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

2/12/98:LETTER TO UN SEC-GENERAL (R (r)



Subject: 2/12/98:LETTER TO UN SEC-GENERAL (REPOSTED)

FROM UN WEBSITE:UPDATE ON GA RESOLUTION ON BURMA. THE BURMA RESOLUTION
IS ADOPTED WITHOUT A VOTE ON 9 DECEMBER 1998 BY UNGA.

Resolution NO: 	A/RES/53/162
Agenda Item: 	a.i.-110(c)
Meeting:	A/53/PV.85, 9 Dec 1998, GA/9532, without a vote
Draft:		A/53/625/Add.3, para.49, draft res VII
Topics:		Human Rights in Myanmar.
-------------------------------------
POSTED 5:50AM, 7 DEC 1998.
LETTER TO UN SECRETARY-GENERAL (2/12/98)
****************************************

Dr U Ne Oo
18 Shannon Place
Adelaide SA 5000
Australia.

2 December 1998

Mr Kofi Annan
Secretary-General
UN Headquarters
New York NY 10017, U.S.A.

Dear Secretary-General:

re: The Draft UN General Assembly resolution (A/C.3/53/L.59)

I respectfully register my concerns with UN Secretary-General
regarding the above mentioned draft resolution on Burma.I believe this
resolution, as it stands, fails to introduce any serious measures that
may improve the situation of human rights in Burma. Also, the
resolution does not seem to bring forward the important issues
regarding ceasefire agreements between Burmese military and ethnic
minority groups and, in particular, above the progress in drafting
Burma's constitution. I am particularly concerned that the omission of
such agenda item in the UN General Assembly resolution will have
adverse impact on our efforts for reconciliation with the ethnic
minority groups. Following, I have summed-up my findings:

1. Forced labour: It becomes clear that the approach taken by the
United Nations General Assembly and its resolutions with regard to
forced labour in Burma has been inadequate. In 1996, the UN General
Assembly encouraged the International Labour Organization to
investigate whether Burma has been in violation of the Forced Labour
Convention of 1930 and the workers' Right to Organize Convention of
1948. In March s1997, the ILO Commission of INquiry undertook the task
and it reported that (a) there have been evidence of the widespread
use of forced labour in Burma and (b) Burma's Village and Town Acts of
1908 is in violation of the ILO Forced Labour Convention. The ILO
Commission of Inquiry has made recommendations in its July 1998

report, which is to be endorsed in this years' (draft) UNGA
resolution. The ILO Commission of Inquiry recommended Burma to repeal
the Village and Town Acts of 1908.

Notably, prior to setting-up of the ILO Commission of Inquiry, the
major human rights violations including forced labour in Burma have
been documented by former UN Special Rapporteur for HUman Rights,
Professor Yozo Yokota. Therefore, the United Nations and international
community already have had enough evidence about the widespread use of
forced labour in Burma. It must be stressed, as noted in the report by
ILO Commission of Inquiry, that the authorities in Burma in practice
do not apply or make any reference to the Village and Town Acts when
exacting forced labour from the population. Furthermore, the
authorities' exaction of forced labour, generally, are accompanied by
the other form of human rights abuses, such as forced relocation. My
assumption about Village and Town Acts in Burma is that the military
government's representative at the UN forums simply use aforementioned
Acts as an excuse to cover-up the forced labour in Burma. In any
event, we will not be able to eliminate forced labour in Burma simply
by revoking the Village and Town Acts. The United Nations also needs
to be aware that the ILO Commission of Inquiry has made its
recommendations to remedy the situation of forced labour only within
that Organizations' competence and mandate. The United Nations General
Assembly merely seeking to endorse the recommendations of ILO
Commission of Inquiry cannot, therefore, be considered as an adequate
response by the UN to solve the problems of forced labour in Burma.
Clearly, the United Nations itself must make additional measures to
improve the situation of forced labour. Whilst numerous suggestions
have already been made to tackle the problem, the United Nations
sending human rights monitors to Burma will be most appropriate at
this time.

