[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
BurmaNet News: December 16, 1994
- Subject: BurmaNet News: December 16, 1994
- From: strider@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 15:47:00
Received: (from strider) by igc2.igc.apc.org (8.6.9/Revision: 1.5 ) id PAA05483; Fri, 16 Dec 1994 15:46:40 -0800
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 15:46:40 -0800
************************** BurmaNet **************************
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
**************************************************************
BurmaNet News: Friday, December 16 1994
Issue #82
**************************************************************
Contents:
1 ABSDF: STATEMENT ON SLORC'S MILITARY OFFENSIVE AGAINST ABSDF
AND KNU
2 NBC: REQUEST FOR ACTION
3 BURMANET: LETTER--REPLY TO "IS THERE ANY JUSTICE TO THAILAND"
4 REG.BURMA: IN DEFENSE OF BUDDHISTS
5 REG.BURMA: STARBUCKS BOYCOTT--YES OR NO?
6 SCB:BURMESE FONTS NOW AVAILABLE ON [WWW] HOMEPAGE
7 SCB:FONT SOURCES ON THE NET .TTF AND .PTIM
8 NATION: BOUNDARY EXTENSION FOR HERITAGE SITE PROPOSED
9 NATION: US CONGRESSMAN TO MAKE SECOND ATTEMPT FOR TALKS WITH
SUU KYI
10 NATION: BUSINESS BAN CALL
11 NATION: NEW UN RESOLUTION CASTIGATES BURMA OVER HUMAN RIGHTS
12 REUTER: U.N. PANEL REBUKES BURMA FOR RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
13 NATION: FOREIGN STAKES UP IN BURMA
14 KAREN MUTINEERS HOLDING KNU NEGOTIATORS HOSTAGE
15 ADELAIDE VOICE: EDITORIAL ON REFUGEES
16 UNGA: HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS: HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS AND
REPORTS OF SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS AND REPRESENTATIVES
**************************************************************
The BurmaNet News is an *********************************
electronic daily newspaper * *
covering Burma. Articles * Iti *
from newspapers, magazines, * snotpo *
The wire services, news- * werthatcor *
letters and the Internet * ruptsbutfea *
are published as well as * r.Fearoflos *
original material. * ingpowercor *
* ruptsthosewhoare *
The BurmaNet News is * subjecttoit...Theef *
e-mailed directly to * fortnecessarytoremain *
subscribers and is * uncorruptedinanenvironm *
also distributed via * entwherefearisanintegralpar *
the soc.culture.burma and * tofeverydayexistenceisnot *
misc.activism.progressive * immediatelyapparent *
newsgroups as well as * tothosefortun *
the seasia-l mailing * ateenoughtol *
list. For a free * iveinstatesgo *
subscription to the * vernedbytheru *
BurmaNet News, send * leoflaw...Iam *
an e-mail note to: * n ota frai *
* d.. *
strider@xxxxxxxxxxx * .D *
* aw *
Subscriptions are handled * Au *
manually so please allow * ng *
for a delay before your * San *
request is fielded. * Su *
* uK *
Letters to the editor, * yi *
comments or contributions * . *
of articles should be *********************************
sent to the strider address as well. For those without e-mail,
BurmaNet can be contacted by fax or snailmail.
By fax: (in Thailand) (66)2 234-6674
Attention to BurmaNet, care of Burma Issues
By snailmail: (in the United States)
BurmaNet, care of Coban Tun
1267 11th Avenue #3
San Francisco, CA 94122 USA
**************************************************************
ABSDF: STATEMENT ON SLORC'S MILITARY OFFENSIVE AGAINST ABSDF AND
KNU
December 12, 1994
ALL BURMA STUDENTS' DEMOCRATIC FRONT(ABSDF)
Troops from the State Law and Order Restoration Council(SLORC)
have started the military offensive against the students and
ethnic Karen forces on December 12, 1994 along the Thai-Burmese
border. According to the information received from our
headquarters in Dawngwin, Burma, about 1,400 troops from the
SLORC's army have captured Lae-Toe which is 10 km west of
Dawngwin, the headquarters of the ABSDF and three-hours walking
distance from Dawngwin.
Severe fighting broke out on 13 December between the SLORC's
troops at Lae-Toe and the ABSDF and the Karen National Liberation
Front(armed forces of the Karen National Union) combined forces.
Another column of the SLORC's troops are now marching toward the
strategic hill Kalimu Kyo, east of Dawngwin. The troops from
Papun in Karen State under the command of South-East Military
Command Headquarters have been mobilized since the first week of
December to exploit the situation after the religious conflict
erupted within the Karen National Union(KNU). As the conflict
intensified between the Buddhist and Christian Karen, the SLORC's
troops quickly captured the strategic hill Mae-Nyaw-Khei on
December 11, Sout-East of Manerplaw, the headquarters of the KNU.
Since December 12, fighting between the SLORC's forces and the
KNU and the ABSDF combined forces has intensified.
Evacuation of women and children from Dawngwin and Manerplaw
headquarters are being under way. Except a report of injuries
among some members of the ABSDF, the detail information of the
causalities during the battle are not yet known. We highly
suspect that the SLORC's intelligence network has increased the
misunderstanding between the Buddhist and Christian Karen members
of the KNU. That is the most ruthless, brutal and inhuman game
that the Burmese military dictatorship has played since they have
seized power in 1962. The SLORC's military offensive against the
ethnic and democratic forces contradicts with the SLORC's claim
for their interest on national reconciliation and cease-fire talk
with ethnic armed groups. Besides, it also indicates that the
SLORC is not sincere in their talk with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and
also with the United Nations in order to restore democracy,
transfer of power to a civilian government and national
reconciliation in Burma.
We would like to call on Governments, Non-Governmental
Organizations and Burmese democratic and support groups around
the world to take effective actions including armed embargo
against SLORC to immediately stop their military offensive
against the ABSDF and the KNU. All Burma Students' Democratic
Front(ABSDF) Europe Office, P. O Box 6720, ST.Olavs Plass, 0130
Oslo, Norway Date. December 16, 1994 For More Information, please
contact; Aye Chan Naing(Re94
Dear friends,
We would like to call on you and your organization to join the
International Campagin to Stop SLORC's military offensive Against
the All Burma Students' Democratic Front(ABSDF) and the Karen
National Union(KNU) forces along the Thai-Burmese border areas.
The information we received today from our office in Bangkok, the
ABSDF's headquarters Dawngwin is under heavy fire as of yesterday
evening and the situation is not in our favour. To protect the
Dawngwin is not important any more than to safe the lives of the
students. Although women and children have been evacuated, there
are still over 1,000 members of the ABSDF in the camp or around
the camp. And the food and medicine are urgently needed. The
KNU and the ABSDF's combined forces are also fighting against
SLORC's troops around Manerplaw, the headquarters of the KNU and
Democratic Alliance of Burma(DAB).
The ABSDF Europe Office in Norway would like to request you to
join the International Campagin to Stop SLORC's Military
Offensive. We would like to request you to coordinate your
actions and activities with all the others groups, campaning
against the SLORC's military offensive.
Please send us your name or name of your orginazition including
your address, phone & fax number and e-mail address if you would
like to join. We like to use your name as a supporter of the
campagin. Even if you don't want to join, we would like to urge
you to take every possible actions or activities to stop the
SLORC's military offensive for example: call on your Government
officials, members of parliaments and Foreign Ministery
officials and urge them to publicly comdemn the SLORC's military
offensive, tell the SLORC to stop their offensive immediately and
call for international armed embargo against the SLORC. Please
act now! Let us unitedly open the new frontier against the SLORC
military regime in the international arena. Yours Sincerely,
Aye Chan Naing(Representative-Europe) All Burma Students'
Democratic Front(ABSDF) Europe Office P.O Box 6720, ST. Olavs
Plass 0130 Oslo, Norway tel & fax: 47 - 22 - 41 41 43 tel : 47 -
22 - 20 00 21 E-Mail: absdf@xxxxxxxxxx
**********************************************************
NBC: REQUEST FOR ACTION
reg.burma 5:03 AM Dec 16, 1994 (at oslonett.no)
The Norwegian Burma Council supports ABSDF's appeal to mobilize
governments and public opinion against the SLORC offensive the
Karen and ABSDF areas. In addition to approaching politicians and
the media, we suggest that direct faxes be sent to Burma to the
fax numbers listed in Burma Alert No 10, vol 5 (Oct. 94) page 6.
In view of the Socialist International's stand on Burma as
expressed in its last meeting in Tokyo, we suggest that
Socialist leaders and parliamentarians be approached on a
priority basis.
ONWARD ! Norwegian Burma Council 16.12.94
**************************************************************
BURMANET: LETTER--REPLY TO "IS THERE ANY JUSTICE TO THAILAND"
from BurmaNet News: December 9-11, 1994.
Dear Kay:
I read with interest your comments on whether the international
criticism on Thailand been a justified action, particularly in
relation with asylum-seekers from Burma.
First of all, I wish to point out that there has been no
criticism to the people of Thailand - which I sincerely believe -
from the international community. In a broader perspective, the
people of Thailand tolerate the refugees (Cambodian, Laotians,
Vietnamese and Burmese) in their country better than any other
nationalities on the whole world.
Of course, this must not be confused with the Government's
reluctance to address the problem of refugees - especially in
relation with those from Burma. The international community's
criticism is directed towards the the Royal Thai Government's
failure to give protection to these refugees, I am assured. Of
course, there may be some reason-behinds for the Royal Thai
Government in not addressing the refugee problem. I am sure you
will have no difficulty in finding that out for yourself.
The failure to address problem amounts to the prolonged suffering
of refugees and delay in solving the underlying root causes that
put refugees to their flight. To be compare with, the 250,000
Burma-Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh have the protection granted
by the Government of Bangladesh and now in their repatriations.
By granting the required international protection to these
refugees, the UNHCR and international community are able to solve
the problem of refugees- which it can be seen in Bangladesh. It
is exactly that kind of arrangement that we need to have it in
Thailand.
Mind you. The refugee issue is always an emotional one, even more
so in the West. The U.S. turned away Haitian boatpeople in
1992-93 is well known. Cuban refugee haven't got any better
treatment. In Germany, the neo-Nazis burned down asylum-houses.
As an international shame, there seem still no solution to the
problem of Vietnamese boatpeople in HK and Indonesia. Our very
own neighbour, Australia, had detained 300 Cambodians for nearly
four years who came here by boat in 1989. Here in Australia, the
incidence of 400 Chinese boatpeople arriving recently is called a
`Large influx of refugees' and the Aussies are already in panic.
Comparing to this, the Thai's tolerance to nearly half-million
Burmese are much admirable.
There is a stark contrast of East and West, regarding with the
response to refugee problem, of people and their governments.
People in the East simply put up with people who are in need of
help and tolerated, like you Thai people do for these Burmese,
and make no complaint to the Government. The Government on the
otherhand, happy to ignore all the problems so long as it don't
come to their office. Of course, this was the main problem with
Burmese refugees - who are quite articulate and politically
active - who directly ask the Government to change its policy on
Burma.
One thing I found out not long ago was that, generally,
nationality tends to be embarassed when their country's human
rights problem is addressed. For example, I recently talked with
a Chinese friend about the procurements of human organs from
prisoners. To my surprise, he defend that action! And I thought I
might lost a friend. To them, it is quite OK to talk about how
governments are bad, but when it comes to human rights they sense
an element of criticism to them. People here in Australia too:
I've been told "You're preaching to the converted", some put
things more blantly "You bite the hand that feeds you". But I
must say that in here there are special people who are so
broad-minded and - the politicians too - you can freely talk
anything to them.
Of course, when we speak out things, embarassments are
unavoidable. Right now Burmese are very nervous about the
estimated 30,000 Burmese-prostitutes in Thailand. In Burma,
people are very poor that an increase in prostitution is
reported. Recently, in Nyang Shwe in Shan State, there is
reported case of an Inn being used as brothel. Burma is about to
be open-up now. How if, Burma being openned with the increase in
such operations ? We are quite worry about this. And how are the
Thais addressing the problems (and Burmese women there) ? We
need to speak out about these things.
Dear Kay, please don't be taken too serious about what you
described as "the Burmese-refugee-mentality" of
not-like-to-be-treated-as-refugee. You know as much as I do,
people who can claim 2500baht/month is perhep only few hundred.
Most of displaced Burmese out there, especially women and
children, are begging on the streets of Bangkok for living, if
they could not find jobs. For desperate girls who are in need of
money for living, you know where they would have to go. There are
350,000 of them - I doubt any organization can successfully
handle that sort of number, and we just feeling so helpless.
Talking about these displaced Burmese, it is certainly true that
Burmese now a day are very poor and desperate enough to enter
Thailand. However, it is quite unkind for some people saying
Burmese just came to Thailand for better life (illegal and
economic migrant) - which literally means - the life of the
street-beggars and prostitutes in Thailand being better life
than in Burma. I think you don't need to use much effort to find
out why they came.
What you saw the Burmese leave to the West are high-profile and
so few in the number, a total of less than 300. Burmese refugees
have been not only forced to leave their country by their
Government, they also have to knelt down in front of foreigners
for their lives and welfare. It is a humiliation - i.e. national
humiliation to us. Under these circumstances, I doubt any
Burmese-refugee you saw will be able to put a smile on their face
- even for a person like you Kay.
