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

The BurmaNet News, April 18, 1998,



------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------  
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"   
----------------------------------------------------------
 
The BurmaNet News: April 18, 1998
Issue #986

SPECIAL EDITION: 1998 REPORT OF THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON MYANMAR TO THE UN
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
 
(posted in two parts for easier downloading)
 
 (Part II)

D. Arbitrary detention
 
  1. During 1997, reports indicated that NLD members and sympathizers, as
well as other persons involved in political activities, continued to be
constantly harassed and some of them arbitrarily arrested and detained when
exercising their rights to freely express their views, to assemble or to
hold rallies. 
 
  2. On 27 June 1997, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Special
Rapporteur on the question of torture, transmitted an urgent appeal to the
Government of Myanmar seeking clarification with regard to allegations of
arbitrary arrest and torture (see E/CN.4/1998/38/Add.1, para. 255). The
Special Rapporteur notes that the International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC) is still not allowed uninhibited access to prisons and places of
detention. 
 
 3. The urgent appeal referred to the arrest, on 13 June 1997, of two
Executive Committee members of the Federation of Trade Unions-Burma and
their families by the National Intelligence Bureau. U Myo Aung Thant, who
is also a member of the All Burma Petro-Chemical Union, is said to have
been detained along with his wife and children at Mingaladon international
airport in Yangon. U Khin Kyaw, who is also an official of the Seamen's
Union of Burma and an affiliate of the International Transport Workers'
Federation (ITF), was reportedly detained along with his wife at his home.
He had allegedly been tortured and his wife had allegedly been sexually
abused during a previous detention in 1993. Fears had been expressed that U
Myo Aung Thant and U Khin Kyaw and their detained family members might be
subjected to torture or other ill-treatment during their present detention.
 
  4. The urgent appeal also referred to reports received by both Special
Rapporteurs according to which the following members of NLD have been
detained since 13 June 1997: Khin Maung Win (also known as Ko Sunny, the
official video- photographer for the NLD), Cho Aung Than (a relative of and
former assistant to NLD General Secretary Daw Aung San Suu Kyi); Daw Khin
Ma Than (the sister of Cho Aung Than); U Shwe Myint Aung (the husband of
Cho Aung Than) and U Ohn Myint (an NLD adviser who is over 80 years of age).
 
  5. On 24 July 1997, the Government of Myanmar responded that the seven
above-named persons (correcting the names of Daw Khin Ma Than and U Shwe
Myint Aung to Nge Ma Ma Than and U Swe Myint Aung, respectively) were said
to have been found to be involved in terrorist activities. They had been
planning bomb attacks on foreign embassies and residences of State leaders,
the blowing up of transformers and the cutting of telephone lines, as well
as the incitement of workers. Cho Aung Than was said to have been involved
in making appointments for foreigners to meet Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Myo
Aung Thant, Nge Ma Ma Than and Cho Aung Than were said to have secret
contacts with foreigners to send financial aid to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Myo
Aung Thant, Nge Ma Ma Than, Cho Aung Than, Khin Maung Win and U Ohn Myint
were said to have participated in producing and smuggling a film of Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi in Kayin national dress for a charity show for refugees in
Bangkok. The Government of Myanmar added that there was no ground for
concern that the persons detained would face ill-treatment while in
detention since torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
were prohibited by relevant laws and regulations in Myanmar which were
scrupulously followed by the authorities concerned. 
 
  1. On 4 November 1997, the two Special Rapporteurs transmitted another
urgent appeal to the Government of Myanmar seeking clarification concerning
eight persons, seven of whom are said to be leading members of the NLD, who
were reportedly arrested by security forces in the night of 28/29 October
1997 (see E/CN.4/1998/38/Add.1, para. 256). 
 
  2. The arrests allegedly occurred following attempts to hold a meeting
with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi at the NLD Mayangone township office on the
outskirts of Yangon. The meeting was reportedly planned for the morning of
28 October, but security forces are said to have set up barricades,
preventing it from taking place. A number of NLD supporters were reportedly
arrested but subsequently released. The following eight persons are still
believed to be detained: Daw May Win Myint (NLD Divisional Organizer and
MP-elect from Mayagone), Khin Maung Myint (NLD Central Youth member and
Secretary of Latha township), Daw San San (NLD Seikkan Divisional
Vice-Chairman and NLD women's leader), Win Win Htay (member of the Yangon
NLD Youth Division), U Soe Myint (Chairman of the Thaketa NLD), Dr Than
Nyein (MP-elect from Kyauktan township), U Win Thaung (Chairman of the
Mayangone NLD office), U Mya Thaung (landlord of the Mayangone NLD office).
Some are also said to have had documents taken from them. They were
reportedly arrested by security forces, including military intelligence
forces, and taken to an unknown place. Fears had been expressed that they
might be subjected to torture or other ill-treatment while in detention.
 
  1. Although the Government of Myanmar did not respond specifically to the
letter sent by the Special Rapporteurs, the officer assigned by the Office
of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to assist the Special Rapporteur
received from the Permanent Mission of Myanmar Official Information Sheet
No. A-0241 dated 10 December 1997, which provided information about these
cases. It states as follow: 
 
"On 9 December 1997, the Special Court of Insein Rehabilitation Centre
passed sentences on the following (7) persons from NLD who have been
charged with section 5 (j) of the Emergency [Provisions] Act of 1950.
[international harm to the morals or conduct of the public or a section of
the public in a manner likely to impair the security or restoration of law
and order of the Union]:
 
(a) Dr. Than Neyin
(b) U Soe Myint
(c) U Win Thaung
(d) U Nyan Thaung
(e) Daw May Win Myint
(f) Ma Win Win Htay
(g) U Khin Maung Myint
 
"The court found the accused (6) persons guilty of section 5 (j) of the
Emergency [Provisions] Act of 1950 and U Khin Maung Myint was found guilty
of both section 5 (j) of the Emergency [Provisions] Act of 1950 and section
16 (a) of 1986 Gambling Law. The court has sentenced Dr. Than Neyin, U Soe
Myint, U Win Thaung, U Nyan Thaung, Daw May Win Myint, Ma Win Win Htay to
(6) years' imprisonment and U Khin Maung Myint (8) years' imprisonment, it
is learnt."
 
  1. According to information received by the Special Rapporteur, the
accused have been denied their right to retain lawyers for their defence
and were not allowed to defend themselves in hearings held on 2 December 1997.
 
  2. On 6 November 1997, Dr. Min Soe Lin, an elected member of parliament
and Secretary-General of the banned Mon National League for Democracy
(MNLD), was reportedly arrested under section 5 (j) of the Emergency
Provisions Act for his role in organizing celebrations for the fiftieth Mon
National Day on 23 February 1997. Dr. Min Soe Lin was arrested in Mudon,
Mon state, but it is not known where he has been taken for detention or
under what conditions he is being held. 
 
  3. On 19 November 1997, the Myanmar authorities reportedly arrested
Thaung Aye and Chit Khin. Thaung Aye, an owner of a building in the South
Okkalapa township of Yangon, had reportedly been arrested because he agreed
to rent an office to the NLD. Chit Khin is the Chairman of the Okkalapa
branch of the NLD. 
 
  4. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on 11 July 1997 transmitted a
communication to the Government of Myanmar concerning a case of detention
which was reported to have occurred in Myanmar. In accordance with its
methods of work, the Working Group has adopted, on 2 December 1997, Opinion
No. 20/1997, the text of which is contained in document E/CN.4/1998/44,
annex II. A summary of the case appears below.
 
  5. After having been released from detention through an amnesty on 4
February 1995, Khin Sint Aung, aged 61, medical doctor and member of the
NLD, was rearrested on 23 July 1996 for recent activities in support of the
opposition. He had previously been arrested on 3 August 1993 and sentenced
on 15 October 1993 to 20 years in prison for destabilizing national unity,
printing and publishing material without official registration and improper
use of official secret documents. Dr. Khin Sint Aung's case had already
been transmitted by the Working Group to the Government in April 1994. The
Working Group, by its Decision No. 13/1994, declared his detention to be
arbitrary. His rearrest was believed to be related to his membership of the
NLD.  
 
  6. The Government informed the Working Group and the Special Rapporteur
that Dr. Khin Sint Aung had been convicted in 1993 under section 5 (j) of
the Emergency Provisions Act, section 17/20 of the Printers and Publishers
Registration Law, and section 5 (1) (4) of the Burma Official Secrets Act.
The Government added that Dr. Khin Sint Aung had been granted amnesty under
section 401 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, after he had been given a
solemn pledge to the authorities that he would henceforth abide by the law.
But, the Government added, Dr. Khin Sint Aung did not abide by his pledge
and, as a consequence, the amnesty extended to him was revoked and he
resumed serving the reminder of his original sentence. 
 
  7. The source of the information, in its observations on the Government's
reply, reiterated its view that Dr. Khin Sint Aung's detention was based
solely on the exercise of his right to free expression. The charges against
him were believed to be specifically related to letters he sent to NLD
members during the January 1993 NLD National Convention.
 
  8. The Working Group, in its Decision No. 13/1994 declaring Dr. Khin Sint
Aung's detention to be arbitrary, noted that the Government had failed to
specify in what way he failed to abide by his pledge, what the activities
were that led to the revocation of the amnesty extended to him, and in what
way they constituted a violation of the pledge.
 
  9. The Working Group held that the renewed detention of Dr. Khin Sint
Aung, like the first one, was linked to the fact that he peacefully
exercised his right to freedom of opinion and expression. Accordingly, the
Working Group concluded as follows: "The deprivation of liberty of Khin
Sint Aung is arbitrary, as being in contravention of articles 9 and 19 of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and falls within category II of
the categories applicable to the consideration of the cases submitted to
the Working Group." The Working Group consequently requested the Government
to take the necessary steps to remedy the situation, and bring it in
conformity with the standards and principles set forth in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. The Working Group further recommended that the
Government take steps to become a party to the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights.
 
 10. With regard to the particular case of Dr. Khin Sint Aung, the Special
Rapporteur wishes to recall the previous reports of his predecessor,
Professor Yozo Yokota, to the Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/1994/57)
and (E/CN.4/1995/65) in which the case was mentioned. When Professor Yokota
visited Myanmar in 1993 and 1994, he personally met Dr. Khin Sint Aung in
Insein prison.
 
 11. In 1993, when Professor Yokota met Dr. Khin Sint Aung, he was
accompanied by the prison warden and his staff and by photographers. Dr.
Khin Sint Aung addressed the Special Rapporteur in the Burmese language, as
he clearly indicated he had been advised to do, although he had done his
medical training in England and spoke English well. Dr. Khin Sint Aung told
the Special Rapporteur that those who met the Special Rapporteur would have
problems and would be likely to be sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment. He
therefore must be careful how he answered the Special Rapporteur's
questions: if he answered "wrong", his 20-year prison sentence would become
40 years. He also said that the grounds for his imprisonment were
prescribed by existing laws; information in that regard could be obtained
from the Government. He said he had been tried in a special court, i.e. not
an ordinary court. It was by his own choice that he did not hire a lawyer
because he wanted to defend himself. He had received his sentence recently
and was intending to appeal through the proper channels. Dr. Khin Sint Aung
indicated that he was treated well in the prison and had even received a
new tooth in his first week there. In concluding, he repeated that he did
not want to be in prison for 40 years, and so he preferred to say no more.
 
 12. In 1994, Professor Yokota again met Dr. Khin Sint Aung in Insein
prison. He was not allowed to enter the cell where the prisoner was kept
but he was able to speak to him through the locked grill of the cell door.
The prison warden and several guards recording the interview were also
present, as well as photographers. The interview was very short and the
prisoner seemed nervous but in good health.
     Unlike their meeting in 1993, Dr. Khin Sint Aung addressed the Special
Rapporteur in Burmese and English. In 1993, he had indicated that he
intended to appeal through the proper channels. He now informed Professor
Yokota that he had not appealed but did not give any specific reason why he
had changed his mind. In concluding, he repeated that he would like from
the bottom of his heart to serve a democratic Government. 
 
 13. As the Special Rapporteur has had occasion to observe, there are laws
in Myanmar that criminalize the normal exercise of basic civil and
political rights (see A/51/466, annex, chaps. III and IV). All the persons
convicted or detained under these laws are, in a true sense, political
prisoners. The SPDC should take urgent steps to have those persons released
by proclaiming a general amnesty.
 
E. Torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 
 
  1. The Special Rapporteur continues to receive numerous allegations of
acts of torture committed by soldiers of the Tatmadaw. The Special
Rapporteur has already reported on some of these cases in his previous
reports to the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights. 
 
