'A Good Foundation Has Been Established'

With Burma's new Parliament having completed its first session, there is now an ongoing debate as to whether the country's first legislative branch in 20 years will promote an agenda that benefits the people and where the nation's democratic transition is heading. To get a first-hand account of the parliamentary session and perspective on how effective the new legislature has been and will be in the future, The Irrawaddy reporter Htet Aung interviewed Dr Aye Maung, chairman of the Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP) who was elected to the Amyotha Hluttaw (Upper House) of Parliament. Aye Maung is also the chairman of the Guarantees, Pledges and Undertakings Vetting Committee for the Upper House.

Dr Aye Maung

Answer: The Parliament has to be built on the foundation of the 20-year military administration. During the parliamentary session, the cabinet ministers, who are all members of the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), viewed their ruling period positively and protected themselves when answering all the questions.  Although our proposals would be beneficial to the people if the union government would carry out them, they were all blocked or rejected by the ruling government’s ministers to protect all of their state-building tasks which were carried out during the military rule in the absence of a constitution.      

But at least we have been able to begin a good tradition in Parliament, under which all the government ministers have to come and answer all the questions asked by the members of the Parliament (MPs). It shows the role of the ministers in this new system. In the next 6 months or one year, when the Parliament will go back in session, the union government ministers will again be questioned by the MPs, who will then prepare a set of questions regarding their respective regions. 

Such a question and answer session will become a good tradition and the minsters will have to pay due respect first to the speaker of the Parliament and speak in good terms in accordance with the Parliament's tradition. I just recalled an incident that happened in the Upper House in which a cabinet minister used inappropriate expressions when he answered the questions of the MPs and then the speaker of the House prohibited him immediately from using these words. What I mean is that no matter whether these ministers are elected or appointed, they have to pay due respect towards the Parliament and the MPs and to cordially respond to the MPs' questions on state affairs.

Q:  There has been no Parliament in the past 20 years and the people have not had any information about what the government is doing. Now after the emergence of the Parliament, the people have come to know the state affairs to some extent. Some people view the right to question the cabinet ministers as a rare chance that has never happened before. On the other hand, some argue that all the ministers protected themselves and their work by displaying a huge pile of statistical data and information, resulting in maintaining the status quo. What is your response to these two different views?

A:  There will always be two sides in viewing a thing. As I said before, we have to consider the fact that a good foundation has been established. When a situation has arisen for the people to voice their criticisms, they will be able to criticize the good and bad images of the Parliament by themselves. This will be to the benefit of all. All the discussions in the first Parliament session will be left as a historical record. In the interim time before the resumption of the second Parliament session, the MPs should study what issues they should raise and how they should approach the people to collect data on the issue. We should look into where the country is going and whether it is in accord with the Constitution.