Indefinite power of a Burmese army officer
Human rights violations in Chinland, and Burma as a whole, is increasing year after year. In 1988 the military took state power after a nationwide pro-democracy uprising in Burma. When the military took power,( by force,) they promise to held a free and fair election and transfer power to elected representative of the peoples. Even though the National League for Democracy NLD party and its allied won more than 85% of contested seats in 1990 election, the military still refuse to transfer power to elected representatives.
Instead of honoring the will of the people by transferring power to elected representatives, the military regime intensify human rights violations up on the opposition parties and the citizens to consolidate its power.
There was only one army battalion in Chin State before the military took power in 1988. At present as many as ten battalions are operating in Chin State. As a result of the increasing military operations in Chin State, Chin peoples have faced all kinds of human rights violations. Torture, rape, pottering, force labors, extortion of money, killings and long term imprisonment without a fair trial are frequently taking place in Chinland under the rule of military regime called State Peace and Development Council SPDC. The following incidents indicate how the military rule effects the life of the civilians in an ethnic inhabitant area like Chin State in Burma. These incidents are the result of a patrolling troop led by Major Khin Maung Ye. There are several major military operations performed by the SPDC regime in Chinland every year and as consequences, thousands of Chins people are seeking refuge in neighboring countries Bangladesh and India. Major Khin Maung Ye of Burmese army Light Infantry Battalion LIB 266 Haka, Chin State of Burma, took position as temporary commander of Lungler army camp.
Leading company 3 of the battalion, he started patrolling the areas in July 1999. On the 25th of August they captured Van Peng, Chin National Army and two other villagers at Pu Than Rawl’s house, Bungkhua Village, Thantlang township. At the same time Za Mang , chairman of Village Peace and Development Council of Fungkah village and two other villagers were also arrested, alleging them as supporters of Chin National Front CNF. All the captives are tightly chained and took them to Lungler army camp. They were tortured day and night in the camp. An eyewitness said, "Their condition in the camp is very bad. They could died or would certainly become disable persons".
The patrolling troop arrested some other 32 villagers in Tlangpi village.
They are also accused of supporting Chin National Front and sent to force labor camp. These 32 captives are not allow going out side the camp, they are constantly forced to work in the road construction between Thantlang and Lungler army camp. The Soldiers tightly guarded them and they are beaten up every night by the army for not obeying their orders properly. The commander, Major Khin Maung Yee of Burmese army, demanded a bribe in exchange of their release. However, the villagers could not effort such a big amount of money because they are just a poor slash and burn farmers. Thang Zawl 52 and Van Peng 45 are the oldest men among these captives.
Villagers are not paid for their labour instead they were kicked, punched and beaten up by the Burmese army while working. Moreover, they had to bring their own tools and food to work for the army. As Chin people are mostly depend on slash and burn, shifting cultivation, it is the most important time(moon soon season in Burma from June to September ) to work on farm for the next crops. Even though the Burmese army knows very well the fact that it is the crucial period for the farmers to work in the farm, they still forcing villagers to work for the army. If they could not work in the most needed time, starving would certainly ahead in the near future.
A frustrated soldier defected
Frustrating of his superiors’ course of action on civilians, in July of 1999 Aung Thu, a Burmese soldier, defected his unit with a G-3 riffle to Chin National Army when a troop led by Major Khin Maung Ye marched from Lungler army camp to Tlangpi village.Village elders and some other villagers were held responsible for the defected soldiers and beaten up by the Burmese army.
All the arrested elders were taken to Haka (the capital of Chin State) police lockup and the rest 30 villagers were taken to Lungler army camp. All of them were forced to work in the farm (owned by army) and in road reconstruction. Among the arrested villagers Ngun Chawng 29 was taken to Thantlang army camp and kept in lockup. Any of Tlangpi villager dare to embody in village council members because they afraid of the military injustice treatment on the village elders. However, when Major Khin Maung Ye ordered Tlangpi villagers to form a new village council, the villagers have to obey the order in fear of his brutality. Thus, the village council was formed with four persons. Right after the village council was formed, the four elected members were summoned to Lungler army camp and detain for no reason.
(This kind of actions by the army is to create fear among the civilians in order to cut off the contact between the opposition groups and the people. This kind of unjust treatment on the civilians is practiced by the Burmese army in many parts of ethnic areas in Burma)
Kyat 80,000 Bribe saves a life
On 10th August a patrolling troop led by Major Khin Maung Ye arrived in Bungkhua village. As soon as they arrived to Bungkhua, they arrested Thawng Cung, (VPDC) president, and took him with his arms tied on his back to Lungler army base.
He was tortured for 9- days. When he could not bear his torment, he asked his family to arrange 80,000 Kyats. He was released from the army camp only after the money is bribed to Major Khin Maung Ye. He was hospitalized but had no money to buy medicine. As a farmer like Thawng Cung, his life is in full of adversities for the money that he borrowed and for his family living as he could not work anymore in the farm.(Note : In Burma, especially in the rural areas, the sick one has to buy the medicine from pharmacy by themselves. Nursing aid only is provided in most hospital but no medicine at all).
Forced labour
Major Khin Maung Ye, LIB 266, ordered the three villages: Saikah, Ruakhua and Ruabuk to present one person per family with their own tools and food in reconstructing road between Sopum and Sihhmuh village. The villagers have started reconstructing the road since 23rd September because they did not dare to resist the order. As most the Chin people are farmers they have no time to work in the fields.Escape in fear of arrest: Hre Ling and Sui Ceu had escaped to Bualpi village, Mizoram State of India when a troop led by Major Khin Maung Ye came to arrested them. The army accused them to be supporters of CNF. Later on, friends and relatives send their families to them on September 8. Sui Ceu has 4 children and Hre Ling has 5 children. They said " It is not easy for us to depend on friends for our living in Bualpi".
Shot on Sight (Innocent Chin civilian Killed By Burmese army)
Pa Mawng (28) was shot death by a troop of 30 soldiers led by Capt. Maung Zaw of Burmese army. Pa Mawng’s death resulted his younger brother arrest, alleging as member of Chin National Front (CNF) on groundless proof. The incident occurred on 12 August 1999.
A troop of Burmese army marching from Vanzang village to Thantlang town deliberately shot death Pa Mawng between Vanzang and Sopum village while he was coming back from visiting his relatives in Vanzang village. The dead body was left on the roadside. The villagers took the dead body and buried it. Capt. Maung Zaw ordered Sopum village headman to bring all Pa Mawng’s belongings to Lungler army camp. The Captain found out Pa Mawng’s green shirt missing. The headman explained him that his younger brother kept it as a remembrance.
Capt. Maung Zaw immediately summoned Pa Mawng’s brother to present himself at Lungler army camp. And the Captain alleged him to be a member of CNF and arrested him. It is said that no villager dares to travel alone.
CHRO’s Interview (Tragedy of village president )
Name : Thakulh Age : 28
Occupation : Chairman, Village PDC Cawnpi village, Falam Township
Nationality : Chin Religion : Christian
Marital status : married, 5 children
Date of interview : 29 September
Q. Why did you flee your village?
A. Van Siang Mang, a villager of Zawlte, and Cung Cung, a villager of Rulbu came to our village to request us to cook some food for 5 Chin National Army who would arrive to our village and Ngaltli village. Believing that we cooked for them, the two informers then reported to the SPDC army in Tuibual camp. On June 23, 1999, 8 soldiers led by Sergeant Major came to our village to arrest me. I escaped before they arrived to our village. I later came to know that they were SPDC informers and were paid money for it.
Q. How and where did you escape?
A. I desperately fled towards Tiphei village where a Police out post is stationed and after evading the post, I walked down towards Tio River, India border until I met some CNA who were on duty there. After spending three nights with them, I headed to Farkawn of Mizoram State, India..
Q. Do you have relatives at Farkawn?
A. Yes, my sister in law is staying there. I was sick for two-and-a-half months as the result of fear and had to be looked after by her. However, she also had difficulty of affording for my treatment as days went long.
Q. Do your wife and children suffer any kind of harassment for your escape?
A. My wife was threatened to arrest if she failed to find me and bring back. But she was excused after she, with the help of my relatives, gave a bribe Kyats 40,000 to the soldiers. However, it didn’t last long. The soldiers again asked her more money, which she refused them by denying that we have been divorced. They didn’t believe her and kept on demand money from her. She will also has to flee after all since she has no more money to give to the soldiers.
Q. How did you come to know about your family?
A. After a slight recovery from my illness, I secretly went back to my village at night a acompanied with my younger brother.
Q. How was your family situation during your absence?
A. They had no money at all. Since they could no longer work in the farm, they had nothing to eat. Moreover, the soldiers stole my wife’s sarong worth about Kyats 800 during the search in my house.
Q. How do you plan to do now?
A. If I return to my village again, I will definitely be arrested because the soldiers got my photo with them. I won’t dare to return because I have no money to give to the soldiers. I am thinking to settle in a safe place in Mizoram when I can take my wife and children. I am also aware that our subsistence will be too difficult in Mizoram since I usually fell ill of Malaria. The soldiers said that I would be killed if they caught me.
Q. Are there any other who suffer like you?
A. At present, each of the 40 villages in Falam Township are demanded Kyats 5000 for allegedly harboring and showing sympathy to CNA members.
Q. How do you think why the soldiers acted like this and how do you see this kind of attitude towards the villagers?
A. What appeared to be the main reason is that, the soldiers are so much afraid of the possible out break of mass revolt and that was why they used various kind of intimidation including arrest, assault and torture as a precaution. Moreover, the soldiers are now well aware that they have no support from the Chins and are jealous of Chin National Front CNF, who they know we sympathize. Having no sufficient ration and money has also compelled them to do everything to get money. Intimidation is a single means left for them, as they are very well aware that they have no public support.
Two Pastors arrested in Thantlang, Chin State
Chin Human Rights Organization CHRO received the following report on 20th September 1999 from reliable source. On 26 June, 1999, a soldier of the 266 Light Infantry Battalion led by 2nd Lieutenant Myo Kyaw, deserted his unit, near Tlangpi village.
The villagers of Tlangpi and of Farrawn, which is one of its neighboring villages, were in no way responsible for his defection, but the chairmen of these villages and other neighboring villages were arrested, taken to Haka, and severely tortured, for it. The chairman of Tlangpi village was given a twelve-year sentence with rigorous imprisonment and the others also two to three-year sentences, with rigorous imprisonment All the chairmen of the villages in Zahnak Tlang area of the Thantlang Township, Chin State viz. of Lungler, Bungkhua, Dawn, Ralpel, Saikah, Fungkah, Thangzang, Sihhmuh, Ruabuk, Ruakhua, have also been arrested by the same Battalion. Also all the chairmen of the "yatkwets" ( block ) in Thantlang Town, viz Pu No Lal Ling of School "Yatkwet", Pu Van Hnun of Market "Yatkwet", and Pu Ceu Hnin of TABC "Yatkwet", have been arrested and tortured, and one of them, viz Pu Ceu Hnin of TABC "Yatkwet"was so severely tortured that all his front teeth were knocked out. A good civilian in Thantlang town, by the name of Al Bik, was also arrested, taken to the Camp of the Military Intelligence at Rung Tlang in Hakha, and has been kept in isolation, allowing nobody to see him. All these arrests were allegedly made on the flimsy evidence that they were in sympathy with the Chin National Front CNF.
When all these arrests and atrocities were taking place, the senior pastor of the Thantlang Baptist Church, the Rev. Biak Kam, who is over 60years of age, and the General Secretary of the Thantlang Association of Baptist Churches, the Rev. Thawng Kam, called a meeting as to how to negotiate with the military authorities in charge of the area and to make a request for their release. But before they could meet with the military authority, the military authority have them also arrested at night on September 7,1999, accusing them of calling a meeting without their knowledge or permission. They were sent away hastily and secretly by night the same night, onfoot,30 miles away, to the Military Out Post in Lungler village. They have been kept there. Nothing has been heard about them, as no one was allowed to see them; hopefully they were not tortured. These two Baptist pastors were almost arrested once at the time of the problem which arose out of matters related to erecting a cross on a hill west of Thantlang in January 1999 and it could very well be that they were secretly observed and shadowed.
Thantlang Baptist Church is the biggest church in Thantlang Township with a membership of over 3000 and Thantlang Association of Baptist Churches(TABC) is a full fledge association, with a membership of 44 village churches, under the Zomi Baptist Convention, which in turn is a full fledge convention under the Myanmar Baptist Convention, which is a national convention of all the Baptist Churches in Burma. There is a great fear that all of them would be tortured and their lives be in danger of death. All the men in Thantlang town have evacuated for fear of being arrested by the military.
VOL.III No.IV NOVEMBER-DECEMBER2000
HUMAN RIGHTS
- Junta Orders Burning Of 16,000 Bibles, Halts Church Construction
- A Reflection By An Eyewitness - Pu Do Thawng; Chin Political Prisoner
- List Of Civilians Charged With "Unlawful Association Acts"
- How The Burmese Soldiers Behave In The Village
REFUGEES
- Chin And Other Burmese Asylum Seekers In Guam Face Crisis
LETTERS & PRESS RELEASE
- An Appeal To SPDC From Catholic Bishops & Council Of Churches In Burma
FACTS & ARGUMENTS
- Ethnic Political Crisis In The Union Of Burma
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUMAN RIGHTS
Junta Orders Burning Of 16,000 Bibles, Halts Church Construction
In June 2000, the SPDC officials in Tamu ordered 16,000 copies of the Bible to be burned in Tamu, Sagaing Division that borders India. These Bibles, which were seized last year by the Burmese Army, are in Chin, Karen and other ethnic languages. Leaders of the Council of Churches in Tamu area are approaching the Burmese military regime not to burn the Bibles. An appeal was also made in early July of this year by the Myanmar Baptist Convention, the organization that represents all Baptist Churches in Burma, to the top SPDC officials in Rangoon. As of today, they received no reply from the Army.
Early 1999, the Burmese Army also seized 30,000 copies of Bible written in Chinese language and which had been kept in the military store rooms in Kaley Wa, Sagaing Division. Every church member was afraid to claim these Bibles. In May and June, 2000, the Military Intelligence of the Burmese Army ordered all church building construction in Tiddim area of Chin State to stop. The buildings included the Evangelical Baptist Church in Myoma Quarter, Faith Bible Theological Seminary in Lawibual Quarter, Sakollam Baptist Church, and Lawibual Baptist Church. During first week of July 2000, worship services at the Lai Baptist Church at No. 41 U Aung Min Street, Ward 2, Mayangone, Bayint Naung Post Office, Yangoon, Myanmar, was prohibited by the authority. Most of the Chin people in the Rangoon area attend worship services here.
At present, the congregation is worshipping at Myanmar Institute of Theology at Seminar Hill, Insein near Rangoon. The church has been closed since June 2000 in spite of church leaders requests for reopening.
A REFLECTION BY AN EYEWITNESS
(Religious Persecution In Chin State)
At mid night on 16. May 1994 the Township Law and Order Restoration Council (TLORC) of Tonzang (Chin State), with the co-operation of the Township Police Force burnt down a cross on top of the hill over looking the town, which was set up by the Catholic congregation there. TLORCs of every township in the Chin State had the order from the State authorities (SLORC) in Haka to dismantle all the crosses. At that time the Baptist Church and other Christian denominations had already dismantled their crosses (set up at the same location) on their own as they did not want to defy the order from the authorities.
This tradition of setting up crosses on top of the hills has been started around the 1970s throughout Chin State, when the Buddhists started to build pagodas on top of the hills with the encouragement by the military government. As the vast majority of the Chin people are Christians they do not want their landscape to be filled with pagodas. As such they started to set up crosses on hilltops around the country before the Burmese authorities could build pagodas. In fact, there have been Buddhist pagodas in almost every major town in Chin State since more than forty years ago [after Independence & the Chin joined the so-called Union of Burma] and this has been tolerated as there are some Burman Buddhists, who are government servants stationed in Chin State and a few Chin converts as well. In the case of the Catholic Church in Tonzang, the Catholics did not want to dismantle their cross as it had been set up with catholic rituals such as blessing and pouring of the holy water by the Priest. At first the TLORC in Tonzang was reluctant to pull down the Catholic's cross by themselves even though they knew that the Catholics were not going to do it on their own.
The conflict between the Church and the local authorities started when the TLORC recruited a forced labour for the construction of a road for the hydroelectric power project near Tonzang. The town's people were aware that the Chin State authorities had allotted some amount of budget for the construction of the said road. But the TLORC simply wanted the money for themselves to line their own pockets and thus forced the people to labour without any wage. Three town elders, who happened to be Catholics, wrote a complaint letter to the State authorities in Haka about the corruption and some TLORC officials were transferred as a result. The entire TLORC officials were so angry with this incident and as a result they now came to see the Catholics as dissenters. In retaliation the TLORC and the police force burnt dawn the cross as mentioned above. Furthermore the police arrested four Catholic elders for three days on the ground that they were responsible for defying the State authorities by refusing to dismantle the cross.
After three days they took them to the court and appeased them not to bring this case any further to the higher authorities and declared the case closed. Nevertheless, one of the elders was sent to Rangoon to complain about the incidents of pulling down crosses in Chin State. But the Deputy Minister Col. Aung Khin of the Interior and Religiuos Affairs Ministry did not take the complaint seriously and instead said that he would see when the case would be put up to him by the TLORC of Tonzang. (NOTE: An eyewitness who was in Tonzang during the incident compiles this report for CFIS. His name is withheld according to his wish).
PU DO THAWNG: CHIN POLITICAL PRISONER
Name:U Do Thawng, elected MP, NLD
Constituency: Kalemyo (1),
Sagaing Division
Born in: 1940
Place of Birth: Bo Kyone village, Falam Township, Chin State.
Parents: U Lian Hnuna (late) and Pi Thang Mani, 90.
Religion:Christian
Charged: 7-years under Article 5 (j) of the 1950 Emergency Provision Act.
Sequence of family arrests U Do Thawng is currently under detention in Mandalay Prison. He was arrested by Military Intelligence (MI) at midnight of May 21, 1996 while preparing to attend the sixth anniversary of National League for Democracy (NLD) to be held at Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's residence. He was detained for two weeks at No (17) MIS, Kalemyo and was tortured the whole night of May 27.
The MIs seized a number of books published inside and outside of Burma from his place. He was then sent to Mandalay Prison without informing his family members. The junta sentenced him 7-years imprisonment. The case number is- MYN/87. U Do Thawng’s eldest son Za Dawla was arrested in Homalin Township, upper Chindwin and was sentenced two years. Za Dawla, father of three children, was detained at Kalemyo Police station for one year without any trial before he was sent to Madalay prison. He was released in April 1998. Soon after the father was arrested, his two other sons, Dr Ro Ding (now NLD/LA) and Dr Lal Lawm Thanga (Democratic Voice of Burma, Oslo- Norway) fled to India to escape from the MIs. The junta, in the press conference held in September 1996, alleged them of collaborating with the exiled goverment, NCGUB and opposition groups to create social unrest in Burma. Party activities U Do Thawng was elected from Kalemyo Township constituency-1 in the 1990 general elections. He was then democratically elected, within the party, to represent Sagaing Division NLD to Burma junta's National Convention that was started in 1993.
