Land rights

expand all
collapse all

Individual Documents

Title: SUMMARY REPORT OF THE THIRD MEKONG REGIONAL LAND FORUM
Sub-title: LAND TENURE IN MEKONG FOREST LANDSCAPES: ADVANCING THE RECOGNITION OF CUSTOMARY RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT PRACTICES
Description: The Mekong Region Land Governance project (MRLG) successfully organized the first Mekong Regional Land Forum in Hanoi in 2016 and co-organized the second with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Bangkok in 2018. The 3rd Mekong Regional Land Forum (hereafter the Forum) took place on 26 and 27 May 2021 and was organized by MRLG, FAO and the Land Portal. The focus of the Forum was on advancing the recognition of customary rights and responsible investment practices in Mekong forest landscapes. Recent global disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted the dependence of Mekong region communities on land and forest resources. More widely recognized than ever, secure tenure and access to land and forests are preconditions for the sustainable management of resources. The Forum brought together reform-minded actors within and beyond the region to engage in in-depth, interactive debate on issues that cut to the core of local tenure security and community resource management. Day 1 of the Forum focused on advancing customary and collective forest tenure rights. The first session compared and examined experiences and approaches within national tenure regimes in Mekong countries. The second session situated these experiences within global trends, emphasizing the potential for regional platforms such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to foster more inclusive and grounded policies for the sustainable management of forests – with diverse benefits including securing tenure rights, local livelihoods, gender equity, and contributions to national commitments on biodiversity and climate change. Day 2 of the Forum focused on how to manage and respond to patterns and practices of investment in Mekong forest landscapes, which is a key issue for smallholder tenure security within Mekong countries. The third Forum overview session aimed at demystifying the principles of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) – principles that are designed to protect the rights of com- munities to land and resources and also to protect investments by avoiding land conflicts. The fourth session highlighted the potential effectiveness of tools such as the ASEAN Guidelines for Responsible Agricultural Investment in Food, Agriculture and Forestry (ASEAN-RAI) in steering agribusiness investments in Mekong forest landscapes towards a more sustainable future. Each Forum session was organized in four parts: a) An expert review of the topic, complemented by two case study presentations. b) A panel discussion with experts and representatives from government and civil society, followed by questions from the public to the speakers and panellists. c) In-person and online breakout groups for debate among participants around a specific experience, topic or question. d) A sum-up of key takeaways from the sessions to stimulate further action. The goal of the Forum was to provide a multi-stakeholder platform for cross-country dialogue on major policy reforms and programmatic initiatives in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Viet Nam relating to land and forest tenure governance. We hope that this summary of the Forum reflects the quality of the presentations and discussions and provides inspiration for the participants to continue pro- moting the land rights of forest communities across the region. We also intend for this summary to provide a comprehensive review of the key messages from the event for those who could not join. Enjoy the reading. Please find key information about the event, online summaries and more on the Land Portal website..."
Source/publisher: Mekong Regional Land Forum 2021
Date of publication: 2021-05-27
Date of entry/update: 2021-10-12
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 5.18 MB (66 pages)
more
Title: Protect the Golden Triangle’s Ruak River Basin – ရွှေတြိဂံ နမ့်ဟုတ်မြစ်ဝှမ်းဒေသကို ကာကွယ်ပါ
Sub-title: SAC go-ahead for UWSA factories in Tachileik threatens far-reaching pollution - စစ်ကောင်စီက UWSA အား တာချီလိတ်တွင် စက်ရုံတည်ဆောက်ခွင့်ပေးလိုက်ခြင်းသည် ကြီးမားသော ညစ်ညမ်းမှုအဖြစ် ခြိမ်းခြောက်နေ
Description: "Renewed efforts by the United Wa State Army’s Hong Pang conglomerate, backed by the SAC regime, to push through construction of two factories on confiscated land near Tachileik, a kilometer from the Thai border, are being strongly opposed by local communities, who want their farmland returned and fear far-reaching polluting impacts. The factories are planned on 100 acres of land east of Tachileik town, part of a 600- acre plot confiscated from residents of Hong Luek village in 1998-1999 by the Burma Army to set up an industrial zone. The 100 acre-plot was acquired by the Hong Pang company in 2001 for factories which were never built. In 2011, the Hong Luek farmers started appealing to the USDP government for the return of their lands in the industrial zone, which they had continued to farm where possible. Despite ongoing appeals after the NLD government came to power, on September 5, 2019, the Shan State government granted permission to Hong Pang’s Loi Sam Song company to build two factories on their 100 acre plot: a rubber crumb factory and a manganese processing factory. In October 2019, the UWSA company tried to start fencing off the land, but the farmers blocked this. The company sued them for trespass and destruction of property, but did not proceed with construction. During 2020 and early 2021, the farmers continued to block efforts by the company to fence off their farmlands, and to appeal through official channels for land return. On May 6, 2021, three months after the military coup, the company suddenly brought in bulldozers to begin levelling the land. When local farmers and monks again blocked this, police were brought in to protect the company workers, showing that the new regime was backing the UWSA’s plans. During May and June, despite intimidation, locals bravely continued to try and block the company’s construction efforts, but the company was allowed to work at night, during curfew hours, managing to lay cement fencing foundations around the land, which are difficult to remove. Construction has paused since early July, but locals assume this is because of the Covid lockdown. Locals are opposing the factory construction not only due to loss of farmlands, but also fears of pollution, particularly of the Ruak River, which flows past the industrial zone before forming the border with Thailand and flowing into the Mekong River at the Golden Triangle confluence. During the past few years, Thai water authorities have measured dangerous levels of manganese in the Ruak River, from which the Mae Sai water supply is pumped. This is likely due to contamination from existing manganese mines north of Tachileik and manganese ore stockpiles, all in the Ruak River catchment area. Construction of a manganese processing factory directly beside the Ruak River will greatly worsen the existing contamination, which is particularly dangerous for children’s health. Locals also worry about air pollution from both factories, particularly the foul smell of rubber processing, which will permeate the eastern suburbs of Tachileik and adjoining areas of Mae Sai in Thailand, causing adverse health impacts and damaging the tourist industry. Manganese mining and widespread rubber cultivation in Tachileik have already negatively impacted the local environment and livelihoods, for the enrichment of military elites and outside investors. The planned factories are poised to inflict even further damage, on both sides of the border. SHRF strongly supports the brave efforts of the Hong Luek villagers to protect their lands, and urges the SAC and UWSA to immediately cancel the planned factory projects, so that the lands can be returned to their rightful owners. We are inspired by the Mae Sai residents’ successful blocking 20 years ago of Hong Pang’s efforts to build a polluting coal-fired power plant in Tachileik, and hope that Mae Sai communities will mobilize again to join this new struggle to protect our shared Ruak river basin environment..."