The forced labour in Burma has clearly been an outstanding problem
that the UN must give an urgent attention. The United Nations by
itself is having enough evidence and has been ascertained of these
facts by /* independent*/ agency such as ILO, it is appropriate to take
action to solve the problem. /* TEXTS DELETED */

2. Notes on CRPP: In my view, the draft resolution doesn't give
appropriate attention to the political developments, such as the
National League for Democracy's efforts to convene the Parliament and
also the formation of Committee Representing Peoples' Parliament
(CRPP). The Operative Paragraph (8) of the draft resolution indirectly
recognize the formation of CRPP. I, however, believe the UN General
Assembly should make a direct recognition of the political
developments in Burma, for example, by highlighting the formation and
the mandate of CRPP in the resolution. The ;UN General Assembly, in
normal circumstances, must show its impartiality regarding with
various power contenders within Burma, in this case, the political
developments in Burma should be stated in the resolution in a truthful
and straightforward manner. Such action is justified because the NLD
is the legitimate contender for power. The UN General Assembly failing

to recognize these political developments will amount to the UN siding
with illegitimate military government.

3. Constitution writing and ceasefire agreements: There has been
omission of agendas in the draft resolution regarding the constitution
writing in Burma and the Burmese army's ceasefire agreements with
ethnic minority groups. In the last years' UNGA resolution, A/52/137,
the lack of progress in the drafting of constitution was noted in
Operative Paragraph (10). The Burmese Army's ceasefire agreements with
ethnic minority rebel groups were also mentioned in Prembular
Paragraph (13) as, "Recalling also the conclusion of ceasefire
agreements between the Government of Myanmar and several ethnic
groups". We, the pro-democracy groups, are quite aware that SPDC/SLORC
has lost the momentum in writing constitution. However, the UN General
Assembly omitting the agenda for writing constitution in Burma, at
this time, may have some implications.

The Burmese military junta had put forward the agenda for writing
constitution of Burma in 1992 in order to legitimize its stay on
power. The junta at that time has also given signals to the ethnic
rebel groups that ceasefire agreements may be made in return for
participation in the constitution writing process. From the outset,
many pro-democracy groups, including the ethnic rebels, are quite
aware that such offer for political concessions by the military was
not a genuine one. Nevertheless, there has been a genuine desire from
the broad spectrum of pro-democracy groups that the ethnic minority
rebels should enter ceasefire agreements in the hope that they'll be
able to participate in a tripartite dialogue, possibly using the
constitutional convention as a forum. Therefore, it is appropriate to
keep the agenda for writing constitution in the UN General Assembly
resolution.

There has also been the danger of ethnic rebel groups mis-interpreting
the omission of the agenda for writing constitution in the UN
resolution. These ethnic rebel groups who concluded ceasefire
agreements with Burmese army, including the Karen National Union that
still has not signed a ceasefire agreement, may view this as they have
been denied of the opportunity to participate in the national
political process. This may lead to the ethnic rebel groups using
violence to make their points. I believe that such outcome is not in
the interested of Burma that has been in the transition from military
dictatorship to democracy.

In conclusion, the draft resolution, as it stands, does not appears to
pave the ways for improvement of the situation in Burma. Although
strong in its texts, this draft resolution (1) does not provide any
substantive measure to improve major human rights violations; (2) does
not lend the civilian opposition of any leverage in order to initiate
a political dialogue and (3) creates uncertain atmosphere for the
reconciliation with ethnic minority groups. I fear that, with this
kind of resolution, we will not be able to make any improvement on
human rights situation particularly in the coming year. I therefore
urge the Secretary-General to look into the matter to improve the

texts of the resolution.

I am aware and appreciate very much that the Secretary-General and his
good office have been intensifying their efforts, especially in recent
weeks, to initiate dialogue in Burma. I, however, feel certain that
these measures will not be adequate to bring the Burmese junta to the
negotiating table. The United Nations and international community must
apply additional leverage on the junta through UN General Assembly
resolution or by any other mechanisms, such as UN Security Council.

In closing, I thank the Secretary-General and UNited Nations for your
continuing efforts made on Burma.

Yours respectfully and sincerely
Sd. U Ne Oo.

Copy to:

1. Hon. Madeleine K Albright, Secretary of State, US Department of
State, Washington DC 20520, USA.

2. Hon. Rajsoomer Lallah, Special Rapporteur for HUman Rights, c/-
Center for HUman Rights, Palias des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10,
Switzerland.

3. Coordinator on Forced Labour, International Labour Organization, 4
Route des Morillons, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland.

--

HTTP://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~uneoo
EMAILS: drunoo@xxxxxxxxxxxx, uneoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
POSTMAIL: Dr U Ne Oo, 18 Shannon Place, Adelaide SA 5000, AUSTRALIA
[http://freeburma.org/][http://www.angelfire.com/al/homepageas/index.htm

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =