political prototype which parallels its own in Indonesia:
maximising the military's role while minimising the impact of democratic
principles on government. In the Indonesian constitutional model, the
president serves both as a governmental head and national leader, and is
elected by an electoral college, whose members are mostly presidential
appointees.

Slorc proposes a similar system in Burma if, and when, its undemocratic
constitution comes into effect. Political repression and violence against
parties opposed to those who hold power is exercised both in Indonesia and
Burma.

Indonesia's Golkar and Slorc's Union Solidarity and Development Association
(USDA) are both government-sponsored organisations that also serve as de
facto political bases for consolidating the regimes' power. Both attempt to
eliminate any form of political opposition while controlling the people's
aspirations for any change in government.

Solidarity among Asean members is imperative to the maintenance of its
political image in the region. It is that very need for continued solidarity
that caused Burma to be so warmly welcomed by Indonesia.

It has become increasingly obvious that the Thai government will not voice
any significant criticism of Burma's military junta, even when Thailand's
sovereignty has been threatened by SLORC troops.

The fact that the government has strengthened its ties with SLORC became
clear during the latter's military offensive against the Karen National
Union (KNU) bases in the Tenasserim region across the border from
Kanchanaburi. During that operation, SLORC received more support and
cooperation from Army Division 9 than at any time during previous attacks.

The government also plans to develop a transportation route connecting
Thailand's major industrial zones with the Andaman Sea through Burmese
territory, a move which could dramatically reduce transportation costs for
its exports to Europe. The route will cross the Tenasserim region,
previously controlled by the KNU and where the Yadana gas pipeline is under
construction. Bangkok may also be betting that the unofficial Slorc policy
to boycott Thai products will change after Burma takes its place in
Asean. Thailand, which was the first advocate of a constructive engagement
policy with Burma, warmly welcomed Burma due to economic interests.

The theory advocated by some Asean leaders that "economic development ushers
in the emergence of a middle class who will lead a movement towards
democratisation" may not be feasible under Burma's military regime. Although
it is true that foreign investment in Burma is high, such investment has
neither improved the living standards nor employed many Burmese.

That a million Burmese illegal immigrants are in Thailand while thousands
more have fled to Japan, Malaysia and Korea to escape poverty proves this.

Even the billion-dollar-plus gas pipeline project, a capital intensive
investment, can employ only a few hundred local people. An undeveloped
country like Burma needs labour-intensive investment projects that can
employ more people. Burma cannot attract investment to support
labour-intensive manufacturing because its infrastructure and education
system is incapable of matching the needs of economic reform.

Up to 50 per cent of the money for infrastructure and other domestic
spending is simply being printed, according to some diplomatic sources.
Inflation under Slorc is at its highest ever in Burma and now stands at 30
per cent.

One former large export earner, rice, is no longer the money-earner it was.
Rangoon-based foreign diplomats have warned that foreign reserves are at
their lowest in years. The huge slowdown of Burma's economy due to massive
expenditure on military and civilian coercion agencies in a country with the
least-developed status in the region - has had a dramatically
negative impact on the nation's people, and their capacity to cope.

Since Asean's adoption of a "constructive engagement" policy towards Slorc,
no political progress has been achieved.

Now, by honouring Burma with membership, Asean has chosen to support a
repressive regime and remain silent about Slorc's adamant refusal to
transfer power to the people's fairly elected representative. Whatever
reasons Asean gives for the admission, none are considered helpful for
democratisation in Burma. Asean's hidden reasons played a major role in
deciding whether or not to admit Burma while its given theory of
democratisation through development seems unworkable.

KHIN MAUNG WIN is a Central Executive Committee member of the All
Burma Students' Democratic Front.

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

BKK POST: FISHING RIGHTS IN BURMESE WATERS 'TO BE FINALISED SOON'
June 22, 1997
Uamdao Noikorn

Rangoon officials to be invited: Minister

The Fisheries Department is to invite Burmese representatives to Thailand
next month to finalise the issue of fishing rights in Burmese waters, Deputy
Agriculture Minister Sampao Prachuabmoh announced.

"We're confident Burma will open its waters this time. We've offered several
measures to curb illegal fishing by Thai fishermen," said Mr Sampao, adding
that the military government at first refused to open its waters until three
years later.

However, Burma's Livestock and Fisheries Minister Aung Tun finally agreed to
review the issue as Burma was also seeking technology transfer and
investment capital, Mr Sampao told a press conference after his Burma visit.