Source/publisher: Shan Human Rights Foundation
Date of publication: 2021-08-26
Date of entry/update: 2021-08-26
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf pdf pdf pdf
Size: 8.16 MB 6.82 MB 7.9 MB 7.89 MB
more
Title: Marginalised people's land rights and access: ethnic minorities, the poor and women
Description: "Overview: The poor, ethnic minorities and women in particular suffer marginalisation that is exacerbated by circumscribed access to land and insecurity of tenure. Ethnic minority land use practices, notably shifting cultivation, are criminalised, while citizenship issues and outright discrimination and ethnic chauvinism have excluded or displaced minorities from access to resources as majority farmers have increasingly availed themselves of land and other resources since upland margins have become more accessible. In some cases, security-oriented programs have distanced ethnic minority communities from land and other resources that are the basis of their livelihoods. Women have seen customary rights in land weakened by formalisation that privileges officially designated heads of households, who are usually male. Decisions and meetings often mainly involve men, and land use planning can neglect land-based resources that are primarily in women's work domains.....Key trends and dynamics: The concept of marginalisation brings together other key themes to specify the negative impacts of land relations on certain groups of people around the Mekong region. The term ‘marginalised’ can be defined as representing the treatment of a person or a group as insignificant or peripheral. There are three important relations to highlight here. Firstly, marginalisation is a process rather than an antecedent condition. Secondly, one becomes marginalised from something, and in this case marginalisation primarily involves access to, control of, or use of land. Thirdly, the marginalised are placed in relation to others who do not suffer the same tribulations. For this latter point, it is possible to apply multiple scales, such as highlighting individuals within a household or a community, or a significant social sub-group or ethnic minority within a particular nation-state. It could be argued that the Mekong region itself is marginalised within global trade and power relations, caught up in power struggles between large capitalist forces such as the USA and China. However, the larger the scale of reference, the greater the risk that inequalities within go unqualified. Although processes of marginalisation take place in specific localised ways, it is important to reflect on the bigger picture of economic transformation in the Mekong region. At one level, it is important to take a historical perspective in order to view the marginalising effect of land policies over the long term. This includes colonial-era law drafted in support of plantation economies, certain aspects of which are retained in present-day statutory law. Moving towards recent economic policy, when considering access to and control of land for smallholders and the rural poor, the marketisation of agriculture, with the introduction of ‘boom crops’ has a strong impact when unaccompanied by propoor policies (Lamb et al. 2015). Neoliberalism encourages well-connected national elites to take control of markets and resources that bolsters their land-based wealth at the expense of the poor (Springer 2011). This is clearly seen in the advent of crony capitalism in Myanmar (Global Witness 2015; Woods 2011). A point of focus for research on marginalising practices highlights large-scale land investments that are discriminatory to local land users, particularly those who make a living outside of statesupported market arenas that have become the priority of developmentalist regimes. In Cambodia, Economic Land Concessions (ELCs) have led to the clearing of farmland and forest under use by indigenous peoples, undermining community resource management practices (Bues 2011). They have also affected the ability of indigenous groups to register themselves under collective land titling, while most concession labour is given to in-migrants (Prachvuthy 2011). Similarly, concessions in Lao PDR have enclosed space, shutting it off to communities who were previously reliant on variety of resources in the designated zone (Baird 2011). In Myanmar, Gittleman and Brown (2014) assert that nearly 1,000 families will be displaced to make way for Thilawa Special Economic Zone, and that the process of this relocation fails to meet international guidelines. There are certain social sub-groups who can be highlighted as being on the receiving end of marginalising processes. However, it is important to clarify that each sub-group should not be assumed to carry a singular identity, and that disparity will be found within. Firstly, large-scale land development can marginalise smallholders who already may be poorly served by statutory law on tenure security. Drbohlav and Hejkrlik (2018) highlight a case from Cambodia where 1,400 fishing families were relocated to make way for a land concession in the Botum Sakor National Park. The study shows that the livelihoods of those relocated has worsened, with employment issues, poor infrastructure at the relocation site, and issues over access to health and education services. Nguyen, Westen and Zoomers (2014) show how the acquisition of land for infrastructure development in peri-urban areas of central Vietnam takes little account of the wishes of local farming households whose land is taken. Ethnic minorities frequently suffer from the exploitation of land for new investment ventures. For example, there is evidence of multiple land grabs from the Ta’ang minority in Shan State, Myanmar, in order to serve military needs such as housing, training, and income generation through hydropower, oil and gas pipelines (Ta’ang Student and Youth Organization 2011). There is much attention brought to the plight of indigenous communities in Ratanakiri, Cambodia, who have lost their land to rubber plantations operated by the Vietnamese company HAGL (Work 2016). In the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, indigenous sea nomads in Southern Thailand have suffered from land dispossession to make way for tourism developments (Neef et al. 2018). However, as a counterpoint Mellac (2011) notes that customary practices for Tai-speaking groups in Northern Vietnam have endured during periods of collectivisation and then individualised marketdriven land use rights. In this way, ethnic groups do display the solidarity and power to ride out the potential negative impacts from outside pressures. Despite legal declarations of equality, patriarchal practices in Mekong countries favour men who monopolise control of land as heads of households (see also the ‘Gender and land’ key theme for further details). They frequently maintain control of land through titling programmes. In Ratanakiri Province, Cambodia, women and girls are becoming marginalised as a consequence of emerging capitalist relations, with reduced autonomy and agency including the recognition of their land rights (Mi Young Park and Maffii 2017). However, there are actions to let women’s voices be heard. In Myanmar, a coalition of over 100 organisations lobbied for the inclusion of women in discussions over National Land Use Policy (NLUP) and helped bring them to the table in the peace process (Faxon 2017; Faxon, Furlong, and Phyu 2015). The urban poor also suffer from insecure land tenure while residing in informal housing, leaving them open to the threat of forced eviction (Cambodian Human Rights Action Committee 2009; Chi Mgbako et al. 2010). Bugalski and Pred (2010) note how a land titling programme in Phnom Penh excluded certain informal communities, thereby exacerbating inequalities (see key theme on ‘Urban land governance’ for further information). There are various ways in which marginalisation is felt by affected communities. Most clearly in relation to land is dispossession (see key theme on ‘Land dispossession/land grabbing’). Engvall and Kokko (2007) make a statistical link between land tenure security and poverty in Cambodia, where a proposed land reform package could result in a 16% fall in poverty incidence for landowning rural households and a 30% fall for the landless. A report from Myanmar looks at rural debt, and how its emergence through entry into marketised agriculture can result in distress sales of land (Kloeppinger-todd and Sandar 2013). Marginalisation from access to land can also impact upon food security for smallholder farmers, where the emergence of cash cropping takes precedence over production for local consumption (Land Core Group 2010; Rammohan and Pritchard 2014). A further impact is cultural, particularly considering that the capitalisation of land frequently ignores other important meanings to its users. By isolating access, the very cultural identity of users can be threatened, where land operates as a key identifier..."