  2. The Special Rapporteur on the question of torture has also raised with
the Government of Myanmar several cases of alleged torture. By letter dated
21 February 1997, he informed the Government of Myanmar about reports
indicating that the Myanmar army still uses torture and ill-treatment
against members of ethnic minorities in Shan and Mon states and in
Tanintharyi division. According to these reports, members of ethnic
minorities are forced to serve as porters for the army. Any person who
cannot carry the required load is allegedly beaten with bamboo sticks or
rifle butts. Deprivation of food, water, rest and medical care is also
reportedly a common method of punishment.
 
  3. In the same letter, the Special Rapporteur also asked the Government
of Myanmar to reply to allegations that a number of persons had been beaten
by the police during student demonstrations in Yangon in December 1996.
 
  4. On 25 April 1997, the Government of Myanmar replied to the Special
Rapporteur stating that nobody had been subjected to violence during the
December 1996 student demonstrations. Concerning the allegations of
ill-treatment of porters, the Government of Myanmar stated that the
recruitment of civilian labour to assist the armed forces is regulated by
law and based on three criteria: the person has to be unemployed;
physically fit to work as a porter; and a reasonable wage has to be agreed
upon before recruitment. Furthermore, according to the Government, porters
were never required to accompany the troops to the battle scene. They were
thus not exposed to danger (see E/CN.4/1998/38/Add.1, paras. 258-267).
  
III. THE GENDER PERSPECTIVE
 
  1. In its resolution 1997/64, the Commission on Human Rights extended the
mandate of the Special Rapporteur, as contained in Commission resolution
1992/58, and requested the Special Rapporteur to keep a gender perspective
in mind when seeking and analysing information. 
 
  1. Gender-specific reporting and analysis entail an examination of gender
as a determining factor in respect of: (a) the form which a human rights
violation takes; (b) the circumstances in which the violation occurs; (c)
the consequences of the violation for the victim; and (d) the availability
and accessibility of remedies. 
 
  2. The term "gender" is used as referring to the socially constructed
roles of women and men in public and private life. It denotes the
significance attached within societies and communities to sex identity.
Historically, different cultures construct gender in different ways so that
women's roles, the value that their particular society places on those
roles, and the relationship with men's roles may vary considerably over
time and from one setting to another. To varying degrees in all societies,
discrimination against women and their unequal treatment are systematic and
reflected in the structure and functioning of public institutions, de jure
and de facto family relations, access to economic resources, and legal
systems. It is mainly for this reason that the mere enactment of
appropriate laws is not sufficient to eradicate discrimination or
inequality on grounds of sex. Other measures, educational, social and
administrative, among others, are particularly necessary to change societal
attitudes and acceptance of traditional values.
 
A. International norms
 
  1. The Government of Myanmar is bound by a number of international
conventions and declarations to which it is party to prohibit
discrimination against women and to ensure the effective enjoyment of their
human rights. A general prohibition against discrimination and unequal
treatment is found in article 2 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, according to which "everyone is entitled to all the rights and
freedoms ... without any distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex
 ... ." and "all are equal before the law and are entitled without any
discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal
protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and
against any incitement to such discrimination." Articles 2 (1), 3 and 26 of
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights contain a similar
prohibition. A more elaborate and explicit prohibition of discrimination
against women in all its forms is found in the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
 
  1. The traffic of women and suppression of prostitution is regulated in
the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the
Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others, signed by Myanmar on 14 March
1956 but not yet ratified. 
 
  2. The Special Rapporteur also recalls the Declaration on the Elimination
of Violence against Women (General Assembly resolution 48/104). Article 2
prohibits violence against women (a) in the family, (b) within the general
community, and (c) by the State. Article 1 of the Declaration defines
"violence against women" as "any act of gender-based violence that results
in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or
suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary
deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life". 
 
  3. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the ratification by Myanmar of the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
Article 1 of the Convention, which came into force for Myanmar on 21 August
1997, defines discrimination against women as "any distinction, exclusion
or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of
impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women,
irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and
women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic,
social, cultural, civil or any other field". The Union of Myanmar is
required under article 18 of the Convention to submit, within one year, a
report to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
on the legislative, judicial, administrative and other measures it has
adopted to give effect to the Convention and on the progress made in its
implementation.
 
  4. In the absence of a visit to Myanmar, the Special Rapporteur is unable
to report comprehensively on the situation of women in situ. The following
paragraphs highlight some legal provisions and other material which the
Special Rapporteur has come across in his work. 
 