With Best Regards,
DR U NE OO, uneoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
**
***************************************************************
REG.BURMA: IN DEFENSE OF BUDDHISTS
Posted by Coban Tun
Written by Htun Aung Gyaw
reg.burma 8:13 PM Dec 14, 1994 (at macpsy.ucsf.EDU)
Dear Coban,
Please send ths information to the Burma net. It is my duty to
save my brother monk. The news is spreading that some reporters
wrote that the conflict between the Buddhists and Christians was
based upon the Buddhist spies. These reports give negative
consequences to my brother, the monk, U Thanwara. Let me explain
abouth his past activities.
His name was U Aung Nu and he is a karen Buddhist. When
General Linn Htin from KNDO laid down his arms and came to the so
called legal fold, young karen Aung Nu visited General Linn Htin
house because they know each other he respect him. After that
General Linn Htin found out that the Burmese general cheated upon
him, so he tried to returned to the rebel base and he was killed.
Also Ne win regime marked all the people who visited Linn Htin
house and consequencly most karens who visited Linn Htin were put
in jail. Among then was Aung Nu. He served three years without
trial and was eventually released.
When he was released he found out that his wife run away with a
man whom he gave a shelter for him. He was very shameful and
felt insulted. He tried to find the couple and one day he met
them in front of their house. He was smaller than this man but
he fought him with great anger. He bite his enemy chest and
swolled a piece of skin, they both were slightly injured but the
man shouted and screamed for help. He was very satisfied by
doing like this and returned back. His enemy was deeply shock
and became mentally ill. One year later his enemy died. U Aung
Nu is this type of individual. If he believes that he is right
he will never compromise. He believes in Buddhism and with the
agreement of the KNU, he built a Zedi (small pagoda) with the
help of the international Buddhist organizations, especially from
Buddhist Relief Mission from Japan who strongly supporting the
democracy movement and strongly opposing the Burmese military
regime. U Aung Nu adventure is not only this , in June 6,
1974 the labour strike broke out . He emerged as a Jute mill
factory workers' leader. The labour strike was brutally
suppressed by the army which killed several workers and innocent
civiians. All the leaders were sent to the military tribunal and
were sentenced 9 to 17 years in prison with hard labour. U Aung
Nu received maximum jail term 17 years. Thats why we met in the
prison and trusted each other. He taught me how to fight with
traditional karen boxing.
I was so impressed with him because he openly challenged the
workers who were the informers. Most of the workers were
married people and thery were very poor and their salary were not
sufficient for their families because of sky rocketing
commodities prices. As a results they joined the labour strike
and demanded for better salary. The dictator's responsed was
killed and captured the workers and their leaders. Some workers
betrayed their fellow prisoners in exchange for their freedom.
This was because their families were starving outside the prison,
so they wanted to cooperate with the governement. But U Aung Nu
never wanted to cooperate with the government and he kicked and
beat up the person whom he found was a government informer.
The second thing is that when the government announced that they
were no longer political prisoners in the prisoner and all the
prisoners were criminials, we protested to the jailors. All the
woker leaders kept quiet and stayed away from us, the students.
But U Aung Nu jumped out from his group and joined the students,
having announced that the students were right. U Aung Nu did not
stay away from us like other workers,who acted like cowards.
Later the criminals and wardens opened the hall rooms and beat
the people who protested. As a result, all the protesters were
badly injuried; some became crippled and never recovered. U Aung
Nu had head injuries and the next day his face was swollen. I
hardly recognized him because of his swollen face. My head was
injuried too; I had one cut on he back of my head.
In 1980, we were released from the prison because of the general
amnesty. U Aung Nu became a monk and his title was U Thanwara.
I undersatnd the intense situation between the Buddhists and
the Christians. SLORC is very clever and cunning. In Manaplaw
the majority of people are Christian. Most of the high ranking
Karen officers including Bo Mya are Christian. The real problem
is that the village Karens do not want the pagoda in their
village. And they have made attempts to stop the pagoda project.
General Bo Mya is an honest individual with integrity. I respect
his honesty but, I think, he, in this case, was informed rather
later when the conflict is getting out of hand. I think junior
Karen Christian officers tried to stop the pagoda project with no
reasonable explanation. They even wanted to stop the Ordination
House called Thein in Burmese. The Ordination House is not as
high and visible as the pagoda Zedi. Thein is the very important
place in Buddhism since it is in Thein where the laymen are to be
ordained.
At the same time, inside Burma, SLORC favors Buddhist monks and
encourages animists to convert into Buddhism because after 1990
elections, many monks boycotted the SLORC. That prompted the
SLORC to detain more than four hundreds monks. Monks were
disrobed and thrown into jail where they were tortured. Now the
SLORC is trying to win the monks onto their side. But there is
no need to compare what the SLORC is doing inside the country
with what is happening in the border: they are entirely two
different issues. SLORC now tries to appease the Buddhist monks
because they had insulted the latter in their attempt to hold on
to power. The insult inflicted upon Buddhist monks caused
tremendous anger among the Buddhist lay people, who make up the
great majority of the total populace in Burma. U
Thanwara's case is different becasue he believed in Buddhism and
hisduty as a monk is to teach Buddhist lay people Buddhism and
promulgate his Buddhist belief. I think everybody will agree
that "everyone has the right to belief in any religion". U
Thanwara is a devout Buddhist monk with a strong belief in human
rights. Accordingly he has been active in human rights issues
and is much respected by the ABSDF students and Buddhist Karens.
I hope General Bo Mya will find a way to resolve the conflict
between Karen and Burmese brothers in a peaceful manner. We need
to be reminded that the SLORC has never hesitated to seize any
opportunity to sow bad blood among democratic forces. Now the
SLORC is spreading the news that they believe in Buddhism and
they are willing to help the Buddhists in the jungle who are
being oppressed by the Christian Karens. They alas are trying to
kill two brids with one stone.
The issue that confronts the community at Manaplaw is the
religious one. Everybody involved should be more tolerant to
others' religious beliefs as there are Muslims besides the two
Buddhist and Christian Karen groups.
I hope that the KNU should not practice the kind of religious
favoritism of the SLORC although in this case favoritism toward
Christian Karens while trying to oppress the Buddhist Karens. At
the moment Manaplaw is being attacked by the SLORC and their
troops approaching the ABSDF headquarters, the internal disunity
among a major democratic force such as KNU can lead to the
destruction of the KNU itself as well as other democratic forces
(like the ABSDF). As a former leader of the ABSDF, I am greatly
worried about the implications of the current conflict between
the Buddhist and Christian Karens. I offer to act as a mediator
beteen the two conflicting parties.
Htun Aung Gyaw
Former Chairman All Burma Students' Democratic Front (ABSDF)
Chairman Freedom Fighters of Burma
***************************************************************
REG.BURMA: STARBUCKS BOYCOTT--YES OR NO?
Sun, 11 Dec 1994 19:17:53 -0500
To: [Addresses deleted to protect recipients privacy]
Starbucks boycott? Yes or no?
To all supporters of the Pepsi boycott:
The Pepsi-Burma Boycott Committee has been gathering comments on
whether Starbucks should face some kind of boycott because of its
joint venture with Pepsi.
There appears to be a consensus that the joint product should be
boycotted and that Starbucks should be asked to publicly
disassociate itself from Pepsi, but Starbucks overall should not
face a total boycott at this time. PBBC would like to add to that
list a request that Starbucks not allow the joint product to be
distributed in Burma.
PBBC speaking on its own behalf is ready to call for a boycott as
outlined above. Our committee does not have any overall authority
regarding the Pepsi boycott but we hope this action will be
supported by other boycotters. In the interest of maintaining a
consensus, however, this mailing is being sent out as a final
notice before we go public on the issue. If anyone has a reason
for PBBC not going ahead as outlined, please email or call (503)
234-2893 before Dec. 15. The announcement is planned for Dec. 17.
Unless you hear otherwise, please plan to publicize/act on the
boycott yourselves anytime after Dec. 16. We think this can be a
very useful tool in educating people as well as showing Pepsi the
consequences of its actions. We look forward to the chance to
create a wedge in Pepsi's linking of companies and products.
OTHER MATTERS: This is the first mailing from PBBC that many of
you will receive. If you do not want to be on this list, please
let us know and we'll remove your name. If you want your address
concealed so it isn't repeated in everyone's email, we can do
that as well. If you know anyone who might want to be added, have
them email their request to us.
Good luck in your work, and for a Free Burma, The Pepsi-Burma
Boycott Committee
**************************************************************
SCB:BURMESE FONTS NOW AVAILABLE ON [WWW] HOMEPAGE
jrchiensoc.culture.burma10:11 AM
Dec 12, 1994(at kuhub.cc.ukans.edu)(From News system)
Burmese fonts, "Shwe and Mya," are available to download at the
following home page:
http://falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~jrchien/burma.html.
Note: You must choose Load to Disk on Option Menu in Mosaic. If
you are using Netscape, just click on Shwe and Mya.
If you have any problem, you can either post it to this newsgroup
or to jrchien@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************************
SCB:FONT SOURCES ON THE NET .TTF AND .PTIM
soc.culture.burma 9:51 AM
Dec 13, 1994
(at get.hooked.net)(From News system)
As of 12/13/94
Known Burmese font locations that We have downloaded and tested:
Windows .ttf ftp linux.colgate.edu /pub/fonts/
(anonymous ok) 4 files exist two for burmese two for karen
by Tom Brackett
Windows etc Postscript
http:// falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~jrchien/burma.html by (?? JR
Chien) Note: True Type Install required for the Postscript
fonts.
Hope this helps, and thanks to the creators and or providers.
Tim and Aye Myint
**************************************************************
SEASIA-L BURMA-MYANMAR--LINTNER DEBATES BURMESE EMBASSY
Posted by Bertil Lintner
bit.listserv.seasia-l 1:10 AM Dec 15, 1994 (at
KSC.AU.AC.TH)(From News system)
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
I a recent posting, the Burmese Embassy in Washington wrote:
"There are 135 ethnic national races, where majority race of the
country= being Burmese with the coverage of 70%. Our former
name "Burma" was the na= me dreamed up by the colonial British
who invaded and occupied the land during= the 19th century and
nearly half of the 20th century. Burma would represent on= ly
the Burmese, the majority race of the country. The minority
races feel neglected and are afraid that they might lose their
identity. Whereas the n= ame Myanmar is a collective name,
embracing all the 135 ethnic races that compr= ise Myanmar's
population. Thus, changing back to the old, former, original
glorious name 'Myanmar'."
This is simply not true. Burma's primary school text book,
used for many years in schools throughout the country to teach
the national language= , was called "myanma patsa patamadan", or
"myanmar reader for the first grade= ". Obviously, this was in
reference to the language of the majority population of the
country, which we in English call Burmese. It had nothing= to do
with the Shans, the Kachins, the Karens or any other minority
people. The same= government-issued school text book also
contains the national anthem, which begins with the familiar
refrain "kaba makye bamapyi..."
Here, bamapyi clearly refers to the whole country as opposed to
myanma, which is used as the name only of the language of the
Burman majority population, not including other nationalities.
The point I want to make is that until June 1989, myanma was
used for= the majority population and their language. The term
never included the non-Burman peoples or languages of the country
=D1 whereas bama has been us= ed (rightly or wrongly) to describe
the whole country.
"bama" was not repeat not "dreamed up by the colonial British" as
the Burmese embassy in Washington claims. Actually, bama and
myanmar are interchangable, and have been so throughout history.
However, there is as= you say a slight difference: the
contracted form bama is more colloquial th= an myanmar. A bit
like muang thai and prathet thai in Thai (the former being more
colloquial than the other). The main point, however, is that
there is no hi= storical or linguistic evidence whatsoever to
back up the official Slorc version that m= yanmar encompasses the
Burmans a well as the minorities. That said, I think we sho= uld
be aware of a couple of points:
a) when the thakins named their movement the dohbama I think it
was more to= it than just a desire to use a more commonly
acceptable, contracted form of th= e name of the country. As this
extract from the official history of the dohba= ma (published in
Rangoon in 1976 by the government) suggests, the thakins did=
really believe that there was a difference between bama and
myanma:
"Since the Dobhama was set up, the movement always paid attention
to the un= ity of all the nationalities of the country...and the
thakins noted that myanma= r naingngan meant only the part of the
country where the Burmans lived. This = was the name given by the
Burmese kings to their country. But this is not corre= ct usage.
Bama naingngan is not the country where only the myanma people
live.= In this country different nationalities such as the
Kachins, Chins, Pa-Os, Palaungs, Mons, Myanmars, Rakhines andd
Shans reside. Therefore, the nationalists did not use the term
myanmar naingngan but bama naingngan. Tha= t would be the correct
term...all nationalities who live in bama naingngan ar= e called
bama."
Therefore, the movement became nown as the dohbama asiayone
instead dohmyanma asiayone. The Burmese edition of the Guardian
monthly concluded i= n its Feb 1971 issue:
"The word myanma signifies only the Burmans whereas bama embraces
all indig= enous nationalities."