Source/publisher: Mekong Land Research Forum
Date of publication: 2021-06-00
Date of entry/update: 2021-06-24
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 337.1 KB
more
Title: Gender and generation in rural politics in Myanmar: a missed space for (re)negotiation?
Topic: Gender; generation; social justice; agrarian transformation; environmental transformation; rural politics
Topic: Gender; generation; social justice; agrarian transformation; environmental transformation; rural politics
Description: "ABSTRACT: The changes that have swept rural Myanmar, transforming landscapes and affecting livelihoods, have ignited rural politics and civil society and grassroot organizations’ strategies to counter, resist, negotiate and adapt to these changes. Rural politics have centred on broad calls for agrarian and environmental rights and social justice that do not address women’s rights, gender and generational justice explicitly. Based on fieldwork carried out in Myanmar’s Taninthary region, and engagement with grassroots organizations, I examine how gender and generational power dynamics play out, transform and are transformed in processes of agrarian and environmental change and rural politics.....Introduction: In Myanmar, land and natural resources have been historically the focus of extractivist initiatives that benefited colonial administrations, central states, the military and powerful elites and deprived small farmers, fishers and forest-dependent groups, including ethnic groups, particularly women and girls, of access to natural resources, shelter and livelihoods (Karen Human Rights Group 2006, 2015; Tavoyan Women’s Union 2015; Barbesgaard 2019; see also Kramer forthcoming; Sekine forthcoming, this collection). Starting in 2012 the neoliberal orientation of recent civilian governments, discursively legitimized by agendas for economic growth, sustainable development and climate change mitigation and adaptation, has bolstered this tendency. Since 2011, legal reforms in the areas of land use, land conversion, and investments have facilitated the entrance and operations of international capital and investors in the country. In addition, the 2012 preliminary ceasefire between the Union Government (UG) and several Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) has enabled access of domestic and foreign capital to once secluded areas, including Tanintharyi region in the South, which had long been a hotspot of conflict and ethnic insurgency and had thus remained relatively isolated (Bryant 1994; Malseed 2009; Woods 2015a, 2015b). The surge of extractive and infrastructure development initiatives, combined with conservation plans to restrict access to protected and designated areas, have accelerated the transformation of Myanmar’s rural landscapes and livelihoods. This, in turn, has sparked civil society and grassroots organizations’ strategies and actions to resist, negotiate and adapt to these changes. Members of affected communities, often with support from grassroots and local civil society organizations, have resisted, mobilized and strategized on ways to advance their own counter-visions of development (Park 2019). Coupled with opportunities to engage in ‘contentious politics’ (Tarrow 1994; Tilly 2002, 2004) as noted in the introductory article of this Special Issue, the mobilization from below has expanded the repertoire of ‘contentious performances’ that are being developed dynamically and in conversation with the political, social and economic context (Tilly 2002, 2004). In Myanmar, just like in other countries in the region, women and men, young and old, have taken active part in these political struggles; women, notably, have been at the forefront of protests and diverse forms of activism, often at the cost of their bodily integrity and the breakdown in family relations. Research from other countries confirms that women, including older women, participated in protests often as a strategy to curb violent repression and retaliation by the military and the police, to protect their sons and husbands, and in some cases as activists in their own right (see for example, Brickell 2014; Lamb et al. 2017; Park and Maffii 2017; Tavoyan Women’s Union 2015; Morgan 2017). While these changes affect different people, including their political agency, in ways that are mediated by gender, age, ethnicity and other social and power differences, the urgency and fluidity of the issues on the ground requires cohesion in mobilization and swift action. Partly because of this, rural politics have tended to centre on broad calls for agrarian and environmental rights and social justice that do not address women’s rights, gender equality and generational justice explicitly. Women’s groups have also been often side-lined; whereas youth have been engaged by environmental and ethnic grassroots groups within the frame of well-defined scripts that do not challenge power, gender and age hierarchies. The exclusion of women’s groups and gender equality from agrarian and environmental justice movements, and the reasons underlying it, have been highlighted by many feminist scholars (see for example, Harris 2015; Park 2018; Deere 2003; Stephen 2006; Krishna 2015) who have called for urgent convergence to avoid the risk that movements for social justice could be void of gender and generational justice. Krishna (2015), for example, notes that in India some of the larger movements that have led to state formation have failed to recognize women’s claims for gender justice in spite of their conspicuous participation and even leadership. In the Andes, Harris (2015, 171) highlights the disconnect between feminist and indigenous and other movements and calls for a better articulation of ‘feminist analytics and organizing’, advocating for going beyond women’s engagement towards adoption of a feminist agenda that questions power structures. The fight against patriarchy has also been central to the demands of peasant women in international movements such as La Via Campesina. This article explores the potential of rural politics to be catalytic of change that promotes gender and generational justice and contributes to making the case for the need for not one but multiple convergences – feminist political ecology with feminist political economy, agrarian and environmental movements with feminist movements. Based on fieldwork conducted in Tanintharyi between 2014 and 2018 and engagement with local grassroots organizations, I examine how gender and generational power dynamics play out, transform and are transformed in processes of agrarian and environmental change and rural politics. I look at the conditions that support a (re)negotiation of gender roles and relations and how these could be conducive to gender-transformative rural politics, that is, politics that fosters gender equality and generational justice as a key dimension of social change and social justice (Cornwall 2014)..."