  5. According to article 22 of the Myanmar Constitution of 1974, which was
repudiated by the SLORC in 1988, "all citizens shall be equal before the
law, regardless of race, religion, status or sex." In addition, in article
154 the following rights of women are explicitly defined: (a) women shall
enjoy equal political, economic, social and cultural rights; (b) mothers,
children and expectant mothers shall enjoy those rights as prescribed by
law; (c) children born of citizens shall enjoy equal rights; and (d) women
shall enjoy the freedoms and rights guaranteed by laws as regards marriage,
divorce, division of property, succession and custody of children. It does
not appear that, after the repudiation of the Constitution, any law,
decree, or order of a basic character has been enacted to guarantee the
rights of women provided in the defunct constitution.
 
B. Myanmar women in public life
 
   1. As is the case for men, Myanmar women who become politically active
are harassed and arbitrarily arrested, especially those who belong to
parties or movements in opposition to the regime. There would not appear to
be any women in the SPDC, in the Cabinet, or in the 14-member Advisory
Group referred to in SPDC Notification No. 3/97 of 15 November 1997.

  2. In the note sent by the Permanent Mission of Myanmar referred to in
paragraph 19 of this report, a number of meetings of the Central Women's
Work Committee are reported to have taken place in the compound of Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi between 11 and 17 December 1997. This is an indication that
women are active in the political field, at least in opposition.
 
C. The situation of refugee women
 
  1. The Special Rapporteur has reported on the situation of Myanmar
refugees and internally displaced persons in his previous reports.
According to testimony received by the Special Rapporteur, many of the
refugees reported about in his report to the General Assembly (A/52/484)
fled in order to escape forced labour, portering and starvation. The
situation of nursing mothers or women with young children is particularly
harsh. There is no doubt that refugee women, particularly those on their
own, are more vulnerable than men to exploitation and deprivation of rights
at every stage of their flight. The Special Rapporteur expresses his
concern that, according to information received, the flow of refugees
continues. In late October and early November 1997 Karen refugees in groups
of 50-100 people, mostly women, children and old people, reportedly entered
Ban Letongkhu, Ban Thijochi and Ban Kuilertor in Umphang, about two
kilometres from the border with Thailand. Myanmar troops had started to
round up and send Karen civilians to a controlled area away from the border.
 
D. Women and forced labour
 
  1. In recent years, increasing numbers of women, including young girls
and the elderly, have been forced to work on infrastructure projects and to
act as porters in war zones. Such uncompensated forced labour continues
despite Myanmar's ratification of ILO Convention No. 29 Concerning Forced
or Compulsory Labour. The Special Rapporteur has on several occasions
reported on the use of forced labour for various development and
infrastructure projects. In these projects women are not spared forced
recruitment, even when they are pregnant or nursing their infants. Those
who are too weak for the strenuous work have to hire another person or face
a fine. On the work site, the forced labourers do not receive appropriate
medical treatment. Further, they are reported to receive no remuneration
and have to provide their own food. While away the women cannot work on
their farms, which results in food shortages for the family. On the work
site women, like men, risk exhaustion, accidents and lack of medical
treatment. They are also victims of many other serious human rights
violations, such as beatings, rape and murder.
 
  2. The Special Rapporteur has on more than one occasion reported on
forced portering. As porters women are more vulnerable than men, since they
have been reported to have been used as (a) forced labour to work as
porters; (b) human shields; and (c) entertainment for soldiers, which often
ends in rape. For instance, on 8 June 1997, SLORC troops from Murngpan
allegedly arrested 17 villagers (10 men and 7 women) at Ter Hung village
and forced them to carry military supplies from Kaeng Twang area to
Murngpan. When they reached Murngpan, the men were released while the women
were detained. During the night all the women were reportedly gang-raped
before being released the next morning. 
 
  3. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that real access to the justice
system by the victims is virtually non- existent.
 
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
 
A. Conclusions
 
  1. The Special Rapporteur regrets that, in spite of his continuing
efforts to obtain the authorization of the Government of Myanmar to visit
the country and in spite of the encouraging statements made by the
Permanent Representative of Myanmar, both in the Commission on Human Rights
and the General Assembly, he has not so far obtained any response. In this
regard, the criticism leveled by the authorities against the reports of the
Special Rapporteur is, in large part, based on the ground that the reports
rely on information received from outside the country and do not reflect
the actual situation in Myanmar. It stands to reason that, if the General
Assembly and the Commission are to benefit from an assessment of that
criticism, the agreement of the Myanmar authorities to a visit by the
Special Rapporteur is essential.
 
  2. The Special Rapporteur has observed the beginnings of a positive
attitude with respect to the easing of restrictions on political parties,
especially in relation to the activities of the NLD and its right to hold
meetings. This change on the part of the authorities is welcome. However,
it would appear that this change is of a purely formal and limited nature
given the virtually complete control which the authorities seem to exercise
on the freedoms of association, assembly and expression. The Special
Rapporteur notes that the absence of respect for the rights pertaining to
democratic governance continues to be at the root of all the major
violations of human rights in Myanmar insofar as this absence is inherent
in a power structure which is autocratic and accountable only to itself,
thus resting on the denial and repression of fundamental rights. The
Special Rapporteur concludes that genuine and enduring improvements in the
situation of human rights in Myanmar cannot be attained without respect for
the rights pertaining to democratic governance. In this regard, he notes
with particular concern that the electoral process initiated in Myanmar by
the general elections of 27 May 1990 has still, after seven years, to reach
its conclusion and that the Government still has not implemented its
commitment to take all necessary steps towards the establishment of
democracy in the light of those elections.
 
  3. On the basis of his examination of the situation of human rights in
Myanmar over the past year, the Special Rapporteur has unfortunately come
to the general conclusion that, except for the apparent easing of
restrictions on political activities as referred to in paragraph 69, there
has been no change in that situation since his last report to the General
Assembly and to the Commission on Human Rights. The  resolutions of the
General Assembly and of the Commission have gone largely unheeded by the
Government of Myanmar. The result is that the conclusions of the Special
Rapporteur as contained in his reports to the General Assembly at its
fifty-second session (A/52/484, annex, paras. 143-151) and the Commission
on Human Rights at its fifty-third session (E/CN.4/1997/64, paras. 101-107)
remain substantially the same, except for the fact that, according to
certain reports, a meeting took place in mid-July 1997 between a
representative of SLORC and an official of the NLD. There have been
suggestions that the substance of those discussions was political in
character but the Special Rapporteur has no concrete information in this
regard. 
 
  1. The well-documented reports, photographs and testimonies received by
the Special Rapporteur lead him to conclude that extrajudicial, summary or
arbitrary executions, the practice of torture, portering and forced labour
continue to occur in Myanmar, particularly in the context of development
programmes and of counter-insurgency operations in minority-dominated
regions. 
 
  2. With regard to arbitrary arrest and detention, the Special Rapporteur
does not doubt that such violations take place on a wide scale if for no
other reason than that an examination of the laws in place show that such
violations are legal and may easily occur. At the same time, the absence of
an independent judiciary, coupled with a host of executive orders
criminalizing far too many aspects of normal civilian conduct, prescribing
enormously disproportionate penalties and authorizing arrest and detention
without judicial review or any other form of judicial authorization, leads
the Special Rapporteur to conclude that a significant percentage of all
arrests and detentions in Myanmar are arbitrary when measured by generally
accepted international standards. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur
expresses his deep concern at the continued detention of many political
prisoners, in particular elected representatives, and the continuing
arrests and harassment of supporters of democratic groups in Myanmar.
 
  3. Because of both visible and invisible pressures, the people of Myanmar
live in a climate of fear in which whatever they or their family members
may say or do, particularly in the exercise of their political rights,
involves the risk of arrest and interrogation by the police or military
intelligence. The Special Rapporteur notes that NLD leaders cannot assemble
in a group, cannot freely discuss, and cannot publish or distribute printed
or video material. In this situation it is difficult to assume that open
discussion and free exchanges of views and opinions can possibly take place
in Myanmar, unless they are in support of the military regime.
 
  4. Turning to freedom of movement and residence in Myanmar, including the
right to leave and re-enter one's own country, the Special Rapporteur
concludes that there are clear violations of those freedoms in both law and
practice. Specifically, severe, unreasonable and, in the case of the Muslim
Rakhine population, racially based restrictions are placed on travel inside
the country and abroad. On the matter of internal deportations and forced
relocations, the Special Rapporteur concludes that the Government's policy
violates freedom of movement and residence and, in some cases, constitutes
discrimination based on ethnic considerations.
 