Because of his commitment to forward NLD's stand for a political dialogue to the Convention, Burma junta expelled him from the list. As part of the party's future plans, he met Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in November 1995 and February 1996 along with other NLD MPs from Sagaing Division. His residence in Kalemyo became party office and meeting palce for Township NLD. However, following his arrest the party signboard and flags were pulled down and removed by the local authorities. Some 19 NLD members in the township were arrested and charged along with U Do Htaung under Article 5 (j) of the 1950 Emergency Provision Act. They all are still in Mandalay prison. It was learned that he has given his signature of mandate to the NLD's further exclusive plans. Kalemyo Township, with a population of more than 400,000 is situated in the Kale valley and borders to Chin State. Eastern half of Kalemyo is dominated by Burmans and the west by Chins. Prison life His wife, Pi Lal Than Sungi, 60, is allowed to visit him twice a month for an hour in one visit. They are not allowed to speak in their own Chin language but are made to speak in Burmese in prison visit. They do not speak in Burmese at home. Only family members are allowed to visit him.
U Do Thawng was put into the dark cell for a week in November 1998 for refusing to sit in prison-position while the authority was passing by. After representatives of the International Committee for Red Cross, ICRC, were allowed to visit Burma prisons, the authority provides him enough rice and water to cook but he still has to be provided with curries from outside. Since they cannot afford transportation charges to Mandalay, family members of 19 NLD prisoners from Kalemyo contribute money and send one eligible person to visit and provide food to them. After a series of argument with the prison officials, he succeeded to celebrate Christmas in prison in 1999. He was once infected with tuberculosis and still has to get follow-up treatments. He is also suffering from ischaemic heart disease, which allowed him to retire after serving 25 years in the health department. Reasons of previous arrest U Do Thawng passed his 3-year Medic Training in Rangoon in 1962 with the highest mark in the country and was conferred Gold Medal. He was studying in Rangoon when dictatorship creator General Ne Win staged the 2nd military coup. From 1963-1971, he worked as Rural Health Assisstant in Thantlang, Matupi and Kanpalet Townships of Chin State. In 1971, he was arrested along with other prominent Chins by so called Burma's Revolutionary Council led by General Ne Win. The arrest was due to the signed boycott letters stating that the newly drafted constitution in 1971 by the Council was too centralized and dictatorial. The Unitarian constitution was enacted in 1974 and hundreds were arrested again. In the critical moments in 1971, U Do Thawng addressed to the Kanpalet Township people's gathering, saying "If you could move Mount Victoria of Chin State to Magwe Division, the Chins would join with the Burman unitary".
U Do Thawng spent two years in Myingyan Prison from 1971 to 1973 for his involvement in the protest. After his release, he was banned from posting in Chin State and was forcibly transfered to the Sagaing Division. From 1973-1989 he worked as Health Assistant in Mawlike, Kale and Homalin Townships of Sagaing Division. According to the rule and regulation of Health Workers Department, Health Assistants should work at least three years in the same area. However, due to his criticism on the ruling one-party, Burma Socialist Programme Party, he was interuptedly transferred to different areas in his three year internship. He decided to retire from civil servant and joined NLD party in 1989. Family members: Lal Than Sungi, 60, spouse (1) Mr. Za Dawla, graduated in Maths, father of three children in Burma. (2) Dr. Ro Ding, son, Veterinary Surgeon (Exile in India) (3) Dr. Za Sing, son, General Physician in Burma. (4) Dr. Lal Lawm Thanga, son, Dental Surgeon (Exile in Norway) (5) Mrs. Khawtin Siami, graduated in Geography, mother of one in Burma (6) Ms. Lal Tan Puii, single in Burma.
LIST OF CIVILIANS CHARGED WITH "UNLAWFUL ASSOCIATION ACTS" IN 1999
(Note: The following list is from just one area in Chinland)
The following civilians, most of them are from Thantlang area, Chin State were accused of supporting Chin National Front. Thus, they were arrested, tortured and sentence to long term imprisonment by the Burmese Military Intelligence Service MIS in 1999. The Burmese military charged them with " Unlawful Association Acts". This law could be applied generously to put suspected people long term jail sentences with hard labour. Chin National Front is an armed resistance group fighting with the ruling Burmese military junta.
1. Mr. Thla Hup, 42 years old member of village Peace and Development Council in Bungkhua village was arrested on 06.01.1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo, Sagaing division.
2. Mr. Sui Cung , 16 years old high school student was arrested on 06.01.1999. He was sentence to 2 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo. Mr. Sui Cung was arrested on behalf of his father Pu Than Rawl, the village headman of Bungkhua village. Pu Than Rawl was accused of supporting CNF and arrested by the Burmese soldiers. He escaped from military detention in Lungler army camp and fled to India. Mr. Than Rawl is now under UNHCR protection in New Delhi.
3. Mr. Chum Ling, 48 years old village headman of Fungkah was arrested on 06.01.1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
4. Mr. Za Mang, 48 years old farmer from Fungkah village was arrested on 06.01.1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
5. Mr. Lal Ling, 24 years old farmer from Fungkah village was arrested on 06.011999. He is now serving 6 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
6. Mr. ZaHnin , 32 years old was arrested on 06.01.1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
7. Mr. Tial Awr 38 years old village headman of Tlangpi was arrested on 16 July 1999. He is now serving 12 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo. He was accused of being responsible for disappearance of a Burmese soldier near Tlangpi village while patroling.
8. Mr. Lian Hram, 36 years old member of village Peace and Development Council was arrested on 16 July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
9. Mr. Thawng Ceu, 34 years old from Tlangpi village was arrested on 16 July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
10. Mr. Duh Lian, 34 years old from Tlangpi village was arrested on 16 July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
11. Mr. Za Uk, 58 years old from Tlangpi village was arrested on 16 July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
12. Mr. Zion, 45 years old pastor was arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
13. Mr. Peng Thang, 18 years old high school student from Tlangpi village was arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail terms with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
14. Mr. Ngun Chawng, 28 years old farmer was arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kaleymyo.
15. Mr. Ral Lian Kap, 31 years old Local Peace and Development Council’s clerk was arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
16. Mr. Ngun Hu, 43 years old from Tlangpi village ws arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term in Kalaymyo.
17. Pu Al Bik, 48 years old trader from Thantlang was arrested on 13. 11. 1998. He was first inhumanly tortured by Military Intelligence for two weeks without providing food. He is now serving 7 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
18. Mr. No Lal Ling, 53 years old chairman of Township Peace and Development Council was arrested in June 1999. He was severely tortured by MIS and now he is serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
19. Mr. Run Cung, 35 years old farmer from Thantlang was arrested in June 1999. He was severely tortured by MIS and now serving 2 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
20. Mr. Sang Khar, 36 years old was arrested in October 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kangaw.
21. Mr. Khing Muang, 32 years old was arrested in October 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term in Kangaw.
22. Mr. Van Hmung, 34 years old clerk of Township Peace and Development Council was arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 2 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
23. Mr. Ral Luai , 42 years old member of Township Peace and Development Council was arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 2 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
24. Mr. Ceu Hnin 35 years old from Thantlang town was arrested in July 1999. He was so severely tortured that all his front teeth were knocked out. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
25. Mr. Ni Ling, 32 years old from Thantlang town was arrested in July 1999. He was severely tortured by the MIS. He is now serving two and a half jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
26. Mr. Lal Thio, 36 years old from Thantlang town was arrested in July 1999. He is now serving 2 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
27. Mr. Bawi Uk, 32 years old from Thantlang town was arrested and severely tortured by MIS in July 1999. He is now serving 5 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
28. Mr. Za Lian, 36 years old from Haka town was arrested and severely tortured by MIS in July 1999. He is now serving 2 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
29. Mr.Chan Kung, 42 years old from Thantlang was arrested and severely tortured by MIS in October 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
30. Miss Dawt Thluai, 28 years old from Haka was arrested and severely tortured by MIS in October 1999. She is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
31. Mr. Zo Kim, 32 years old farmer from Sopum village, Thantlang township was arrested in October 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
32. Mr. Dawt Lian, 33 years old from Haka was arrested in October 1999. He is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
33. Miss Ni Cia, 29 years old teacher from Cawngthia village, Thantlang township was arrested and severely tortured by the MIS on 5.12.1998. She is now serving 3 years jail term with hard labour in Kalaymyo.
34. Mr. Sa Tin Ral, 68 years old village headman from Bapi village, Tonzang twonship was arrested in October 1999. He is now serving 2 years jail term in Kalaymyo.
HOW THE BURMESE SOLDIERS BEHAVE IN THE VILLAGE
The following information is provided by Mr. Van Khum, 40 years old farmer from Thinghual village, Thantlang township of Chin State. A strength of 15 soldiers led by Lieutenant Myo Swe of Company No.4 entered our village and stayed for 6 days. The commander asked me a pressure cooker as a gift. When I told him that we did not have one he was angry that he almost threw a cup at me. He angrily entered our bedroom and rummaged around saying that there must be some things CNF had asked me to keep. He asked two baskets of rice and 8 chickens promising to pay for those.
The whole villagers had to gather rice and chicken. But, Lieut. Myo Swe did not pay for those. The soldiers made the villagers, young and old, to fetch water and took bath. Lt. Myo Swe said that it was our village’s turn to construct army camp at Tui Bual village but as it was time for cultivation it would be a good idea to give him 10,000 Kyats instead of labour. We thus had to give him ten thousand kyats. LIB-274 of Mindat Battalion was stationed at Tui Bual village. In their 6-day stay the soldiers stole dried meat and eggs of our villagers and made the nearby villagers of Tikhuangtum and Tahtlang to provide them with one basket of rice and 4 chickens each. All of us suffer a lot because the soldiers came to our village twice a month and did the same thing to us. Besides, the villagers do not have time to work for cultivation as they have to keep watch the soldiers.
VILLAGERS EVICTED FOR A NEW TRADE ROUTE ON INDO-BURMA BORDER
Aizawl, December 7, 2000
Mizzima News Group
The authorities in Mizoram State evicted villagers staying on Indo-Burma border from their village for a new Indo-Burma border trade route. Some houses were bulldozed by the authorities as the owners refused to move to the government-allocated new site. Mizoram state government issued an order on October 20 for the villagers in and around Zokhutthar village in Indo-Burma border to move to a new location by the end of November. The government has planned to rehabilitate the villagers in the new location, called Phulmawi Village, which is about two furlong far from Zokhutthar.
However, most of the villagers refused to relocate themselves in the new village, alleging that the government is not providing necessary compensation and arrangement. Therefore, total 120 villagers of Zo Khuttha village recently filed a petition with the court and the Mizoram Bench of Guwahati High Court last week stayed the eviction of 104 Indian villagers for two weeks. Most of these villagers continue to stay in Zokhutthar as they wait for the government's response. The rest who ware not able to prove their identity as Indian citizens are, however, not included in the High Court stay order. Moreover, the stay order does not include the villagers staying on "no man land" situated between the border pillars of two countries. The state authorities bulldozed two houses in the area last Friday. The Mizoram State government, through Border Road Organization (BRO), is planning to start the construction of some buildings related to border trade in Zokhutthar village. The new trade route, apart from current Tamu-Moreh border trade route, is to connect Rih in Chin State of Burma and Zokhutthar in Mizoram, crossing Tio stream. The government of India has offered to construct a bridge across Tio stream for facilitating the border trade between India and Burma.
REFUGEES
Chin And Other Burmese Asylum Seekers In Guam Face Crisis (October 28, 2000)
I. Guam-Only Visa Waiver Program Burma is listed in the Guam-Only Visa Waiver program and therefore, citizens from Burma are allowed to enter Guam territory under tourist status for a 15-day period. As of October 9, 2000, there were 280 asylum seekers from Burma, mostly from Chin State in the northwestern part of Burma, which borders India and Bangladesh. According to information dated October 27, 2000 from Guam, there are currently 420 asylum seekers living in Guam. Upon arrival in Guam, asylum seekers may submit their applications to the U.S Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) Asylum office in California. If they are granted asylum status by the INS, they are allowed to live in Guam or the mainland U.S.
II. Statistical Analysis of Asylum Seekers in Guam ? -53 asylum seekers being detained by the Department of Corrections (DOC) (Male-46; Female-7) -367 asylum seekers are not in the DOC (Male-293; Female-74) ? -189 people have submitted applications to INS. -37 people have conducted interviews with Asylum officers. -24 asylum seekers are currently employment in Guam Ethnic Groups: Chin, Kachin, Karen, and Burmese (Burmans).
III: Asylum Seekers in Two Statuses There are two groups of Asylum seekers in Guam. 1) DOC Currently, there are 53 asylum seekers held in the DOC. These people claimed asylum status at the Airport in Guam upon arrival from Burma. Sometimes, they have to work outside the DOC without pay in such jobs as cleaning or cutting wood. They are detained until they can appear before a judge for their case review. There is only one judge, who usually comes to Guam from Honolulu, Hawaii. Therefore, it takes time to process these cases. While residing in the DOC, the DOC receives, per detainee, a $100.00 a day from INS for a total of $5300.00 a day. Currently, there are only two asylum attorneys available to provide legal representation to those who are in the DOC. The fee for legal services, per person, is approximately $2500.00. Therefore, the asylum seekers find it difficult to pay for legal services. Since there are no pro-bono lawyers or "legal clinics" available in Guam, if an attorney is desired, one must be hired. 2) Asylum seekers not in DOC Asylum seekers who are not in the DOC often live together. Since most do not speak English, they need interpreters for their cases and for interviews. If asylum officers grant them asylum status, they will be able to live either in the U.S mainland or in Guam. Denial of their application initiates an appearance in court to plea their case. This is often difficult due to the financial considerations of hiring an attorney.
IV. Case Status Asylum cases in Guam are under the jurisdiction of the US INS California Service Center in Laguna Niguel, CA. Therefore, all asylum application forms must be sent to the California Service Center for processing at which time the asylum office in California sends asylum officers to Guam to process the cases. In early October 2000, two officers were sent to Guam where only 37 out of 189 pending applicants were interviewed. According to Asylum officials in California, asylum officers may not be able to make their next visit to Guam until early 2001. Therefore, all current asylum seekers will have to wait until then for their initial interview. Three cases that were submitted in August 1998 are still waiting processing.
V. Concerning Asylum Seekers from Chinland Asylum seekers from Chinland provide the following information. Forced Labor
1. Boeing 747 Airfield The Burmese Army has been planning to build an airfield at Surbungtlang, only 7 miles from Falam town Chin State, since 1992. This airfield was reportedly to be used for better communication between Chin State and other parts of Burma. However, reports claim that in reality, the Burmese Army planned this airfield to combat the activities of the Chin National Front. In this plan, forced labor of villagers from 87 villages in Falam town-ship worked this high mountain to create an airfield. Many asylum seekers from Falam town-ship participated in this airfield construction. Because of a lack of water for workers, the Army suspended construction in 1996 but may resume construction soon. 2. Kaley-Haka Motor Road In March and April of 1998, there was a national student's festival held in Haka, the capital of Chin State. In preparation for the 1998 festival, motor roads between Kaley and Haka were prepared as many Burmese Army high-ranking officers planed to participate at the festival. It is approximately 120 miles between Kaley Myo and Haka. Villagers between these two towns were forced to work at least one week per family.
3. Tamu-Kaley-Kaleywa Motor Road Since the border trade agreement took place between India and Burma in 1994, the India government has been providing construction of a road from Tamu to Kaley Myo. The Burma town of Tamu borders Moreh town of Manipur State in India. Construction of the road now being complete, India has been working on Kaley Myo and Kaley Wa road. Asylum seekers from Kaley Myo area say India BRTF had been directly working for Burma. In July 2000, a Chin girl was killed secondary to Indian road construction. There was no action taken after reporting the case to higher authorities. About 70 Indian construction machines, driven by Indian people, have been working in Kaley Myo and Kaleywa. Civilian cars are also forced to provide assistance to Indian people.
4. Kaley- Kankaw Rail Road Project: During 1994-1996, villagers from Tongphila, Pinlong, Tahan and other villages along Kaleymyo and Kankaw village worked on construction of a railroad to connect the two towns. Villagers were forced to work from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. seven days a week, while staying in portable camps. About 10 people died from Malaria and lack of medical treatment. Labor Camps Chin people, used to work on motor roads and other construction projects, are held in labor camps by the Burmese Army. The following is a list of Labor Camps. (This is not an all-inclusive list, and it is difficult to know the exact number of prisoners in the camps.) Place of Labor Camp Number of Prisons/Laborers Zawng Kawng ( Kalay Falam Road ) 40 Var ( Kalay Falam Road ) 72 Tlang Zar ( Haka- Falam Road ) 100 Zo Khua ( Near Haka ) 55 Others Issues There are many others issues such as violation of religious freedom. For example, a Christian cross, erected at Lumbang Baptist Church in Lumbang village, was destroyed by the Burmese Army. Chin girls, targeted for marriage by members of the Burmese military, are used in combat against activities of the Chin National Front. Many fled because they supported the CNF. Forced porter work for the Burmese Army is another widespread abuses.
VI. Recommendations
1) The U.S Immigration and Naturalization Service
(a.) Asylum cases in Guam need to be handled more expediently. Asylum seekers should be allowed to travel to the mainland US and change their venue of address. (In the case of those who have relatives or who could provide necessary assistance.)
( b.) Asylum seekers should not be detained in the Department of Corrections. Those who entered with proper documents, and are held in DOC, should be released. These asylum seekers do not fall under the Expedited Removal Categories.
2) The U.S Resettlement Agencies Baptist Churches and other religious organizations are currently providing food, clothes, etc. Resettlement agencies and other advocacy groups should provide assistance to them.
3) State Peace and Development Council The Burmese military regime known as the State Peace and Development Council must stop human rights abuses, which have forced refugees to flee to Guam. The SPDC must engage in a tripartite dialogue with the National League for Democracy and ethnic groups.
LETTERS & PRESS RELEASE
AN APPEAL TO THE STATE PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
From Myanmar Catholic Bishops And The Myanmar Council Of Churches September 24,1999 Yangon, Myanmar
May the Peace and Grace of Jesus Christ and God be with you!
A. The Myanmar Catholic Bishops Conference and the Myanmar Council of Churches were formed with the objectives of all Christians in Myanmar to work for Christ's Mission.
B. The Myanmar Catholic Bishops Conference, an organization comprised of 13 Bishops, has been working hard leading 12 Catholic regions.
C. The Myanmar Council of Churches, a leading national Christian ministry, is comprised of 13 members of national Christian denominations that are affiliated with 9 other prominent Christian organizations such as the Young Women Christian and the Young Men Christian Association. The leaders, as well as the members of these organizations, under the above two major organizations are all citizens of Myanmar.
D. Although both of the two major organizations are cooperating with other organizations around the world, they are freely operating in their own cause.
E. The Myanmar Catholic Bishops Conference and the Myanmar Council of Churches are working for human developments for the benefit of the mission and the country. They establish hospitals, clinics, and schools that are basic necessities for a peaceful society; and selfless doctors and teachers are sacrificing in the good cause. Until today, they have established such things as a hospital for leprosy, school for the deaf, school for the blind, school for elderly care, school for orphans and are providing their best possible care for the abandoned and refugees.
F. They are also working with their best possible efforts for better environments, efficient transportation, welfare and developments of the lives of young people, women, and children.
H. To be able to undertake the above mentioned mission responsibilities, the Myanmar Catholic Bishops Conference has formed the "Peace and Justice Commission" and the Myanmar Council of Churches has formed the "Reconciliation and Peace Commission." The basic Biblical principle of the Commission is as follows:
I. Being faithful believers of the peaceful God, who governs with everlasting love, we believe that as we are responsible to build and prosper the virtues that will end conflicts and promote justice and peace, which has always been desired by the people, we will carry out this task so long as we are alive. (Biblical References: Hosea 2:4; Matthew 5:9; Ephesians 2:14-16).