Creator/author:
Source/publisher: The Journal of Peasant Studies via Routledge (London)
Date of publication: 2021-01-12
Date of entry/update: 2021-04-27
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 2.53 MB
more
Title: New report: Proposed Myanmar dam could displace thousands
Sub-title: Some worry that despite financial and social costs, much of the electricity proposed dam will generate will be exported.
Description: "Myanmar government officials claim a hydroelectricity project along the Tanintharyi River could significantly benefit the Southeast Asian nation. But new research by a trio of human rights organisations offers a dark contrast to that bright picture. Almost 7,000 people could be displaced if a dam is built along the river, according to a joint report, Blocking a Bloodline, by Candle Light, Southern Youth, and the Tarkapaw Youth Group. "These approximately 7,000 people will lose everything they know, including their way of life, community and kinship, ancestral history, local use of natural resources, and their lands," Human Rights Watch's Asia Deputy Director Phil Robertson wrote in an email to Al Jazeera. "If this [project] goes forward, [the villagers] will mark the first day of their displacement as the start of the worst period of their lives, when their rights were trod on by the Myanmar government and they were shuffled off to a wholly inadequate resettlement area where quality land, water, services, and support are entirely lacking." The reports suggest the project will alter the livelihoods of the Karen, the area's indigenous people. This dam could "irreversibly alter the lives of up to 32,000 people living along it," the authors write. They predict that not only could up to 32 upstream villages be displaced, but 58,500 hectares of land would likely be destroyed..."
Creator/author:
Source/publisher: "Al Jazeera"
Date of publication: 2019-08-14
Date of entry/update: 2019-08-18
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
more
Title: The Villagers speak out for their land for Thai - Myanmar' bridge 2-ရၤမတံနီၣ်ဂံၢ်( ၂)တိၤအဂီၢ် ဟံၣ်ဃီဘၣ်တၢ်မၤဟးဂီၤအဖီခိၣ် ကလိာ်ဘၢလိာ်ကွီၢ်က့ၤ၀ဲအဂ့ၢ် ၦၤအတူၢ်ဘၣ်တၢ်တဖၣ်စံး၀ဲ
Description: “ၦၤလၢတၢ်မၤဟးဂီၤအဟံၣ်ခဲအံၤသ့ၣ်တဖၣ် ကီၢ်ပဒိၣ်ဟ့ၣ်စ့အီၣ်လိးလီၤႉ ပတဟံးအီၤတမ့ၢ်ဘၣ်ႉ ဟ့ၣ်၀ဲထဲတၢ်သုးလီၢ်သုး ကျဲအလဲန့ၣ်လီၤႉ ဘၣ်မနုၤဃိ ၦၤထံဖိကီၢ်ဖိသ့ၣ်တဖၣ်တသုးဘၣ်လဲၣ်န့ၣ် ကျဲမုၢ်၀ဲန့ၣ်အကျိၤဆီ တလဲသးအဃိန့ၣ်လီၤႉ ပတီၣ်ထီၣ်လၢကဘှါရှဲန့ၢ်ၦၤအဘျီတဖၣ်အဘီလျီၤႉ အ၀ဲသ့ၣ်တကပၤတဲ၀ဲလၢပဟံၣ်လီၢ်န့ၣ်အိၣ် တလၢကွံာ်၀ဲထံကီၢ် အဟီၣ်ခိၣ်လီၢ်အဃိ မၤဟးဂီၤကွံာ်၀ဲန့ၣ်လီၤႉ မၤ၀ဲလၢအတဖိးမံဒီးတၢ်ဘျၢဘၣ်န့ၣ်လီၤႉ ပကဲကမျၢၢ်ဘၣ်ဒိလၢၦၤလီၤႉ ၀့ၢ်အံၤပၢပြးခိၣ်ဟ့ၣ်လီၤတၢ်ကလုၢ် ဟဲမၤဟးဂီၤ၀ဲလၢဂီၤခီ(၅)နၣ်ရံၣ်လၢတၢ်န့ၣ်အဃိ ပဟံးပက့ၤ လိာ်ဘၢလိာ်ကွၢ်က့ၤ အ၀ဲသ့ၣ်လီၤႉ..."
Creator/author: စးအဲၣ်ဆူ
Source/publisher: KIC (Karen Information Center)
Date of publication: 2018-12-12
Date of entry/update: 2019-01-14
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: Sgaw Karen
more
Title: Myanmar Democracy: Small Steps on a Long Journey
Description: ''For decades, Myanmar was governed by a small military elite, accused of acting solely in their own interests. The introduction of a new constitution in 2008 was a dramatic and significant development, creating 14 new state and region governments and parliaments and the promise of democratic participation by a more diverse range of actors. At its heart, democratization in Myanmar means transforming a top-down, autocratic regime into a system that is responsive to the needs and aspirations of democratic constituencies at many levels—local, regional, and national—and establishing effective mechanisms of public administration to achieve them. The creation of the state and region governments thus marks the beginning of a process of decentralization with vast potential for greater participation by citizens and greater responsiveness to regional and local needs. On October 31, The Asia Foundation published a new edition of its flagship report, State and Region Governments in Myanmar, reflecting on five years of progress in Myanmar’s decentralization. The report finds both challenges ahead and grounds for cautious optimism, with encouraging signs of increasing accountability, responsiveness to local needs, and greater public participation in governance...''