I disagree with this analysis, but this is what the authorities
believed be= fore 1989.
b) when in 1989 the Slorc decided that the opposite is true, I
also think= they really believed it. Slorc officials always say
that "Burma" is a colonial term invented by Western intellectuals
while Myanmar is the indige= nous name of their country. This is,
of course, also a distortion of history. Myanma and= bama is the
same, but there is no term in any language to describe the
myanma/bama and the other minorities, since no such entity
existed before t= he arrival of the British in the 19th century.
Burma, as we know it today, is a colonial= creation. The Slorc's
assertion that "the minorities were unhappy with the term bama"
while they are said to approve of the term "myanma" is utter
nonsense= . Myanma is a Burmese term, in the bama/myanma
language, and most minority peoples I have met complain that
myanma is a Burmese term with no meaning i= n any other language.
What I intended to do was to highlight that both a) and b) are
wrong. And I think this is quite important since an amazing
number of diplomats, journalists and others have taken the 1989
explanation at face value.
I would appreciate it if the Burmese Embassy could clarify on
what historic= al and/or linguistic grounds the government has
decided that the term Myanmar now suddenly, is supposed to cover
myanmar-speaking as well as
**************************************************************
ABSDF: STATEMENT ON SLORC'S MILITARY OFFENSIVE AGAINST ABSDF AND
KNU
December 12, 1994
ALL BURMA STUDENTS' DEMOCRATIC FRONT(ABSDF)
Troops from the State Law and Order Restoration Council(SLORC)
have started the military offensive against the students and
ethnic Karen forces on December 12, 1994 along the Thai-Burmese
border. According to the information received from our
headquarters in Dawngwin, Burma, about 1,400 troops from the
SLORC's army have captured Lae-Toe which is 10 km west of
Dawngwin, the headquarters of the ABSDF and three-hours walking
distance from Dawngwin.
Severe fighting broke out on 13 December between the SLORC's
troops at Lae-Toe and the ABSDF and the Karen National Liberation
Front(armed forces of the Karen National Union) combined forces.
Another column of the SLORC's troops are now marching toward the
strategic hill Kalimu Kyo, east of Dawngwin. The troops from
Papun in Karen State under the command of South-East Military
Command Headquarters have been mobilized since the first week of
December to exploit the situation after the religious conflict
erupted within the Karen National Union(KNU). As the conflict
intensified between the Buddhist and Christian Karen, the SLORC's
troops quickly captured the strategic hill Mae-Nyaw-Khei on
December 11, Sout-East of Manerplaw, the headquarters of the KNU.
Since December 12, fighting between the SLORC's forces and the
KNU and the ABSDF combined forces has intensified.
Evacuation of women and children from Dawngwin and Manerplaw
headquarters are being under way. Except a report of injuries
among some members of the ABSDF, the detail information of the
causalities during the battle are not yet known. We highly
suspect that the SLORC's intelligence network has increased the
misunderstanding between the Buddhist and Christian Karen members
of the KNU. That is the most ruthless, brutal and inhuman game
that the Burmese military dictatorship has played since they have
seized power in 1962. The SLORC's military offensive against the
ethnic and democratic forces contradicts with the SLORC's claim
for their interest on national reconciliation and cease-fire talk
with ethnic armed groups. Besides, it also indicates that the
SLORC is not sincere in their talk with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and
also with the United Nations in order to restore democracy,
transfer of power to a civilian government and national
reconciliation in Burma.
We would like to call on Governments, Non-Governmental
Organizations and Burmese democratic and support groups around
the world to take effective actions including armed embargo
against SLORC to immediately stop their military offensive
against the ABSDF and the KNU. All Burma Students' Democratic
Front(ABSDF) Europe Office, P. O Box 6720, ST.Olavs Plass, 0130
Oslo, Norway Date. December 16, 1994 For More Information, please
contact; Aye Chan Naing(Re94
Dear friends,
We would like to call on you and your organization to join the
International Campagin to Stop SLORC's military offensive Against
the All Burma Students' Democratic Front(ABSDF) and the Karen
National Union(KNU) forces along the Thai-Burmese border areas.
The information we received today from our office in Bangkok, the
ABSDF's headquarters Dawngwin is under heavy fire as of yesterday
evening and the situation is not in our favour. To protect the
Dawngwin is not important any more than to safe the lives of the
students. Although women and children have been evacuated, there
are still over 1,000 members of the ABSDF in the camp or around
the camp. And the food and medicine are urgently needed. The
KNU and the ABSDF's combined forces are also fighting against
SLORC's troops around Manerplaw, the headquarters of the KNU and
Democratic Alliance of Burma(DAB).
The ABSDF Europe Office in Norway would like to request you to
join the International Campagin to Stop SLORC's Military
Offensive. We would like to request you to coordinate your
actions and activities with all the others groups, campaning
against the SLORC's military offensive.
Please send us your name or name of your orginazition including
your address, phone & fax number and e-mail address if you would
like to join. We like to use your name as a supporter of the
campagin. Even if you don't want to join, we would like to urge
you to take every possible actions or activities to stop the
SLORC's military offensive for example: call on your Government
officials, members of parliaments and Foreign Ministery
officials and urge them to publicly comdemn the SLORC's military
offensive, tell the SLORC to stop their offensive immediately and
call for international armed embargo against the SLORC. Please
act now! Let us unitedly open the new frontier against the SLORC
military regime in the international arena. Yours Sincerely,
Aye Chan Naing(Representative-Europe) All Burma Students'
Democratic Front(ABSDF) Europe Office P.O Box 6720, ST. Olavs
Plass 0130 Oslo, Norway tel & fax: 47 - 22 - 41 41 43 tel : 47 -
22 - 20 00 21 E-Mail: absdf@xxxxxxxxxx
**********************************************************
NBC: REQUEST FOR ACTION
reg.burma 5:03 AM Dec 16, 1994 (at oslonett.no)
The Norwegian Burma Council supports ABSDF's appeal to mobilize
governments and public opinion against the SLORC offensive the
Karen and ABSDF areas. In addition to approaching politicians and
the media, we suggest that direct faxes be sent to Burma to the
fax numbers listed in Burma Alert No 10, vol 5 (Oct. 94) page 6.
In view of the Socialist International's stand on Burma as
expressed in its last meeting in Tokyo, we suggest that
Socialist leaders and parliamentarians be approached on a
priority basis.
ONWARD ! Norwegian Burma Council 16.12.94
**************************************************************
BURMANET: LETTER--REPLY TO "IS THERE ANY JUSTICE TO THAILAND"
from BurmaNet News: December 9-11, 1994.
Dear Kay:
I read with interest your comments on whether the international
criticism on Thailand been a justified action, particularly in
relation with asylum-seekers from Burma.
First of all, I wish to point out that there has been no
criticism to the people of Thailand - which I sincerely believe -
from the international community. In a broader perspective, the
people of Thailand tolerate the refugees (Cambodian, Laotians,
Vietnamese and Burmese) in their country better than any other
nationalities on the whole world.
Of course, this must not be confused with the Government's
reluctance to address the problem of refugees - especially in
relation with those from Burma. The international community's
criticism is directed towards the the Royal Thai Government's
failure to give protection to these refugees, I am assured. Of
course, there may be some reason-behinds for the Royal Thai
Government in not addressing the refugee problem. I am sure you
will have no difficulty in finding that out for yourself.
The failure to address problem amounts to the prolonged suffering
of refugees and delay in solving the underlying root causes that
put refugees to their flight. To be compare with, the 250,000
Burma-Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh have the protection granted
by the Government of Bangladesh and now in their repatriations.
By granting the required international protection to these
refugees, the UNHCR and international community are able to solve
the problem of refugees- which it can be seen in Bangladesh. It
is exactly that kind of arrangement that we need to have it in
Thailand.
Mind you. The refugee issue is always an emotional one, even more
so in the West. The U.S. turned away Haitian boatpeople in
1992-93 is well known. Cuban refugee haven't got any better
treatment. In Germany, the neo-Nazis burned down asylum-houses.
As an international shame, there seem still no solution to the
problem of Vietnamese boatpeople in HK and Indonesia. Our very
own neighbour, Australia, had detained 300 Cambodians for nearly
four years who came here by boat in 1989. Here in Australia, the
incidence of 400 Chinese boatpeople arriving recently is called a
`Large influx of refugees' and the Aussies are already in panic.
Comparing to this, the Thai's tolerance to nearly half-million
Burmese are much admirable.
There is a stark contrast of East and West, regarding with the
response to refugee problem, of people and their governments.
People in the East simply put up with people who are in need of
help and tolerated, like you Thai people do for these Burmese,
and make no complaint to the Government. The Government on the
otherhand, happy to ignore all the problems so long as it don't
come to their office. Of course, this was the main problem with
Burmese refugees - who are quite articulate and politically
active - who directly ask the Government to change its policy on
Burma.
One thing I found out not long ago was that, generally,
nationality tends to be embarassed when their country's human
rights problem is addressed. For example, I recently talked with
a Chinese friend about the procurements of human organs from
prisoners. To my surprise, he defend that action! And I thought I
might lost a friend. To them, it is quite OK to talk about how
governments are bad, but when it comes to human rights they sense
an element of criticism to them. People here in Australia too:
I've been told "You're preaching to the converted", some put
things more blantly "You bite the hand that feeds you". But I
must say that in here there are special people who are so
broad-minded and - the politicians too - you can freely talk
anything to them.
Of course, when we speak out things, embarassments are
unavoidable. Right now Burmese are very nervous about the
estimated 30,000 Burmese-prostitutes in Thailand. In Burma,
people are very poor that an increase in prostitution is
reported. Recently, in Nyang Shwe in Shan State, there is
reported case of an Inn being used as brothel. Burma is about to
be open-up now. How if, Burma being openned with the increase in
such operations ? We are quite worry about this. And how are the
Thais addressing the problems (and Burmese women there) ? We
need to speak out about these things.
Dear Kay, please don't be taken too serious about what you
described as "the Burmese-refugee-mentality" of
not-like-to-be-treated-as-refugee. You know as much as I do,
people who can claim 2500baht/month is perhep only few hundred.
Most of displaced Burmese out there, especially women and
children, are begging on the streets of Bangkok for living, if
they could not find jobs. For desperate girls who are in need of
money for living, you know where they would have to go. There are
350,000 of them - I doubt any organization can successfully
handle that sort of number, and we just feeling so helpless.
Talking about these displaced Burmese, it is certainly true that
Burmese now a day are very poor and desperate enough to enter
Thailand. However, it is quite unkind for some people saying
Burmese just came to Thailand for better life (illegal and
economic migrant) - which literally means - the life of the
street-beggars and prostitutes in Thailand being better life
than in Burma. I think you don't need to use much effort to find
out why they came.
What you saw the Burmese leave to the West are high-profile and
so few in the number, a total of less than 300. Burmese refugees
have been not only forced to leave their country by their
Government, they also have to knelt down in front of foreigners
for their lives and welfare. It is a humiliation - i.e. national
humiliation to us. Under these circumstances, I doubt any
Burmese-refugee you saw will be able to put a smile on their face
- even for a person like you Kay.
With Best Regards,
DR U NE OO, uneoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************************
UNGA: HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS: HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS AND
REPORTS OF SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS AND REPRESENTATIVES
United Nations General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL
A/49/594
28 October 1994
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
Forty-ninth session Agenda item 100 (c)
HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS: HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS AND REPORTS OF
SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS AND REPRESENTATIVES
Situation of human rights in Myanmar
Note by the Secretary-General
The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the
members of the General Assembly the interim report prepared by Mr
Yozo Yokota, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human
Rights on the situation of human rights in Myanmar in accordance
with paragraph 20 of Commission on Human Rights resolution
1994/85 of 9 March 1994 and Economic and Social Council decision
1994/269 of 25 July 1994.
94-42026 (E) 111194 151194
ANNEX
Interim report on the situation of human rights in Myanmar
prepared by Mr Yozo Yokota, Special Rapporteur of the Commission
on Human Rights, in accordance with Commission resolution
1994/85 and Economic and Special Council decision 1994/269
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1 - 4 3
II. CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF MYANMAR
5 - 8 3
III. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS RECEIVED
9 6
I. INTRODUCTION
1. On 9 March 1994, at its fiftieth session, the Commission of
Human Rights adopted without a vote resolution 1994/85 entitled
Situation of human rights in Myanmar. In paragraph 20 of the
resolution the Commission decided to extend for one year the
mandate of the Special Rapporteur to establish or continue direct
contacts with the Government and people of Myanmar, including
political leaders deprived of their liberty, their families and
their lawyers and requested him to report to the General
Assembly at its fifty-first session. The present report, which
constitutes a preliminary report by the Special Rapporteur, is
being presented in accordance with that request. A final report
will be submitted to the Commission on Human Rights at its
fifty-first session.
2. In resolution 1994/85, the Commission, inter alia: noted
with particular concern that the electoral process initiated in
Myanmar by the general elections of 27 May 1990 had yet to reach
its conclusion; deplored the fact that political leaders
remained deprived of their liberty, in particular Nobel Peace
Prize laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi; expressed its grave concern
at the violations of human rights which remained extremely
serious, including, in particular, the practice of torture,
summary and arbitrary executions, forced labour, including
forced portering, abuse of women, politically motivate arrests
and detention, forced displacement, important restrictions on
the freedoms of expression and association, and the imposition of
oppressive measures directed at minority groups; and expressed
its concern about the continuous problems created in
neighbouring countries by the exodus of refugees from Myanmar.
3. In addition to the above, the Commission took note of the
fact that the Government of Myanmar had acceded to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949; signed a Memorandum of
Understanding on 5 November 1993 with the Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) concerning
voluntary repatriation of refugees from Bangladesh; received the
Special Rapporteur for a visit to Myanmar; and observed
cease-fires and undertaken negotiations with several minority
groups.
4. On 25 July 1994, the Economic and Social Council, in its
decision 1994/269, approved Commission resolution 1994/85.
II. CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF MYANMAR
5. On 10 August 1994, the Special Rapporteur addressed the
following letter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Union
of Myanmar:
I have the honour to refer to Commission on Human
Rights resolution 1994/85 of 9 March 1994 by which my mandate as
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar
was extended for a third year. For your convenience, please find
attached a copy of resolution 1994/85. As you may be aware, at
its most recent session, the Economic and Social Council
approved Commission resolution 1994/85 by its decision 1994/269
of 25 July 1994.
By paragraph 20 of its resolutions 1994/85, the
Commission called upon the Special Rapporteur to establish or
continue contacts with the Government and people of Myanmar,
including political leaders deprived of their liberty. Paragraph
21 urged the Government of Myanmar to cooperate fully and
unreservedly with the Commission and the Special Rapporteur and,
to that end, to ensure that the Special Rapporteur has
effectively free access to any person in Myanmar whom he may
deem it appropriate to meet in the performance of his mandate,
including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.
Accordingly, I would be most grateful to continue
benefiting from the cooperation of your Excellencys Government so
that I may provide the Commission and the General Assembly with a
comprehensive assessment of the situation of economic, social,
cultural, civil and political rights in Myanmar. In this regard,
I would wish to visit your country again. Specifically, and
keeping in mind the schedule of the General Assembly, I would
hope that your Government would agree to my visit at about the
same time as last year; may I suggest from 7 to 16 November
1994? Hoping that this would be acceptable to your Excellencys
Government may I also follow upon the suggestion made to me last
year in Yangon by one governmental official that, after spending
the first days of my visit in Yangon, I might spend some days in
the eastern part of your country towards the frontiers? On this
last matter especially, I would certainly welcome your specific
suggestions. On more general and substantive issues, let me also
restate my commitment to endeavouring to accord full
consideration to your Government's views and that, as such, I am
at your disposal to continue our dialogue about the situation of
human rights in Myanmar.
6. On 23 September, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the
Union of Myanmar addressed the following letter to the Special
Rapporteur:
I have the honour to refer to your letter of 10 August
1994, regarding your proposed visit to Myanmar.
I am pleased to inform you that your proposal is
acceptable to the Government of Myanmar. It is indeed our
pleasure to welcome you again this year to Myanmar as an
expression of our continuing cooperation with the United
Nations.
I am sure that you will have the opportunity once
again to observe at first hand the consensus reached for the
writing of a firm and enduring Constitution in the national
political process, as well as the achievements made in the
economic development endeavours.
I shall once again try my best to make your visit in
Myanmar most productive and meaningful.
7. In a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Union
of Myanmar to the United Nations Offices at Geneva, which
accompanied the above letter from the Minister for Foreign
Affairs, the Special Rapporteur was informed that the proposed
dates for his visit had been tentatively agreed to.
8. On October 1994, the Special Rapporteur addressed the
following letter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Union
of Myanmar:
I have the honour to refer to your letter of 23
September 1994, by which you communicated your Government's
acceptance of my proposal to visit the Union of Myanmar in
November of this year. I am most appreciative of this
opportunity to examine first-hand the situation of human rights
in your country and to continue in person our dialogue on issues
and developments in this regard.
With respect to the specific itinerary to be followed
during my visit to your country in November, I would welcome
again the opportunity of meeting with the following officials:
Secretary of the State Law and Order Restoration Council; the
Minister of Information; the Attorney-General; the Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court; and, of course, your Excellency. In
addition, I would welcome the opportunity of meeting with the
following persons: leaders of various political parties
participating in the National Convention, including the Chairman
of the National League for Democracy; representatives of the
Myanmar Red Cross Society; and, in fulfilment of paragraph 21 of
Commission on Human Rights resolution 1994/85, Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi. I would also appreciate the opportunity of visiting again
Insein Prison with unrestricted access to all prisoners.
Finally, I would greatly appreciate the opportunity of travelling
to the eastern part of your country towards the frontiers where
I would hope to meet with local authorities, visit a local
prison, tour some development or construction sites, and meet
with such persons as I may deem relevant to my mandate.
In keeping with my commitment to endeavouring to
accord full consideration to your Government's views on the
substantive issues raised in my mandate, including both general
and specific allegations of human rights violations by the
Government of Myanmar, I submit herewith a summary of
allegations, I would appreciate receiving your Government's
responses to the following:
1. Please specify the reasons, including reference
to specific legal authority, for keeping Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
under house arrest after 20 July 1994, and please indicate
precisely when the Government intends to release her.
2. Please describe in as much detail as possible the
present status of Daw Aung San Suu Kyis physical health.
3. Please detail the Government's position with
regard to maintaining dialogue with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,
indicating the time-frame the Government intends to follow in
this regard.
4. Please describe in as much detail as possible the
progress made so far in the National Convention and the drafting
of a new constitution, indicating the anticipated schedule of
future meetings.
5. Please indicate whether or not the Burmese
version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been
distributed to all the delegates in the National Convention.
In so far as I would like to bring your Government's
views on the attached summary of allegations to the attention of
the General assembly during its present session, I would be
grateful of receiving your Government's comments or specific
responses by 31 October 1994. I would also appreciate receiving
your Government's responses to the above queries as soon as
possible.
The continuing cooperation of the Government of
Myanmar in the fulfilment of my mandate is more appreciated.
III. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS RECEIVED
9. The following is the text of the summary of allegations
which the Special Rapporteur submitted to the Government of
Myanmar with his letter of 5 October 1994 as indicated above.
With due regard to general assembly resolutions 37/14 Commission
of 16 November 1982 and 47/202 B of 22 December 1992 and
Commission on Human Rights resolution 1993/94 of 11 March 1993,
concerning, inter alia, the timely submission and circulation of
reports, the Special Rapporteur reproduces below the text of his
summary of allegations while awaiting receipt of the views of
the Government of Myanmar. Immediately upon receipt of the views
of the Government of Myanmar, the Special Rapporteur shall
submit an addendum to the present report reproducing the
aforementioned views in their entirety.
A. Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary execution
1 Numerous communications from non-governmental sources
continue to be received by the Special Rapporteur reporting
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killings of civilians by
Myanmar military forces under a variety of circumstances. In the
regions of the country with predominantly non-Burman populations
and where insurgencies have been taking place, many of the
alleged killings are summary executions of civilians who are
accused of either being insurgents or collaborating with
insurgents. For example, on 5 February 1994, Myanmar Army forces
from Division No. 99, Battalion No. 84, reportedly arrested
seven men working in a field in Paan Township, Thaton District,
Karen State; the men were accused of collaborating with the
armed Karen insurgents and two of them were executed, while the
others were held to ransom and subsequently freed. Many other
similar situations include allegations of such severe torture
that the victims died as a result. For example, in March 1994 in
Paan Township, Thaton District, Karen State, soldiers from the
Myanmar Army reportedly arrested a 13-year-old boy driving
cattle outside his village; the boy was said to have been
interrogated, tortured and killed by the Myanmar forces. Other
examples of alleged extrajudicial killings include the
following: on 10 March 1994, forces of Light Infantry Battalion
No. 59 alleged arbitrarily executed Saw Soe Ghaz Htoo (aged 35
years) in Thay Baw village, Lu Thaw Township, Papun (Mudraw)
District; on 18 March 1994, forces of Light Infantry Battalion
No. 59 also alleged arbitrarily executed saw Ko Pa Moo (aged 30
years) in Thu Daz village, Lu Thaw Township, Papun (Mudraw)
District; on 20 April 1994, forces of Light Infantry Battalion
No. 96 are alleged to have killed the villager Pa Kloh (aged 26
years) and wounded Saw er Ker (aged 20 years) in Paw Ghem Khee
village, Thaton District; and on 10 May 1994, in Naw KToh
village, Thaton District, two villagers (Kyaw Soe Puy, aged 32
years, and Than Shwe Ganoo, aged 35 years) were said to have
been arrested and executed by the forces of the Light Infantry
Battalion No. 76.
2. Many of the reports from non-governmental sources have also
described occasions where soldiers from the Myanmar Army have
opened fire with light arms against civilians without any evident
provocation. Such situations have frequently been reported in the
process of attempts by the Army to arrest and detain civilians
for the purposes of forced portering and other labour; as
villagers attempt to avoid being arrested or to escape the
approaching troops, soldiers are often reported to open fire. In
other situations, the Army is reported to have killed civilians
who have disobeyed orders from the Army to relocate their homes,
to supply goods or provide labour for little or no compensation.
3 In addition to the above, Myanmar Army troops are reported
to take revenge against nearby villages after being attacked by
insurgent forces. These collective and arbitrary punishments are
often said to include summary executions of civilians present in
the area. On 15 December 1993, for example, following an
insurgent ambush of Myanmar Army forces near Htee La Nay
village, Hlaing Bwe Township, Paan District, Karen State, Army
villager working in Army field was reportedly shot on sight.
Under similar circumstances in May 1993, two young schoolboys
were allegedly shot in Kyint Kyo village, Thaton Township. It
has also been reported that, in the beginning of 1994, the
regional commanders in Thaton District informed the civilian
headmen of the district that, in the future, five villagers
would be killed for every soldier who died. However, it is not
known whether these reported threats have ever been carried out.
4. In Shan State, different sources have alleged that, since
December 1993, an offensive by the Myanmar Army against Khun Sa
and the so-called Ming Tai Army has included air force strikes on
civilian villages in the area of the insurgency. For example, on
10 July 1994, San Akhu village is reported to have been attacked
and two boys are said to have been killed (aged 7 and 14 years)
while five other persons were wounded. Whole villages are
reported to have been destroyed by the Myanmar Army Forces
because of alleged cooperation with the Ming Tai Army. As in
other cases, villagers trying to escape the military forces are
said to have been shot on sight upon the suspicion of being
insurgents or cooperating with them.
B. Arbitrary arrest and detention
5. The Nobel Peace Prize winner, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, is
still being held under prolonged house detention without trial;
on 20 July 1994, she passed her fifth anniversary in detention.
Seeking her release and return to freedom in Myanmar, including
respect for all of her civil and political rights under
international law, parliamentarians, non-governmental
organisations and individuals from throughout the world sent
thousands of petitions to the United Nations in the last few
months.
6. Although some political prisoners have reportedly been
released in the last year from centres of detention in Yangon,
reports from different sources describe how an unknown number of
civilians continue to be arrested as suspected insurgents (or
sympathizers thereto) and how they remain detained in
countryside prisons, especially in the regions of the country
with predominantly non- Burman populations.
7. Recently, the following new cases have been brought to the
attention of the Special Rapporteur. On 27 May 1994, Army Swiss
national displayed Army banner in front of Yangon City Hall,
demanding the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Seven persons who
were passively observing the protest in Yangon are reported to
have been arrested by Myanmar intelligence officers.
8. On 4 July 1994 at Yangon airport, members of Military
Branch Three reportedly arrested Khin Zaw Win (a university
student) when he tried to board a plane for Singapore. The
report indicates that Khin Zaw Win was studying in Singapore and
was writing a thesis on the political situation in Myanmar; he
had been visiting Myanmar in order to obtain more material for
his thesis. Recent reports say that he has been transferred from
the Military Intelligence Centre to Insein Prison, and is now
being detained in the same cell as a supporter of the National
League for Democracy. Khin Zaw Win has allegedly yet to have
been charged with any offence.
9. On 21 July 1994 in Plat Hon Pai section, Kwan Saya village,
part of Halockhani refugee camp, soldiers from Infantry Battalion
No. 62 of the Myanmar Army attacked the camp, destroying about
50 houses and causing some 500 Mon refugees (recently
repatriated from Thai) to flee again across the t border. The
soldiers reportedly arrested 19 men, most of whom were camp
leaders. The fate of those arrested remains unknown.
10. On 4 or 5 August 1994 in Yangon, the following persons were
reportedly arrested: U Khin Maung Swe (aged 52 years, a
prominent dissident Member of Parliament-elect and member of the
Central Executive Committee of the National League for
Democracy); U Sein Hla Oo (aged 58 years, a journalist and
opposition politician); Dr. Htun Myat aye (a dentists who had
apparently worked for the un Childrens Fund (UNICEF) at Yangon);
Daw San San Tin (a translator who had apparently been working
occasionally for UNICEF); and Daw San San Nwe (a writer) and her
daughter. It is not known where these persons are being
detained, nor what (if any) charges have been brought against
them. It is also reported that Khin Maung Swe, U Sein Hla Oo and
Saw San San Nwe have all been previously imprisoned by the
Government.