II. We would like to present the hardships and obstacles we have faced while undertaking these tasks in recent years to the national heads. Prohibition of Christian evangelical works in some states and townships, expulsion of mission workers, prohibition of worship services, arrests and persecutions, forced renunciation of Christian faith, and destroying of Christian crosses have been encountered. In some states, repairing of Christian buildings was not allowed. Permission for building was not allowed or permission was delayed. For Christians, crosses are very important because they are the symbols of sacrifice and service for human beings. Therefore, a place for worship and a place for erecting Christian crosses are of prime importance. In publication of Christian literature, some words and vocabularies were not allowed or were restricted by the censorship board. This restriction can consequently lessen the warm relationship among religious organizations.
Due to the above obstacles, Christians have no peace of mind. Therefore, with the aims of building a new developed and modern country by joining hands in unity with all ethnic nationalities and Burmese, we would like to request and present to the national leaders to solve the above mentioned obstacles. Also, in the future, we will present the needs and difficulties to you as necessary. The Myanmar Catholic Bishops Conference and the Myanmar Council of Churches would also like to state that on the basis of love and justice, we would always try to build a long lasting reconciliation and peace.
May the grace and peace of the ever-lasting God bestow upon our national leaders and our motherland! Amen!
FACTS & ARGUMENTS
ETHNIC POLITICAL CRISIS IN THE UNION OF BURMA
(The following paper is presented by Zo T. Hmung at a Seminar Organized by the Council for Southeast Asia Studies, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA) October 25, 2000
Approximately, Burma has a population of 48 million people. Of those 48 million, 68% are Burman, and the rest, 32 %, belong to the ethnic groups such as Arakan, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Karenni, Mon, Shan, etc. This statistics are only the estimated statistics as there is no proper documented information available inside Burma. The ethnic people have their own religions, culture, and languages.
There are different religions such as Buddhism, Muslim, Christianity, and Hinduism. Burmans belong to the majority religion, Buddhism where most of ethnic Chins and Kachins are Christians. The ethnic political issue is important to Burma's politics. Because in order to put an end to civil war, which has spanned over half a century in Burma, the ethnic political crisis must first be resolved in accordance with the full consent of the ethnic minority people. Therefore, Burma's political history, especially how the minority and the majority groups came to live together under the Union government, needs to be addressed. The Formation of the Union Government: To be more precise, I will take an example from Chin history, as I am an ethnic Chin.
In 1886, the British annexed Burma and ruled together with India, from India, known as the British-Burma. At that time, Chin territory was an independent territory with its own political administration, culture, religion, and language, without any outside political interference. Ten years later, in 1896, the British occupied Chin territory and ruled together with Burma and India from India. Before the British's occupation, Chinland had lived independently since time immemorial. In 1937, for administrative convenience, the British divided her administration into two parts known as British-Burma and British-India. Chinland was ruled from British-Burma. On December 20, 1946, Mr. Clement Richard Atlee, then Prime Minister of United Kingdom of Great Britain, proposed granting independence to Burma at the House of Commons.
As a result, Aung San, who led the Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League (AFPFL), was invited to London to speak on ways to transfer to independence. Unfortunately, the Labor Party government in London had not invited any representatives from the ethnic groups, even though the ethnic people had voiced concern that Aung San could not represent their will concerning their future status with the British government. The British ignored the complaints of the ethnic groups and asked Aung San to gain consent of the Frontier Areas (Frontier areas means ethnic peoples). This unfortunate lack of representation became part of the impetus for the ethnic political crisis that is so evident today. If ethnic groups were given self-determination to choose their own destiny by the Labor Party government in London, today's political histories would be very different from today's ethnic political crisis in the Union of Burma.
The AFPFL had the right to represent the Burmans only, not the ethnic minority groups. AFPFL representative Aung San, for the interim government of Burma, and Clement Richard Atlee, for the British government, signed an agreement on January 27, 1947, for Burma to become an independent country within a year. The second step of political strategy for Aung San was to convince the ethnic groups to join the interim Burmese government during the transitional period, and to later form the Union government based on equal footing of all Union members. In order to convince the ethnic minority to join the interim government of Burma, the AFPFL’s campaign message was to gain independence from the British first, and then to form a Union government together. This campaign message of independence became powerful and convincing as the British had been ruling them for more than half a century. Everyone wanted to gain independence from the British colonial rule. Within a month of Aung San's return from England to Burma, representatives of Burma led by Aung San, along with representatives of the Chin, Kachin and Shan, signed an agreement popularly known as the Panglong Agreement at the Panglong Conference in Shan State on February 12, 1947. February 12 became Union Day in the Union of Burma and is observed as an official holiday in Burma. This clearly indicates how these different groups came together to form the Union country.
The Preamble of the Panglong Agreement said: "The members of the Conference, believing that freedom will be more speedily achieved by the Shans, the Kachins, and the Chins by their immediate cooperation with the Interim Burmese government" (See the Panglong Agreement). The basic concept of each state administration in federal system of government was evident in the Panglong Agreement. Article 5 of the Agreement said, "full autonomy in internal administration for the Frontier Areas is accepted" (See Panglong Agreement). A common interest, aimed for mutual benefits, had gathered together the Burmans and the ethnic people to form a Union government. Based on the Panglong conference, the Right of Secession was enshrined in the 1947 Union Constitution, Chapter X. This Right of Secession meant if one of the Union government members did not find benefits, or if they lost benefits within the Union government, that member had the right to depart from the Union government. In my opinion, as the proposed Union belonged to different groups with different territories/countries, the name of the government should not be Burma. It should have a different name, one that could represent all Union members.
Therefore, the Union government, according to the Panglong Agreement, was of the Union government of the Panglong signatories, which was based on trust, faith, and mutual benefits. Kio Mang, a Chin representative from Haka town, Chin State, said he singed the Panglong Agreement because he trusted in Aung San. The spirit of the Union and a trust of each other mattered to the Union-founding members. A Lack of Federalism in the 1947 Union Constitution After the Panglong Agreement, the AFPFL election followed in April. In this very first election, there were 255 seats; 210 seats were for Burmans and only 45 seats went to ethnic groups. Like today's National League for Democracy (NLD), the people mandated AFPFL, led by Aung San, as it was the party that took lead in the independence struggle for the Burmans. The above seats indicated that the Burmans could control the government and drive the Union government in their own way. Chances for the ethnic groups at the central government level were almost nil. However, it was the transitional period and the priority was about independence from British within a year. My assumption is that the ethnic groups did not focus on the importance of the election. In June 1947, Aung San led the drafting of the Union constitution for the future Union government, in accordance with the Panglong Agreement, to be a federal system of governance. Unfortunately, Aung San and his cabinets were assassinated on July 19, 1947, only one month after drafting had begun. U Nu headed the AFPFL continuance of the Union constitution drafting by appointing Tin Tut, Sir Ba U, E Maung, and Kyaw Myint. All were Burmans educated in the law school of Cambridge. U Chan Htoon was appointed as a constitutional adviser. No ethnic group participated in this constitutional drafting process. This process began the question of federalism in the Union of Burma. U Chan Htoon himself admitted that the Union Constitution did not represent the spirit of Union, which was federalism. He said: "Our constitution in theory federal, is in practice unitary". (Tinker, Hugh; "The Union of Burma" :London, 1967, p. 30). On September 24, 1947, the Union Constitution was adopted, becoming effective on January 4, 1948, the date that Burma gained independence. The Union Constitution was not even federal in theory; it was both unitary in theory and practice.
In a unitary system of government, the government is centralized wherein the federal state's powers are placed under the central government's direct control. I would like to take an example from Chin Special Division to show the relationship between the federal state and the central union government. For Chin Special Division, the President of the Union government appointed a Minister for Chin Affairs from a member of the Union government, upon nomination by the Union Prime Minister. The Union Minister member designated as a Minister for Chin Affairs was the head of the government. The power of the Minister's administration for Chin Affairs was subject to the approval by the Union government in all state affairs such as education, culture, etc. Therefore, the Minister was under the direct control of the central Union government. There is the Chin Affairs Council comprising of all members of Parliament elected by the Chin people. The Chin Affairs Council's function was simply to aid and advise the Minister for Chin Affairs in matters such as recruitment, postings, and transferring civil services. Therefore, they too were under direct control of the central Union government. Moreover, there was no provision for passing bills or the right to legislation of the Chin Special Division in the 1947 Union Constitution. This is called a system of centralized government putting every powers in the center. As such, the Chin people and Chin territory were in the hands of the Burmese. (See: 1947 Union Constitution, Part V: Section: 196, 197, 198). Another example is of the Kachin State. Like Chin Special Division, the Kachin had a State Council and a State government. The Minister for Kachin Affairs was the head of the government. Members of the State Council had partial right to pass bills of the state. The problem was, the bills should be presented to the President for approval, and should be subject to the President’s signature, in order to come into existence. And the State can only recommend the passing of the law to the Union parliament. (see Part II- 166-170 of 1947 Union Constitution).
Therefore, both in Chin Special Division and Kachin State, all powers, both in State and central government, went to central government. In federal system of government, the State Council or the federal state should be given full authority to function independently, especially in the case of Burma as it consists of different groups. The federal state should have had the right to legislation, especially in school, police, press, and other individual state affairs. In addition, the constitution should provide for the right of passing bills. Neither the Union government nor the central authorities should control or impose her authorities to federal state council or the state government. Even in the local government, there should be self-government, as there are many different dialects and cultures. The federal government's role should be in the matters of monetary issues, taxation, foreign affairs, communication, and federal armed forces. All these were absent in the Union Constitution of 1947. Therefore, the AFPFL, led by U Nu’s constitution of 1947, aimed to control all power in local, state, and central government. The Burman majority enjoyed all authority from top to bottom and bottom to top. In summary, the 1947 Union Constitution betrayed Aung San's Union as well as the Panglong Agreement. This constitutional crisis led to ethnic groups meeting in Taungyi on February 25, 1961 and submitting a proposal of federalism to parliament. Unfortunately, General Ne Win took power from U Nu, the Prime Minister of the Union government, claiming non-integration of the country on March 2, 1962. The ethnic issues continued to worsen. General New Win's Policy of Burmanization and Ethnic Cleansing Right after his military coup, General Ne Win began using a policy of Burmanization, also known as assimilation, that means making all ethnic groups into Burmans. He abolished the 1947 Constitution and ruled by guns. It was now forbidden to teach or learn ethnic languages in the universities and colleges. Burman cultural dress, such as Taihpung and Longkyi, became the official dress in offices and schools. In Chin State, there is not a single college or university. As result, many Chin people could not pursue higher education and became uneducated. Chins who attended the Mandalay University and Rangoon University were indoctrinated in Burman cultures. This is a calculated assimilation policy of Ne Win to assimilate all ethnic groups into Burmans. As a last resort, more ethnic minority groups took up arms against Ne Win’s dictatorial rule leaving families, relatives and friends behind in an attempt to regain their inherent rights and to safeguard their freedom. Ethnic civilians do not escape the Burmese Army's eye either because the Burmese Army regards them as supporters of the ethnic armed forces. They are subject to torture, imprisonment, and arbitrary arrest along with forced relocation.
In order to escape the Burmese Army's persecution, ethnic groups have fled to other countries for safe haven. The Revolutionary Council, from 1962 to 1974, and the Burma Socialist Program Party, the one party system, did not satisfy the majority of Burmans either. The Military regime not only failed the economic policy of the country, but also spent approximately 40% of the national income for the defense budget in order to strengthen the armed forces to fight against the ethnic armed forces. It had been used for ethnic cleansing activities. Selling her rich natural resources, such as hardwood to neighboring countries including Thailand could not solve the economic crisis. To bail out of the economic crisis, the only choice left was applying for the Least Developed Country status. In 1987, Burma became one of the ten poorest countries in the world. One of the main reasons for the 1988 uprising was freedom from the Burmese dictatorial rule, which included economic freedom, cultural freedom, educational freedom, etc. After the uprising, the regime doubled armed forces along with the doubling of opium production. Production of opium became one of the main sources of income for the Burmese Army. Most of opium production had been taken places in ethnic areas such as in the Wa area of Shan State. This has not only been a threat to Burmans and the ethnic groups, but also to the international community. The International Narcotics Control Strategy Report 1999, released by the Department of State in March 2000, describes Burma as follows: "Burma has been, and continues to be, one of the world's largest producers of illicit opium. Burmese opium production doubled in 1989". (International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, 1999 released by the Department of State in March 2000, P. 5). The Burmese military regime regards the ethnic minority groups as the enemy. Two months ago, on August 7, 2000, the Central Executive Committee of the National League for Democracy (NLD) released a four points statement condemning the burning of Chin Christian’s churches, houses, school buildings and live stock. The fourth point of the statement said: "In Burma today, under the rule of the military dictators, if you are not a Burman Buddhist you are discriminated against. The military dictators regard you as an enemy." (Central Executive Committee, National League for Democracy, Statement 124 (8/00), 7 August 2000, Rangoon). This statement truthfully highlights the crux of the political crisis in Burma. For non-Burman groups, and those who oppose the SPDC, life in Burma is full of fear.
Two weeks ago, I was in Guam interviewing an estimated 280 refugees from Burma, mostly from Chin State on human rights issues. One thing that strikes me most concerns Chin girls. I was told that the Burmese Army is targeting Chin girls for marriage. These girls, and their families, obtain more opportunity by marrying members of the Burmese Army, and in the same way Burmese soldiers who marry Chin girls are promoted in rank. Chin women who married Burmese soldiers later received military training at the Football ground in Haka. They are then used to combat the activities of the Chin National Front. These Chin girls are used for both purposes of assimilation and attacking the Chin people. A high school teacher at Haka town, Chin State told me another painful story. One day the Army Captain came to his high school classroom saying that he needed the most beautiful girl in the classroom. Shortly thereafter, a Chin girl was taken to his house where it was later discovered she had been raped. Her family said they were afraid to report the rape to higher authorities knowing there would be no action taken and the family would surely be accused of lying. These acts committed crimes against humanity. Chin State, my State, is a restricted area. Chin-Americans could not travel to Chin State to visit their relatives. Foreigners are also not allowed to visit Chin State. In Chin State, approximately 10% are Burman, they are the Burmese Army and their families. Not less than 90% of the population is Chin people. Ten percent of the population holds power over the will of 90% of the population. The U.N Human Rights Commission’s Rapporteur Rajsoomer Lallah's report on Burma, released on October 16, 2000, said that the worst violence committed by the Burmese Army was against ethnic minorities.
This is about ethnic cleansing. According to the report of the U.S Committee for Refugees 2000 World Refugee Survey, at least 200,000 refugees from Burma live in Thailand, Malaysia, India, Bangladesh, and other countries. Approximately, up to one million people are internally displaced. (US Committee for Refugees, World Refugee Survey, 2000 Page 133). These figures provide a clear picture.
|
VOLUME IV.NO.VI. NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2001
Contents:
SPDC uses Forced Labor in Army Owned Farm
SPDC Troops Forced Chin Villagers To Serve as Porters
Forced Portering In Thantlang Twongship
SPDC Soldier Robbed Villagers
SPDC Lt. Colonel Demanded Solar Plate From Chin Villagers
Civilians Forced to Repair Army Camp
SPDC Soldiers Looted From Civilians
Can’t Afford Identity Card
Burmese Army Force Chin Civilians to Sell Liquor
" You Must Play Soccer" Said SPDC Captain
ICRC Suggests Some Prisoners Not Relevant to Hard Labour
LETTER & PRESS RELEASE:
Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s Letter to The Burmese Regime
Burma’s Democracy Leader Still Under House Arrest, Ten Years After Winning Noble Peace Price
FACTS & ARGUMENTS:
Canadian Ties to Burma’s Dictatorship
HUMAN RIGHTS:
SPDC uses Forced Labor in Army Owned Farm
The Burmese army has been forcing the civilian to work in the army-owned farms in Kankaw township of Western Burma, according to the testimony of U Kyaw Win (Name changed for security reason). A 48 year-old village headman from XXX village, U Kyaw Win testified to the CHRO field reporter that amidst claims by Burmese junta of having eradicated forced labor in Burma, the practice continues.
According to him, the Burmese army has a large plot of farm in the vicinity of Taung-khin-yin Village of Kankaw Township, Magwe division, Western Burma. The farm is operated under the supervision of army North Western Command since 1996.
From the beginning, villagers were forced to clear 15,000 acres of virgin land. Since then, forced labor never ceases in our area. From 1997 to 2001 the farm was operated under the command of Major Kyaw Soe of Light Infantry Battallion LIB 269 based in Tidim.
From March 2001, Major Kyaw Soe was replaced by Major Zaw Oo from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 226, based in Haka. Civilians from around the area have to work at the army farm from the time of sowing to harvesting time. Sometimes the soldiers are unsatisfied with the human labor, and forced laborers are made to bring along their bulls and buffaloes to work at the farm
This harvesting season (2001), civilians from Taung-khin-yin village, Tha-lin village, Shwebo village, Thin-taw village, Hnan-kha village, Min-tha village, Kung-ywa village, A-lay village and Ywa-ma villagers are among those forced to work at the army farm from June to Septermber¡̈
U Kyaw Win added that; besides the farm works, villagers have to do manual works for the army such as building the army barracks, cutting woods for the army, carrying waters and making furniture for the army officers.
( CHRO: interview U Kyaw Win on October 1, 2001 )
SPDC Troops Forced Chin Villagers To Serve as Porters
The Burmese army Light Infantry Battalion LIB 268 from Lentlang army camp, Tidim township of Chin state, forced 15 civilians from Lentlang village to serve as porter on September 8, 2001.
The porters were herded by Sergeant Tin Myint of LIB 268, and his troops from Lentlang village to Tio village of Falam township, Chin State. When they arrived to Tio village, the porters were forced to carry ration for the army. Overburdened, the porters could not carry the loads.
Thus, Sergeant Tin Myint demanded two more porters from Tio village. While the porters were packing the load, one soldier took a stick and started to beat the porters saying that they are too slow in packing the load. He stopped beating them only after an elder from Tio village begged the soldier to stop.
The next day, on September 9, 2001, Sergeant Tin Myint and his troops took another 15 porters from Tio village and forced them to carry army ammunition from Tio village to Lentlang army camp.
Ms. Nini (an eye witness of the incident), 29 years old villager from Tio village reported the incident to CHRO field worker on September 15 2001.
(CHRO note: the name Nini is not her real name. We changed the name to protect her identity for security reasons)
Forced Portering In Thantlang Twongship
Burmese Army Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274 and LIB 268 conducted a joint military operation in Thantlang township, Chin State in the month of August 2001. Commanding in charge of military intelligence unit in Chin State, Hla Myint Htun led the operation.
To aid in the supply needs during the operation, Hla Myint Htun and his troops arrested many civilians to serve as porters. The huge loads of army supplies, however, exceeded the availability of civilian porters. Thus, the troops demanded horses from the civilians to carry the loads.
The operation lasted for three weeks, and villagers from Thantlang township had to endure grueling conditions during the whole operations.
SPDC Soldier Robbed Villagers
Captain Hlaing Hlaing of Burmese Army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 274 Mindat battalion robbed 10000 Kyats from Pu Dun (Name change for security reason) of Pintia village of Matupi township, Chin State on August 25, 2001.
Pu Dun and his friends were traveling when they met with Captain Hlaing Hlaing and his troops. The soldiers stopped Pu Dun and his friends and search their bags and took 10000 Kyats from Pu Dun. The incident occurred at Khemu stream between Hlungmang and Zawngling village.
SPDC Lt. Colonel Demanded Solar Plate From Chin Villagers
The following report is provided by Pu Than Kip, a 60 year-old farmer from Lungcawi village of Matupi township in Chin State.
Commander of Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274 from Mindat, Lt. Colonel Maung Maung and his troops came to Lungcawi village to patrol around the India-Burma border on 24th August 2001. As soon as they arrived, the Lt. Colonel demanded 4 villagers to porter army supplies. Thus, the village headman has to quickly assemble the villagers to serve as porter. As most of the villagers were working at their farm at the time the army arrived, the village headman had to ask some elderly people to serve(including Pu Sui Kung 55 year old, who was sick at that timer) as porter to meet the Lt. Colonel demand.
Pu Sui Kung and three other villagers had to carry rations and ammunition for Lt. Colonel and his troops for four days. After four days, they came back to Lungcawi village on 28 August 2001.
While Lt. Colonel Maung Maung was in the village, the village headman and some village elders took the opportunity to ask him to give them permission for making a ferryboat to be used for crossing the Bawinu river, which separates India and Burma, for easy access to goods from the India side. Lungcawi area is so remote and isolated from major towns in Burma that it is easier for the villagers to get their commodity supplies from India.
Lt. Colonel told the villagers that if they give him a solar plate and 10000 Kyats, he would give them his permission. Thus the villagers bought a solar plate, which is worth 50000 Kyat and gave it to Lt. Colonel Maung Maung along with 10000 Kyats.
Civilians Forced to Repair Army Camp
Villagers from Matupi township of Chin State were forced to repair army camp in the month of September.
Captain Hlaing Hlaing of Burmese Army from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274 based in Mindat ordered villagers from Sabawgte area to repair Sabawngte army camp.
Nine persons from Pintia village, 10 villagers from Hlungmang village, 10 villagers from Sabawngpi village, and 8 villagers from Tawnglalung village have to repair the fence of Sabawngte army camp from September 10 to 15, 2001.
The work started from 6 AM to 5 PM every day. The villagers have to carry their own tools and rations.
During the third day of their work, 14 year-old boy laborer from Pintia village got bitten by a snake. Even though there is a military medic present in the army camp, the boy did not get any treatment from the army. Thus, villagers treated him with traditional method and carried him to his village.
One village elder said that there was an order issued by the home ministry to prohibiting the practice of forced labor, but the army still used forced labor and called civilian for porter whenever they needed. "It is very difficult to make a living here. We spend most of our labor working for the army"̈ said the villager.
SPDC Soldiers Looted From Civilians
The Burmese military launched offensive against the Chin National Front, the armed opposition group, in the month of August and September. Thus, the Burmese military forced many people to serve as porters during the operation.
A Captain ( name not known ) from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 268 Falam battalion established a temporary command camp at Ngaphaipi village, Thantlang towship during the military operation. One 21 August 2001, the Captain ordered Fartlang village, Khuapilu village, La-u village, Ngaphaipi village, that each village must bring two tins of rice, five chickens and 8600 Kyats to the camp.
Similarly, Captain Myo Kyaw Htun, Company commander from LIB 274 Vuangtu army camp established temporary army camp between Lungcawipi and Ngaphaipi village. As the camp was on the trade route to Mizoram State of India, Captain Myo Kyaw Htun looted 300000 Kyats from cattle traders on 28 August 2001.
One of the Cattle traders reported the incident to CHRO on 15 September 2001.
Can’t Afford Identity Card
In the area around the townships of Tamu and Kalay of Sagaing Division, Western Burma, people are being required to pay a cost of 40,00 Kyats in order to obtain a national identity card. Ordinary citizens such as farmers are finding it difficult to afford the high cost. Possession of national identity card is a mandatory requirement for every Burmese citizen, which must be carried along at all times.
A person has to pay 4000 Kyats in Burmese currency to the department of immigration in order to be issued the national identity card. If the card is destroyed or lost, an additional 6000 Kyats have to be paid to the department for issuance of a new card.
Unable to afford the cost, most farmers have to get reference letter from the village headman whenever they travel, as a temporary substitute for the card. The reference letter is valid up to three months from the date of issue. Village headmen are charging 250 Kyats per reference letter per person. If the immigration department finds out that someone is using expired document, he/she is subject to fine up to 1500 Kyats to 2000 Kyats.
In Burma, registration for national identity card is made mandatory to every citizen and everyone must carry it with him or her at all times especially when traveling. Travelers or visitors have to report their presence to the village or township authority in which they are visiting. Immigration officials and military intelligence conduct door-to-door surprise and random checks at night. Anyone found without proper guest registration or without identity card is subject to fine or arrest.
Burmese Army Force Chin Civilians to Sell Liquor
Chin Christian villages from Thantlang Township, Chin State were forced to sell liquor by the Burmese army in September 2001.
The order to sell liquor was signed by Captain Myo Kyaw Htun, commander of Vuangtu army camp, of Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274, known as Mindat battalion.
Captain Myo Kyaw Htun ordered villages headmen from 28 villages to come to Vuangtu army camp without fail for an important meeting. When the villages¡| headmen, except the headman of Banawhtlang village who was absent, came to Vuangtu army camp, he ordered that each village headman have to sell 48 bottles of liquor in their village as the rate of 120 Kyats per bottle.
The Captain was outraged due to the absence of the headman of Banawhtlang in the meeting. Thus, he sent a warning letter to the headman of Banawhtlang village that if he could not give satisfactory explanation for failing to come to the meeting, he will be automatically considered as a strong supporter of Chin National Front and the army will take necessary action against his village.
The warning of the Burmese Captain terrified all the villagers. Pu Thang Ling 54 year old village elder from Banawhtlang village said that the reason their village could not go to the meeting was due to the fact that the village was facing shortage of food and village elders were busy managing to get food for the village.
"You Must Play Soccer" Said SPDC Captain
Captain Myo Kyaw Htun, commander of Vuangtu army camp from Thantlang towship Chin State issued an order that there be a soccer tournament at Vuangtu village on August 14, 2001. He ordered 28 villages from Thantlang towship to participate in the tournament.
The villagers have to bring their own foods and all necessary accessories for the tournament. In addition, each village is ordered to pay 2500 Kyats to the Captain as an admission fee to the competition. He further decreed that selling of liquor during the tournament is compulsory.
Even though August is the busiest time for farmers in Chin State, the villagers do not dare to deny the order and the entire villages, except for Banawhtlang village, were compelled to participate in the competition.
Enraged by the absence of Banawhtlang village, Captain Myo Kyaw Htun sent a warning letter saying that the village headman have to explain in person the reason why they did not participate in the tournament. Besides, Banawhtlang village still have to pay 2500 Kyats admission fee, 3 bags of rice and a pig (a big one), despite their absense.
The headman of Banawhtlang village was so scared to meet with the Captain. So he asked Lulpilung village headman Pu Biak Mang to meet Captain Myo Kyaw Htun on his behalf. Thus, Banawhtlang village sent 10000 Kyats to the Captain through Pu Biak Mang. Pu Biak Mang explained to the Captain that Banawhtalng village were facing food shortage and they were in great trouble and he asked the Captain to reconsider his order regarding Banawhtlang village.
The Captain took 10000 Kyats and told Pu Biak Mang that Banawhtlang village have to send 5000 more kyats and a chicken.
List of Villages Ordered to Participate in the soccer tournament
Banawhtlang, Lulpilung, Salen, Tikir A, Tikir B, Tlangrua A, Tlangrua B, Zephai A, Zephai B, Ngalang, Belhar, Lawngtlang A, Lawngtlang B, Hriphi A, Hriphi B, Vomkua, Khuabung A, Khuabung B, Zabung, Hlam Phei, Hmunhalh, Hriangkhan, Thao, Fartlang, Lungcawi, Ngaphaipi, Ngaphaite, and Lailen.
Order Sent by Vuangtu Army Camp Commander to Banawhtlang Village
( CHRO translated it from original Burmese )
Order
To.
Banawhtlang village
All the youth representatives have a meeting on 28 July 2001. Even though Banawhtlang village have received the order, they failed to come to the meeting. This letter is to inform you that there will be a soccer tournament at Vuangtu army camp on 14 August 2001. You must bring 3 bags of rice, a ball and a pig.
Admission fee: 2500 Kyats
First Prize : 15000 Kyats
Second Prize : 10000 Kyats
Third Prize : 7000 Kyats
Sd./
Company commander
Vuangtu Camp
To.
Village headman
Banawhtlang village
Date 29. 7. 2001
You failed to obey my order to send the youth from your village. We sent you several orders to come to the camp, but still ignored the order of the army. The army considered you and your village as strong supporter of the underground Chin National Front. As soon as you get this order, you must come to the camp without fail. If you fail to come to the camp, I have to report the case to my superior and will take necessary actions.
Sd./
Company commander
Vuangtu Camp
ICRC Suggests Some Prisoners Not Relevant To Hard Labor
November 2, 2001
Some of the prisoners are going to be sent back to original prisons from hard labor camps of number one "new life project" near Indo-Burma border due to suggestion of International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
Local Burmese doctors will under take the prisoners from Thanan, Myothit, Bandula and Razagyo number two camps a medical check up before ICRC's visit to these camps. Those who are not in suitable health conditions will be sent back to original prisons for food substitution, rest and medical treatments, mentioned in an order released by Directorate of Prison Affairs under Ministry of Home Affairs on October 25.
Prisoners who are in good health from Kalay prison will be replaced in these sent back prisoners, also mentioned in the order.
ICRC visited to so call "New Life Projects" in Kabal valley near Indo-Burma border from September 1 to September 19 and suggested more than 130 prisoners in these camps were not suitable for the hard labor. The ICRC delegation visited Oak-pho, Sayasan and Razagyo number one camps in the same new life project number one.
More than 120 prisoners from these three camps were sent back to their original prisons and about 200 prisoners from Monywa prison were replaced in the camps, NMG reported in a previous article.
Although ICRC visited and suggested for better situation in hard labor camps, five prisoners from Razagyo number one camp ran away on October 25, while they were doing their work under tight security. The security guards rearrested those run away prisoners and beat them, a source from Indo-Burma border reported. All of five prisoners as well as other 6 who were alleged to discuss for escape were put in shackles and halters.
ICRC made two visits during September to hard labor camps and made suggestion on the situation of the camps, mentioned in leaked reports. ICRC found out that the food given to prisoners were not good enough in both quality and quantity, drinking water is not safe, prisoners do not get rest including who suffering from illnesses, improper health care system and prisoners are frequently beaten. ICRC suggested to prison authorities of Burma to improve these conditions, NMG learnt from the reports leaked out.
All together eight "New Life Projects", all over Burma, were opened for the prisoners, who are charged for imprisonment with hard labor, with the instruction of Senior General Than Shwe in 1994.
Burmese regime is using these labors to implement its long-term agricultural projects. The mortality rate in these hard labor camps ranges from 24 to 30 percent because of continuous hard labor, malaria and insufficient food, according to the prison authorities reports.
Network Media Group
Letter & Press Release:
Archbishop Desmond Tutu's Letter To The Burmese Regime
11 December 2001
Senior General Than Shwe
State Peace and Development Council
Ministry of Defense
Signal Pagoda Road
Yangon, Myanmar
Dear General Than Shwe,
We were gratified to learn of your public statements in response to our call for the release of our colleague Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest, full respect for the human rights of the citizens of your country and agreement to extend confidence building talks with Aung San Suu Kyi to include dialogue with the leaders of political parties and ethnic minorities.
It is heartening to learn of your belief that we are all on "the winning side" in that we share "the common objective of creating Myanmar to become a fully functioning democracy." Your statement declared: "Today we are in the process of joining hands walking on the same path toward our common objective while successfully maintaining the hard-won peace stability and national unity."
We are concerned with the misunderstanding that you report exists between the National League for Democracy and the Government of Myanmar. We are of the strong belief that misunderstandings can best be resolved through open and respectful dialogue. We are willing and prepared to support this process in any way. To do so, we would like to meet with you at your earliest convenience. We respectfully request that you agree to welcome a delegation of Nobel Peace Laureates to your country so that we might meet with you and your colleagues as well as with our colleague, Aung San Suu Kyi.
We sincerely believe that the "path toward our common objective" to which you refer can be made more open by your willingness to agree to release Aung San Suu Kyi and all political detainees immediately. It will also be enhanced by your agreement to move forward with a genuine and substantive dialogue that includes leaders of political parties and ethnic minorities with the aim of achieving national reconciliation and the restoration of democracy.
Such action will not only move your nation closer to realizing the common goal of a fully functioning democracy, but also to considerably enhancing your standing in the world. We look forward to supporting you in this process and to the full integration of Burma into the international community.
Sincerely and respectfully yours,
Archbishop Desmond M. Tutu
Chair, Nobel Peace Laureate Campaign for Aung San Suu Kyi
And the People of Burma
Burma’s Democracy Leader Still Under House Arrest, Ten Years After Winning Nobel Peace Prize
For Immediate Release
Aung San Suu Kyi urges end to Canadian investment in Burma because of dictatorship’s human rights abuses, collaboration with heroin traffickers
OTTAWA, December 7, 2001. Ten years ago on December 10, Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of Burma’s democracy movement, won the Nobel Peace Prize for her remarkable non-violent struggle against one of the world’s worst military dictatorships. Today, she continues her struggle, while waiting for her chance to take the office she legally won, in a landslide general election, more than a decade ago.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy, won an overwhelming victory in her country’s democratic elections in 1990. But instead of handing over the reins of government, Burma’s military rulers illegally nullified the election results and kept Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest where she has spent most of her time since 1989.
In the ten years since then, the military regime has earned continuous international condemnation for its widespread use of forced labour, its violent campaign against ethnic minorities, and its complicity in the multi-billion-dollar heroin trade. As a result, the dictatorship is an international pariah with few friends.
But in spite of these abuses, the dictatorship remains firmly in power. An important reason for this is that only one country, the United States, has imposed sanctions against investing in Burma. With no firm rules prohibiting investment in Burma, companies from most countries, including Canada, are free to choose for themselves.
In a video smuggled out of Burma in 1999, Aung San Suu Kyi addressed the people of Canada, thanking them for their continued support of Burma’s democracy movement. She also repeated her call for Canadians not to do business in Burma, stressing that "investment only benefits the military authorities and their allies…we do not think that investment in our country at this time can do our country any good."
She has a good point. Foreign companies investing in Burma are usually steered into joint ventures with state-owned enterprises, which are run by the generals. Some Canadian companies have heeded Aug San Suu Kyi’s urging to cut business ties with the Burmese military dictatorship. These companies include Wal-Mart Canada, Sears Canada, and The Bay.
However, many other Canadian companies continue to do business with the Burmese military. One of these, Marshall Macklin Monaghan (MMM) Ltd. of Toronto, helped to build the Mandalay airport, even though the military forcibly relocated villagers who lived near the site, and forced other local villagers to help build the road to the airport.
Another Canadian company, Ivanhoe Mines, which is in a 50-50 partnership with the dictatorship in the largest foreign mining operation in Burma, is a likely beneficiary of the regime’s use of forced labour. Testimony from local villagers indicates that the military forcibly relocated people from a total of eight villages in order to make way for the Monywa mine.
Although the Canadian government officially discourages investment in Burma, in reality Ivanhoe receives generous tax incentives for the Monywa mine operation.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s call for sanctions against the dictatorship echoes that of Nelson Mandela, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and others, in their successful struggle against the South African apartheid regime. Last November, the International Labour Organization (ILO) called on its members, which include Canada, to review their connections with Burma to make sure they are not helping to perpetuate the system of forced labour there. Reports to the ILO say that it is impossible to carry out business in Burma without benefiting from or perpetuating the country’s distinct brand of slavery to which hundreds of thousands of its citizens are subjected each year.
Although Burma is thousands of kilometres away, literally on the other side of the planet, Canadians pay a heavy—and direct—social price because of the failure to impose comprehensive sanctions against the military dictatorship. According to the RCMP, most of the heroin imported to Canada comes from Burma. In spite of strong international pressure to stop the heroin trade, the Burmese generals allow convicted drug lords to live freely and even to launder drug money through state-owned banks.
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, launched fifty years ago, signaled the beginning of the end of Japan’s military expansion in China and Southeast Asia. Four years later, the defeat of the Japanese empire heralded a hopeful new era for the people of the region. And yet, over fifty years after Japan’s defeat, Burma still suffers under a dictatorship every bit as harsh and arbitrary as the Japanese occupation. And, like the Afghan Taliban regime, it is universally known as a corrupt and brutal collection of thugs who condone, and even profit from, the sale of heroin to the west.
As people across Canada prepare to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Aung San Suu
Kyi, winning the Nobel Peace Prize, they will also reflect on the inconsistency of Canadian policy toward rogue states.
At a time when the international community is working to strengthen money-laundering laws to fight terrorism, the military regime in Burma still makes it possible to launder profits from the drug industry. And notorious Burmese drug lords, indicted in the United States, continue to live freely and comfortably under Rangoon’s wing. Aung San Suu Kyi’s supporters across Canada call for her immediate and unconditional release, as well as the release of all other political prisoners in Burma. When this happens, there can be tripartite dialogue between the NLD, Burma’s military regime, and ethnic minority representatives.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the South African Nobel Peace Laureate and a prominent opponent of the former apartheid regime, has urged the international community and fellow Nobel Peace Laureates to salute and support Burma’s democracy leader and the people of Burma in their non-violent struggle for human rights and democracy.
Canadians will join Burma supporters all over the world in marking this important anniversary. There will be celebrations in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Edmonton, and Ottawa.
For more information, please contact:
Canadian Friends of Burma, Ottawa, (613) 237-8056.
Facts & Arguments:
Canadian Ties To Burma’s Dictatorship
Although Burma is thousands of kilometres away, Canadians are very much connected to this Southeast Asian country of 50 million people. Ever since Burma’s military regime opened the country up to foreign trade and investment in 1989 for the first time in three decades, Canada’s corporate sector has been conducting business there. These commercial links have increased steadily over the past decade, rising sharply in the past few years to over $300 million of investment and $60 million worth of trade at the present time.
Burma’s Nobel Peace Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi has called on the international community not to do business in her country under the current military regime. Leader of the National League for Democracy, which won an overwhelming victory in the country’s 1990 national elections, Aung San Suu Kyi stresses that foreign business only props up the military dictatorship and does not help the majority of Burma’s citizens.
More recently, reports to the ILO say that it is impossible to carry out business in Burma without benefiting from or perpetuating the country’s distinct brand of slavery to which hundreds of thousands of citizens are subjected each year. In response to this problem, last November, the International Labour Organization (ILO) called on its members, which include Canada, to review their connections with Burma to make sure they are not helping to foster the system of forced labour there.
Most of the heroin that comes into Canada originates in Burma according to the RCMP. Heroin has had devastating effects on people=s lives in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. The military dictatorship does not just turn a blind eye to the heroin traffic, it supports by letting convicted drug lords roam free and by allowing heroin profits to be laundered through state-owned banks controlled by the military regime. Moreover, the report Out of Control 2, produced by the Southeast Asian Information Network identifies heroin refineries that are located next to army bases and others, which are partially-owned by senior Burmese military generals.
Canadian Policy:
Although concerned with the deteriorating human rights situation in Burma, the Government of Canada continues to allow Canadian business in Burma. In August 1997, Canada removed Burma’s preferential tariff eligibility and restricted Canadian exports to Burma, to encourage the military regime to enter into meaningful dialogue with the leaders of the democracy movement.
Despite these measures, imports to Canada from Burma have more than tripled in the past four years. Last year’s import value of $60.794 million was more than double the value of the previous year (Industry Canada).
The Canadian government imposes absolutely no restriction on investment, which has shot up to over $300 million to date mostly in Burma’s mining and gas sectors. CFOB’s most recent research indicates that, since 1997, at least 11 new Canadian companies have invested in or expanded already-existing investment in Burma[1]. The Government of Canada maintainsthat with regard to investment, their hands are tied because of the Special Economic Mea! sures Act (SEMA). The recent ILO resolution, however, now fully justifies triggering the SEMA to ban investment.[2]
Canadian Corporations in Burma:
The largest foreign mining venture in Burma, Ivanhoe Mines, is registered in Canada’s Yukon to take advantage of generous tax incentives provided by the Territorial government. Invanhoe is involved in a copper mine, which is a 50/50 joint venture with Burma’s military controlled Mining Enterprise No.1".
In research conducted by CFOB, testimony was received from Burmese villagers[3] stating that eight villages were forcibly relocated in June 2000 to make way for the Monywa copper mine’s expansion. Ivanhoe has already invested $150 million in the project and is looking for a further $400 million for its expansion. In addition, nearly one million workers toiled on the building of a railway line from Monywa to the district centre of Pakokku, while another 5,000 villagers had to contribute their labour to the irrigation development around the Thazi dam near Monywa. The proximity of these infrastructur! e projects to the mine would make it extremely difficult for Ivanhoe to avoid benefitting from forced labour.
Another significant Canadian commercial venture in Burma is the $24 million contract that Canadian Helicopters International signed in 1997 for five years involving two aircraft operating from Rangoon and a third remotely operated. Previously, CHC provided helicopter services for a French oil company named Total, for its work on the Yadana pipeline which was constructed with the help of forced labour.[4]
Currently, one of Total Oil’s foreign partners in the project, the American oil giant, Unocal, is being sued by 14 villagers who had been living in the vicinity of the pipeline and suffered terrible abuses by the military regime in connection with the project’s construction and security. In September 2001, a US Federal Court judge stated that evidence suggested Unocal knew about and benefitted from forced labour on the pipeline.
Forced Labour in Burma: A Modern Form of Slavery
One of the most pervasive human rights violations in Burma is the military regime’s system of forced labour. Called a modern form of slavery, by the United Nations, International Labour Organization (ILO), forced labour is used on a multitude of construction projects in numerous industries, from repairing tourist sites to carrying artillery for the army during military offensives.
The ILO took the strongest action it has ever taken towards a member country, against Burma, due to the country’s forced labour situation. In November 2000, the ILO called on its members, which include Canada, to review their connections with Burma to ensure that they are not helping to perpetuate the system of forced labour there. Reports to the ILO state that it is impossible to carry out business in Burma without benefitting from or perpetuating the country’s distinct brand of slavery to which hundreds of thousands of its citizens are subjected each year.
Generally any person in Burma can be forced into hard labour at any time by military authorities, men, women, children, the elderly, the sick and pregnant women. Forced labour is often accompanied by beatings, rape, deprivation of food, rest, and medical care.
ILO Report on Forced Labour:
After 30 years of criticism by the ILO of forced labour in Burma, in 1997, a commission of inquiry was set up to discover the facts. In July 1998, they released their findings in a 392 page document distilled from nearly 10,000 pages of testimonies and eye witness reports.
A year after the report was published, the military had still not taken any measures to fulfil the report’s recommendations to address the widespread use of forced labour. Therefore, in an unprecedented move, the ILO banned Burma from future meetings and from any future support until the regime takes significant steps towards positive change.
Report Excerpts:
There is abundant evidence before the Commission showing the pervasive use of forced labour imposed on the civilian population of Myanmar by the authorities and the military for portering, construction, maintenance and servicing of military camps, other work in support of the military, work on agriculture, logging and other production projects undertaken by the authorities or the military, sometimes for the profit of private individuals, the construction and maintenance of roads, railways, and bridges, and other infrastructure work..
... it appears that unfettered powers of military and government officers to exact forced labour from the civilian population are taken for granted...the manifold exactions of forced labour often give rise to the extortion of money...also to threats to life and security, extrajudicial punishment, physical abuse, beatings, torture, rape and murder.
Forced labour in Myanmar is almost never remunerated or compensated, secret directives notwithstanding, but on the contrary often goes hand in hand with the exaction of money, food and other supplies from the civilian population.
All the information and evidence before the Commission shows utter disregard for the safety and health as well as the basic needs of the people performing forced or compulsory labour...
A state which supports, instigates, accepts or tolerates forced labour on its territory commits a wrongful act...Whatever may be the position in national law...any person who violates the prohibition of recourse to forced labour under the Convention is guilty of an international crime, that is also, if committed in a widespread or systematic manner, a crime against humanity.
The Commission considers...the establishment of a government freely chosen by the people and the submission of all public authorities to the rule of law are, in practice indispensable prerequisites for the suppression of forced labour in Myanmar.
This report reveals a saga of untold misery and suffering, oppression and exploitation of large sections of the population. The government, the military and the administration seem oblivious to the human rights of the people, their actions gravely offend human dignity and have a debasing effect on the civil society, where human rightsare denied or violated in any part of the world it is bound to have a chain effect on other parts of the world and it is therefore of vital interest to the international community.
Burma’s Illicit Drug Economy
Since the ascendance of the current military regime in 1988, Burma has become one of the world’s largest suppliers of heroin. The current military regime profits from, protects and supports Burma’s illicit drug industry.
The regime allows notorious Burmese drug lords, such as Khun Sa and Lo Hsing Han, to operate as legitimate businessmen in Burma. The South East Asian Information Network (SAIN) in a 1998 report, listed five army regiments with headquarters or outposts alongside heroin refineries. It reports that bulk heroin exports from the refinery at Paletwa in north-west Burma were carried by army helicopter into Bangladesh, there being no roads for transportation. Dr. Desmond Ball, an Australian researcher, identified in 1999 three infantry battalions that, between them were maintaining six heroin refineries along the drug routes in north-eastern Burma. He also identifies senior generals that were part owners of heroin refineries at the time of his research.
Money Laundering:
Desperate for foreign currency, the Burmese military regime has created legislation that helps launder the proceeds of drugs. In levying a 40 per cent tax rate on declared assets, the regime makes no inquiry into the source of the assets. Moreover, Burma’s military junta openly allows profits from the drug trade to be channeled through military-controlled companies such as banks and the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprises. As a result of this money laundering, illicit drug profits permeate Burma’s economy.
In such an environment, foreign companies have no way to ensure their operations in Burma are clean. A prime example of this problem was the case of Wal-Mart Canada, which was found in 2000 to be importing from a clothing company in Burma owned by the notorious drug lord Lo Hsing Han.
Burma Heroin in Canada:
Canadians are not immune from the scourge of Burma’s heroin trade. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police RCMP states that most of the heroin coming into Canada originates in Burma. Meanwhile, heroin has had devastating effects on people’s lives in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. Therefore, Canadian companies which support Burma’s military regime through their business there, are inevitably and ironically contributing to social problems in Canada.
In 1997, Burma was responsible for about 60 per cent of the word's supply of heroin. Production of raw opium exceeded 2500 tonnes, or more than double the yield in 1988 when the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), the forerunner of the SPDC took power. Opium poppy cultivation in Burma has also increased from some 92,300 hectares to more than 200,000 under the SPDC (Dr. Desmond Ball,"Burma and Drugs: The Regime's Complicity in the global drug trade! " in Asia-Pacific Magazine, No.14, 1999).
The regime has created legislation which helps launder the proceeds of drugs. The Burmese regime levies a 40 % tax rate on declared assets other than real property, but as long a! s the tax is paid, there is no inquiry into the source of the assets (US State Department, 1998). Also banks launder dubious money in exchange for a 25 % to 40% fee. In 1996, there was US $250 million of unexplained investment attracted by the scheme (The IMF and the UN Conference on Trade and Development in the Sunday Times [London] May 10, 1998).
Money laundering and the return of narcotic profits laundered elsewhere are very significant factors in the overall Burmeseeconomy and are officially sanctioned by the junta. The SPDC openly allows profits from the drug trade to be channeled into private and public enterprises through Burma’s national company, the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprises (MOGE) and the banks. (Leslie Kean and Dennis Bernstein, People of the Opiate in the Nation, Dec. 16, 1996).
A study by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) cites large expenditures unaccounted for by the junta: Despite the fact that Burma's foreign exchange reserves from 1991-1993 were only approximately $300 million, the SLORC purchased arms worth $1.2 billion during the period (The Nation, Dec. 1996).!
A Unless there is a democratically elected civilian government that can win the support of all the Burmese people, including the ethnic minorities, progress on the drug front will be impossible. (Michael Jendrzejeczyk, Director of Human Rights Watch/Asia, the New York Times, Feb.12, 1993).
A major dimension of the corruption [of the military dictatorship in Burma] is the involvement of the regime - from the most senior members of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) which rules the country, down to infantry soldiers stationed in border areas - in drug trafficking. (Dr. Desmond Ball, Burma and Drugs: The Regime’s Complicity in the global drug trade in Asia-Pacific Magazine, No.14, 1999).
# The opium-heroin trade in Burma is a sophisticated, world-wide multi-billion dollar business which requires a large infrastructure, especially for refining, transporting and protecting the product, from Burma’s borders to its neighbouring countries. (Dr. Chao-Tzang Yawnghwe, The War on Drugs and Drug Policies; paper distributed at the International Conference on Drugs, 1996).
# US anti-drug assistance to the Burmese government has failed in the past, and in the last four years Burmese authorities have made no discernible effort to improve their performance...SLORC has been part of the problem, not the solution. (Robert S. Gelbard, former US assistant secretary of state for international narcotics and law-enforcement affairs, Far Eastern Economic Review, Nov.21, 1996).
The United States: We are increasingly concerned that Burma’s drug traffickers, with official encouragement, are laundering their profits through Burmese banks and companies--some of which are joint ventures with foreign businesses.It is hard to imagine a lasting solution to this region’s narcotics problem without a lasting solution to Burma’s political crisis. (Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of State, Jul.1997).
Britain: Burma is the largest single world producer of opium, and it has achieved that infamous position precisely because it has a government that does not act against the drug barons. It is not only a deeply repressive regime, but is also a deeply irresponsible regime in that it is one of the few governments in the world whose members are prepared to profit out of the drugs trade rather than to seek to suppress it (Robin Cook, British Foreign Secretary, South-China Morning Post, Sept.2,1998).
Thailand: Thai anti-narcotics officials have been quoted as saying that the Burmese military are actively supporting the United Wa State Army believed to be one of the main drug trafficking organizations in the Golden Triangle (The BBC, Jul 25,1999)
Burma’s Military-Controlled Economy
International investment may help open societies and bring democratic change in some countries. In Burma, however, foreign investment helps perpetuate the cruelty of a repressive unelected junta. While the majority of Burmese receive no benefit from foreign enterprise, foreign exchange allows the military to maintain its rule by force of arms.
The military regime’s own figures state that expenditure on defence since 1988 to the present had increased from 22.35 per cent to49.93 per cent. During the same period, spending on health-care and education had dropped from 4.71 per cent and 12.9 per cent to 2.53 and 6.98, respectively.
Full foreign ownership of companies operating in Burma is generally forbidden and almost all large investment in Burma is carried out through joint ventures with the military regime, notably the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings (UMEH). The UMEH is owned in part (40%) by the Defense Ministry's Directorate of Procurement, whose main function is to import armaments. The other 60% of UMEH shares is reserved for active and retired military officers, army-owned business enterprises and friendship societies, including veteran groups.
Since the ascendance of the current military regime in 1988, Burma has become one of the world’s largest suppliers of heroin. This very fact is just one of the many examples that point to the regime’s profiting, protection and support of Burma’s illicit drug industry.
The regime allows notorious Burmese drug lords, such as Khun Sa and Lo Hsing Han, to operate as legitimate businessmen in Burma. The South East Asian Information Network (SAIN) in a 1998 report, listed five army regiments with headquarters or outposts alongside heroin refineries. It reports that bulk heroin exports from the refinery at Paletwa in north-west Burma were carried by army helicopter into Bangladesh, there being no roads for transportation. Dr. Desmond Ball, an Australian researcher, identified in 1999 three infantry battalions that, between them were maintaining six heroin refineries along the drug routes in north-eastern Burma. He also identifies senior generals that were part owners of heroin refineries at the time of his research.
Nobel Peace Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi and her democratically elected National League for Democracy have been calling for sanctions against their own country since it became obvious that foreign investment was only benefiting the military authorities and their allies. In a video smuggled out of Burma in August 1999, Aung San Suu Kyi stated that:
"We do not think that investment in our country at this time can do our country any good...Investment made at the right time in the right way could be of enormous benefit not only to the people of Burma but to thos who are investing in Burma. But that time has not yet come."
Just as the South African anti-apartheid movement called for economic sanctions against their own country, Burma’s democracy movement is calling for an end to foreign financial support to the brutal military dictatorship.
The Situation of Women in Burma
Like all their fellow citizens, Burma’s women face the day-to-day struggle of life under military rule in Burma. But the country’s women also face particular problems and abuse on account of their gender. Apart from the general maltreatment and discrimination directed against women in their society, Burmese women and girls, especially in ethnic minority areas, are faced with the constant danger of being raped or trafficked into the sex industry.
Sexual Assault:
Women are subjected to rape and other sexual assaults in a variety of contexts; in their villages and fields; during flight; while they are serving as forced labourers or forced porters for the army; and under assorted pretexts in which soldiers abuse their authority and claim to be checking women’s documents. Women are raped by Burmese soldiers in their own homes, while they are internally displaced, and while they are on their way to seek refuge in neighbouring countries. These abuses have escalated over the past decade under because soldiers have become used to taking what they want under the current military regime which allows them to do so with impunity. (See School of Rape by Earthrights In! ternational, Convention for the Elimination of Violence Against Women Shadow Report)
Trafficking into Sex Industry:
The burgeoning sex industry in Burma and trafficking of Burmese women to Thailand and other countries also gives rise to enormous health difficulties, most notably HIV and AIDS. As well, Burmese sex workers (often coerced into the industry) in Burma, in Thailand, India and Bangladesh suffer from high rates of sexually transmitted disease and are often victims of beatings and other physical assaults.
An estimated 80,000 women from Burma are engaged in prostitution in Thailand. Along the Thai-Burma border, agents recruit women with false promises of providing them with employment or legal resident status in Thailand or force them into prostitution under threats to their lives. Many brothels are surrounded by electric fences and armed guards to avoid escape. They rarely have access to heath care or HIV education. Their rate of HIV infection is much higher than among Thai prostitutes.
Women’s Health:
Maternal motility rate in 1993 was 140 per 100,000 live births. In 1987, abortions accounted for 52 per cent of all registered maternal deaths. Though the practice is illegal in Burma, induced abortion is resorted to in the absence of knowledge and other means for family planning. Other causes of high material mortality are malaria, malnutrition,goiter, severe anemia, sexually transmitted diseases and the limited coverage of trained birth attendants in remote areas.
According to UNICEF, the national infant mortality rate in 1996 was 105 per live births, which can be compared to 33 in Vietnam, 31 in Thailand and 11 in Malaysia. One million children are reportedly malnourished. 9 to 12 percent of them severely so. The high rate of babies with birth weight below 2,300 grams is probably reflection of the high malnutrition levels among pregnant women. Under the current regime which took power in 1988, these figures have likely increased since health care has deteriorated significantly. Moreover, this data is not completely accurate because it does! not include information from Burma’s ethnic civil war areas, where health conditions are even worse, because UN agencies and international non-governmental organizations have limited access.
[1]Ivanhoe Mines, Aeroground Group Services, Cavern International Industries, East Asia Gold Corporation, First Dynasty Mines, International Bio-Recovery, Leeward Capital Corp, Marshall Macklin Monaghan, Northrock Resources, Prime Resources Management, Suzuki Canada
[2]This is because the ILO resolution responds to the Act=s allowance that a resolution from an international body, such as the United Nations, empowers such an action. AThe Governor in Council may, for the purpose of implementing a decision, resolution or recommendation of an international organization of states or association of states, o! f which Canada is a member, that calls on its members to take economic measures against a foreign state.
[3]Individual identities are not disclosed to protect their security
[4]ATotal Denial Continues@ by Earthrights International, 2000
VOLUME IV.NO.VI. NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2001
Contents:
SPDC uses Forced Labor in Army Owned Farm
SPDC Troops Forced Chin Villagers To Serve as Porters
Forced Portering In Thantlang Twongship
SPDC Soldier Robbed Villagers
SPDC Lt. Colonel Demanded Solar Plate From Chin Villagers
Civilians Forced to Repair Army Camp
SPDC Soldiers Looted From Civilians
Can’t Afford Identity Card
Burmese Army Force Chin Civilians to Sell Liquor
" You Must Play Soccer" Said SPDC Captain
ICRC Suggests Some Prisoners Not Relevant to Hard Labour
LETTER & PRESS RELEASE:
Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s Letter to The Burmese Regime
Burma’s Democracy Leader Still Under House Arrest, Ten Years After Winning Noble Peace Price
FACTS & ARGUMENTS:
Canadian Ties to Burma’s Dictatorship
HUMAN RIGHTS:
SPDC uses Forced Labor in Army Owned Farm
The Burmese army has been forcing the civilian to work in the army-owned farms in Kankaw township of Western Burma, according to the testimony of U Kyaw Win (Name changed for security reason). A 48 year-old village headman from XXX village, U Kyaw Win testified to the CHRO field reporter that amidst claims by Burmese junta of having eradicated forced labor in Burma, the practice continues.
According to him, the Burmese army has a large plot of farm in the vicinity of Taung-khin-yin Village of Kankaw Township, Magwe division, Western Burma. The farm is operated under the supervision of army North Western Command since 1996.
From the beginning, villagers were forced to clear 15,000 acres of virgin land. Since then, forced labor never ceases in our area. From 1997 to 2001 the farm was operated under the command of Major Kyaw Soe of Light Infantry Battallion LIB 269 based in Tidim.
From March 2001, Major Kyaw Soe was replaced by Major Zaw Oo from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 226, based in Haka. Civilians from around the area have to work at the army farm from the time of sowing to harvesting time. Sometimes the soldiers are unsatisfied with the human labor, and forced laborers are made to bring along their bulls and buffaloes to work at the farm
This harvesting season (2001), civilians from Taung-khin-yin village, Tha-lin village, Shwebo village, Thin-taw village, Hnan-kha village, Min-tha village, Kung-ywa village, A-lay village and Ywa-ma villagers are among those forced to work at the army farm from June to Septermber¡̈
U Kyaw Win added that; besides the farm works, villagers have to do manual works for the army such as building the army barracks, cutting woods for the army, carrying waters and making furniture for the army officers.
( CHRO: interview U Kyaw Win on October 1, 2001 )
SPDC Troops Forced Chin Villagers To Serve as Porters
The Burmese army Light Infantry Battalion LIB 268 from Lentlang army camp, Tidim township of Chin state, forced 15 civilians from Lentlang village to serve as porter on September 8, 2001.
The porters were herded by Sergeant Tin Myint of LIB 268, and his troops from Lentlang village to Tio village of Falam township, Chin State. When they arrived to Tio village, the porters were forced to carry ration for the army. Overburdened, the porters could not carry the loads.
Thus, Sergeant Tin Myint demanded two more porters from Tio village. While the porters were packing the load, one soldier took a stick and started to beat the porters saying that they are too slow in packing the load. He stopped beating them only after an elder from Tio village begged the soldier to stop.
The next day, on September 9, 2001, Sergeant Tin Myint and his troops took another 15 porters from Tio village and forced them to carry army ammunition from Tio village to Lentlang army camp.
Ms. Nini (an eye witness of the incident), 29 years old villager from Tio village reported the incident to CHRO field worker on September 15 2001.
(CHRO note: the name Nini is not her real name. We changed the name to protect her identity for security reasons)
Forced Portering In Thantlang Twongship
Burmese Army Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274 and LIB 268 conducted a joint military operation in Thantlang township, Chin State in the month of August 2001. Commanding in charge of military intelligence unit in Chin State, Hla Myint Htun led the operation.
To aid in the supply needs during the operation, Hla Myint Htun and his troops arrested many civilians to serve as porters. The huge loads of army supplies, however, exceeded the availability of civilian porters. Thus, the troops demanded horses from the civilians to carry the loads.
The operation lasted for three weeks, and villagers from Thantlang township had to endure grueling conditions during the whole operations.
SPDC Soldier Robbed Villagers
Captain Hlaing Hlaing of Burmese Army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 274 Mindat battalion robbed 10000 Kyats from Pu Dun (Name change for security reason) of Pintia village of Matupi township, Chin State on August 25, 2001.
Pu Dun and his friends were traveling when they met with Captain Hlaing Hlaing and his troops. The soldiers stopped Pu Dun and his friends and search their bags and took 10000 Kyats from Pu Dun. The incident occurred at Khemu stream between Hlungmang and Zawngling village.
SPDC Lt. Colonel Demanded Solar Plate From Chin Villagers
The following report is provided by Pu Than Kip, a 60 year-old farmer from Lungcawi village of Matupi township in Chin State.
Commander of Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274 from Mindat, Lt. Colonel Maung Maung and his troops came to Lungcawi village to patrol around the India-Burma border on 24th August 2001. As soon as they arrived, the Lt. Colonel demanded 4 villagers to porter army supplies. Thus, the village headman has to quickly assemble the villagers to serve as porter. As most of the villagers were working at their farm at the time the army arrived, the village headman had to ask some elderly people to serve(including Pu Sui Kung 55 year old, who was sick at that timer) as porter to meet the Lt. Colonel demand.
Pu Sui Kung and three other villagers had to carry rations and ammunition for Lt. Colonel and his troops for four days. After four days, they came back to Lungcawi village on 28 August 2001.
While Lt. Colonel Maung Maung was in the village, the village headman and some village elders took the opportunity to ask him to give them permission for making a ferryboat to be used for crossing the Bawinu river, which separates India and Burma, for easy access to goods from the India side. Lungcawi area is so remote and isolated from major towns in Burma that it is easier for the villagers to get their commodity supplies from India.
Lt. Colonel told the villagers that if they give him a solar plate and 10000 Kyats, he would give them his permission. Thus the villagers bought a solar plate, which is worth 50000 Kyat and gave it to Lt. Colonel Maung Maung along with 10000 Kyats.
Civilians Forced to Repair Army Camp
Villagers from Matupi township of Chin State were forced to repair army camp in the month of September.
Captain Hlaing Hlaing of Burmese Army from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274 based in Mindat ordered villagers from Sabawgte area to repair Sabawngte army camp.
Nine persons from Pintia village, 10 villagers from Hlungmang village, 10 villagers from Sabawngpi village, and 8 villagers from Tawnglalung village have to repair the fence of Sabawngte army camp from September 10 to 15, 2001.
The work started from 6 AM to 5 PM every day. The villagers have to carry their own tools and rations.
During the third day of their work, 14 year-old boy laborer from Pintia village got bitten by a snake. Even though there is a military medic present in the army camp, the boy did not get any treatment from the army. Thus, villagers treated him with traditional method and carried him to his village.
One village elder said that there was an order issued by the home ministry to prohibiting the practice of forced labor, but the army still used forced labor and called civilian for porter whenever they needed. "It is very difficult to make a living here. We spend most of our labor working for the army"̈ said the villager.
SPDC Soldiers Looted From Civilians
The Burmese military launched offensive against the Chin National Front, the armed opposition group, in the month of August and September. Thus, the Burmese military forced many people to serve as porters during the operation.
A Captain ( name not known ) from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 268 Falam battalion established a temporary command camp at Ngaphaipi village, Thantlang towship during the military operation. One 21 August 2001, the Captain ordered Fartlang village, Khuapilu village, La-u village, Ngaphaipi village, that each village must bring two tins of rice, five chickens and 8600 Kyats to the camp.
Similarly, Captain Myo Kyaw Htun, Company commander from LIB 274 Vuangtu army camp established temporary army camp between Lungcawipi and Ngaphaipi village. As the camp was on the trade route to Mizoram State of India, Captain Myo Kyaw Htun looted 300000 Kyats from cattle traders on 28 August 2001.
One of the Cattle traders reported the incident to CHRO on 15 September 2001.
Can’t Afford Identity Card
In the area around the townships of Tamu and Kalay of Sagaing Division, Western Burma, people are being required to pay a cost of 40,00 Kyats in order to obtain a national identity card. Ordinary citizens such as farmers are finding it difficult to afford the high cost. Possession of national identity card is a mandatory requirement for every Burmese citizen, which must be carried along at all times.
A person has to pay 4000 Kyats in Burmese currency to the department of immigration in order to be issued the national identity card. If the card is destroyed or lost, an additional 6000 Kyats have to be paid to the department for issuance of a new card.
Unable to afford the cost, most farmers have to get reference letter from the village headman whenever they travel, as a temporary substitute for the card. The reference letter is valid up to three months from the date of issue. Village headmen are charging 250 Kyats per reference letter per person. If the immigration department finds out that someone is using expired document, he/she is subject to fine up to 1500 Kyats to 2000 Kyats.
In Burma, registration for national identity card is made mandatory to every citizen and everyone must carry it with him or her at all times especially when traveling. Travelers or visitors have to report their presence to the village or township authority in which they are visiting. Immigration officials and military intelligence conduct door-to-door surprise and random checks at night. Anyone found without proper guest registration or without identity card is subject to fine or arrest.
Burmese Army Force Chin Civilians to Sell Liquor
Chin Christian villages from Thantlang Township, Chin State were forced to sell liquor by the Burmese army in September 2001.
The order to sell liquor was signed by Captain Myo Kyaw Htun, commander of Vuangtu army camp, of Light Infantry Battalion LIB 274, known as Mindat battalion.
Captain Myo Kyaw Htun ordered villages headmen from 28 villages to come to Vuangtu army camp without fail for an important meeting. When the villages¡| headmen, except the headman of Banawhtlang village who was absent, came to Vuangtu army camp, he ordered that each village headman have to sell 48 bottles of liquor in their village as the rate of 120 Kyats per bottle.
The Captain was outraged due to the absence of the headman of Banawhtlang in the meeting. Thus, he sent a warning letter to the headman of Banawhtlang village that if he could not give satisfactory explanation for failing to come to the meeting, he will be automatically considered as a strong supporter of Chin National Front and the army will take necessary action against his village.
The warning of the Burmese Captain terrified all the villagers. Pu Thang Ling 54 year old village elder from Banawhtlang village said that the reason their village could not go to the meeting was due to the fact that the village was facing shortage of food and village elders were busy managing to get food for the village.
"You Must Play Soccer" Said SPDC Captain
Captain Myo Kyaw Htun, commander of Vuangtu army camp from Thantlang towship Chin State issued an order that there be a soccer tournament at Vuangtu village on August 14, 2001. He ordered 28 villages from Thantlang towship to participate in the tournament.
The villagers have to bring their own foods and all necessary accessories for the tournament. In addition, each village is ordered to pay 2500 Kyats to the Captain as an admission fee to the competition. He further decreed that selling of liquor during the tournament is compulsory.
Even though August is the busiest time for farmers in Chin State, the villagers do not dare to deny the order and the entire villages, except for Banawhtlang village, were compelled to participate in the competition.
Enraged by the absence of Banawhtlang village, Captain Myo Kyaw Htun sent a warning letter saying that the village headman have to explain in person the reason why they did not participate in the tournament. Besides, Banawhtlang village still have to pay 2500 Kyats admission fee, 3 bags of rice and a pig (a big one), despite their absense.
The headman of Banawhtlang village was so scared to meet with the Captain. So he asked Lulpilung village headman Pu Biak Mang to meet Captain Myo Kyaw Htun on his behalf. Thus, Banawhtlang village sent 10000 Kyats to the Captain through Pu Biak Mang. Pu Biak Mang explained to the Captain that Banawhtalng village were facing food shortage and they were in great trouble and he asked the Captain to reconsider his order regarding Banawhtlang village.
The Captain took 10000 Kyats and told Pu Biak Mang that Banawhtlang village have to send 5000 more kyats and a chicken.
List of Villages Ordered to Participate in the soccer tournament
Banawhtlang, Lulpilung, Salen, Tikir A, Tikir B, Tlangrua A, Tlangrua B, Zephai A, Zephai B, Ngalang, Belhar, Lawngtlang A, Lawngtlang B, Hriphi A, Hriphi B, Vomkua, Khuabung A, Khuabung B, Zabung, Hlam Phei, Hmunhalh, Hriangkhan, Thao, Fartlang, Lungcawi, Ngaphaipi, Ngaphaite, and Lailen.
Order Sent by Vuangtu Army Camp Commander to Banawhtlang Village
( CHRO translated it from original Burmese )
Order
To.
Banawhtlang village
All the youth representatives have a meeting on 28 July 2001. Even though Banawhtlang village have received the order, they failed to come to the meeting. This letter is to inform you that there will be a soccer tournament at Vuangtu army camp on 14 August 2001. You must bring 3 bags of rice, a ball and a pig.
Admission fee: 2500 Kyats
First Prize : 15000 Kyats
Second Prize : 10000 Kyats
Third Prize : 7000 Kyats
Sd./
Company commander
Vuangtu Camp
To.
Village headman
Banawhtlang village
Date 29. 7. 2001
You failed to obey my order to send the youth from your village. We sent you several orders to come to the camp, but still ignored the order of the army. The army considered you and your village as strong supporter of the underground Chin National Front. As soon as you get this order, you must come to the camp without fail. If you fail to come to the camp, I have to report the case to my superior and will take necessary actions.
Sd./
Company commander
Vuangtu Camp
ICRC Suggests Some Prisoners Not Relevant To Hard Labor
November 2, 2001
Some of the prisoners are going to be sent back to original prisons from hard labor camps of number one "new life project" near Indo-Burma border due to suggestion of International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
Local Burmese doctors will under take the prisoners from Thanan, Myothit, Bandula and Razagyo number two camps a medical check up before ICRC's visit to these camps. Those who are not in suitable health conditions will be sent back to original prisons for food substitution, rest and medical treatments, mentioned in an order released by Directorate of Prison Affairs under Ministry of Home Affairs on October 25.
Prisoners who are in good health from Kalay prison will be replaced in these sent back prisoners, also mentioned in the order.
ICRC visited to so call "New Life Projects" in Kabal valley near Indo-Burma border from September 1 to September 19 and suggested more than 130 prisoners in these camps were not suitable for the hard labor. The ICRC delegation visited Oak-pho, Sayasan and Razagyo number one camps in the same new life project number one.
More than 120 prisoners from these three camps were sent back to their original prisons and about 200 prisoners from Monywa prison were replaced in the camps, NMG reported in a previous article.
Although ICRC visited and suggested for better situation in hard labor camps, five prisoners from Razagyo number one camp ran away on October 25, while they were doing their work under tight security. The security guards rearrested those run away prisoners and beat them, a source from Indo-Burma border reported. All of five prisoners as well as other 6 who were alleged to discuss for escape were put in shackles and halters.
ICRC made two visits during September to hard labor camps and made suggestion on the situation of the camps, mentioned in leaked reports. ICRC found out that the food given to prisoners were not good enough in both quality and quantity, drinking water is not safe, prisoners do not get rest including who suffering from illnesses, improper health care system and prisoners are frequently beaten. ICRC suggested to prison authorities of Burma to improve these conditions, NMG learnt from the reports leaked out.
All together eight "New Life Projects", all over Burma, were opened for the prisoners, who are charged for imprisonment with hard labor, with the instruction of Senior General Than Shwe in 1994.
Burmese regime is using these labors to implement its long-term agricultural projects. The mortality rate in these hard labor camps ranges from 24 to 30 percent because of continuous hard labor, malaria and insufficient food, according to the prison authorities reports.
Network Media Group
Letter & Press Release:
Archbishop Desmond Tutu's Letter To The Burmese Regime
11 December 2001
Senior General Than Shwe
State Peace and Development Council
Ministry of Defense
Signal Pagoda Road
Yangon, Myanmar
Dear General Than Shwe,
We were gratified to learn of your public statements in response to our call for the release of our colleague Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest, full respect for the human rights of the citizens of your country and agreement to extend confidence building talks with Aung San Suu Kyi to include dialogue with the leaders of political parties and ethnic minorities.
It is heartening to learn of your belief that we are all on "the winning side" in that we share "the common objective of creating Myanmar to become a fully functioning democracy." Your statement declared: "Today we are in the process of joining hands walking on the same path toward our common objective while successfully maintaining the hard-won peace stability and national unity."
We are concerned with the misunderstanding that you report exists between the National League for Democracy and the Government of Myanmar. We are of the strong belief that misunderstandings can best be resolved through open and respectful dialogue. We are willing and prepared to support this process in any way. To do so, we would like to meet with you at your earliest convenience. We respectfully request that you agree to welcome a delegation of Nobel Peace Laureates to your country so that we might meet with you and your colleagues as well as with our colleague, Aung San Suu Kyi.
We sincerely believe that the "path toward our common objective" to which you refer can be made more open by your willingness to agree to release Aung San Suu Kyi and all political detainees immediately. It will also be enhanced by your agreement to move forward with a genuine and substantive dialogue that includes leaders of political parties and ethnic minorities with the aim of achieving national reconciliation and the restoration of democracy.
Such action will not only move your nation closer to realizing the common goal of a fully functioning democracy, but also to considerably enhancing your standing in the world. We look forward to supporting you in this process and to the full integration of Burma into the international community.
Sincerely and respectfully yours,
Archbishop Desmond M. Tutu
Chair, Nobel Peace Laureate Campaign for Aung San Suu Kyi
And the People of Burma
Burma’s Democracy Leader Still Under House Arrest, Ten Years After Winning Nobel Peace Prize
For Immediate Release
Aung San Suu Kyi urges end to Canadian investment in Burma because of dictatorship’s human rights abuses, collaboration with heroin traffickers
OTTAWA, December 7, 2001. Ten years ago on December 10, Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of Burma’s democracy movement, won the Nobel Peace Prize for her remarkable non-violent struggle against one of the world’s worst military dictatorships. Today, she continues her struggle, while waiting for her chance to take the office she legally won, in a landslide general election, more than a decade ago.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy, won an overwhelming victory in her country’s democratic elections in 1990. But instead of handing over the reins of government, Burma’s military rulers illegally nullified the election results and kept Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest where she has spent most of her time since 1989.
In the ten years since then, the military regime has earned continuous international condemnation for its widespread use of forced labour, its violent campaign against ethnic minorities, and its complicity in the multi-billion-dollar heroin trade. As a result, the dictatorship is an international pariah with few friends.
But in spite of these abuses, the dictatorship remains firmly in power. An important reason for this is that only one country, the United States, has imposed sanctions against investing in Burma. With no firm rules prohibiting investment in Burma, companies from most countries, including Canada, are free to choose for themselves.
In a video smuggled out of Burma in 1999, Aung San Suu Kyi addressed the people of Canada, thanking them for their continued support of Burma’s democracy movement. She also repeated her call for Canadians not to do business in Burma, stressing that "investment only benefits the military authorities and their allies…we do not think that investment in our country at this time can do our country any good."
She has a good point. Foreign companies investing in Burma are usually steered into joint ventures with state-owned enterprises, which are run by the generals. Some Canadian companies have heeded Aug San Suu Kyi’s urging to cut business ties with the Burmese military dictatorship. These companies include Wal-Mart Canada, Sears Canada, and The Bay.
However, many other Canadian companies continue to do business with the Burmese military. One of these, Marshall Macklin Monaghan (MMM) Ltd. of Toronto, helped to build the Mandalay airport, even though the military forcibly relocated villagers who lived near the site, and forced other local villagers to help build the road to the airport.
Another Canadian company, Ivanhoe Mines, which is in a 50-50 partnership with the dictatorship in the largest foreign mining operation in Burma, is a likely beneficiary of the regime’s use of forced labour. Testimony from local villagers indicates that the military forcibly relocated people from a total of eight villages in order to make way for the Monywa mine.
Although the Canadian government officially discourages investment in Burma, in reality Ivanhoe receives generous tax incentives for the Monywa mine operation.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s call for sanctions against the dictatorship echoes that of Nelson Mandela, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and others, in their successful struggle against the South African apartheid regime. Last November, the International Labour Organization (ILO) called on its members, which include Canada, to review their connections with Burma to make sure they are not helping to perpetuate the system of forced labour there. Reports to the ILO say that it is impossible to carry out business in Burma without benefiting from or perpetuating the country’s distinct brand of slavery to which hundreds of thousands of its citizens are subjected each year.
Although Burma is thousands of kilometres away, literally on the other side of the planet, Canadians pay a heavy—and direct—social price because of the failure to impose comprehensive sanctions against the military dictatorship. According to the RCMP, most of the heroin imported to Canada comes from Burma. In spite of strong international pressure to stop the heroin trade, the Burmese generals allow convicted drug lords to live freely and even to launder drug money through state-owned banks.
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, launched fifty years ago, signaled the beginning of the end of Japan’s military expansion in China and Southeast Asia. Four years later, the defeat of the Japanese empire heralded a hopeful new era for the people of the region. And yet, over fifty years after Japan’s defeat, Burma still suffers under a dictatorship every bit as harsh and arbitrary as the Japanese occupation. And, like the Afghan Taliban regime, it is universally known as a corrupt and brutal collection of thugs who condone, and even profit from, the sale of heroin to the west.
As people across Canada prepare to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Aung San Suu
Kyi, winning the Nobel Peace Prize, they will also reflect on the inconsistency of Canadian policy toward rogue states.
At a time when the international community is working to strengthen money-laundering laws to fight terrorism, the military regime in Burma still makes it possible to launder profits from the drug industry. And notorious Burmese drug lords, indicted in the United States, continue to live freely and comfortably under Rangoon’s wing. Aung San Suu Kyi’s supporters across Canada call for her immediate and unconditional release, as well as the release of all other political prisoners in Burma. When this happens, there can be tripartite dialogue between the NLD, Burma’s military regime, and ethnic minority representatives.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the South African Nobel Peace Laureate and a prominent opponent of the former apartheid regime, has urged the international community and fellow Nobel Peace Laureates to salute and support Burma’s democracy leader and the people of Burma in their non-violent struggle for human rights and democracy.
Canadians will join Burma supporters all over the world in marking this important anniversary. There will be celebrations in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Edmonton, and Ottawa.
For more information, please contact:
Canadian Friends of Burma, Ottawa, (613) 237-8056.
Facts & Arguments:
Canadian Ties To Burma’s Dictatorship
Although Burma is thousands of kilometres away, Canadians are very much connected to this Southeast Asian country of 50 million people. Ever since Burma’s military regime opened the country up to foreign trade and investment in 1989 for the first time in three decades, Canada’s corporate sector has been conducting business there. These commercial links have increased steadily over the past decade, rising sharply in the past few years to over $300 million of investment and $60 million worth of trade at the present time.
Burma’s Nobel Peace Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi has called on the international community not to do business in her country under the current military regime. Leader of the National League for Democracy, which won an overwhelming victory in the country’s 1990 national elections, Aung San Suu Kyi stresses that foreign business only props up the military dictatorship and does not help the majority of Burma’s citizens.
More recently, reports to the ILO say that it is impossible to carry out business in Burma without benefiting from or perpetuating the country’s distinct brand of slavery to which hundreds of thousands of citizens are subjected each year. In response to this problem, last November, the International Labour Organization (ILO) called on its members, which include Canada, to review their connections with Burma to make sure they are not helping to foster the system of forced labour there.