Creator/author: Richard Batcheler
Source/publisher: Asia Foundation
Date of publication: 2018-11-07
Date of entry/update: 2019-01-13
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: Housing, Land and Property Rights in Myanmar
Description: ''Over the past decade, Displacement Solutions has undertaken extensive research aimed at shedding light on the numerous housing, land and property (HLP) rights issues facing the people of Myanmar. Through these efforts DS aims to build the capacity of the people of Myanmar to exercise and enforce their HLP rights. To this end, DS provides practical guidance to citizens and their governments through the development of institutional and policy frameworks, guiding principles and practical steps which seek to reduce, eliminate and redress HLP rights abuses. The following eleven books and reports were published with the intent of informing and aiding the Myanmar government, key ethnic actors, humanitarian organisations and citizens on the importance of HLP rights within Myanmar. The documents outlined here are just a portion of DS' research efforts concerning the country. Many of our other papers and reports on more sensitive themes have intentionally been kept internal by the organisations and institutions for whom they were prepared. These publications cover topics spanning national policy development on land grabbing and speculation, recommendations for the development of a comprehensive HLP rights framework within Myanmar, the manner in which HLP rights can be addressed during peace negotiations as well as land rights in relation to mine action. The most recent report outlines the need for the government of Myanmar to establish a Myanmar National Climate Land Bank to pre-emptively address the threats of climate displacement. Throughout the past ten years, DS has had the privilege of working with an extraordinary group of legal experts, local groups and donors, and would like to thank them all once again for their collective efforts to make Myanmar a country where housing, land and property rights are enjoyed in full by everyone. Finally, a special thanks to Hannah Crothers and Amy Pattle from Monash Law School for their assistance in preparing this overview...''
Creator/author: Scott Leckie
Source/publisher: Displacement Solutions
Date of publication: 2018-06-04
Date of entry/update: 2019-01-08
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 243.14 KB
more
Title: A vision for restitution in Myanmar
Description: ''The sun sets over a village in rural Myanmar, where a group of men and women discuss a recent announcement they have seen posted in the distant Township Office. The notice refers to a company’s claims on certain parcels of land that the villagers’ families have been cultivating for decades. According to the notice, such land is now officially classified as vacant; some of the land has already been fenced off and used to cultivate rubber. The deadline for objections mentioned in the letter had passed long before any of the affected farmers realised what was going on. Some of the villagers, who used to cultivate this land but were displaced, live elsewhere and are unaware of the situation. What is to be done? The need for HLP restitution Ten years after the enactment of Myanmar’s new Constitution in 2008 and the start of the period of government transition, the quest for peace and for real and effective remedies for past and present land grabbing and displacement continues despite some positive – albeit tentative – steps being taken by the government. During the civil wars, entire villages were forcibly displaced, with people also suffering forced labour and gender-based violence.1 The legal framework continues to be a complicated mix of colonial-era legislation and newer laws, with the latter clearly designed to favour private investment and widespread land acquisition without adequate safeguards to protect the rights of farmers and their families.2 Laws governing land acquisition disproportionately favour the State, the military and companies which have close relationships with or are otherwise favoured by these entities, and pay less attention to the rights of affected people and communities...''
Creator/author: José Arraiza and Scott Leckie
Source/publisher: Displacement Solutions
Date of publication: 2018-02-23
Date of entry/update: 2019-01-08
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 334.75 KB
more
Title: Land confiscation threatens villagers? livelihoods in Dooplaya District
Description: "In September 2011, residents of Je--- village, Kawkareik Township told KHRG that they feared soldiers under Tatmadaw Border Guard Battalion #1022 and LIBs #355 and #546 would soon complete the confiscation of approximately 500 acres of land in their community in order to develop a large camp for Battalion #1022 and homes for soldiers? families. According to the villagers, the area has already been surveyed and the Je--- village head has informed local plantation and paddy farm owners whose lands are to be confiscated. The villagers reported that approximately 167 acres of agricultural land, including seven rubber plantations, nine paddy farms, and seventeen betelnut and durian plantations belonging to 26 residents of Je--- have already been surveyed, although they expressed concern that more land would be expropriated in the future. The Je--- residents said that the village head had told them rubber plantation owners would be compensated according to the number of trees they owned, but that the villagers were collectively refusing compensation and avoiding attending a meeting at which they worried they would be ordered to sign over their land. The villagers that spoke with KHRG said they believed the Tatmadaw intended to take over their land in October after the end of the annual monsoon, and that this would seriously undermine livelihoods in a community in which many villagers depended on subsistence agriculture on established land. This bulletin is based on information collected by KHRG researchers in September and October 2011, including five interviews with residents of Je--- village, 91 photographs of the area, and a written record of lands earmarked for confiscation."
Source/publisher: Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG)
Date of publication: 2011-10-31
Date of entry/update: 2012-01-23
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 452.67 KB
more
Title: Displacement and Dispossession: Forced Migration and Land Rights in Burma
Description: "According to COHRE?s new report, ?Displacement and Dispossession: Forced Migration and Land Rights in Burma?, land confiscation by Government forces is responsible for many serious housing, land and property (HLP) rights violations in Burma. These abuses occur during military counter-insurgency operations; to clear land for the construction of new army bases; to make way for infrastructure development projects; to facilitate natural resource extraction; and to cater for the vested interests of business. ?Displacement and Dispossession: Forced Migration and Land Rights in Burma? also reveals that control of land is a key strategy for the military regime, and a means of promoting the on-going expansion of the Burmese Army (Tatmadaw). In 1998, the SPDC issued a directive instructing Tatmadaw battalions to become self-sufficient in rice and other basic provisions. This prompted the Tatmadaw to ?live off the land? by appropriating resources (food, cash, labour, land) from the civilian population. This policy has exacerbated conflict and displacement across much of rural Burma. The Thai Burma Border Consortium (TBBC) and its partners estimate that during 2007, approximately 76,000 people have been newly displaced by armed conflict and associated human rights abuses. The majority of new incidents of forced migration and village destruction were concentrated in northeast Karen State and adjacent areas of Pegu Division. The total number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Eastern Burma in October 2007 was 503,000. These included 295,000 people in ceasefire zones, 99,000 IDPs ?in hiding? in the jungle and 109,000 in relocation sites. The estimates exclude hundreds of thousands of IDPs in other parts of Burma (especially Kachin and Shan States, and the west of the country, as well as in some parts of Karen State). Including these figures would bring the total to over a million internally displaced people. COHRE?s Du Plessis said, "More than one million people have been dispossessed and are internally displaced in Burma -- not because of a natural disaster, but due to their own government?s calculated and brutal actions. We have here a state monopoly which forcibly transfers property, income and assets, from rural, non-Burman ethnic nationalities to an elite, military Government. The HLP violations found in Burma today are the result of short-sighted and predatory policies that date back to the early years of Independence, and to the period of colonial rule. These problems can only be resolved through substantial and sustained change in Burma. Political transition should include improved access to a range of fundamental rights, as enshrined in international law and conventions -- including respect for HLP rights."