11. Since 1993, many reports from different sources have alleged
widespread practice of arbitrary arrest and detention of persons
for ransom, especially in the countryside. Civilians are said to
have been rounded up in various public places in both urban and
rural communities and held in detention until their relatives
could supply a certain sum of money or goods; these detentions
are often said to be maintained under the threat that the
detainees will be taken as Army porters or be executed should
the ransom not be paid.
12. The information has also reached the Special Rapporteur
that, on 15 July 1994 in Insein Prison, Thet Khine died four
days after a failed suicide attempt. It has been alleged that
the prison authorities placed Thet Khine in the prisons Medical
Unit after his attempted suicide, choosing not to take him to a
hospital facility outside the Prison; he died in the prisons
Medical Unit. Thet Khine was arrested in 1989 and had been
sentenced to 20 years imprisonment together with other political
prisoners.
C. Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment
13. Numerous allegations, often in considerable detail, have
been received from various sources alleging that forces of the
Myanmar military, intelligence and security services and police
continue to torture persons in detention or otherwise subject
them to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatments and punishments.
Such treatment seems to be routinely employed during the
interrogation of persons who have been arrested or held on
suspicion of real or perceived anti- government activities.
Allegations include subjection to severe beatings, shackling,
near suffocation, burning, stabbing, rubbing of salt and
chemicals in open wounds and psychological torture, including
threats of death. Other reported methods of torture include
forcing victims to consume large quantities of water or pouring
hot liquids down victims noses or throats.
14. The Special Rapporteur has continued to receive information
from many sources indicating that rape occurs on a wide scale;
reports of so-called gang rapes by entire groups of Myanmar
military personnel are not uncommon. The victims are mostly
reported to be women belonging to minority populations, although
allegations of homosexual rape have also been received
(including, e.g., the written testimony of a 13-year-old boy
from Thaton Township, Thaton District, Karen State). Women
serving as porters or otherwise as forced labourers are
especially vulnerable and are often said to be victims of rape.
It is also reported that rape is being used as a punishment for
joining indigenous womens groups. Some of the reported rapes are
said to have lead to death as a consequence of continuous rape
or be infections caused by rape. Reports also describe
situations where women who have resisted rape, or screamed during
rape, have been killed. Furthermore, rape is also alleged to be
used as a method of forcing women from ethnic minorities to
marry soldiers from the Myanmar Army; the children of these
marriages are subsequently considered to be of Burmese
nationality.
15. An especially severe incident which has been brought to the
attention of the Special Rapporteur reportedly occurred on 2
August 1993 in Won Mon village, Won Tse village circle, Laikha
Township in Southern Shan State, when Myanmar Army soldiers from
Infantry Battalion No. 64 were said to have entered the village
in search of a defector: they alleged arrested 12 women (ages
15 to 35 years) and took them to a nearby farm for
interrogation, whereupon the women were gang-raped.
D. Forced labour
16. In his 15 August 1994 statement to the United Nations
Subcommittee on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of
Minorities at its forty-sixth session, Ambassador U Tin Kyaw
Hlaing of the Permanent Mission of Myanmar to the United Nations
Office at Geneva stressed the following: In Myanmar, voluntary
contribution of labour to build shrines, temples, roads,
bridges, etc. is a long- established tradition going back
centuries. While the Special Rapporteur observes that uncoerced
contribution of labour for the public good can hardly be
described as a violations of human rights, it is to be noted
that numerous reports from a wide variety of sources still
characterize most of the contributed labour as being conducted
under various threats of violations of personal integrity rights
or property rights. In general, reports of such forced labour
may be divided into three categories: forced portering, other
forced labouring and different kinds of obligatory guard duty.
17. As has been previously reported by the Special Rapporteur,
much of the forced portering in Myanmar has occurred in
connection with military campaigns against insurgent forces in
various of the states of the Union of Myanmar. Although
cease-fire talks between the Government and the main insurgent
groups were agreed upon in late 1993 and early 1994, reports on
forced portering for the Army still flow in from different
sources. For example, in May 1994 the Myanmar Army is said to
have arrested hundreds of persons in Tachilek in Shan State in
order to use them as Army porters in the battle against Khun Sa
and the Ming Tai Army. Porters were reported to have been
forcibly recruited from all public places and also from private
homes in the areas of Kalaw, Taunggyi and Tachilek. Fighting
between the Myanmar military and the Ming Tai Army is reported to
have been intense with high casualty figures on both sides,
including the deaths of many porters caught in the cross-fire.
The Myanmar authorities have also reportedly failed to protect
civilians from being forced to porter for the Ming Tai Army.
Moreover, the Myanmar Army has allegedly regularly been taking
internally displaced persons from a camp established by the
Myanmar Army at Loi Hsa Htoong near the border with Thai for
purposes of portering military materiel as needed.
18. Forced portering has been reported especially in the areas
of conflict in the Karen, Karenni, Shan and Mon regions. Persons
taken for portering are reported to have been rounded up by the
military in various places, such as schools, buses and market
places. Convicts are also said to be used as Army porters,
especially at the front lines of the fighting. Reports indicate
that porters are forced, under very poor conditions, to carry
heavy loads of Army materiel and supplies for the troops. They
are said to be given very small or spoiled food rations, little
water and no medical care if ill or wounded. Large numbers of
porters are reported to have died from ill-treatment, illness and
malnutrition. Irrespective of their condition, those who can no
longer respond to the heavy physical demands of portering are
reportedly routinely abandoned without food, or simply executed
on the spot. Porters who attempt to escape are reportedly shot.
19. Allegations have also been made that elderly persons, women
and children have been taken as Army porters. These persons are
often said to be used as human shields in military operations.
20. Of a similar nature to forced portering in support of
military activities, the Special Rapporteur has received
information alleging the use of civilian labour, under coercive
measures, for other purposes. Reports indicate that the villages
near Army camps are obliged to supply daily workforces to assist
with the construction of Army barracks, fences, land clearance,
wood-cutting operations, agricultural projects and other
activities in direct support of the Army camps.
21. In connection with certain large development projects
initiated by the Government of Myanmar, some of them with the
assistance of foreign aid, it has been alleged that civilians
have been forced to contribute non-recompensed labour. Such
projects include the building of hospitals, roads, railways, gas
pipelines, bridges, and fisheries. Reports indicate that people
from villages in the areas of various projects are frequently
obligated to contribute their labour and other resources, often
under threat of violation of their personal integrity rights.
22. Many reports of considerable detail have been received
alleging a variety of violations of human rights on a massive
scale in connection with the construction of a railway between
the city of Ye in Southern Mon State and the city of Tavoy in
Tenasserim (Taninthari) District. The Government reportedly
began construction of the railway in November 1993. According to
reports received, each family from the villages along the line
and also from surrounding areas is obliged to supply one worker
for 15 days at a time in rotating shifts. Almost all the
civilian families in Ye Township, Thanbyuzaya Township and Mudon
Township of Mon State, as well as Yebyu Township, Tavoy
Township, Launglon Township and Thayet Chaung Township of
Tenasserim District, are said to have been forced to contribute
labour for the railways construction. The workers are reportedly
required to bring their own food, provide their own shelter,
ensure their own health and medical needs, use their own tools
and, in some cases, also supply materials for the construction
of the railway. Allegations have also been made that the
military supervising the construction of the railway demands
money for the use of bulldozers available at construction sites;
the fuel needed for use of the bulldozers is also said to be
sold by the military. Despite articles in the official government
press stating that wages have been paid to local persons
participating in ground-levelling and other work associated with
the construction of the railway (e.g., an article published in
the 31 July 1994 edition of the New Light of Myanmar), reports
received consistently estimate that over 100,000 persons have
had to contribute their labour for the railway project without
any compensation. Elderly persons, children and pregnant women
are also reported to have been seen as labourers along the
railway. Several persons are also reported to have died from
illness and accidents caused by poor conditions at construction
sites. Forced labour is said to be concentrated in seven main
control centres from Ye to Zimba. Each of the aforementioned
centres is alleged to control 7,000 to 8,000 forced labourers
daily. The land along the railways route is said to have been
confiscated from its owners without compensation. Myanmar Army
battalions (especially Light Infantry Battalion Nos. 343, 407,
408, 409 and 410, together with regular Infantry Battalion Nos.
61 and 104) are reported to be responsible for the construction
of the railway. The railway is expected to be completed sometime
during 1996.
23. As other examples of forced labour allegedly being used in
relation to major development projects, information has been
received relating to a road project started in December 1993
between Bo Pyin and Lay Nya in Mergui/Tavoy District. Every
family from the villages along the road have reportedly to
participate in its construction by building 10 feet of the road.
Forced labour is also said to be used in the construction of an
international airport at Bassein and a new military airfield in
Laboutta Township. In addition, many other smaller development
projects in urban areas, such as the restoration of tourist
sites in Mandalay, are reported to rely upon forced labour.
24. Another form of forced labour which has been reported to the
Special Rapporteur alleges the requirement of lengthy guard duty
by civilians along roads and railways in many of the regions
where insurgencies have been taking place. Reports indicate that
civilians from nearby villages are often required to serve 24
hour guard duties without compensation and on threats of
violations of their personal integrity rights. In addition, such
guard duty is often said to include contribution of physical
labour for reparations to the roads and railroads. Furthermore,
some reports allege that civilians used for such duties, in
particular women and children, are also required to sweep roads
for land-mines; it has been alleged that villagers have been
forced to walk or ride in carts in front of military columns in
order to detect mines.
E. Violations of the freedom of movement
25. Reports continue to be received alleging the forced
relocation and internal displacement of persons on a wide scale:
in the past six years, it has been estimated that over 1 million
persons have been forcibly relocated, without compensation, to
new towns, villages or relocation camps or have been internally
displaced owing to armed conflict with various insurgent groups.
In the regions of the country with predominantly non-Burman
populations and where insurgencies have been taking place, the
inhabitants of small vis are still said to be forced to relocate
to larger villages or to temporary relocation camps for purposes
of enabling government forces better to control the populations.
In those cases when the inhabitants of a village refuse to
relocate, they are said to be first threatened in various ways
prior to being forcibly evicted and having their homes
destroyed.
26. Forced relocations and evictions have also been reported in
connection with major development projects. According to several
non-governmental sources, the gas pipeline project from the
Martaban Gulf to Thailand led to the forcible relocation of
villages in Mergui/Tavoy District in December 1993: villagers
around Bsaw Law were allegedly forced to move to Kaleingung;
villagers around Shwetapi were allegedly forced to move Huan
Gui; and villagers in the Baw Law Gui area were allegedly forced
to move to Ye Byu. All the relocation sites are said to be along
a government-controlled road near to the coast.
27. In connection with the reports of forced relocations of
persons residences, information has been received by the Special
Rapporteur that other restrictions are placed on the liberty of
movement of relocated persons. For example, some persons are said
to have been placed in relocation camps which are surrounded by
high fences and guarded by Government forces. Reports allege
that a curfew from 0600 to 1800 hours is in effect in these
camps, despite the fact that the official curfew order was
lifted by the Government of Myanmar on 10 September 1992.
Persons held in the relocation camps, or who are otherwise
apparently required to remain within the confines of the
villages to which they have been forcibly relocated, are
reportedly prohibited from returning to tend to their farms or to
collect property which they were forced to leave behind. In some
places, persons needing to go outside a village or a camp (e.g.,
for purposes of work) are reported to need special permission,
which is issued for one day at a time against a fee, from the
local Army headquarters. In certain rural areas, persons are
reportedly prohibited from spending the night in temporary
shelters at their farms.
28. While most reports concerning alleged violations of freedom
of movement detail incidents of forced relocation, the Special
Rapporteur has also received reports alleging forced assembly and
participation in public meetings organized by the Government.
Such reports have mostly related to meetings of the Union
Solidarity Development Association organized since the beginning
of 1994 in different parts of Myanmar (e.g., Toungoo, Monywa,
Mandalay and Lokaw). People from the surrounding areas were
reportedly forced to attend these meetings under various
threats, such as deprivation of electricity or water supplies,
monetary fines or physical abuse. Students are said to have been
told by their teachers that if they failed to attend the rallies
they would each receive 15 lashes of a cane. The Union
Solidarity Development Association rally held on 7 February 1994
in Prome town in Pegu District is reported to have been preceded
by chaos when large numbers of people who had been brought into
fenced compound the night before were not allowed to leave the
compound for purposes of going to the toilet: in the hysteria
which accompanied a fight between civilians and security forces,
2 men are reported to have been trampled to death while over 20
other people were said to have been wounded.
F. Violations of the right to property
29. Many reports received by the Special Rapporteur allege
various kinds of violations of property rights, especially by the
Myanmar military forces. These reports include allegations of
regular looting of villages in the countryside, the arbitrary
and unlawful institution of a wide variety of fees for various
purposes and the application of military orders against
civilians requiring them to provide specified goods without
adequate compensation.