  5. In his report to the General Assembly, the Special Rapporteur analysed
the laws relating to citizenship and their effect on the exercise of civil
and political rights. He raised serious questions of the consistency of
those laws with generally accepted international norms, since those laws
appear to be discriminatory on the basis of ethnicity, fail to ensure
equality before the law, and do not provide special measures of protection
to which children are entitled. In the short term, this situation produces
serious violations of the rights of both minorities and other persons
living in the country as well as a sense of not belonging to Myanmar. In
the long term, the situation is likely to discourage a sense of national
unity and to encourage and exacerbate secessionist movements likely to be
destructive of a multi-ethnic and multi-religious nation. Sheer repression
following efforts at ceasefire agreements would not appear to be the answer.
 
  6. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the ratification by Myanmar of the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
in 1997. In this regard, he hopes that the Government of Myanmar will also
ratify the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of
the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others, signed by Myanmar on 14
March 1956.
 
B. Recommendations
 
  1. In the light of the foregoing conclusions, the Special Rapporteur
submits the following recommendations.
 
  2. To ensure that the institutions of government genuinely reflect the
will of the people, in conformity with article 21 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, steps should be taken to allow all citizens to
participate freely in the political process, in accordance with the
principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to accelerate
the process of transition to democracy, in particular through the transfer
of power to the democratically elected representatives. The institutions of
the Union of Myanmar should be such as to ensure that the executive
authorities are accountable to the citizenry in a clear and meaningful way.
Furthermore, steps should also be taken to restore the  independence of the
judiciary and to subject the executive to the rule of law and render unjust
and unjustifiable actions justiciable. 
 
  3. All necessary measures should be taken to accelerate the process of
transition to a democratic order and to involve in a meaningful way in that
process the representatives duly elected in 1990. In this regard, genuine
and substantive discussions should take place without further delay between
the present military regime and the leaders of the National League for
Democracy and with other political leaders who were duly elected in the
democratic elections of 1990, including representatives of the ethnic
minorities. Certain steps taken in July 1997 by the SLORC, and in December
1997 by the SPDC, to initiate such discussions are a welcome and positive
development, but one which requires to be intensified. The SPDC should do
all it can to ensure that the character and substance of the discussions
are genuine and are perceived to be so by all the participants and the
people generally. In addition, political parties should be free to decide
the composition of their own delegations for the purposes of the dialogue. 
 
  4. Immediate measures should be taken to put an end to the harassment of
the leaders and the members of the National League for Democracy, to ensure
that the General Secretary of the National League for Democracy is
genuinely free and able to exercise her functions without fear of attack,
and to ensure that all political parties are able freely to carry out their
activities. In other words, the present embargo or recess on the exercise
of political rights, which is rigidly enforced by exceptional legal and
administrative machinery, should be ended. Political "detente" should
replace the political embargo by way of a general amnesty or otherwise.
 
  1. All political detainees, including elected political representatives,
students, workers, peasants and others arrested or detained under martial
law for the exercise of their normal civil and political rights after the
1988 and 1990 demonstrations or as a result of the National Convention
should be immediately released. The Government should also ensure that
there are no acts of intimidation, threats or reprisal against them or
their families and should take appropriate measures to compensate all those
who have suffered arbitrary arrest or detention.
 
  2. Constitutionality and the rule of law should be re-established and
orders and decrees should no longer be the basis of law. All laws rendering
violations of human rights legitimate should be repealed urgently and all
laws should be given due publicity. The laws in Myanmar should be brought
into conformity with international standards regarding the rights relating
to protection of physical integrity, including the right to life,
protection against disappearance, prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment, providing humane conditions for all persons under
detention and ensuring the minimum standards of judicial guarantees.
 
  1. Particular attention should be given to conditions in the country's
prisons and all the necessary steps taken to allow international
humanitarian organizations to have access thereto and to communicate freely
and confidentially with prisoners.
 
  2. Urgent steps should be taken to facilitate and guarantee the enjoyment
of the freedoms of opinion, expression and association, in particular by
decriminalizing the expression of opposition views and by relinquishing
government controls over the media and literary and artistic works.
 
  3. Restrictions relating to the entry and exit of citizens into and out
of the country, as well as their movement within the country, should be
abolished.
 
  4. All discriminatory policies which interfere with the free and equal
enjoyment of property should cease and adequate compensation should be paid
to those who have been arbitrarily or unjustly deprived of their property.
 