Source/publisher: Coalition on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE)
Date of publication: 2007-12-05
Date of entry/update: 2010-12-01
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: Overview of Land Confiscation in Arakan State
Description: Introduction: "The following analysis has been compiled to bring attention to a wider audience of many of the problems facing the people of Burma, especially in Arakan State. The analysis focuses particularly on the increase in land confiscation resulting from intensifying military deployment in order to magnify security around a number of governmental developments such as the Shwe Gas, Kaladan, and Hydropower projects in western Burma of Arakan State...Conclusion: "The SPDC?s ongoing parallel policy of increasing militarisation while increased forced land confiscation to house and feed the increasing troop numbers causes widespread problems throughout Burma. By stripping people of the land upon which peopl?s livelihoods are based, whilst providing only desultory compensation if any at all, many citizens face threats to their food security as well as water shortages, a decrease or abolition of their income, eradicating their ability to educate their children in order to create a sustainable income source in the future. Additionally, the policy of using forced labour in the Government?s construction and development projects, coupled with the disastrous environmental effects of many of these projects, continues to create severe health problems throughout the country whilst simultaneously stifling the local economy so that varied or sustainable work is difficult to become engaged in. All of this often leads to people fleeing the country in search of a better life."
Source/publisher: All Arakan Students? and Youths? Congress (AASYC)
Date of publication: 2010-06-00
Date of entry/update: 2010-06-16
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 2.34 MB
more
Title: Exploitative abuse and villager responses in Thaton District
Description: "...SPDC control of Thaton District is fully consolidated, aided by the DKBA and a variety of other civilian and parastatal organisations. These forces are responsible for perpetrating a variety of exploitative abuses, which include a litany of demands for ?taxation? and provision of resources, as well as forced labour on development projects and forced recruitment into the DKBA. Villagers also report ongoing abuses related to SPDC and DKBA ?counter insurgency? efforts, including the placement of unmarked landmines in civilian areas, conscription of people as porters and ?human minesweepers? and harassment and violent abuse of alleged KNLA supporters. This report includes information on abuses during the period of April to October 2009..."
Source/publisher: Karen Human Rights Group Field Reports (KHRG #2009-F20)
Date of publication: 2009-11-25
Date of entry/update: 2009-11-29
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: Notes on Landmine Use: SLORC and KNLA
Description: "...The technical mine information below was obtained from KNLA sources and was current as of early 1994, though it is apparently still current. The notes regarding effect on civilians are mainly from KHRG observations. Abbreviations: SLORC = State Law & Order Restoration Council, the junta ruling Burma; KNLA = Karen National Liberation Army, the Karen resistance force; DKBA = Democratic Kayin Buddhist Army, a Karen faction allied with SLORC..." "...The most common landmine used is the American M-76, of which the Burmese now manufacture their own copies. Almost all of these found used to be American-made, but now more are the Burmese copies. They are the "classic" landmine design, made of heavy-duty metal, cylindrical, about 2" diameter and 4-5" high, with a screw-in top the diameter of a pencil which extends a couple of inches above the body of the mine - this screw-in top is surmounted by a plunger the size of a pencil eraser which is what sets off the mine. The safety pin goes through the plunger, and can be used to rig a tripwire. However, most common use is to bury the mine with only the plunger above ground, generally hidden by leaf litter. The body of the mine is Army green, stencilled with yellow lettering: for example "LTM-76 A.P. MINE / DI-LOT 48/84" (copied off a recovered SLORC mine). "A.P." means Anti-Personnel. This mine is designed to kill or maim people. The person who steps on it is almost certainly killed, and anyone in a 5-metre radius is wounded..." These informal notes were prepared in response for specific requests for information on landmine use. They are not intended to present a complete picture of landmine use.
Source/publisher: Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG Articles & Papers)
Date of publication: 1996-03-31
Date of entry/update: 2009-11-26
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: Networks of Noncompliance: Grassroots resistance and sovereignty in militarised Burma
Description: "This paper examines repression and state?society conflict in Burma through the lens of rural and urban resistance strategies. It explores networks of noncompliance through which civilians evade and undermine state control over their lives, showing that the military regime?s brutal tactics represent not control, but a lack of control. Outside agencies ignore this state?society struggle over sovereignty at their peril: ignoring the interplay of interventions with local politics and militarisation, and claiming a ?humanitarian neutrality? which is impossible in practice, risks undermining the very civilians interventions are supposed to help, while facilitating further state repression. Greater honesty and awareness in interventions is required, combined with greater solidarity with villagers? resistance strategies."... Keywords: peasant resistance; humanitarian policy; Karen; Kayin; Burma; Myanmar
Creator/author: Kevin Malseed
Source/publisher: "Journal of Peasant Studies" (originally published by Yale Agrarian Studies Colloquium, 2008-04-25 and Karen Human Rights Group, 2008-11-10)
Date of publication: 2009-07-22
Date of entry/update: 2009-11-25
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 203.29 KB
more
Title: Karen Human Rights Group Commentary #95-C4
Description: "...SLORC continues to show no remorse whatsoever for its continually expanding program of civilian forced labour throughout Burma. Roads, railways, dams, army camps, tourist sites, an international airport, pagodas, schools - virtually everything which is built in rural Burma is now built and maintained with the forced labour of villagers, as well as their money and building materials. Forced labour as porters fuels the SLORC?s military campaigns, while forced labour farming land confiscated by the military, digging fishponds, logging and sawing timber for local Battalions fills the pockets of SLORC military officers and SLORC money-laundering front companies such as Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd. Even farming one?s own land is more and more becoming a form of forced labour, as SLORC continues to increase rice quotas which farmers must hand over for pitiful prices. Even after a year like 1994, when record floods destroyed crops in much of the country, the quotas must be paid - if not, the farmer is arrested and the Army takes his land, only to resell it or set up yet another forced labour farm. 1995 has seen very small harvests, increased confiscation and looting of rice and money from the farmers, 40 million people struggling to avoid starvation, and SLORC agreeing to sell a million tonnes of rice to Russia for profit - rice which it has confiscated from village farmers for 50 Kyat a basket, or for nothing..."