Burma has granted Thailand fishing rights on and off since 1975. But the
dependency of Thai fishermen on neighbouring countries' resources has
increased significantly as its fish population has been depleted at a faster
rate than it can recover.

The supply shortage has led Thai fishermen to violate Burmese fishing rules
including those of trespass, adding unregistered boats to registered ones,
fishing in forbidden areas, and fishing during the mating season.

Due to high taxes, operators tend to avoid registering their boats. The most
popular, but illegal, method is to attach tugboats behind the registered boats.

Despite the permanent withdrawal of fishing rights in 1995, arrests of
illegal Thai fishing operators by Burmese authorities continue.

Among the planned measures are the department's screening of operators to be
allowed for registration. Another step is to require all crewmen to show
their ID cards before boarding at a specified port.

A fishermen's leader has called on the government to try harder to conserve
marine resources in southern waters, as one of the ways of dealing with
fishing disputes with other countries.

Many of the conflicts between Thai fishermen and other countries have been
caused by dwindling marine resources, prompting a number of fishermen to
fish illegally in other waters, Niras Arwae said.

Mr Niras is one of the local southern fishermen's leaders attending the
Environment 95 Conference last weekend to address environmental problems
that the fishermen have been facing in recent years.

The recent fishing dispute with Malaysia in which two Thai fishermen were
shot dead by Malaysian naval officials shows the government's incompetence
in dealing with the decreasing number of marine resources in the country's
waters, he said.

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

THAILAND TIMES: SLORC APPROVES IDEA OF TRANS-ASIAN HI-WAY
June 22, 1997
By Assawin Pinitwong

TAK: The Burmese junta has agreed in principle to the construction of a
highway linking Mae Sot to Rangoon which when completed will cut down the
journey time between the two countries, the initiator of the Thai-Burmese
Friendship Bridge said yesterday.

U-dorn Tantisunthorn said the 38-kilometer-long road forms part of the
Trans-Asian Highway which is hoped to eventually link up with the Middle
East and Europe.

He said the Thai-Burmese leg of the highway will begin at the Friendship
Bridge and end in Rangoon, adding that financial support for a preliminary
survey for he project will be provided by the UN.

The former deputy  interior minister, who recently discussed the terms and
conditions of the project with Bur ma's senior military officials said both
nations will benefit from the highway in terms of trade, investment and tourism.

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

ILO STATEMENTS: FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION - BURMA
June 21, 1997

                    BURMA AT THE ILO JUNE 1997
 
                FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION CONVENTION 
 
BELOW ARE DOCUMENTS FROM THE DISCUSSION IN THE COMMITTEE ON THE APPLICATION
OF STANDARDS ON BURMA'S NON-OBSERVANCE OF ILO CONVENTION 87 CONCERNING
FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION*. 
  
                             CONTENTS
 
1) TEXT OF THE SPECIAL PARAGRAPH ON MYANMAR
2) TEXT LISTING MYANMAR FOR CONTINUED FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT
3) PROVISIONAL RECORD OF THE DEBATE ON MYANMAR 12-13 JUNE 1997 IN THE
COMMITTEE ON THE APPLICATION OF STANDARDS (OFFICIAL PRECIS OF A NUMBER OF
STATEMENTS) 

On 12-13 June 1997 the Committee on the Application of Standards of the
International Labour Organisation discussed Burma's non-implementation of
the Convention concerning Freedom of Association - one of the ILO's core
Conventions, which Burma ratified on 4 March 1955. After listening to
statements by Worker, Employer and Government members as well
as statements by the representative of the Government of Myanmar, the
Committee issued a Special Paragraph on Myanmar. To mention a case in a
special paragraph of the Committee's report is one of the strongest measures
the ILO can take on a country. The Committee also listed Myanmar under a
paragraph on continued failure to implement.
                                      ...............
  
1) TEXT OF THE SPECIAL PARAGRAPH
 
168. As regards the application by Myanmar of Convention No. 87, the
Committee took note of the statement made by the Government representative
and of the wide discussion which took place. It recalled that this case has
been discussed by the Committee on numerous occasions, in 1987, 1989, 1993,
1994 1995 and 1996. In 1995 the Committee put its conclusions in a special
paragraph of its General Report and in 1996 it also
mentioned this case in a section of its General Report highlighting the
continued failure to implement, taking into account that, for many years and
in spite of various appeals, serious discrepancies with the Convention
continued to exist in legislation and practice. The Committee could not but
deplore the fact that no government report was received by the Committee of
Experts and expressed its profound regret that serious divergences between
the national legislation and the Convention continued to exist. It also
deplored the fact that the Government failed to cooperate. Being greatly
concerned with the total absence of progress in the application of the
Convention, the Committee once again urged the Government to adopt, as a
priority, the measures and mechanisms necessary to guarantee, in legislation
and practice, to all workers and employers, without any distinction or any
previous authorization, the right to join organizations of their own
choosing to protect their interests. The Committee insisted also on the need
for those organizations to have the right to affiliate with federations and
confederations and with the international organizations, without any
interference from the public authorities. The Committee expressed a firm
hope that substantial progress in the application of the Convention might be
noted in the very near future and urged the
Government to supply a detailed report to the Committee of Experts.
                           ..............
  
2) TEXT OF PARAGRAPH ON CONTINUED FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT
 
173. The Committee recalls that its working methods provide for the listing
of cases of continued failure over several years to eliminate serious
deficiencies previously discussed, in the application of ratified
Conventions. This year the Committee noted with great concern that there had
been continued failure over several years to eliminate serious discrepancies
in the application by Myanmar of the Freedom of Association and Protection
of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No.87); by Nigeria of the Freedom
of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No.
87); and by Sudan of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29).
                        ...................
  
3) DEBATE ON MYANMAR UNDER CONVENTION 87
 
 C. App/PV.15
12.06.97
Afternoon
  
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR CONFERENCE
85th session, Geneva, June 1997
 
COMMITTEE ON THE APPLICATION OF STANDARDS
 15th sitting, 12th June 1997, 3.15 p.m.
 
Discussion of individual cases
 Convention No. 87: Freedom of Association  and Protection of the Right to
Organise, 1948
  
[GOVERNMENT OF MYANMAR REPRESENTATIVE]**
 
Myanmar (Ratification: 1955). A Government representative recalled that, in
previous sessions of the International Labour Conference, information
relating to the application of Convention No. 87 had been provided to the
Conference Committee, regarding which some members of the Committee
commented on the continued efforts of his Government to enact a new trade
union law. He reaffirmed the interest of his Government in promoting and
protecting the legitimate rights of all workers. A total of 17
labour-related laws were still in force in his country. Half of those laws
had been enacted during the British colonial days, while the remaining half had
been adopted after the attainment of independence nearly five decades ago.
The Department of Labour under the Ministry of Labour was mainly responsible
for reviewing and redrafting all laws to ensure that they were in conformity
with changing circumstances. In the process of reviewing and redrafting
laws, priority had been given to the Trade Union Law, the
Workman's Compensation Law, the Factories Law, the Leave and Holiday Law,
the Minimum Wages Law and the Employment and Training Law. Other labour laws
were also scheduled to undergo the same process.
 
     Focusing on the draft trade unions law, he stated that the Department
of Labour and the Office of the Attorney- General had approved the draft and
submitted it to the Central Laws Scrutiny Body. After scrutinizing the
draft, the Central Body had returned it to the Labour Ministry with remarks
and recommendations for modifications and redrafting. One
important recommendation by the Central Body was that, following the
necessary drafting, the revised text should be tabled and subjected to
extensive consultation with all the parties concerned, namely employers'
organizations, such as the Union of Myanmar Chamber of Commerce and
Industry, representatives of public and private enterprises and workers'
welfare associations. Taking into consideration the recommendation of the
Central Laws Scrutiny Body, which it was planned to implement within the
year, it was hoped that it would be possible to submit the revised draft to
the respective supervisory body at an appropriate time.
  
[WORKER MEMBERS]
 
     The Worker members recalled that Myanmar was a persistent violator of
the Convention and had therefore frequently come before the Committee. The
case had been discussed in 1987, 1989, 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996. For over
40 years, the ILO had been requesting the Government to respect the
fundamental principles of freedom of association. The Committee had
requested it to ensure the right of workers to freely
establish and to join first-level unions, federations and confederations,
without previous authorization, subject only to the rules of the
organization concerned, and to freely affiliate to international workers'
organizations, in
accordance with Articles 2, 5 and 6 of the Convention.
 
     Over the years, the Government had bluntly refused to cooperate with
the Committee and had once again failed to supply the report requested,
despite the inclusion of the case in a special paragraph last year. The case
had been mentioned by the Committee in a special paragraph in 1993, 1995 and
1996 and deserved to be placed in a special paragraph once again
this year. The message from the Government of Myanmar was clearly that it
considered it more important to deny the workers in the country freedom of
association than to live up to the obligations deriving from the Convention.
This amounted to an insult to all ILO constituents and the Government
rightfully deserved worldwide condemnation for its behaviour.
 
