Page 1 of
2 New
rights, old wrongs in Myanmar By Benjamin Zawacki and Donna Jean Guest
NAYPYIDAW and YANGON - Amid myriad changes
taking place in Myanmar, Amnesty International
concluded its first official visit to the country
in nearly a decade on May 23.
Our two-week
mission consisted of a diverse collection of 49
meetings with government officials, political
parties and their members of parliament; members
of the diplomatic community; lawyers and other
civil society actors; ethnic minority activists;
former political prisoners as well as the families
of current political prisoners; and a
representative of the National Human Rights
Commission.
The mission provided a
preliminary opportunity to assess Myanmar's
current human-rights situation, which Amnesty
International has monitored for the past 25 years.
What has improved since the new government came
into power a little more
than a year ago? What
human rights violations have persisted or even
worsened? And what new human-rights challenges
have the country's recent reform efforts
engendered or brought to the fore?
In a
major step forward, between May 2011 and January
2012 the Myanmar government released more than 650
political prisoners and reduced the sentences of
many others. While a number of former political
prisoners noted that they had been released only
under conditions set out in Section 401 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, many told Amnesty
International that they have been relatively free
to resume their political activity without
harassment or intimidation.
We are hopeful
that the cycle of imprisonment, release, and
re-arrest has come to an end, and that in the
words of one person who met our recent delegation
to the country, that "the dark nights of fearing
the knock on the door are over".
However,
Amnesty International believes that hundreds of
political prisoners remain behind bars in Myanmar.
Due primarily to a lack of transparency by the
government, exact numbers are not known. We regard
political prisoners as persons who have been
imprisoned on account of their political activity,
even if they committed or advocated violence. They
should be afforded a prompt and fair trial under
an internationally recognized offense, or
released.
On May 8, for example, Phyo Wai
Aung was sentenced to death for his alleged
involvement in a 2010 bombing. His experience has
simply been a succession of human-rights
violations: a confession extracted through
torture, an unfair trial held in Insein prison,
and the death penalty. Phyo Wai Aung should be
released, not least on humanitarian grounds, as he
was recently admitted to hospital with a terminal
illness.
Some government officials told
our delegation that Myanmar has never held
political prisoners and only detains persons who
have "violated prevailing laws". They also said
that nearly all the names on various lists of
those still locked up do not correspond to
prisoners of any kind, but are "just names".
The case of Aye Aung, however, suggests
otherwise. Arrested in 1998 for staging peaceful
student demonstrations and for distributing a
student union statement, he is still serving a
30-year sentence in Kalay prison in Sagaing
Region. Aye Aung is the only student arrested
during those demonstrations still imprisoned, and
suffers from a spinal injury that requires
surgery. He was severely beaten by military
intelligence officers during his initial
detention.
Similarly, Khin Kyi was
arrested in October 2008 while distributing the
logo and message of Generation Wave, a group
founded after 2007's "Saffron Revolution." He is
one of the last members of his organization still
behind bars, and is serving a 15-year sentence in
Bago prison.
These people are not just
names, they are prisoners of conscience. As we
explained to all relevant officials we met in
Myanmar, prisoners of conscience are persons
imprisoned because of their political or religious
beliefs, ethnic origin, sex, color, language,
national or social origin, economic status, birth,
sexual orientation, or other status, who have not
used or advocated violence.
Because of
discrepancies in numbers and definitions of
political prisoners, there was broad agreement
among nearly every relevant person Amnesty
International spoke with in Myanmar - including
officials - that the government should initiate a
review process. With United Nations assistance and
appropriate non-governmental participation, it
should establish a mechanism to review the cases
of all prisoners in Myanmar to determine the true
reason that they were arrested.
Indeed,
since there are undoubtedly political prisoners in
Myanmar whose names have not been recorded -
particularly in ethnic minority areas - this
review process should go well beyond even the
longest of the outstanding lists. While a
representative of Myanmar's National Human Rights
Commission expressed interest in this proposal,
the commission's current capacity - mandate,
resources, budget, and staff - is insufficient and
should be urgently strengthened by the Myanmar
authorities.
Moreover, in addition to a
review process, the Myanmar government should
grant the International Committee of the Red Cross
access to its prison system in such a manner that
it can work to the fullest extent of its
humanitarian mandate. Psycho-social problems,
including post-traumatic stress disorder for
victims of torture and solitary confinement,
require urgent attention and resources for
rehabilitation purposes.
Aside from
political conditions attached to their release,
many former political prisoners struggle with
reintegrating into a fast-changing society. Long
periods of imprisonment have taken an educational
and occupational toll on former prisoners, and
often a financial toll on their families; skills
training and income-generation are increasing
challenges. In the words of one young woman
released in January this year, "I am seven years
late on my future."
Most political
prisoners in Myanmar have been sentenced under
laws that place the country well outside of
international norms and standards on the freedoms
of expression, peaceful assembly, and association.
Legal reform in Myanmar is long overdue.
This is actually underway and has yielded
some positive results. Amnesty International had
the opportunity in Myanmar to meet with people -
representing a wide range of interests - directly
associated with or affected by the new Labor
Dispute Settlement Law. Not only does the law
itself promote and protect the rights of workers,
but the government also consulted international
experts in drafting it. Both law and process have
set a constructive precedent.
This is not
the only recent example of legal reform: a new
media law, once expected for publication this
month, is now anticipated for July. While the
government did meet with international experts and
local journalists and the law's thematic chapter
headings were disclosed earlier this year, the law
itself has not yet been made public.
Amnesty International was told that
Myanmar's Press Scrutiny and Censorship Board has
shortened its reach by a considerable degree since
late last year, which marks a definite improvement
in the right to freely receive and disseminate
information.
It is thus all the more
discouraging that reform of the media law - like
other new legislation - has not been more
transparent. The worry persists that the new law
will simply replace the Censorship Board in
suppressing free speech.
While our
delegation was not able to explore other laws and
their formation in detail, we did receive critical
feedback on several new laws pertaining to land,
agriculture, and forestry. Legal reform should
eliminate laws whose language is either so broad
that its interpretation is subject to political
abuse, or is so precise that it unduly restricts
the rights of Myanmar citizens.
Marginalized minorities Amnesty
International has conducted human-rights research
on the situation in Myanmar's ethnic minority
areas for more than 25 years. Our delegation thus
welcomed the reiteration by officials of President
Thein Sein's pledge on May 1 to eradicate forced
labor in Myanmar by 2015, as well as credible
reports that the practice is on a downward trend.
Though not confined to ethnic minority areas,
forced labor has persisted there for decades.
Many ethnic minority areas have
experienced - and several continue to experience -
insurgencies or armed conflicts between the
Myanmar army and various ethnic minority armed
groups. While Amnesty International does not take
a position on issues of war and peace, because the
human rights situation has generally been better
in ceasefire areas than in conflict zones,
ceasefires recently agreed by the government with
10 of 11 ethnic minority armed groups may lead to
a decrease in violations.
Amnesty
International does, however, monitor armies' and
armed groups' adherence to international
human-rights and humanitarian law, with a
particular focus on the protection of civilians.
While there was broad acknowledgement among those
we met in Myanmar that civilians are currently
bearing the brunt of ongoing fighting in northern
Shan and Kachin States, there was almost
categorical denial by officials that the Myanmar
army is responsible for systematic violations
against civilians.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road,
Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