Source/publisher: Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG #95-C4)
Date of publication: 1995-08-04
Date of entry/update: 2009-11-22
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : html
Size: 19.25 KB
Local URL:
  1. HTML icon msg00073.html
more
Title: Karen Human Rights Group Commentary #96-C3
Description: "...The State Law & Order Restoration Council (SLORC) junta ruling Burma is now using mass forced relocations of entire geographic regions as a major element of military strategy. While this is not new to SLORC tactics, they have seldom or never done it to such an extent or so systematically before. The large-scale relocations began in Papun District of Karen State in December 1995 and January 1996, when up to 100 Karen villages were ordered to move within a week or be shot [see "Forced Relocation in Papun District", KHRG #96-11, 4/3/96]. These were all the villages in the region between Papun and the Salween River, an area about 50-60 km. north-south and 30 km. east-west. Most of them were ordered to move to sites beside military camps at Papun, Kaw Boke, Par Haik and Pa Hee Kyo, where SLORC was gathering people to do forced labour on the Papun-Bilin and Papun-Kyauk Nyat roads. However, the main reasons for the forced relocation were to cut off all possible support for Karen guerrilla columns in the area, most of which has only been SLORC-controlled since mid-1995, and to create a free-fire zone which would also block the flow of refugees from inside Karen State to the Thai border. Recently, though, SLORC troops in the area have limited their movements rather than combing the area, allowing some villagers to trickle back to their villages. This may be partly because of rainy season or because of the current SLORC-Karen National Union ceasefire talks, but it is probably largely because SLORC realised it could not control the result - people were fleeing into hiding in the jungle, some were fleeing to Thailand, but none were heading for the relocation camps. This has not stopped SLORC from conducting new and larger relocation campaigns. Starting in March 1996 it began an unprecedented forced relocation campaign in central and southern Shan State, covering the entire region from the Salween River westward for 120 km. to Lai Kha and Mong Kung, and from Lang Ker and Mong Nai in the south (about 60 km. north of the Thai border) northward to the area west of the ruby mines at Mong Hsu - a total area of 120 km. east-west and 180 km. north-south. [See "Forced Relocation in Central Shan State", KHRG #96-23, 25/6/96.] In this area, between March and June almost every village away from towns and major roads has been forced to move. Estimates are that at least 400-500 villages are included, a total of 60,000-80,000 people. Information gathered by both the Shan Human Rights Foundation and KHRG already includes the names of 320 villages, as well as 22 other village tracts (averaging 5-15 villages per tract) for which lists of village names are not yet available, in Kun Hing, Mong Nai, Nam Sang, Lai Kha, Mong Kung, Lang Ker, Mong Nong, and Kay See townships..."
Source/publisher: Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG #96-C3)
Date of publication: 1996-07-18
Date of entry/update: 2009-11-22
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : html
Size: 32.47 KB
Local URL:
  1. HTML icon msg00022.html
more
Title: Pa
Description: "Villagers in northern Pa?an District of central Karen State say their livelihoods are under serious threat due to exploitation by SPDC military authorities and by their Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) allies who rule as an SPDC proxy army in much of the region. Villages in the vicinity of the DKBA headquarters are forced to give much of their time and resources to support the headquarters complex, while villages directly under SPDC control face rape, arbitrary detention and threats to keep them compliant with SPDC demands. The SPDC plans to expand Dta Greh (a.k.a. Pain Kyone) village into a town in order to strengthen its administrative control over the area, and is confiscating about half of the village?s productive land without compensation to build infrastructure which includes offices, army camps and a hydroelectric power dam - destroying the livelihoods of close to 100 farming families. Local villagers, who are already struggling to survive under the weight of existing demands, fear further forced labour and extortion as the project continues..."
Source/publisher: Karen Human Rights Group Field Report (KHRG #2006-F1)
Date of publication: 2006-02-11
Date of entry/update: 2009-11-09
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: Land confiscation and the business of human rights abuse in Thaton District
Description: "While the SPDC and DKBA have both continued to utilise forced labour and extortion as means of financing local operations in Thaton, these two groups have also employed other, separate exploitive practices. The SPDC has confiscated large tracts of land belonging to local villagers and then sold it to the Max Myanmar Company for use in rubber cultivation. The DKBA, for its part, has used forced labour, arbitrarily detained and beaten villages and has also required Thaton villagers to buy calendars and religious photographs of DKBA leaders. This report documents abuses between September 2008 and January 2009..."
Source/publisher: Karen Human Rights Group Field Reports (KHRG #2009-F6)
Date of publication: 2009-04-02
Date of entry/update: 2009-10-31
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: Holding Our Ground: Land Confiscation in Arakan & Mon States, and Pa-O Area of Southern Shan State
Description: Introduction: "The following report has been compiled to bring to the attention of a wider audience many of the problems facing the people of Burma, especially its many ethnic nationalities. For many outside observers, Burma?s problems are confined simply to the ongoing incarceration of Nobel Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the country?s democratically elected leader, and many other political prisoners. However, as we hope to show in the following report, this is only one of very many human rights abuses that provide obstacles to the people?s hope for democracy. This report concentrates in 3 specific areas of the country – Arakan State, Mon State and the Pa-O Area of southern Shan State. This is partly due to budget and time constraints, but, primarily because the brutal treatment received by the people of these areas at the hands of the military junta has received limited media attention in the past."...Conclusion: "The SPDC?s ongoing dual policy of increasing militarization and forced land confiscation, both to house and feed the increasing troop numbers, causes widespread problems throughout Burma. By robbing people of the land from which many make their livings, without any or providing only desultory compensation, many citizens face drastic problems such as food and water shortages, an inability to educate their children and an inability to find work. Additionally, the policy of using forced labour in the Government?s construction and development projects, coupled with the disastrous environmental effects of many of these projects, continues to create severe health problems throughout the country. All of this often leads to people fleeing the country in search of a better life."