     In 1996, the Government representative had reaffirmed his Government's
firm commitment to the principles of freedom of association and to a
multi-party democratic system, a free market economy, justice and human
rights for all. However, the Government's conception of what this implied
appeared to differ enormously from that of the Worker members. The continued
repression and violation of human rights, including the right to freedom of
association and democracy, by a military regime showed that the Government
had no intention whatsoever of complying with its obligations or the
requests of the Committee. The Worker members recalled that a Commission of
Inquiry had been set up to investigate a
complaint under article 26 of the Constitution concerning the non-observance
of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29). Moreover, the Government
representative had requested technical assistance from the ILO, but the ILO
representative had been prevented by the authorities from undertaking the
mission.
 
     For some years the Worker members had been raising the matter of
seafarers in Myanmar and had been requesting the Government to confirm that
they were no longer required to sign contracts obliging them not to contact
international trade union organizations and that they were no longer
intimidated if they exercised their rights in accordance with the
Convention. Regrettably, the question had to be repeated once again this year.
 
     The Worker members expressed surprise that Myanmar had recently been
admitted to become a future member of the Association of South East Asian
Nations (ASEAN). This constituted a setback for the democratic forces in
Myanmar and had been criticized by the Nobel Prize winner, Aung San Suu Kyi.
The Worker members were concerned that the Governments concerned might relax
their demands concerning respect for
freedom of association in the country and that, in reality, the ILO
Constitution might be set aside. The Declaration of Philadelphia stated that
all national and international policies and measures, in particular those of
an economic and financial character, should be judged and accepted only if
they promoted the fundamental principles of the Organization, including
freedom of expression and association. The acceptance of Myanmar as a future
member of ASEAN was not a good example of the application at the regional
level of the ILO principles of objectivity, impartiality and transparency,
which were actively advocated in the ILO by many of the
Governments concerned.
 
     In conclusion, the Worker members urged the Government to immediately
accept the right of workers to organize freely in trade unions without prior
authorization and to affiliate freely with international trade union
organizations. However, as no action had been taken by the Government, the
Committee should express its dissatisfaction in the strongest possible terms
and mention the case in a special paragraph for
continued failure to implement the Convention.
  
[EMPLOYER MEMBERS]
 
     The Employer members observed that the comments made by the Committee
of Experts on the case of Myanmar were getting shorter. This was due to the
fact that, after repeated examination of the case, there was almost nothing
new to be said. The ILO supervisory bodies had been examining the continued
non-existence of freedom of association in the
country for decades. Since the early 1980s, the Conference Committee had
been placing its conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of its
report due to persistent violations of the Convention. When the case had
been examined by the Conference Committee the previous year, the Government
representative had nothing new to report and had merely repeated his
statements from previous years. There had briefly been some hope that an ILO
mission might be able to assist in addressing the problems related to
application of the Convention. However, although the mission had been
invited, it had not been received by the authorities in Myanmar and had
not therefore been able to provide the necessary assistance. For the past 40
years it had been impossible to establish a trade union or an employers'
organization without prior authorization from the national authorities and
there were therefore no federations at higher levels. In effect, there was
no freedom of association in the country. Although the Government had
referred in general terms to certain draft Bills on a number of issues of
labour law, there had been no clear indication that any of these would lead
to the development of freedom of association. Moreover, once again the
Government had not submitted the requested report to the Committee of
Experts. This was a very clear indication of a lack of cooperation, and
indeed non-cooperation on the part of the Government. The Conference
Committee was therefore bound to repeat what it had stated last year and
express its regret even more profoundly that, despite its observations, not
the slightest progress had been made. Its conclusions should be included
once again in a special paragraph of the Committee's report.
 ............
  
C. App/PV.16
13.06.97
Afternoon
 
16th sitting, 13 June 1997, 3.15 p.m.
 Convention No. 87: Freedom of Association  and Protection of the Right to
Organise, 1948
  
[WORKER MEMBER OF JAPAN]
 
Myanmar (Ratification: 1995) (cont.) The Worker member of Japan (Mr
NAKAJIMA) pointed out that this was one of the oldest and most serious cases
of violation of Convention No. 87 before this Committee. The Government had
accepted to receive a direct contacts mission to the country. Its subsequent
failure to do so showed a complete lack of respect
for the supervisory machinery and the requirements of the Convention. He
further pointed out that freedom of association could not exist without
freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly all of
which were absent in Myanmar. People who had participated in peaceful
demonstrations were regularly arrested and detained, and more than 2,000 had
been arrested in 1996. Students and fellow workers who participated in these
demonstrations were unfortunately forced to seek asylum. He insisted that
the Government bring, without delay, its legislation into conformity with
the requirements of the Convention, and announce a scheduled time frame for
doing so. He urged the Committee to have Myanmar placed in a special paragraph.
  