Most of the heroin that comes into Canada originates in Burma according to the RCMP. Heroin has had devastating effects on people=s lives in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. The military dictatorship does not just turn a blind eye to the heroin traffic, it supports by letting convicted drug lords roam free and by allowing heroin profits to be laundered through state-owned banks controlled by the military regime. Moreover, the report Out of Control 2, produced by the Southeast Asian Information Network identifies heroin refineries that are located next to army bases and others, which are partially-owned by senior Burmese military generals.
Canadian Policy:
Although concerned with the deteriorating human rights situation in Burma, the Government of Canada continues to allow Canadian business in Burma. In August 1997, Canada removed Burma’s preferential tariff eligibility and restricted Canadian exports to Burma, to encourage the military regime to enter into meaningful dialogue with the leaders of the democracy movement.
Despite these measures, imports to Canada from Burma have more than tripled in the past four years. Last year’s import value of $60.794 million was more than double the value of the previous year (Industry Canada).
The Canadian government imposes absolutely no restriction on investment, which has shot up to over $300 million to date mostly in Burma’s mining and gas sectors. CFOB’s most recent research indicates that, since 1997, at least 11 new Canadian companies have invested in or expanded already-existing investment in Burma[1]. The Government of Canada maintainsthat with regard to investment, their hands are tied because of the Special Economic Mea! sures Act (SEMA). The recent ILO resolution, however, now fully justifies triggering the SEMA to ban investment.[2]
Canadian Corporations in Burma:
The largest foreign mining venture in Burma, Ivanhoe Mines, is registered in Canada’s Yukon to take advantage of generous tax incentives provided by the Territorial government. Invanhoe is involved in a copper mine, which is a 50/50 joint venture with Burma’s military controlled Mining Enterprise No.1".
In research conducted by CFOB, testimony was received from Burmese villagers[3] stating that eight villages were forcibly relocated in June 2000 to make way for the Monywa copper mine’s expansion. Ivanhoe has already invested $150 million in the project and is looking for a further $400 million for its expansion. In addition, nearly one million workers toiled on the building of a railway line from Monywa to the district centre of Pakokku, while another 5,000 villagers had to contribute their labour to the irrigation development around the Thazi dam near Monywa. The proximity of these infrastructur! e projects to the mine would make it extremely difficult for Ivanhoe to avoid benefitting from forced labour.
Another significant Canadian commercial venture in Burma is the $24 million contract that Canadian Helicopters International signed in 1997 for five years involving two aircraft operating from Rangoon and a third remotely operated. Previously, CHC provided helicopter services for a French oil company named Total, for its work on the Yadana pipeline which was constructed with the help of forced labour.[4]
Currently, one of Total Oil’s foreign partners in the project, the American oil giant, Unocal, is being sued by 14 villagers who had been living in the vicinity of the pipeline and suffered terrible abuses by the military regime in connection with the project’s construction and security. In September 2001, a US Federal Court judge stated that evidence suggested Unocal knew about and benefitted from forced labour on the pipeline.
Forced Labour in Burma: A Modern Form of Slavery
One of the most pervasive human rights violations in Burma is the military regime’s system of forced labour. Called a modern form of slavery, by the United Nations, International Labour Organization (ILO), forced labour is used on a multitude of construction projects in numerous industries, from repairing tourist sites to carrying artillery for the army during military offensives.
The ILO took the strongest action it has ever taken towards a member country, against Burma, due to the country’s forced labour situation. In November 2000, the ILO called on its members, which include Canada, to review their connections with Burma to ensure that they are not helping to perpetuate the system of forced labour there. Reports to the ILO state that it is impossible to carry out business in Burma without benefitting from or perpetuating the country’s distinct brand of slavery to which hundreds of thousands of its citizens are subjected each year.
Generally any person in Burma can be forced into hard labour at any time by military authorities, men, women, children, the elderly, the sick and pregnant women. Forced labour is often accompanied by beatings, rape, deprivation of food, rest, and medical care.
ILO Report on Forced Labour:
After 30 years of criticism by the ILO of forced labour in Burma, in 1997, a commission of inquiry was set up to discover the facts. In July 1998, they released their findings in a 392 page document distilled from nearly 10,000 pages of testimonies and eye witness reports.
A year after the report was published, the military had still not taken any measures to fulfil the report’s recommendations to address the widespread use of forced labour. Therefore, in an unprecedented move, the ILO banned Burma from future meetings and from any future support until the regime takes significant steps towards positive change.
Report Excerpts:
There is abundant evidence before the Commission showing the pervasive use of forced labour imposed on the civilian population of Myanmar by the authorities and the military for portering, construction, maintenance and servicing of military camps, other work in support of the military, work on agriculture, logging and other production projects undertaken by the authorities or the military, sometimes for the profit of private individuals, the construction and maintenance of roads, railways, and bridges, and other infrastructure work..
... it appears that unfettered powers of military and government officers to exact forced labour from the civilian population are taken for granted...the manifold exactions of forced labour often give rise to the extortion of money...also to threats to life and security, extrajudicial punishment, physical abuse, beatings, torture, rape and murder.
Forced labour in Myanmar is almost never remunerated or compensated, secret directives notwithstanding, but on the contrary often goes hand in hand with the exaction of money, food and other supplies from the civilian population.
All the information and evidence before the Commission shows utter disregard for the safety and health as well as the basic needs of the people performing forced or compulsory labour...
A state which supports, instigates, accepts or tolerates forced labour on its territory commits a wrongful act...Whatever may be the position in national law...any person who violates the prohibition of recourse to forced labour under the Convention is guilty of an international crime, that is also, if committed in a widespread or systematic manner, a crime against humanity.
The Commission considers...the establishment of a government freely chosen by the people and the submission of all public authorities to the rule of law are, in practice indispensable prerequisites for the suppression of forced labour in Myanmar.
This report reveals a saga of untold misery and suffering, oppression and exploitation of large sections of the population. The government, the military and the administration seem oblivious to the human rights of the people, their actions gravely offend human dignity and have a debasing effect on the civil society, where human rightsare denied or violated in any part of the world it is bound to have a chain effect on other parts of the world and it is therefore of vital interest to the international community.
Burma’s Illicit Drug Economy
Since the ascendance of the current military regime in 1988, Burma has become one of the world’s largest suppliers of heroin. The current military regime profits from, protects and supports Burma’s illicit drug industry.
The regime allows notorious Burmese drug lords, such as Khun Sa and Lo Hsing Han, to operate as legitimate businessmen in Burma. The South East Asian Information Network (SAIN) in a 1998 report, listed five army regiments with headquarters or outposts alongside heroin refineries. It reports that bulk heroin exports from the refinery at Paletwa in north-west Burma were carried by army helicopter into Bangladesh, there being no roads for transportation. Dr. Desmond Ball, an Australian researcher, identified in 1999 three infantry battalions that, between them were maintaining six heroin refineries along the drug routes in north-eastern Burma. He also identifies senior generals that were part owners of heroin refineries at the time of his research.
Money Laundering:
Desperate for foreign currency, the Burmese military regime has created legislation that helps launder the proceeds of drugs. In levying a 40 per cent tax rate on declared assets, the regime makes no inquiry into the source of the assets. Moreover, Burma’s military junta openly allows profits from the drug trade to be channeled through military-controlled companies such as banks and the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprises. As a result of this money laundering, illicit drug profits permeate Burma’s economy.
In such an environment, foreign companies have no way to ensure their operations in Burma are clean. A prime example of this problem was the case of Wal-Mart Canada, which was found in 2000 to be importing from a clothing company in Burma owned by the notorious drug lord Lo Hsing Han.
Burma Heroin in Canada:
Canadians are not immune from the scourge of Burma’s heroin trade. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police RCMP states that most of the heroin coming into Canada originates in Burma. Meanwhile, heroin has had devastating effects on people’s lives in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. Therefore, Canadian companies which support Burma’s military regime through their business there, are inevitably and ironically contributing to social problems in Canada.
In 1997, Burma was responsible for about 60 per cent of the word's supply of heroin. Production of raw opium exceeded 2500 tonnes, or more than double the yield in 1988 when the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), the forerunner of the SPDC took power. Opium poppy cultivation in Burma has also increased from some 92,300 hectares to more than 200,000 under the SPDC (Dr. Desmond Ball,"Burma and Drugs: The Regime's Complicity in the global drug trade! " in Asia-Pacific Magazine, No.14, 1999).
The regime has created legislation which helps launder the proceeds of drugs. The Burmese regime levies a 40 % tax rate on declared assets other than real property, but as long a! s the tax is paid, there is no inquiry into the source of the assets (US State Department, 1998). Also banks launder dubious money in exchange for a 25 % to 40% fee. In 1996, there was US $250 million of unexplained investment attracted by the scheme (The IMF and the UN Conference on Trade and Development in the Sunday Times [London] May 10, 1998).
Money laundering and the return of narcotic profits laundered elsewhere are very significant factors in the overall Burmeseeconomy and are officially sanctioned by the junta. The SPDC openly allows profits from the drug trade to be channeled into private and public enterprises through Burma’s national company, the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprises (MOGE) and the banks. (Leslie Kean and Dennis Bernstein, People of the Opiate in the Nation, Dec. 16, 1996).
A study by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) cites large expenditures unaccounted for by the junta: Despite the fact that Burma's foreign exchange reserves from 1991-1993 were only approximately $300 million, the SLORC purchased arms worth $1.2 billion during the period (The Nation, Dec. 1996).!
A Unless there is a democratically elected civilian government that can win the support of all the Burmese people, including the ethnic minorities, progress on the drug front will be impossible. (Michael Jendrzejeczyk, Director of Human Rights Watch/Asia, the New York Times, Feb.12, 1993).
A major dimension of the corruption [of the military dictatorship in Burma] is the involvement of the regime - from the most senior members of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) which rules the country, down to infantry soldiers stationed in border areas - in drug trafficking. (Dr. Desmond Ball, Burma and Drugs: The Regime’s Complicity in the global drug trade in Asia-Pacific Magazine, No.14, 1999).
# The opium-heroin trade in Burma is a sophisticated, world-wide multi-billion dollar business which requires a large infrastructure, especially for refining, transporting and protecting the product, from Burma’s borders to its neighbouring countries. (Dr. Chao-Tzang Yawnghwe, The War on Drugs and Drug Policies; paper distributed at the International Conference on Drugs, 1996).
# US anti-drug assistance to the Burmese government has failed in the past, and in the last four years Burmese authorities have made no discernible effort to improve their performance...SLORC has been part of the problem, not the solution. (Robert S. Gelbard, former US assistant secretary of state for international narcotics and law-enforcement affairs, Far Eastern Economic Review, Nov.21, 1996).
The United States: We are increasingly concerned that Burma’s drug traffickers, with official encouragement, are laundering their profits through Burmese banks and companies--some of which are joint ventures with foreign businesses.It is hard to imagine a lasting solution to this region’s narcotics problem without a lasting solution to Burma’s political crisis. (Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of State, Jul.1997).
Britain: Burma is the largest single world producer of opium, and it has achieved that infamous position precisely because it has a government that does not act against the drug barons. It is not only a deeply repressive regime, but is also a deeply irresponsible regime in that it is one of the few governments in the world whose members are prepared to profit out of the drugs trade rather than to seek to suppress it (Robin Cook, British Foreign Secretary, South-China Morning Post, Sept.2,1998).
Thailand: Thai anti-narcotics officials have been quoted as saying that the Burmese military are actively supporting the United Wa State Army believed to be one of the main drug trafficking organizations in the Golden Triangle (The BBC, Jul 25,1999)
Burma’s Military-Controlled Economy
International investment may help open societies and bring democratic change in some countries. In Burma, however, foreign investment helps perpetuate the cruelty of a repressive unelected junta. While the majority of Burmese receive no benefit from foreign enterprise, foreign exchange allows the military to maintain its rule by force of arms.
The military regime’s own figures state that expenditure on defence since 1988 to the present had increased from 22.35 per cent to49.93 per cent. During the same period, spending on health-care and education had dropped from 4.71 per cent and 12.9 per cent to 2.53 and 6.98, respectively.
Full foreign ownership of companies operating in Burma is generally forbidden and almost all large investment in Burma is carried out through joint ventures with the military regime, notably the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings (UMEH). The UMEH is owned in part (40%) by the Defense Ministry's Directorate of Procurement, whose main function is to import armaments. The other 60% of UMEH shares is reserved for active and retired military officers, army-owned business enterprises and friendship societies, including veteran groups.
Since the ascendance of the current military regime in 1988, Burma has become one of the world’s largest suppliers of heroin. This very fact is just one of the many examples that point to the regime’s profiting, protection and support of Burma’s illicit drug industry.
The regime allows notorious Burmese drug lords, such as Khun Sa and Lo Hsing Han, to operate as legitimate businessmen in Burma. The South East Asian Information Network (SAIN) in a 1998 report, listed five army regiments with headquarters or outposts alongside heroin refineries. It reports that bulk heroin exports from the refinery at Paletwa in north-west Burma were carried by army helicopter into Bangladesh, there being no roads for transportation. Dr. Desmond Ball, an Australian researcher, identified in 1999 three infantry battalions that, between them were maintaining six heroin refineries along the drug routes in north-eastern Burma. He also identifies senior generals that were part owners of heroin refineries at the time of his research.
Nobel Peace Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi and her democratically elected National League for Democracy have been calling for sanctions against their own country since it became obvious that foreign investment was only benefiting the military authorities and their allies. In a video smuggled out of Burma in August 1999, Aung San Suu Kyi stated that:
"We do not think that investment in our country at this time can do our country any good...Investment made at the right time in the right way could be of enormous benefit not only to the people of Burma but to thos who are investing in Burma. But that time has not yet come."
Just as the South African anti-apartheid movement called for economic sanctions against their own country, Burma’s democracy movement is calling for an end to foreign financial support to the brutal military dictatorship.
The Situation of Women in Burma
Like all their fellow citizens, Burma’s women face the day-to-day struggle of life under military rule in Burma. But the country’s women also face particular problems and abuse on account of their gender. Apart from the general maltreatment and discrimination directed against women in their society, Burmese women and girls, especially in ethnic minority areas, are faced with the constant danger of being raped or trafficked into the sex industry.
Sexual Assault:
Women are subjected to rape and other sexual assaults in a variety of contexts; in their villages and fields; during flight; while they are serving as forced labourers or forced porters for the army; and under assorted pretexts in which soldiers abuse their authority and claim to be checking women’s documents. Women are raped by Burmese soldiers in their own homes, while they are internally displaced, and while they are on their way to seek refuge in neighbouring countries. These abuses have escalated over the past decade under because soldiers have become used to taking what they want under the current military regime which allows them to do so with impunity. (See School of Rape by Earthrights In! ternational, Convention for the Elimination of Violence Against Women Shadow Report)
Trafficking into Sex Industry:
The burgeoning sex industry in Burma and trafficking of Burmese women to Thailand and other countries also gives rise to enormous health difficulties, most notably HIV and AIDS. As well, Burmese sex workers (often coerced into the industry) in Burma, in Thailand, India and Bangladesh suffer from high rates of sexually transmitted disease and are often victims of beatings and other physical assaults.
An estimated 80,000 women from Burma are engaged in prostitution in Thailand. Along the Thai-Burma border, agents recruit women with false promises of providing them with employment or legal resident status in Thailand or force them into prostitution under threats to their lives. Many brothels are surrounded by electric fences and armed guards to avoid escape. They rarely have access to heath care or HIV education. Their rate of HIV infection is much higher than among Thai prostitutes.
Women’s Health:
Maternal motility rate in 1993 was 140 per 100,000 live births. In 1987, abortions accounted for 52 per cent of all registered maternal deaths. Though the practice is illegal in Burma, induced abortion is resorted to in the absence of knowledge and other means for family planning. Other causes of high material mortality are malaria, malnutrition,goiter, severe anemia, sexually transmitted diseases and the limited coverage of trained birth attendants in remote areas.
According to UNICEF, the national infant mortality rate in 1996 was 105 per live births, which can be compared to 33 in Vietnam, 31 in Thailand and 11 in Malaysia. One million children are reportedly malnourished. 9 to 12 percent of them severely so. The high rate of babies with birth weight below 2,300 grams is probably reflection of the high malnutrition levels among pregnant women. Under the current regime which took power in 1988, these figures have likely increased since health care has deteriorated significantly. Moreover, this data is not completely accurate because it does! not include information from Burma’s ethnic civil war areas, where health conditions are even worse, because UN agencies and international non-governmental organizations have limited access.
[1]Ivanhoe Mines, Aeroground Group Services, Cavern International Industries, East Asia Gold Corporation, First Dynasty Mines, International Bio-Recovery, Leeward Capital Corp, Marshall Macklin Monaghan, Northrock Resources, Prime Resources Management, Suzuki Canada
[2]This is because the ILO resolution responds to the Act=s allowance that a resolution from an international body, such as the United Nations, empowers such an action. AThe Governor in Council may, for the purpose of implementing a decision, resolution or recommendation of an international organization of states or association of states, o! f which Canada is a member, that calls on its members to take economic measures against a foreign state.
[3]Individual identities are not disclosed to protect their security
[4]ATotal Denial Continues@ by Earthrights International, 2000
Rhododendron News
VOL.V No.V NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2002
Human Rights:
New Buddhist Pagoda Being Built in Chin State with Forced Labor
Burmese Army on the Rampage of Extortion
Refugees:
District-wide Eviction Left Hundreds of Chin Refugees Shelterless in Mizoram
Chin Refugees in Another District of Mizoram To Be Evicted in January 2003
Ignored Chin Refugees In New Delhi:
The Case of Pu J Lal Kung
The Case of Ms. Cer Cin Sang (Mikhaing)
The Case of Ms. Tha Hlei Sung ( Sungsung)
The Case of Mr. That Ci Lian
The Long and Winding Road to Asylum
Refugees and Displaced Persons
Letter & Press Release:
CHRO’s Letter to Chin Churches and Communities Overseas
Facts & Arguments:
Mizo Hnahthlak (or) Mizo Group By R. Vanlawma
HUMAN RIGHTS:
New Buddhist Pagoda Being Built in Chin State with Forced Labor
November 20, 2002
Chin Human Rights Organization
A small Christian village in northern Chin State is the site for a new Buddhist pagoda being built by the Burmese military regime, State Peace and Development Council SPDC, as part of a program to promote Buddhism in a region where the inhabitants are predominantly Christians. Construction of the new pagoda is ongoing at Lentlang, a small village in Tiddim Township, which is located on a major trade route between India and Burma. Authorities are forcing all commercial vehicles mostly operated by Christians passing through the route to carry sand, bricks and other materials needed for building the pagoda at Lentlang.
At least about 10 to 20 small trucks are passing through the border trade route every day, and the trucks are made to transport construction materials from nearby villages of Haimual, Rihkhawdar and Malsawm, without any compensation for their services.
The pagoda construction project was initially supervised by Lieutenant Moe Kyaw Hein from Burmese army Light Infantry Battalion 269, jointly with officers from the local immigration and police forces. However, since the beginning of 2002, the task was taken over by Light Infantry Battalion 266 after they failed to meet the projected date of completion. The officers in charge of the project were reportedly severely reprimanded by higher SPDC authorities.
Residents of Lentlang village, according to available information, are all Christians.
The construction of a new pagoda in Lentlang is among several Buddhist pagodas the military regime has built across Chin State since early 1990s. In 1997, the regime constructed a pagoda at Rih Khawdar village, just eight miles away from Lentlang village. Christians were forced to build and contribute money for the construction of the pagoda. Upon completion of the current construction, the pagoda is expected to stand much taller and larger in size than the one that was built at Rih Khawdar five years ago.