  5. The Government of Myanmar should fulfil its obligations under ILO
Convention No. 87 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the
Right to Organize of 1948. In compliance with this Convention, it should
guarantee by law the right of trade unions to exist and operate freely. In
that respect, the Government of Myanmar is encouraged to cooperate more
closely with the ILO through a technical cooperation programme so that the
very serious discrepancies between the law and the practice on the one
hand, and the Convention on the other hand, are eliminated urgently. 
 
  6. The Government of Myanmar is urged to comply with its obligations
under ILO Convention No. 29, prohibiting the practice of forced labour. In
this connection, the Government of Myanmar should urgently take the
appropriate measures to repeal the offending legal provisions under the
Village Act and the Towns Act to halt the practice of forced labour. The
Government of Myanmar is encouraged to cooperate with the Commission of
Inquiry established by the ILO. 
 
  7. Urgent steps should be taken to put an end to the enforced
displacement of persons and to create appropriate conditions to prevent the
flow of refugees to neighbouring States. In the event that the relocation
of villagers becomes necessary in circumstances which are in conformity
with international norms, proper consultations should take place with the
villagers, including the payment of appropriate compensation, reviewable by
independent courts, and the taking of measures to ensure that food, housing
facilities, proper medical care and social amenities, including appropriate
arrangements for the education of children, are provided in adequate
measure in the interest of the displaced persons. 
 
  8. The Government of Myanmar should refrain from actions which contribute
to insecurity affecting the population, such as the use of military force
and bombardments against civilian targets along the border with Thailand.
In this regard, given the great number of allegations of summary or
arbitrary executions and other grave human rights violations, particularly
in areas where ethnic minorities live or to which they are being forcibly
displaced, it is of the utmost importance that the new government conduct a
high-level inquiry with broad terms of reference, specifically to gauge the
extent of the violations and to propose remedial measures.
 
  9. In order to promote repatriation of the Myanmar Muslims and other
minorities, the Government should create the necessary conditions of
respect for their human rights. The Government should ensure, in law and in
practice, their safe return and resettlement in their villages of origin.
To this end, it should also promote their complete civil, political,
social, economic and cultural participation in Myanmar without restriction
or discrimination.
 
 10. The laws relating to citizenship should be revised in order to ensure
that they have no unfavourable incidence on the exercise of civil and
political rights and to be consistent with generally accepted norms. In
particular these laws should be substantially revised so as to remove all
discriminatory features based on ethnicity, legal status and adverse impact
on the right of children to have a nationality. Further, necessary measures
should be adopted by the administration to ensure that citizenship can be
obtained without burdensome and unrealistic administrative procedures and
requirements. These laws should also be brought into conformity with the
principles embodied in the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of
Statelessness. Consideration should also be given by Myanmar to ratify that
Convention as well as the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of
Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. 
 
 11. Military and law enforcement personnel, including prison guards,
should be thoroughly trained and informed as to their responsibility to
treat all persons in full accordance with international human rights norms
and humanitarian law. Such standards should be incorporated in Myanmar law,
including the new constitution to be drafted.
 
 12. Given the magnitude of the abuses, the Government should subject all
officials committing human rights abuses and violations to strict
disciplinary control and punishment and put an end to the culture of
impunity that prevails at present in the public and military sectors. 
 
 13. The Government of Myanmar is urged to fulfil in good faith the
obligations it has assumed under Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter of the
United Nations to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the
Organization for the achievement of universal respect for, and observance
of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to
race, sex, language or religion. In this respect, the Special Rapporteur
wishes to encourage the Government of Myanmar to adopt, as one of the basic
constitutional principles, the provisions of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, a copy of which should be made widely available in the main
languages spoken in Myanmar.
 
 14. The Government of Myanmar should consider accession to the
International Covenants on Human Rights, the Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the two
Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. In the meantime, it
should ensure that the principles proclaimed in those international
instruments are applied, in order to evidence a firm commitment to the
promotion and protection of human rights without discrimination of any kind.
 
 15. The Government of Myanmar should take early steps to amend all
existing laws, orders or decrees in order to ensure that its international
obligations with regard to the rights of women are effectively implemented,
including by the adoption of administrative and other measures as well as
the allocation of sufficient funds. In addition, in the drafting of a new
constitution, steps should be taken to ensure that the rights of women with
regard to equality and non-discrimination are guaranteed by the enactment
of basic provisions. 
                                  
                         END OF DOCUMENT
  
Copyright 1998. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights, Geneva, Switzerland