[WORKER MEMBER OF PAKISTAN]
 
     The Worker member of Pakistan (Mr AHMED) regretted that the Government
representative had not bothered to reply to the observation of the Committee
of Experts concerning the prevalence of the denial of freedom of association
in Myanmar. Basic human rights, including freedom of association, as
incorporated in ILO core Conventions, were fundamental to all persons and if
they were denied these rights, in any country, no social justice could
exist. He, along with the Worker members, fully supported that freedom of
association principles be immediately respected in Myanmar.
  
[WORKER MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES]
 
     The Worker member of the United States (Mr FISHMAN) pointed out that
this case had been examined by the Committee of Experts and this Committee
on numerous occasions, for many reasons. The most obvious was the hope that,
despite the long history of no progress, the unrelenting pressure of the ILO
to ensure that the Government respects its obligation taken together with a
growing international campaign to force the military regime to step down and
allow civilian self- government, would one day begin to have an impact.
Secondly, despite the fact that nothing of substance had been heard from the
Government representative thus far, this was yet another opportunity to
communicate directly to the representatives of the military regime, the
condemnation of the international community. Finally, it provided the
Committee with an
opportunity to bring to the attention of the Committee of Experts even more
information on the violations of freedom of association by the military regime.
 
     The speaker wished to ask the Government representative, given the
vague statements that the latter had made earlier on, about the regime's
respect for the rights of workers in Myanmar, why the Free Trade Unions of
Burma (FTUB) was not allowed to function inside Myanmar. Moreover, he
wondered why workers who were identified with the FTUB were under constant
surveillance by the police and the military intelligence, and why they lived
in permanent fear of arrest and torture. He strongly supported the view of
both Employer end Worker members that this Committee had to find a way to
express its extreme displeasure over the lack of progress and cooperation
from the military regime in even stronger terms than the
previous year. The Committee's conclusions should be contained, once again,
in a special paragraph of its report as a case of continued failure to apply
the Convention.
  
[GOVERNMENT MEMBER OF DENMARK]
 
     The Government member of Denmark (Mr HESS), speaking on behalf of the
Governments of Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland,
the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom,
expressed his deep regret that the Committee, once again, had to examine the
violations by Myanmar of the Convention. In addition to the fact that the
Government had not sent a report to the
Committee of Experts, it regrettably had not been possible for an ILO
mission to visit the country, due to the lack of cooperation on the part of
the Government. Although the Government representative had told the
Committee, the previous year, that it was his Government's intention to
apply the Convention, nothing had happened with regard to the rights for
workers in Myanmar to establish and join independent trade unions.
References also had to be made to Resolution 1997/64 of the United Nations
Human Rights Commission, which had been adopted by consensus. The Government
of Myanmar had been asked to "fulfil its obligations as a State party to the
freedom of association Convention No. 87 of the ILO, and to cooperate more
closely with the ILO". He firmly hoped, that it would be possible to agree
on a date for a mission to Myanmar in the near future, that it would be
undertaken before the next
Conference and that the Government would take the necessary measures to
ensure fully the right to organize and join independent trade unions.
  
[GOVERNMENT MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES]
 
     The Government member of the United States (Mr SPRING) stated that the
situation of the rights of workers in Myanmar was, quite simply, and very
sadly, deplorable. There were no functioning trade unions. Workers continued
to be unable to organize freely. Efforts by the ILO to offer technical
assistance had proved fruitless and were at present suspended. In addition,
seafarers from Myanmar who had attempted to receive fair treatment and wages
for their services on international vessels, were intimidated and harassed
when they returned home. Those who did speak of free trade unions, dared not
return to their country for fear of imprisonment by the Government and were
obliged to live in exile. Although Myanmar had freely ratified the
Convention in 1955, the
Committee of Experts and this Committee were obliged to conclude that it was
not applied and that freedom of association just did not exist in Myanmar.
There were no adequate explanations for this horrible situation. The only
appropriate answer was swift and concrete action to fully restore trade
union rights in Myanmar. In the meantime, he joined the overwhelming call in
the Committee for the strongest possible conclusions in this case.
  
