| By THAR NYUNT OO | AUGUST, 1999 - VOLUME 7 NO.7 |
Recently, the Australian government has proposed the establishment of an independent human rights commission in Burma. Thar Nyunt Oo takes a look at the Burmese government human rights record and history of its concessions to the West in his exploration of the prospects of the proposal. On the first week of August 1999, two different news stories came out about Burma: First, the 3-year-old daughter of a pro-democracy activist was arrested by Military Intelligence as a means of forcing him out of hiding and, second, Australia’s human rights commissioner, Chris Sidoti said that the Burmese regime had expressed interest in establishing a human rights body in Burma. The junta denied the former story, while the international community was surprised by the latter. Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer first proposed the idea for a human rights watchdog a year ago. In the July Asean foreign ministry level meeting, Mr. Downer raised the issue again with Win Aung, foreign minister of the Burmese regime, and Chris Sidoti, Australia’s human rights commissioner, was able to visit Burma through a favor by Win Aung. Upon return from a three-day visit to Burma, Sidoti said he had been surprised by the expressions of support at several meetings with Burmese officials over setting up a national human rights body. This became popular news amongst Burma watchers and diplomats. However, neither story surprised me. While I was hiding inside Burma just after the 1996 students’ movement, my father was called by the Military Intelligence Services (MIS), who were looking for me. They forced him to phone my colleagues and placed a small microphone on his shirt collar. Because of their use of intimidation against him, he had to do as they ordered. Then he was detained for three days at interrogation center. In a similar story, one of my colleagues from the Delta region was sought for arrest, but his father, who was over 50 years old, was arrested first by the MIS, who tortured him. Such incidents are matter-of-course in our community, and we joked about them to defuse our tension about these bitter experiences. We activists know well that our families also have to sacrifice their lives and their interests if we are involved in democracy and anti-government movements. So while the world was shocked by the news of a 3-year-old’s arrest, it wasn’t so surprising for Burmese activists. Such human rights violations committed by the regime are simply a matter of routine. The junta still commits widespread human rights abuses, including arrests, torture, intimidation, harassment and forced labor. Despite this litany of human rights abuses committed by the military government, the regime has expressed interest in establishing a human rights commission as a result of Sidoti’s visit. Some activists have dismissed this news as meaningless, but others have concluded that it is a positive sign for Burma. The military government always promises to do what the international community and the Burmese people desire, and they show good intentions whenever they are faced with a critical situation. But everyone should remember the promises made by the regime when they took power in 1988. They vowed to hold an election and to transfer power to the elected body. An electoral commission was formed in order to supervise the election. While the government announced the election results in 1990, it hasn’t followed through on its promise to honor the them. Moreover, it has interfered in the activities of political parties and their internal matters. The government exists above the electoral commission, which is unable to prevent the junta’s interference. Though the electoral commission was established for the multi-party democratic system, it could not operate in a democratic way. It became a hollow shell of the junta’s promise of a multi-party democracy system. Many NLD members have been pressured to resign by the government. Rather than resign to the NLD they are forced to resign to the electoral commission. Other empty actions include the junta’s establishment of a Burmese women’s association, an entrepreneurs’ organization and some technological institutions. They were formed after the lack of civil society and free institutions became a popular issue. But these are all totally controlled by the regime and have become props for the military. These organizations work to strengthen military rule and implement the government’s policies. Actually, the military regime doesn’t want independent institutions nor an empowered civil society. But they need international recognition and support for their rule, so they set up these associations under their control and to get support and legitimacy through them. However, they are stubborn about the human rights situation, because they have executed widespread human rights abuses in every sector of society in order to solidify their military power. They have proclaimed that democracy and human rights are copied from Western thought and are not Burmese traditions. In 1996, some lawyer, youths and students secretly formed a human rights committee. The committee released a report on human rights abuses in Burma and the events of the student movement of October and December 1996. The authorities arrested these human rights’ activists and intimidated them into stopping this. One of the youth activists was charged with the crime of being involved in a human rights movement and was sentenced to a long-term prison stay for this activity. The military regime described the human rights activists as their enemy, as their actions are against the military’s rules. As the regime comes to realize that Burma can no longer afford to be isolated from the world, they have tried to become closer to other countries. This is a good sign for Burma. But the government’s initiatives to gain closer relations with other nations should be done with good intentions for the Burmese people, not just to enhance the military’s power. For civil society to appear in Burma, military rule and its administration must be stamped out and a civilian administration and government must be substituted. Civil society and military rule are completely incompatible, and the prevention of human rights abuses is thus inconceivable in the absence of democratic rule. To advance the human rights situation in Burma, we should learn who violates human rights and what prevents them from being exercised. We shouldn’t focus only on one tree but instead try to see the whole forest. It is impossible to stop human rights abuses without any consideration for the surrounding environment. Most human rights violations stem from political and social problems. Also they are related to the type of government administration. So we cannot shy away from criticism of particular political systems when we are discussing human rights. Two essential preconditions that should be met before the establishment of a human rights commission are freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Without these freedoms, the commission cannot hope to possess the power to enforce respect for human rights. Unless freedom of expression is guaranteed, the human rights commission will not be able to accurately assess the situation, and could even be used to cover up human rights abuses. When the regime sets up a human rights body, who will participate in and initiate it? It is unacceptable to install a human rights body managed by the junta and their cronies who are actively involved in the human rights abuses. It is like appointing a tiger to guard rabbits. Mr. Sidoti said in his press release, “Whether the (opposition) National League for Democracy likes it or not, the simple fact is that the NLD is not presently in a position to do very much at all about protecting the human rights of the people of Burma.” But Mr. Sidoti has forgotten that the NLD and other opposition groups in Burma were the ones who initiated human rights activities in Burma. So it is important to choose the right people for a human rights body in order for it to be helpful for the people. If not, the human rights body will become an oppressive mechanism that assists the rule of the military just like every other legal organization in Burma. Anyway, we welcome the attempts of the Australian government to support human rights in Burma. However, as a former political prisoner and someone who has suffered from human rights abuses, I believe that a human rights committee that exists without freedom of the press and other independent institutions is not a good prospect for Burma. We want someone we can trust to control the human rights body. I think the intention of the Australian government is right, but the right people to approach to restore the human rights in Burma aren’t the military government that has committed human rights abuses for a decade. It must be a civilian body. Thar Nyunt Oo is a former student activist now living in Thailand.