Source/publisher: All Arakan Students? and Youths? Congress (AASYC), Pa-O Youth Organisation (PYO) and Mon Youth Progressive Organisation (MYPO)
Date of publication: 2009-03-00
Date of entry/update: 2009-04-21
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English, Burmese
Format : pdf pdf
Size: 2.21 MB 793.16 KB
more
Title: Arbitrary Confiscation of Farmers? Land by the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) Military Regime in Burma
Description: Abstract" "This research was framed by a human rights approach to development as pursued by Amartya Sen. Freedoms are not only the primary ends of development but they are the principle means of development. The research was informed by international obligations to human rights and was placed within a context of global pluralism and recognition of universal human dignity. The first research aim was to study the State Peace and Development Council military regime confiscation of land and labour of farmers in villages of fourteen townships in Rangoon, Pegu, and Irrawaddy Divisions and Arakan, Karenni, and Shan States. Four hundred and sixty-seven individuals were interviewed to gain understanding of current pressures facing farmers and their families. Had crops, labour, household food, assets, farm equipment been confiscated? If so, by whom, and what reason was given for the confiscation? Were farmers compensated for this confiscation? How did family households respond and cope when land was confiscated? In what ways were farmers contesting the arbitrary confiscation of their land? A significant contribution of this research is that it was conducted inside Burma with considerable risk for all individuals involved. People who spoke about their plight, who collected information, and who couriered details of confiscation across the border into Thailand were at great risk of arrest. Interviews were conducted clandestinely in homes, fields, and sometimes during the night. Because of personal security risks there are inconsistent data sets for the townships. People revealed concerns of health, education, lack of land tenure and livelihood. Several farmers are contesting the confiscation of their land, but recognise that there is no rule by law or independent judiciary in Burma. Farmers and their family members want their plight to be known internationally. When they speak out they are threatened with detention. Their immediate struggle is to survive. The second aim was to analyse land laws and land use in Burma from colonial times, independence in 1948, to the present military rule by the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC). The third aim was to critically review international literature on land tenure and land rights with special focus on research conducted in post-conflict, post-colonial, and post-socialist nations and how to resolve land claims in face of no documentation. We sought ideas and practices which could inform creation of land laws, land and property rights, in democratic transition in Burma."
Creator/author: Dr. Nancy Hudson-Rodd; Sein Htay
Source/publisher: The Burma Fund
Date of publication: 2008-02-00
Date of entry/update: 2008-03-29
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 11.22 MB
more
Title: Housing, Land, and Property Rights in Burma
Description: "...The main objective of this research is to examine housing, land, and property rights in the context of Burma?s societal transition towards a democratic polity and economy. Much has been written and discussed about property rights in their various manifestations, private, public, collective, and common in terms of ?rights?. When property rights are widely and fairly distributed, they are inseparable from the rights of people to a means of living. Yet in the contemporary world, millions of people are denied access to the land, markets, technology, money and jobs essential to creation of livelihoods (Korten, 1998). The most significant worldwide problems of unjust property rights remain those associated with landlessness, rural poverty, and inequality (Hudson-Rodd & Nyunt, 2000)..."
Creator/author: Nancy Hudson-Rodd
Source/publisher: Edith Cowan University, Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE)
Date of publication: 2004-10-00
Date of entry/update: 2007-02-26
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 741.09 KB
more
Title: Deserted Fields: The destruction of agriculture in Mong Nai Township, Shan State
Description: Summary: "Wrong-headed agricultural and development policies, counter-insurgency activities, as well as corruption and cronyism by the Burmese military regime, have all caused a dramatic decrease in rice production and food security in southern Shan State over the past ten years. The township of Mong Nai provides a good example of how food security, commonly defined as the physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food at all times, has been put in a precarious condition despite the regime?s claims that it is achieving self-sufficiency and agricultural development. In the past Mong Nai was well known for its fertile land and abundant production of quality rice. Even though people could not make much income from their crops, they had enough to survive. Since 1994, however, a series of national policies and initiatives have led to a decline in rice production, the abandonment of fertile fields, and the exodus of thousands of residents to neighbouring Thailand. In order to implement its national rice procurement policy, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) set up a paddy (unmilled rice) buying center in the town of Mong Nai in 1994. Farmers were forced to sell rice to the regime at depressed prices (about one quarter of the normal market price) based on the acreage of land they customarily tended and regardless of actual crop yields. This center, and how its quota system was implemented, disrupted farmers? access to their own rice harvests and drove many into debt. The SPDC proudly announced the abolishment of this system and the opening of a market-oriented economy in 2003. However, new practices have been able to ensure that the military maintains its own stores of rice at the expense of local populations. agriculture, and led to decreased rice production and food security in the township. The amount of rice fields under cultivation has decreased by approximately 56% since 1994 while the population has decreased by approximately 30%. The drastic decrease in upland agriculture has practically wiped out the cultivation of sesame and the subsequent production of sesame oil in the township, while a wide variety of beans, fruits, and other vegetables are also not cultivated. Restrictions on trade and travel have made foodstuffs harder to get and more expensive. Contrary to the regime?s claims, Burma is not on the road to self-sufficiency and food security."... Table of Contents: Summary.2; Background 4; Food and Agriculture Situation Before 1994 5; Rice Procurement Policy/the Quota System 6; Forced Relocation 7; Map 1: Rice Cultivation and Villages in 1994 8; Map 2: Rice Culitvation, Remaining Villages and Confiscated Lands in 2005 9; Land Confiscation 10; Restricted Movement 12; Trading Restrictions 13; Forced Planting of Summer Paddy 13; Conclusion: The Situation Today 15... Appendix 1: Decrease in Rice Production in Mong Nai Township 1994-2005 16.
Source/publisher: Shan Relief and Development Committee (SRDC)
Date of publication: 2006-01-00
Date of entry/update: 2006-01-18
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: No Land to Farm
Description: "...In the last four years, the Burmese army based in Mon State has confiscated thousands acres of farmland. The farmers whose land had been confiscated were not given any compensation. They have no opportunity to take legal actions against the army. As a result, many farmers who lost their lands left to Thailand to seek employment. Those who stayed in villages and towns became landless and jobless..." Land confiscation by the Burmese military - description, analysis and case studies.
Source/publisher: Human Rights Foundation of Monland (HURFOM)
Date of publication: 2003-09-30
Date of entry/update: 2004-06-18
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more