[WORKER MEMBER OF GREECE]
 
     The Worker member of Greece (Mr DASSIS) invited the members of the
Committee who were not familiar with this case to consult the reports
adopted by this Committee during its 1994, 1995 and 1996 sessions. In those
reports, the Committee had noted the commitment of the Government to bring
its legislation and practice into conformity with the provisions of the
Convention. The Government representative had just made the same statement
again this year. The Employer members were quite right when they stated that
everything had been thoroughly discussed regarding this case. The Committee
of Experts also noted the absence of any new element. The list of delegates
for this Conference revealed an interesting aspect of the trade union
situation: the Worker member appeared in that list in his capacity of
controller of oil wells and sites
in the petroleum company. Although Myanmar was a third world country, it had
an abundance of resources. By forbidding workers and citizens to organize
themselves, a minority was only trying to prevent the majority from
organizing itself to defend its own interests. The means available to incite
a change of attitude by the Government were unfortunately limited to the
adoption of a special paragraph. As we move towards the twenty-first
century, other means should be envisaged in dealing with such a serious case
where a regime did not respect the most fundamental human rights.
  
[REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF MYANMAR]
 
     The Government representative indicated that an interesting dialogue
had taken place in the Committee for improvement in the application of the
Convention, both in law and in practice. He stressed that the present
Government was building the country into a peaceful modern and developed
nation, after having laid down clear-cut political, economic and social
objectives, which reflected the aspirations of its citizens and the
objective situation of the country. In this context, efforts for national
reconsolidation and the emergence of an enduring new State constitution were
being met with success as a result of the goodwill of the Government. It was
to be recalled that Myanmar was a union of more than 100 ethnic groups, and
that the Government through its goodwill had been successful in bringing 15
out of 16 armed groups back into the legal fold. This meant that peace
reigned in the country after almost half a century of internal conflict that
had held back development.
 
     He stressed that the other important task to which his Government was
firmly committed to, was the establishment of a genuine multi-party
democratic system and the enjoyment of the principles of justice, liberty
and equality. At this juncture, although there were no trade union
organizations in the actual sense of the term, workers' welfare associations
in various industries were functioning on a tripartite basis. There were
more than 2,000 associations of this kind. Workers' supervisory committees
at the township level also looked after matters relating to industrial
relations. There were clear indications that the Government never neglected
the well-being and welfare of workers. The labour administration system was
as strong as ever in terms of protecting the legislative rights of workers.
There was no doubt that trade unions' rights would prevail within the
framework of a new constitution. Stability and national reconsolidation were
the prerequisites to reach this desired goal in the shortest possible time.
His Government had learned from the painful
events that had recently occurred in some countries that hasty changes lead
to disorder and instability that resulted in suffering for the citizens.
Therefore, it was making efforts at gradual and stable progress towards the
goal of a genuine democratic society.
  
[CONCLUSIONS OF THE COMMITTEE]
 
     The Committee took note of the statements made by the Government
representative and of the wide discussion which took place. It recalled that
this case has been discussed by the Committee on numerous occasions in 1987,
1989, 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996. In 1995, the Committee put its
conclusions in a special paragraph of its general report and, in 1996 it
also mentioned this case in a section of its general report highlighting the
continued failure to implement, taking into account that for many years and
in spite of various appeals, serious discrepancies with the Convention
continued to exist in legislation and practice. The Committee could not but
deplore the fact that no Government report was received by the Committee of
Experts and expressed its profound regret that serious divergences between
the national legislation and the Convention continued to exist. It
also deplored the fact that the Government failed to cooperate. Being
greatly concerned with the total absence of progress in the application of
the Convention, the Committee once again urged the Government to adopt, as a
priority, the measures and mechanisms necessary to guarantee, in legislation
and practice, to all workers and employers, without any
distinction and any previous authorization, the right to join organizations
of their own choosing to protect their interests. The Committee insisted
also on the need for those organizations to have the right to affiliate with
federations and confederations and with the international organizations,
without any interference from the public authorities. The Committee
expressed a firm hope that substantial progress in the application of the
Convention might be noted in the very near future and urged the Government
to supply a detailed report to the Committee of Experts. The Committee
decided that its conclusions would figure in a special paragraph of its
report and to mention this case among cases of continued failure to
implement Convention No. 87.
                            ...........
 
* Text of the Convention posted separately
**(Headings in square brackets added - ed)

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