30. Myanmar Army troops are frequently reported to have entered
villages and to have confiscated, without compensation,
different kinds of valuables in the forms of non-perishable
personal property, food supplies and livestock. Among the goods
reportedly confiscated are many items which cannot be said to be
necessary for purposes of providing public security, for example
womens sarongs, jewellery, tape-recorders and alcohol.
31. Various kinds of fees are said to be regularly demanded from
both individuals and villages as a whole. The most widespread fee
is said to be the porter fee which is allegedly demanded each
month from every family: in towns, the fees are reported to be
about 100 kyats per month, while in the countryside they are
reported to be between 200 and 400 kyats per month. Recent
reports have also alleged the application of other kinds of
fees, such as courier fees and taxes on tools, carts and other
goods. As noted above, villagers in the areas of development
projects are also said to be forced to participate in the
funding of these projects; fines are also reportedly assessed if
a family is unable to supply the demanded amount of forced
labour or a minimum amount of demanded goods. People who are
unable to pay assessed fees or fines are reportedly threatened
with being taken away to be used as Army porters or for other
purposes of long term and heavy forced labour.
32. Reports received in the last several months allege that the
Myanmar Army has started to demand compensation from local
villagers for vehicles and other military property damaged by
land- mines. Fines of 100,000 kyats are said to have been
demanded from the village closest to the place of an incident,
with 50,000 kyats being demanded from as many as 10 or 13 of the
surrounding villages. For example, in Thaton Township a truck
was reportedly destroyed by a land-mine on 29 January 1994: the
two nearest villages, Tor Klor Khee and Tor Klor Po Khee, were
said to have been fined 300,000 kyats by Myanmar Army Infantry
Battalion No. 120. Village headmen in Thaton Township have also
reportedly been forced to sign documents taking all
responsibility for security in the area and to pay fines of
50,000 kyats if shelling by insurgent forces occurs or to pay
fines of 100,000 kyats if Army trucks are damaged by land-mines.
33. Other reported incidents of compensation being required
from villagers following loss of property by the military include
reports of cases where owners of cattle which have been killed by
Army land-mines close to Army camps have had to pay compensation
for the destroyed land-mines. In one reported incident, villagers
had to pay compensation to members of the Armed forces for the
bullets fired at them when, in fear of being taken as porters,
the villagers tried to escape the soldiers.
34. Farmers are also said to have been forced to sell parts of
their crops to government-related agencies for prices well below
market price, in addition to paying the fixed government tax on
these crops. As a result, it has been reported that some farmers
no longer cultivate their fields in order to avoid the constant
confiscations of their crops or the obligations to sell parts of
their crops well below market value. In addition, reports have
also described how soldiers sometimes deliberately destroy rice
paddies and other crop fields. For example, on 21 February 1994,
Light Infantry Battalion No. 32 led by Captain Myo Lwin Thet
Lwin, allegedly burned down the houses of four villagers in
Taree Hta Gaun village in Kya In Seik Gyi Township, Dooplaya
District, destroying in the process the stored crops of rice,
betel nut and pepper.
35. With respect to real property, reports indicate that Myanmar
military forces frequently confiscate land in all parts of the
country, without paying any compensation. Such confiscations
have been reported in relation to the realization of development
projects, the creation of State farms, or for the personal
benefit of military commanders. For example, in Tacheilek, Shan
State, it has been alleged that senior members of the Myanmar
Army confiscated paddy fields, divided them into blocks and sold
them back to farmers or to officers under their command.
G . The situation of refugees from Myanmar
36. According to information received by the Special Rapporteur,
approximately 75,000 refugees from Myanmar are estimated to live
in camps inside Thailand along the border with Myanmar. An
unknown number of persons, possibly as many as 100,000 are said
to be internally displaced on the Myanmar side of the border.
These persons are reported to have fled their villages in fear
of ill-treatment, forced portering, forced labouring or other
human rights violations. Some 200,000 Muslim refugees from the
northern Rakhine State are still in Bangladesh after fleeing
their homes in Myanmar. Many of them reportedly allege that they
were forcibly relocated or that their land was confiscated for
government construction projects, prawn cultivation or timber
projects during 1990-1992.
37. Recently, thousands of Mon refugees were repatriated from
Loh Loe in Thailand to Halockhani inside Myanmar. On 21 July
1994, the refugee camp inside Myanmar was reportedly attacked
and partly destroyed by approximately 300 soldiers of the
Myanmar Armys Infantry Battalion No. 62 under the command of
Deputy Battalion Commander Lt. Col. Ohn Myint. Fifty refugees
were said to have been taken hostage by the troops while all the
Mon refugees (approximately 5,000 to 6,000 persons) in the camp
fled back into Thailand. Although reports indicate that most of
the hostages were later released (after allegedly having been
used as human shields and porters), 19 of those taken hostage
are still believed to be detained.
-----
**************************************************************
UNGA: HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS: HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS AND
REPORTS OF SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS AND REPRESENTATIVES
United Nations General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL
A/49/594
28 October 1994
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
Forty-ninth session Agenda item 100 (c)
HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS: HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS AND REPORTS OF
SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS AND REPRESENTATIVES
Situation of human rights in Myanmar
Note by the Secretary-General
The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the
members of the General Assembly the interim report prepared by Mr
Yozo Yokota, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human
Rights on the situation of human rights in Myanmar in accordance
with paragraph 20 of Commission on Human Rights resolution
1994/85 of 9 March 1994 and Economic and Social Council decision
1994/269 of 25 July 1994.
94-42026 (E) 111194 151194
ANNEX
Interim report on the situation of human rights in Myanmar
prepared by Mr Yozo Yokota, Special Rapporteur of the Commission
on Human Rights, in accordance with Commission resolution
1994/85 and Economic and Special Council decision 1994/269
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1 - 4 3
II. CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF MYANMAR
5 - 8 3
III. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS RECEIVED
9 6
I. INTRODUCTION
1. On 9 March 1994, at its fiftieth session, the Commission of
Human Rights adopted without a vote resolution 1994/85 entitled
Situation of human rights in Myanmar. In paragraph 20 of the
resolution the Commission decided to extend for one year the
mandate of the Special Rapporteur to establish or continue direct
contacts with the Government and people of Myanmar, including
political leaders deprived of their liberty, their families and
their lawyers and requested him to report to the General
Assembly at its fifty-first session. The present report, which
constitutes a preliminary report by the Special Rapporteur, is
being presented in accordance with that request. A final report
will be submitted to the Commission on Human Rights at its
fifty-first session.
2. In resolution 1994/85, the Commission, inter alia: noted
with particular concern that the electoral process initiated in
Myanmar by the general elections of 27 May 1990 had yet to reach
its conclusion; deplored the fact that political leaders
remained deprived of their liberty, in particular Nobel Peace
Prize laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi; expressed its grave concern
at the violations of human rights which remained extremely
serious, including, in particular, the practice of torture,
summary and arbitrary executions, forced labour, including
forced portering, abuse of women, politically motivate arrests
and detention, forced displacement, important restrictions on
the freedoms of expression and association, and the imposition of
oppressive measures directed at minority groups; and expressed
its concern about the continuous problems created in
neighbouring countries by the exodus of refugees from Myanmar.
3. In addition to the above, the Commission took note of the
fact that the Government of Myanmar had acceded to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949; signed a Memorandum of
Understanding on 5 November 1993 with the Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) concerning
voluntary repatriation of refugees from Bangladesh; received the
Special Rapporteur for a visit to Myanmar; and observed
cease-fires and undertaken negotiations with several minority
groups.
4. On 25 July 1994, the Economic and Social Council, in its
decision 1994/269, approved Commission resolution 1994/85.
II. CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF MYANMAR
5. On 10 August 1994, the Special Rapporteur addressed the
following letter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Union
of Myanmar:
I have the honour to refer to Commission on Human
Rights resolution 1994/85 of 9 March 1994 by which my mandate as
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar
was extended for a third year. For your convenience, please find
attached a copy of resolution 1994/85. As you may be aware, at
its most recent session, the Economic and Social Council
approved Commission resolution 1994/85 by its decision 1994/269
of 25 July 1994.
By paragraph 20 of its resolutions 1994/85, the
Commission called upon the Special Rapporteur to establish or
continue contacts with the Government and people of Myanmar,
including political leaders deprived of their liberty. Paragraph
21 urged the Government of Myanmar to cooperate fully and
unreservedly with the Commission and the Special Rapporteur and,
to that end, to ensure that the Special Rapporteur has
effectively free access to any person in Myanmar whom he may
deem it appropriate to meet in the performance of his mandate,
including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.
Accordingly, I would be most grateful to continue
benefiting from the cooperation of your Excellencys Government so
that I may provide the Commission and the General Assembly with a
comprehensive assessment of the situation of economic, social,
cultural, civil and political rights in Myanmar. In this regard,
I would wish to visit your country again. Specifically, and
keeping in mind the schedule of the General Assembly, I would
hope that your Government would agree to my visit at about the
same time as last year; may I suggest from 7 to 16 November
1994? Hoping that this would be acceptable to your Excellencys
Government may I also follow upon the suggestion made to me last
year in Yangon by one governmental official that, after spending
the first days of my visit in Yangon, I might spend some days in
the eastern part of your country towards the frontiers? On this
last matter especially, I would certainly welcome your specific
suggestions. On more general and substantive issues, let me also
restate my commitment to endeavouring to accord full
consideration to your Government's views and that, as such, I am
at your disposal to continue our dialogue about the situation of
human rights in Myanmar.
6. On 23 September, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the
Union of Myanmar addressed the following letter to the Special
Rapporteur:
I have the honour to refer to your letter of 10 August
1994, regarding your proposed visit to Myanmar.
I am pleased to inform you that your proposal is
acceptable to the Government of Myanmar. It is indeed our
pleasure to welcome you again this year to Myanmar as an
expression of our continuing cooperation with the United
Nations.
I am sure that you will have the opportunity once
again to observe at first hand the consensus reached for the
writing of a firm and enduring Constitution in the national
political process, as well as the achievements made in the
economic development endeavours.
I shall once again try my best to make your visit in
Myanmar most productive and meaningful.
7. In a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Union
of Myanmar to the United Nations Offices at Geneva, which
accompanied the above letter from the Minister for Foreign
Affairs, the Special Rapporteur was informed that the proposed
dates for his visit had been tentatively agreed to.
8. On October 1994, the Special Rapporteur addressed the
following letter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Union
of Myanmar:
I have the honour to refer to your letter of 23
September 1994, by which you communicated your Government's
acceptance of my proposal to visit the Union of Myanmar in
November of this year. I am most appreciative of this
opportunity to examine first-hand the situation of human rights
in your country and to continue in person our dialogue on issues
and developments in this regard.
With respect to the specific itinerary to be followed
during my visit to your country in November, I would welcome
again the opportunity of meeting with the following officials:
Secretary of the State Law and Order Restoration Council; the
Minister of Information; the Attorney-General; the Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court; and, of course, your Excellency. In
addition, I would welcome the opportunity of meeting with the
following persons: leaders of various political parties
participating in the National Convention, including the Chairman
of the National League for Democracy; representatives of the
Myanmar Red Cross Society; and, in fulfilment of paragraph 21 of
Commission on Human Rights resolution 1994/85, Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi. I would also appreciate the opportunity of visiting again
Insein Prison with unrestricted access to all prisoners.
Finally, I would greatly appreciate the opportunity of travelling
to the eastern part of your country towards the frontiers where
I would hope to meet with local authorities, visit a local
prison, tour some development or construction sites, and meet
with such persons as I may deem relevant to my mandate.
In keeping with my commitment to endeavouring to
accord full consideration to your Government's views on the
substantive issues raised in my mandate, including both general
and specific allegations of human rights violations by the
Government of Myanmar, I submit herewith a summary of
allegations, I would appreciate receiving your Government's
responses to the following:
1. Please specify the reasons, including reference
to specific legal authority, for keeping Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
under house arrest after 20 July 1994, and please indicate
precisely when the Government intends to release her.
2. Please describe in as much detail as possible the
present status of Daw Aung San Suu Kyis physical health.
3. Please detail the Government's position with
regard to maintaining dialogue with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,
indicating the time-frame the Government intends to follow in
this regard.
4. Please describe in as much detail as possible the
progress made so far in the National Convention and the drafting
of a new constitution, indicating the anticipated schedule of
future meetings.
5. Please indicate whether or not the Burmese
version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been
distributed to all the delegates in the National Convention.
In so far as I would like to bring your Government's
views on the attached summary of allegations to the attention of
the General assembly during its present session, I would be
grateful of receiving your Government's comments or specific
responses by 31 October 1994. I would also appreciate receiving
your Government's responses to the above queries as soon as
possible.
The continuing cooperation of the Government of
Myanmar in the fulfilment of my mandate is more appreciated.
III. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS RECEIVED
9. The following is the text of the summary of allegations
which the Special Rapporteur submitted to the Government of
Myanmar with his letter of 5 October 1994 as indicated above.
With due regard to general assembly resolutions 37/14 Commission
of 16 November 1982 and 47/202 B of 22 December 1992 and
Commission on Human Rights resolution 1993/94 of 11 March 1993,
concerning, inter alia, the timely submission and circulation of
reports, the Special Rapporteur reproduces below the text of his
summary of allegations while awaiting receipt of the views of
the Government of Myanmar. Immediately upon receipt of the views
of the Government of Myanmar, the Special Rapporteur shall
submit an addendum to the present report reproducing the
aforementioned views in their entirety.
A. Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary execution
1 Numerous communications from non-governmental sources
continue to be received by the Special Rapporteur reporting
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killings of civilians by
Myanmar military forces under a variety of circumstances. In the
regions of the country with predominantly non-Burman populations
and where insurgencies have been taking place, many of the
alleged killings are summary executions of civilians who are
accused of either being insurgents or collaborating with
insurgents. For example, on 5 February 1994, Myanmar Army forces
from Division No. 99, Battalion No. 84, reportedly arrested
seven men working in a field in Paan Township, Thaton District,
Karen State; the men were accused of collaborating with the
armed Karen insurgents and two of them were executed, while the
others were held to ransom and subsequently freed. Many other
similar situations include allegations of such severe torture
that the victims died as a result. For example, in March 1994 in
Paan Township, Thaton District, Karen State, soldiers from the
Myanmar Army reportedly arrested a 13-year-old boy driving
cattle outside his village; the boy was said to have been
interrogated, tortured and killed by the Myanmar forces. Other
examples of alleged extrajudicial killings include the
following: on 10 March 1994, forces of Light Infantry Battalion
No. 59 alleged arbitrarily executed Saw Soe Ghaz Htoo (aged 35
years) in Thay Baw village, Lu Thaw Township, Papun (Mudraw)
District; on 18 March 1994, forces of Light Infantry Battalion
No. 59 also alleged arbitrarily executed saw Ko Pa Moo (aged 30
years) in Thu Daz village, Lu Thaw Township, Papun (Mudraw)
District; on 20 April 1994, forces of Light Infantry Battalion
No. 96 are alleged to have killed the villager Pa Kloh (aged 26
years) and wounded Saw er Ker (aged 20 years) in Paw Ghem Khee
village, Thaton District; and on 10 May 1994, in Naw KToh
village, Thaton District, two villagers (Kyaw Soe Puy, aged 32
years, and Than Shwe Ganoo, aged 35 years) were said to have
been arrested and executed by the forces of the Light Infantry
Battalion No. 76.
2. Many of the reports from non-governmental sources have also
described occasions where soldiers from the Myanmar Army have
opened fire with light arms against civilians without any evident
provocation. Such situations have frequently been reported in the
process of attempts by the Army to arrest and detain civilians
for the purposes of forced portering and other labour; as
villagers attempt to avoid being arrested or to escape the
approaching troops, soldiers are often reported to open fire. In
other situations, the Army is reported to have killed civilians
who have disobeyed orders from the Army to relocate their homes,
to supply goods or provide labour for little or no compensation.
3 In addition to the above, Myanmar Army troops are reported
to take revenge against nearby villages after being attacked by
insurgent forces. These collective and arbitrary punishments are
often said to include summary executions of civilians present in
the area. On 15 December 1993, for example, following an
insurgent ambush of Myanmar Army forces near Htee La Nay
village, Hlaing Bwe Township, Paan District, Karen State, Army
villager working in Army field was reportedly shot on sight.
Under similar circumstances in May 1993, two young schoolboys
were allegedly shot in Kyint Kyo village, Thaton Township. It
has also been reported that, in the beginning of 1994, the
regional commanders in Thaton District informed the civilian
headmen of the district that, in the future, five villagers
would be killed for every soldier who died. However, it is not
known whether these reported threats have ever been carried out.
4. In Shan State, different sources have alleged that, since
December 1993, an offensive by the Myanmar Army against Khun Sa
and the so-called Ming Tai Army has included air force strikes on
civilian villages in the area of the insurgency. For example, on
10 July 1994, San Akhu village is reported to have been attacked
and two boys are said to have been killed (aged 7 and 14 years)
while five other persons were wounded. Whole villages are
reported to have been destroyed by the Myanmar Army Forces
because of alleged cooperation with the Ming Tai Army. As in
other cases, villagers trying to escape the military forces are
said to have been shot on sight upon the suspicion of being
insurgents or cooperating with them.
B. Arbitrary arrest and detention
5. The Nobel Peace Prize winner, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, is
still being held under prolonged house detention without trial;
on 20 July 1994, she passed her fifth anniversary in detention.
Seeking her release and return to freedom in Myanmar, including
respect for all of her civil and political rights under
international law, parliamentarians, non-governmental
organisations and individuals from throughout the world sent
thousands of petitions to the United Nations in the last few
months.
6. Although some political prisoners have reportedly been
released in the last year from centres of detention in Yangon,
reports from different sources describe how an unknown number of
civilians continue to be arrested as suspected insurgents (or
sympathizers thereto) and how they remain detained in
countryside prisons, especially in the regions of the country
with predominantly non- Burman populations.
7. Recently, the following new cases have been brought to the
attention of the Special Rapporteur. On 27 May 1994, Army Swiss
national displayed Army banner in front of Yangon City Hall,
demanding the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Seven persons who
were passively observing the protest in Yangon are reported to
have been arrested by Myanmar intelligence officers.
8. On 4 July 1994 at Yangon airport, members of Military
Branch Three reportedly arrested Khin Zaw Win (a university
student) when he tried to board a plane for Singapore. The
report indicates that Khin Zaw Win was studying in Singapore and
was writing a thesis on the political situation in Myanmar; he
had been visiting Myanmar in order to obtain more material for
his thesis. Recent reports say that he has been transferred from
the Military Intelligence Centre to Insein Prison, and is now
being detained in the same cell as a supporter of the National
League for Democracy. Khin Zaw Win has allegedly yet to have
been charged with any offence.
9. On 21 July 1994 in Plat Hon Pai section, Kwan Saya village,
part of Halockhani refugee camp, soldiers from Infantry Battalion
No. 62 of the Myanmar Army attacked the camp, destroying about
50 houses and causing some 500 Mon refugees (recently
repatriated from Thai) to flee again across the t border. The
soldiers reportedly arrested 19 men, most of whom were camp
leaders. The fate of those arrested remains unknown.
10. On 4 or 5 August 1994 in Yangon, the following persons were
reportedly arrested: U Khin Maung Swe (aged 52 years, a
prominent dissident Member of Parliament-elect and member of the
Central Executive Committee of the National League for
Democracy); U Sein Hla Oo (aged 58 years, a journalist and
opposition politician); Dr. Htun Myat aye (a dentists who had
apparently worked for the un Childrens Fund (UNICEF) at Yangon);
Daw San San Tin (a translator who had apparently been working
occasionally for UNICEF); and Daw San San Nwe (a writer) and her
daughter. It is not known where these persons are being
detained, nor what (if any) charges have been brought against
them. It is also reported that Khin Maung Swe, U Sein Hla Oo and
Saw San San Nwe have all been previously imprisoned by the
Government.
11. Since 1993, many reports from different sources have alleged
widespread practice of arbitrary arrest and detention of persons
for ransom, especially in the countryside. Civilians are said to
have been rounded up in various public places in both urban and
rural communities and held in detention until their relatives
could supply a certain sum of money or goods; these detentions
are often said to be maintained under the threat that the
detainees will be taken as Army porters or be executed should
the ransom not be paid.
12. The information has also reached the Special Rapporteur
that, on 15 July 1994 in Insein Prison, Thet Khine died four
days after a failed suicide attempt. It has been alleged that
the prison authorities placed Thet Khine in the prisons Medical
Unit after his attempted suicide, choosing not to take him to a
hospital facility outside the Prison; he died in the prisons
Medical Unit. Thet Khine was arrested in 1989 and had been
sentenced to 20 years imprisonment together with other political
prisoners.
C. Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment
13. Numerous allegations, often in considerable detail, have
been received from various sources alleging that forces of the
Myanmar military, intelligence and security services and police
continue to torture persons in detention or otherwise subject
them to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatments and punishments.
Such treatment seems to be routinely employed during the
interrogation of persons who have been arrested or held on
suspicion of real or perceived anti- government activities.
Allegations include subjection to severe beatings, shackling,
near suffocation, burning, stabbing, rubbing of salt and
chemicals in open wounds and psychological torture, including
threats of death. Other reported methods of torture include
forcing victims to consume large quantities of water or pouring
hot liquids down victims noses or throats.
14. The Special Rapporteur has continued to receive information
from many sources indicating that rape occurs on a wide scale;
reports of so-called gang rapes by entire groups of Myanmar
military personnel are not uncommon. The victims are mostly
reported to be women belonging to minority populations, although
allegations of homosexual rape have also been received
(including, e.g., the written testimony of a 13-year-old boy
from Thaton Township, Thaton District, Karen State). Women
serving as porters or otherwise as forced labourers are
especially vulnerable and are often said to be victims of rape.
It is also reported that rape is being used as a punishment for
joining indigenous womens groups. Some of the reported rapes are
said to have lead to death as a consequence of continuous rape
or be infections caused by rape. Reports also describe
situations where women who have resisted rape, or screamed during
rape, have been killed. Furthermore, rape is also alleged to be
used as a method of forcing women from ethnic minorities to
marry soldiers from the Myanmar Army; the children of these
marriages are subsequently considered to be of Burmese
nationality.
15. An especially severe incident which has been brought to the
attention of the Special Rapporteur reportedly occurred on 2
August 1993 in Won Mon village, Won Tse village circle, Laikha
Township in Southern Shan State, when Myanmar Army soldiers from
Infantry Battalion No. 64 were said to have entered the village
in search of a defector: they alleged arrested 12 women (ages
15 to 35 years) and took them to a nearby farm for
interrogation, whereupon the women were gang-raped.
D. Forced labour
16. In his 15 August 1994 statement to the United Nations
Subcommittee on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of
Minorities at its forty-sixth session, Ambassador U Tin Kyaw
Hlaing of the Permanent Mission of Myanmar to the United Nations
Office at Geneva stressed the following: In Myanmar, voluntary
contribution of labour to build shrines, temples, roads,
bridges, etc. is a long- established tradition going back
centuries. While the Special Rapporteur observes that uncoerced
contribution of labour for the public good can hardly be
described as a violations of human rights, it is to be noted
that numerous reports from a wide variety of sources still
characterize most of the contributed labour as being conducted
under various threats of violations of personal integrity rights
or property rights. In general, reports of such forced labour
may be divided into three categories: forced portering, other
forced labouring and different kinds of obligatory guard duty.
17. As has been previously reported by the Special Rapporteur,
much of the forced portering in Myanmar has occurred in
connection with military campaigns against insurgent forces in
various of the states of the Union of Myanmar. Although
cease-fire talks between the Government and the main insurgent
groups were agreed upon in late 1993 and early 1994, reports on
forced portering for the Army still flow in from different
sources. For example, in May 1994 the Myanmar Army is said to
have arrested hundreds of persons in Tachilek in Shan State in
order to use them as Army porters in the battle against Khun Sa
and the Ming Tai Army. Porters were reported to have been
forcibly recruited from all public places and also from private
homes in the areas of Kalaw, Taunggyi and Tachilek. Fighting
between the Myanmar military and the Ming Tai Army is reported to
have been intense with high casualty figures on both sides,
including the deaths of many porters caught in the cross-fire.
The Myanmar authorities have also reportedly failed to protect
civilians from being forced to porter for the Ming Tai Army.
Moreover, the Myanmar Army has allegedly regularly been taking
internally displaced persons from a camp established by the
Myanmar Army at Loi Hsa Htoong near the border with Thai for
purposes of portering military materiel as needed.
18. Forced portering has been reported especially in the areas
of conflict in the Karen, Karenni, Shan and Mon regions. Persons
taken for portering are reported to have been rounded up by the
military in various places, such as schools, buses and market
places. Convicts are also said to be used as Army porters,
especially at the front lines of the fighting. Reports indicate
that porters are forced, under very poor conditions, to carry
heavy loads of Army materiel and supplies for the troops. They
are said to be given very small or spoiled food rations, little
water and no medical care if ill or wounded. Large numbers of
porters are reported to have died from ill-treatment, illness and
malnutrition. Irrespective of their condition, those who can no
longer respond to the heavy physical demands of portering are
reportedly routinely abandoned without food, or simply executed
on the spot. Porters who attempt to escape are reportedly shot.
19. Allegations have also been made that elderly persons, women
and children have been taken as Army porters. These persons are
often said to be used as human shields in military operations.
20. Of a similar nature to forced portering in support of
military activities, the Special Rapporteur has received
information alleging the use of civilian labour, under coercive
measures, for other purposes. Reports indicate that the villages
near Army camps are obliged to supply daily workforces to assist
with the construction of Army barracks, fences, land clearance,
wood-cutting operations, agricultural projects and other
activities in direct support of the Army camps.
21. In connection with certain large development projects
initiated by the Government of Myanmar, some of them with the
assistance of foreign aid, it has been alleged that civilians
have been forced to contribute non-recompensed labour. Such
projects include the building of hospitals, roads, railways, gas
pipelines, bridges, and fisheries. Reports indicate that people
from villages in the areas of various projects are frequently
obligated to contribute their labour and other resources, often
under threat of violation of their personal integrity rights.
22. Many reports of considerable detail have been received
alleging a variety of violations of human rights on a massive
scale in connection with the construction of a railway between
the city of Ye in Southern Mon State and the city of Tavoy in
Tenasserim (Taninthari) District. The Government reportedly
began construction of the railway in November 1993. According to
reports received, each family from the villages along the line
and also from surrounding areas is obliged to supply one worker
for 15 days at a time in rotating shifts. Almost all the
civilian families in Ye Township, Thanbyuzaya Township and Mudon
Township of Mon State, as well as Yebyu Township, Tavoy
Township, Launglon Township and Thayet Chaung Township of
Tenasserim District, are said to have been forced to contribute
labour for the railways construction. The workers are reportedly
required to bring their own food, provide their own shelter,
ensure their own health and medical needs, use their own tools
and, in some cases, also supply materials for the construction
of the railway. Allegations have also been made that the
military supervising the construction of the railway demands
money for the use of bulldozers available at construction sites;
the fuel needed for use of the bulldozers is also said to be
sold by the military. Despite articles in the official government
press stating that wages have been paid to local persons
participating in ground-levelling and other work associated with
the construction of the railway (e.g., an article published in
the 31 July 1994 edition of the New Light of Myanmar), reports
received consistently estimate that over 100,000 persons have
had to contribute their labour for the railway project without
any compensation. Elderly persons, children and pregnant women
are also reported to have been seen as labourers along the
railway. Several persons are also reported to have died from
illness and accidents caused by poor conditions at construction
sites. Forced labour is said to be concentrated in seven main
control centres from Ye to Zimba. Each of the aforementioned
centres is alleged to control 7,000 to 8,000 forced labourers
daily. The land along the railways route is said to have been
confiscated from its owners without compensation. Myanmar Army
battalions (especially Light Infantry Battalion Nos. 343, 407,
408, 409 and 410, together with regular Infantry Battalion Nos.
61 and 104) are reported to be responsible for the construction
of the railway. The railway is expected to be completed sometime
during 1996.
23. As other examples of forced labour allegedly being used in
relation to major development projects, information has been
received relating to a road project started in December 1993
between Bo Pyin and Lay Nya in Mergui/Tavoy District. Every
family from the villages along the road have reportedly to
participate in its construction by building 10 feet of the road.
Forced labour is also said to be used in the construction of an
international airport at Bassein and a new military airfield in
Laboutta Township. In addition, many other smaller development
projects in urban areas, such as the restoration of tourist
sites in Mandalay, are reported to rely upon forced labour.
24. Another form of forced labour which has been reported to the
Special Rapporteur alleges the requirement of lengthy guard duty
by civilians along roads and railways in many of the regions
where insurgencies have been taking place. Reports indicate that
civilians from nearby villages are often required to serve 24
hour guard duties without compensation and on threats of
violations of their personal integrity rights. In addition, such
guard duty is often said to include contribution of physical
labour for reparations to the roads and railroads. Furthermore,
some reports allege that civilians used for such duties, in
particular women and children, are also required to sweep roads
for land-mines; it has been alleged that villagers have been
forced to walk or ride in carts in front of military columns in
order to detect mines.
E. Violations of the freedom of movement
25. Reports continue to be received alleging the forced
relocation and internal displacement of persons on a wide scale:
in the past six years, it has been estimated that over 1 million
persons have been forcibly relocated, without compensation, to
new towns, villages or relocation camps or have been internally
displaced owing to armed conflict with various insurgent groups.
In the regions of the country with predominantly non-Burman
populations and where insurgencies have been taking place, the
inhabitants of small vis are still said to be forced to relocate
to larger villages or to temporary relocation camps for purposes
of enabling government forces better to control the populations.
In those cases when the inhabitants of a village refuse to
relocate, they are said to be first threatened in various ways
prior to being forcibly evicted and having their homes
destroyed.
26. Forced relocations and evictions have also been reported in
connection with major development projects. According to several
non-governmental sources, the gas pipeline project from the
Martaban Gulf to Thailand led to the forcible relocation of
villages in Mergui/Tavoy District in December 1993: villagers
around Bsaw Law were allegedly forced to move to Kaleingung;
villagers around Shwetapi were allegedly forced to move Huan
Gui; and villagers in the Baw Law Gui area were allegedly forced
to move to Ye Byu. All the relocation sites are said to be along
a government-controlled road near to the coast.
27. In connection with the reports of forced relocations of
persons residences, information has been received by the Special
Rapporteur that other restrictions are placed on the liberty of
movement of relocated persons. For example, some persons are said
to have been placed in relocation camps which are surrounded by
high fences and guarded by Government forces. Reports allege
that a curfew from 0600 to 1800 hours is in effect in these
camps, despite the fact that the official curfew order was
lifted by the Government of Myanmar on 10 September 1992.
Persons held in the relocation camps, or who are otherwise
apparently required to remain within the confines of the
villages to which they have been forcibly relocated, are
reportedly prohibited from returning to tend to their farms or to
collect property which they were forced to leave behind. In some
places, persons needing to go outside a village or a camp (e.g.,
for purposes of work) are reported to need special permission,
which is issued for one day at a time against a fee, from the
local Army headquarters. In certain rural areas, persons are
reportedly prohibited from spending the night in temporary
shelters at their farms.
28. While most reports concerning alleged violations of freedom
of movement detail incidents of forced relocation, the Special
Rapporteur has also received reports alleging forced assembly and
participation in public meetings organized by the Government.
Such reports have mostly related to meetings of the Union
Solidarity Development Association organized since the beginning
of 1994 in different parts of Myanmar (e.g., Toungoo, Monywa,
Mandalay and Lokaw). People from the surrounding areas were
reportedly forced to attend these meetings under various
threats, such as deprivation of electricity or water supplies,
monetary fines or physical abuse. Students are said to have been
told by their teachers that if they failed to attend the rallies
they would each receive 15 lashes of a cane. The Union
Solidarity Development Association rally held on 7 February 1994
in Prome town in Pegu District is reported to have been preceded
by chaos when large numbers of people who had been brought into
fenced compound the night before were not allowed to leave the
compound for purposes of going to the toilet: in the hysteria
which accompanied a fight between civilians and security forces,
2 men are reported to have been trampled to death while over 20
other people were said to have been wounded.
F. Violations of the right to property
29. Many reports received by the Special Rapporteur allege
various kinds of violations of property rights, especially by the
Myanmar military forces. These reports include allegations of
regular looting of villages in the countryside, the arbitrary
and unlawful institution of a wide variety of fees for various
purposes and the application of military orders against
civilians requiring them to provide specified goods without
adequate compensation.
30. Myanmar Army troops are frequently reported to have entered
villages and to have confiscated, without compensation,
different kinds of valuables in the forms of non-perishable
personal property, food supplies and livestock. Among the goods
reportedly confiscated are many items which cannot be said to be
necessary for purposes of providing public security, for example
womens sarongs, jewellery, tape-recorders and alcohol.
31. Various kinds of fees are said to be regularly demanded from
both individuals and villages as a whole. The most widespread fee
is said to be the porter fee which is allegedly demanded each
month from every family: in towns, the fees are reported to be
about 100 kyats per month, while in the countryside they are
reported to be between 200 and 400 kyats per month. Recent
reports have also alleged the application of other kinds of
fees, such as courier fees and taxes on tools, carts and other
goods. As noted above, villagers in the areas of development
projects are also said to be forced to participate in the
funding of these projects; fines are also reportedly assessed if
a family is unable to supply the demanded amount of forced
labour or a minimum amount of demanded goods. People who are
unable to pay assessed fees or fines are reportedly threatened
with being taken away to be used as Army porters or for other
purposes of long term and heavy forced labour.
32. Reports received in the last several months allege that the
Myanmar Army has started to demand compensation from local
villagers for vehicles and other military property damaged by
land- mines. Fines of 100,000 kyats are said to have been
demanded from the village closest to the place of an incident,
with 50,000 kyats being demanded from as many as 10 or 13 of the
surrounding villages. For example, in Thaton Township a truck
was reportedly destroyed by a land-mine on 29 January 1994: the
two nearest villages, Tor Klor Khee and Tor Klor Po Khee, were
said to have been fined 300,000 kyats by Myanmar Army Infantry
Battalion No. 120. Village headmen in Thaton Township have also
reportedly been forced to sign documents taking all
responsibility for security in the area and to pay fines of
50,000 kyats if shelling by insurgent forces occurs or to pay
fines of 100,000 kyats if Army trucks are damaged by land-mines.
33. Other reported incidents of compensation being required
from villagers following loss of property by the military include
reports of cases where owners of cattle which have been killed by
Army land-mines close to Army camps have had to pay compensation
for the destroyed land-mines. In one reported incident, villagers
had to pay compensation to members of the Armed forces for the
bullets fired at them when, in fear of being taken as porters,
the villagers tried to escape the soldiers.
34. Farmers are also said to have been forced to sell parts of
their crops to government-related agencies for prices well below
market price, in addition to paying the fixed government tax on
these crops. As a result, it has been reported that some farmers
no longer cultivate their fields in order to avoid the constant
confiscations of their crops or the obligations to sell parts of
their crops well below market value. In addition, reports have
also described how soldiers sometimes deliberately destroy rice
paddies and other crop fields. For example, on 21 February 1994,
Light Infantry Battalion No. 32 led by Captain Myo Lwin Thet
Lwin, allegedly burned down the houses of four villagers in
Taree Hta Gaun village in Kya In Seik Gyi Township, Dooplaya
District, destroying in the process the stored crops of rice,
betel nut and pepper.
35. With respect to real property, reports indicate that Myanmar
military forces frequently confiscate land in all parts of the
country, without paying any compensation. Such confiscations
have been reported in relation to the realization of development
projects, the creation of State farms, or for the personal
benefit of military commanders. For example, in Tacheilek, Shan
State, it has been alleged that senior members of the Myanmar
Army confiscated paddy fields, divided them into blocks and sold
them back to farmers or to officers under their command.
G . The situation of refugees from Myanmar
36. According to information received by the Special Rapporteur,
approximately 75,000 refugees from Myanmar are estimated to live
in camps inside Thailand along the border with Myanmar. An
unknown number of persons, possibly as many as 100,000 are said
to be internally displaced on the Myanmar side of the border.
These persons are reported to have fled their villages in fear
of ill-treatment, forced portering, forced labouring or other
human rights violations. Some 200,000 Muslim refugees from the
northern Rakhine State are still in Bangladesh after fleeing
their homes in Myanmar. Many of them reportedly allege that they
were forcibly relocated or that their land was confiscated for
government construction projects, prawn cultivation or timber
projects during 1990-1992.
37. Recently, thousands of Mon refugees were repatriated from
Loh Loe in Thailand to Halockhani inside Myanmar. On 21 July
1994, the refugee camp inside Myanmar was reportedly attacked
and partly destroyed by approximately 300 soldiers of the
Myanmar Armys Infantry Battalion No. 62 under the command of
Deputy Battalion Commander Lt. Col. Ohn Myint. Fifty refugees
were said to have been taken hostage by the troops while all the
Mon refugees (approximately 5,000 to 6,000 persons) in the camp
fled back into Thailand. Although reports indicate that most of
the hostages were later released (after allegedly having been
used as human shields and porters), 19 of those taken hostage
are still believed to be detained.
-----
*********************************************************
NEWS SOURCES REGULARLY COVERED/ABBREVIATIONS USED BY BURMANET:
AP: ASSOCIATED PRESS
AFP: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
AW: ASIAWEEK
AWSJ: ASIAN WALL STREET JOURNAL
Bt.: THAI BAHT; 25 Bt.=US$1 (APPROX),
BBC: BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION
BI: BURMA ISSUES
BKK POST: BANGKOK POST (DAILY NEWSPAPER, BANGKOK)
BRC-CM: BURMESE RELIEF CENTER-CHIANG MAI
BRC-J: BURMESE RELIEF CENTER-JAPAN
CPPSM: C'TEE FOR PUBLICITY OF THE PEOPLE'S STRUGGLE IN MONLAND
FEER: FAR EAST ECONOMIC REVIEW
IRRAWADDY: NEWSLETTER PUBLISHED BY BURMA INFORMATION GROUP
JIR: JANE'S INTELLIGENCE REVIEW
KHRG: KAREN HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP
Kt. BURMESE KYAT; 150 KYAT=US$1 BLACK MARKET
100 KYAT=US$1 SEMI-OFFICIAL
6 KYAT=US$1 OFFICIAL
MOA: MIRROR OF ARAKAN
NATION: THE NATION (DAILY NEWSPAPER, BANGKOK)
NLM: NEW LIGHT OF MYANMAR (DAILY STATE-RUN NEWSPAPER, RANGOON)
S.C.B.:SOC.CULTURE.BURMA NEWSGROUP
S.C.T.:SOC.CULTURE.THAI NEWSGROUP
SEASIA-L: S.E.ASIA BITNET MAILING LIST
SLORC: STATE LAW AND ORDER RESTORATION COMMITTEE
USG: UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
XNA: XINHUA NEWS AGENCY (PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA)
**************************************************************