While building new Buddhist pagodas in various parts of Chin State often by using Christians as forced laborers, since 1997 the Burmese military regime has ceased to give Christians permits for building any new church buildings in Chin state.
Burmese Army on the Rampage of Extortion
December 19, 2002
Burmese army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 266 based in Ruazua town, Southern Chinland is collecting chickens and goats from villagers in the township. Each village is being asked to provide two chickens and two goats to the army so that the battalion can raise them in the army farm. Each village is also being asked to provide 4800 Kyats to the army to cover the cost of raising the chickens and goats.
Ruzua acquired a township status in 2002, becoming the tenth township headquarters in Chin State. As part of the development project for the newly created township headquarters, the Burmese army had used extensive forced labor and extortion.
The extortion was the result of a meeting decision within Light Infantry Battalion 266 on November 21, 2001. Chaired by its commander Lieutenant Colonel Ngwe Toe and attended by all gazette and non-commissioned officers in the battalion, the meeting made a number of decisions including the creation of an army farm, to build a Karaoke Hall, and to fence the army camp.
The army has already collected about 200 chickens and 50 goats from the Chin villagers all for free. One chicken is worth Kyats 1300 to 2000 and a goat is worth Kyat 8000 to 13000 at the present market rate in the area.
Refugees:
District-wide Eviction Left Hundreds of Chin Refugees Shelterless in Mizoram
Aizawl, November 23, 2002
Chin refugees in parts of Mizoram may all be chased out as soon as before Christmas. According to CHRO source, District Authority of Lunglei, the second biggest town in Mizoram state of India has decided to drive out all “foreigners” before Christmas. The “foreigners” includes immigrants from other Indian states who illegally came to Mizoram state in search of better economic opportunities, and Chin refugees from Burma who sought sanctuary there to escape persecutions in their homeland.
Chin refugees are the main targets for the ongoing campaign against the foreigners in the district of Lunglei, and many of them have already been evicted not too long a go. Although only those living in the town were targeted, a district-wide eviction is now being implemented in Lunglei area.
In June 2002, a meeting was held in Lunglei town in order to make decision on how to drive out all the foreigners from the district, and the district authorities are now implementing the decision made in that meeting. The meeting was attended by several social and organizations such as Young Mizo Association ( YMA), Members of Village Council, Mizo Hmeichhia Insuihkhawm Pawl ( Mizo Women Union ), Mizo Upa Pawl ( Mizo Senior Citizen Association, Young People Conference ( YPC), Young Adventure Club ( YAC ), Consummer Association, and Tualchhung Kohhran Committee (Local Religious Committee). Local units of Mizo National Front, the political party currently controlling the state government, and Mizo People’s Conference also endorsed the decision.
The decision to expel foreigners was signed by Chair person. Secretaries of each of the thirteen organizations attending the meeting also signed the order.
The decision warned local house owners to not rent out their houses to Chin refugees.
It is estimated that there are about 1,500 families of Chin refugees in the whole Lunglei district including 600 to 700 families who are in living in Lunglei town itself. A few of them who are able to afford some money have managed to escape to New Delhi to seek protection from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Office. However, most families are forced to seek sanctuary elsewhere in Mizoram State, where they are likely to risk other security problems.
Influx of Chin refugees into India northeastern States have steadily occurred during the last decade since the Burmese military junta began expanding its military establishments in Chin State that resulted in a range of human rights abuse against Chin civilians. Due to close cultural, linguistic and religious ties with India’s Mizo people, Chin refugees who escaped into India have previously been able to live along side the local Mizos without much security problems. However, they are frequently caught in campaigns against foreigners resulting in mass arrests and forced repatriation of hundreds of Chins to Burma.
India has not recognized Burmese refugees nor does it allow UNHCR access to the border region where most refugees are concentrated. Instead, since 1995, it has closed down refugee camps along Mizoram border, and many Chin asylum seekers have been forcibly repatriated to Burma in the years that followed. Currently, an estimated 500, 00 Chin refugees are now living as illegal immigrants in Mizoram.
Chin Refugees in Another District of Mizoram To Be Evicted in January 2003
Aizawl
December 19, 2002
Eviction order has been issued to Chin refugees living in part of Dampui village of Serchip district, according to information provided by a Chin refugee living in the area. The order came from the district authority, stating that all Chin refugees residing in northern part of Dampui village must evacuate the area before January 3, 2003.
On December 1, 2002, the village chairman of Dampui summoned all Chin refugees living in the jurisdiction and informed them that they must evacuate the area no later than January 15, 2003. Any refugees who do not leave the area before the specified date will be fined 500 Rupees per month up to three months, and anyone who fails to leave the area after three months will be handed over to the Mizoram Police, the order said.
The order also said that the refugees stay in the jungle during the month of December and that they would be allowed to come to the village only on Sundays to buy foodstuffs and other basic commodities.
No shops or businesses are open on Sunday in the whole Mizoram state since it is a holiday for Mizo people who are mostly Christians.
The order further forbade worship services for Chin refugees after January 15, 2003. The Lai Christian Fellowship, a place where Chin Refugees in the area conduct worship services in their own language, is not to be shut down.
The Chin refugees’ repeated appeals to Dampui village authority had met with no success.
There are about 80 Chin refugees including families currently living in Dampui village, after they fled military repression and religious persecutions in Burma. Most of them are making their living as casual laborers. The eviction of Chin refugees is part of a larger effort to get rid of “foreigners” from Mizoram state when the campaign was intensified in 2000.
Ignored Chin Refugees In New Delhi
The Case of Pu J Lal Kung
Name : Pu J Lal Kung
Sex : Male
Ethnicity : Chin
Religion : Christian
Marital status : Married
Family members : 5
Date of interview: 16/11/2002
Place of Interview: Janak Puri, New Delhi
Date of arrival in India : 15/11/1999
CHRO: Tell us about your life in Burma?
Lal Kung: I was born on 18th March 1957 at Kalay valley, Hakha lay, Sagaing Division, Burma. On 14th October 1980 I got married to Hram Mem(Par Mawii). We have 4 children. We lived in Tahan, Kalay, Sagaing Division, Burma. I am a farmer. We had 5-acre wide paddy field. In January 1995, for the construction of Kalay-Gangaw rail way, the military junta took all of our fields without giving even one kyat for that. This is the only way of earning our lives and when we lost our field I became jobless for a moment. So we shifted to Chin state in 1996 for our further survival. We made a rest house, sold food and meal in between Thlua Lam village and Hraing Khan village of Thantlang Township. This is the way where the merchants travel to Mizoram, India.
CHRO: What made you unable to stay in your country?
Lal Kung: First of all, the military took away our 5-acre paddy fields without giving any penny to us, which was the main source of our livelihood from our ancestors. Then, having no idea what to do next, we shifted to the Chin State in 1996. On the road between Thlua Lam village and Hraing Khan village which is the route used by the merchants to India, we run a rest house for the passers by. We sold food and also let them use to stay at nights if it was inconvenient for them to go further at nights. As you know, since it was the only road to go to India and vice versa, the CNF also used that road and used to have a food at our shop. Since they were fully armed we were also afraid of them and did what they asked us to do without any complaint. Life was steady till the beginning months of the year 1999 by doing that business. But, on the end of 1999, the military army came to know about the CNF using our house for shelter. They started accusing us that we supported the CNF and member of CNF. They would oftenly came to our house and making threats to us in various ways. But soon after their warning, the CNF also came to our house and asked for food. Having no option left, we gave them as they might harm us too if they were not pleased. Then, when the military people knew that incidence, they really got frustrated and beat me. The worst thing they did was burning our rest house in our sights only. Then they arrested me and led me to Thantlang to imprison me on that day itself. It was 14th November 1999. But, by God’s sake, I found my way to escape from them on the way. I ran to the border side and got to Sangau village, Mizoram, India. In my absence, my family left in there was tortured by the military asking my where abouts. When they couldn’t bear it all, they joined me where I lived and we were united again in Sangau village, India.
CHRO: Since you were a foreigner did the local people and the authority give any trouble or harm to you when you were living in Mizoram?
Lal Kung: We moved to Zawlpui from Sangau when my family could join me. There was no harm in the first. We had lived in harmony with the local people. But when we made the sugar cane field and got success in that, they became jealous and tried to find faults on whatever we do. We were hard workers since Burma and knew how to do well in farming. Our farm had become the most successful one, which gave the best result in our village. It was almost Rs.80000 that we got from our farm per year. We got a more comfortable live gradually and that made them feel jealous of us. So, they started complaining to their village council that we were foreigners and that is why we could not made or use any of their farms or did any kind of business on their land. The villagers destroyed all of our sugar cane plants and drove away us from their village. They started discriminating us. They also found faults on our religion. We are the only United Pentecostal Church believers and since they are Presbyterians, they said that we could not use the ration card, or the cemetery if something happened to us. They told us that we could not find wood from the forest and that we could not take any advantage of their land. On some nights, the youth drunkards throw stones to our house and that affected my wife’s health. She soon became too weak and suffered a heart disease. So she was taken to the Hospital and for her operation, she needed a bottle of blood donated. But there was none who wanted to donate her blood. At last, we begged the Indian soldiers and when the empathy was there in their hearts, that soldiers donated their blood to my wife. Then the YMA president Lal Dong Liana and Lal Rin Puia Chairman of the Village Council gave a warning to us that stated that we had to leave here by 15 of June. As we had nowhere to go, we came to Delhi on 21st April 2002.
CHRO: How is your refugee status now?
Lal Kung: We arrived to Delhi on 21st April 2002 and we instantly reported the UNHCR and gave the application. We were interviewed on 27th July 2000. We received the rejected letter from UNHCR on 27th August 2002.
CHRO: How do you survive now? Are you employed now?
Lal Kung: It was incomparable with the urban life and the village life. It is really tough to earn our lives here. Since we don’t know Hindi and English, nobody wants to give us jobs though we approach everywhere which seem to have a vacant place for work. I sold vegetables among our community. And sometimes we got assistance from our Church, the UPC. That is the way we are living here till today.
CHRO: How do you think of the UNHCR when you have been rejected?
Lal Kung: I feel really desperate and disappointed. At the same time, I feel really sad and think that there is no right for us. Though we didn’t commit any sin, we were chased by the army form our home country and then again drove away by the Mizos. There is no one to rely on. Sometimes I really wonder what goes wrong with the world now? There is no justice in the world today. I do feel dejected, depressed whenever I think of our family future. Our future is totally dark. I was really taken aback that even though I could show the proper documents that we received from the Mizo Authority that we couldn’t stay there any longer. What I want most is that the UNHCR would take into consideration of our case deeply so that we may be able to be recognized as refugees.
CHRO: How do you feel about your security?
Lal Kung: Whenever I see the polices, the soldiers or whosoever who wears the office uniforms, I really got scared and run away from them immediately as we were constantly tortured by them in Burma and in Mizoram. We don’t feel secure, as we know that we can be deported at any time by the Indian authority. This makes me feel insane.
The Case of Ms. Mikhaing
Name : Mikhaing (Cer Cin Sang)
Sex : Female
Ethnicity: Chin
Religion : Christian
Marital status: Single
Date of Interview: 13/11/2002
Place of Interview: Janak Puri, New Delhi
Date of arrival in India: 16/May/2000
CHRO: Tell us about your life in Chin state, Burma?
Mikhaing: I was born on 13/02/1978 in Hakha Township, Chin state of Burma. I passed my Matriculation in 1996 from Basic Education High School, Hakha. After that I served as a clerk in SPDC Office in Thantlang more than tow years.
CHRO: Why did you leave from your own home country?
Mikhaing: Because I distributed both UNLD magazines that were all about democracy and human rights concern and Chin state Constitution drafting which were written by my uncle Dr. Lian Hmung Sakhong and Pu Lian Uk (MP) who are exiles in the west. I got the magazines on 08/05/2000 through Chin Development Committee (CRDC). I distributed to each and every person of Democracy activists in Than Tlang Township. When the MI came to know all these things, they immediately came to our house and found the magazine under my bed. Pertaining with this, my mother was imprisoned, as they could not arrest me. The military MI has been trying to arrest me since then. Therefore, I fled to Mizoram State of India to seek my safety.
CHRO: How do you feel about your physical security?
Mikhaing: I do not feel good. Because I’m afraid of the local people and I know that I could be deported back to Burma by the Indian authority. In 2000,many Chin refugees were sent back to Burma by the Indian authority. I am leading a difficult life here because our landlords and our neighbors do not like visiting. Since we do not have work, we would like to visit each other. We would like to share our sufferings among our community. However, neighbors’ complained about us and we have to move from one place to another every now and then. Once a stone fell down in front of our room. Our neighbor accused us of throwing a stone. So, we were afraid and we moved to another apartment. At one house that we rent about 5 months back, we were unfairly accused by our landlord that we were stealthily use the electricity for cooking meals though we didn’t use it at all. He took away all the electricity appliances with him and beat severely whom I live together, Salai Za Ceu Lian and Salai Tluang Val Lian. Till now we haven’t been given back our appliances. He told us that we have to pay Rs.2000 for those appliances if we want them back. On the very next day we shifted to another house, as we were drove out by him. Whenever we want to go shopping at the market, we must have a male to accompany us otherwise some guys would try to tease us in an improper ways. So, life is not easy at all.
CHRO: Tell us about your indefinite hunger strike in front of the UNHCR?
Mikhaing: On May 30,2000, I submitted my application for refugee status to the UNHCR. I was interviewed only on October 6,2000 and I received rejected letter by post on November 13,2000.And again I submitted appealing letter. Then I waited for six months. I made so many calls to the UNHCR Office and asked for the result. No response was there on my request. So, I was so clear that the UNHCR did not process our cases properly. They ignored our cases along with other 24 people.
On May 8,2001, we began an indefinite hunger strike in front of the UNHCR office in 14, Jor Bagh, Lodi Road, New Delhi. Since we did not have refugee status for 6 months, there is no reason for us to stay in New Delhi. We stayed with friends who have financial assistance from UNHCR. We were lying before the UNHCR office silently. We were not allowed to use UNHCR’s restrooms.
On the seventh day of the hunger strike, I was too weak and felt stomach pain. On the eighth-day, Two of my friends and I lost our conscious and were taken to the hospital named All India Institute of Medical Science by the police. When I was there, I had three injections on my right arm and was put on three drips. Then I felt stronger.
As soon as I was discharged from the hospital on the next day , I again joined the demonstration. Chief of Mission of UNHCR, Mr. Mahiga told us to stop the hunger strike and to go back home. We told him that we had no home to return. We asked him to protect us. Then, the local police came to us and forced us to stop our demonstration on May 16,2001. All refugees in New Delhi also joined one-day hunger strike in supporting our matter. All Burmese Student League (ABSL) took us to their office, as we have no home to return. We stayed more than one month at there .On July 9,2001, I was interviewed again and rejected again on 19, July, 2001.After receiving rejected letter from UNHCR, I went to their office to meet the officer but I could not meet them. I wrote so many applications but still now I receive no response from them. My mind goes blank whenever I think of my future life.
CHRO: How do you survive without getting financial assistance from UNHCR?
Mikhaing: When I think of my survival in here, I wonder God’s love to me even though I do not deserve. God provide me food and cloth through my friends from our community in here. I stay along with my friends those who get SA from UNHCR. I lived at the various houses shifting one after another whom I knew from Burma itself. I lived at Pu Tawk Cung Ling’s house for 3 months and then again shifted to Salai Tin Mg Win (BU 618) and lived there for 5 months. At the present I am living with Salai Za Ceu Lian and Tluang Val Lian.
CHRO: Do you want to return to Burma?
Mikhaing: Definitely, I do want to. But then when it is so sure that you would be arrested and tortured, what is the use of returning home??
CHRO: How do you feel about being rejected by UNHCR?
Mikhaing: I am so sad and feel hurt inside. What I knew about the UNHCR is that it is the place, which give refuge and shelter to the people who have been forced to leave his or her own country, home, etc for political or religious reasons, or because there is a war, shortage of food, etc. And then why I was rejected when I am a refugee? I feel that there is no justice on earth at all because even the UNHCR people neglect us. If they see us in their own eyes how the junta torture and how we suffer in Burma, they would be very sorrowful and sympathize us. The only question that I want to ask them is if they put themselves in my place, how would they be. Even though I am a refugee, I was not recognized as a refugee by the UNHCR. Therefore until and unless they recognize me as a refugee, I would fight for it till I get. You know, nobody wants to be regarded as refugee in the world. But why we keep on asking that?? Because there is no other choice left for us. We need protection.
The Case of Ms. Sungsung
Name : Tha Hlei Sung (Sung Sung)
Sex : Female
Ethnicity : Chin
Religion : Christian
Marital status : Single
Date of Interview: 13/11/2002
Date of arrival in India : 17/01/2000
CHRO: What made you flee from your home country?
Sungsung: My father is the president of the National League for Democracy and our basement is their office. I am also the staff member of the party. In September 1999, UN GS Mr.Desoto arrived to Burma. When they came to know of his arrival, Pu Cin Sian Thang (Zomi National Congress), Khin Tun Oo (Shan National League for Democracy) and Dr. Saw Mra Aung (Arakan) met him in Yangoon, the capital of Burma. They were arrested when the MI knew their secret meeting with him. With connection of their arrest, NLD and People Representative Committee stealthily wrote the statement and they sent that book to our office too. I received that book in my hand and the MI knew that I had that one. They came to our house and searched for that book thoroughly and found it. I was not at home when the MI came to our house and my father was arrested. After I was searched by the junta for a long time, I fled to India by the help of my friends.
CHRO: Do you hold any legal protection from UNHCR now?
Sungsung: No. I arrived to New Delhi on 17/01/2000 and I gave them the report on 20/01/2000. I was interviewed on 09/03/2000. I was rejected on 21/09/2000. I wrote the appealing letter and was called again for re-interview on 09/11/2000. Since then I don’t get any response from the UNHCR about my status. I wrote so many applications, called the office several times and sent fax every now and then to them, but I am totally neglected. Till date I am not informed that whether I get the refugee status or I am rejected. That is why, I myself is not sure that I got refugee status or not. I do not know where I stand now.
CHRO: Could you tell me about your hunger strike in front of UNHCR office?
Sungsung: Pertaining with my status, I didn’t get any information from the UNHCR for a long time. I just got upset for their behaviors and I started hunger strike on 08./05/2001 no matter what. After participating in hunger strike, I was again called for re-interview on 05/06/2001They told me that they would send my result by post, but till now I didn’t receive any letter from them. No matter how I tried to contact them, they just ignored me and don’t take any action on my case. As a result from that hunger strike, now I have the permanent stomach pain.
CHRO: How do you survive without getting any financial assistance from UNHCR?
Sungsung: When the other people are trying paths for getting smoother lives, but for me, I wonder how would I eat today and tomorrow. Being a girl from the other side, it is very tough to get a job over here. Besides that, I have difficulty in languages i.e., in Hindi. Salai Za Ceu Lian (BU-434) and Salai Tluang Val Lian (BU-519) sympathize me a lot and let me live with them without giving any penny to them.
CHRO: After you left your home country, do you get any news about your family?
Sungsung: After I left my home, I got two letters from my family through traders. Other than that, I could not contact my family. I dare not do that because it is quite dangerous for them if they receive any communication from New Delhi. If the military junta knows that, they would arrest my family. Therefore, I cannot make any contacts with my family.
CHRO: How do you feel about the UNHCR when you are just ignored?
Sungsung: I really feel sad that I am ignored for more than two years. I came here just counting on the UNHCR that they are the ones who would take care of the refugees. But things are different. Life is too difficult in here. There are a big gap and difference between the local people and us. The way we eat, the way we lead our life styles, culture, religion, language and to make thing worse we are disdained and bullied by the local people. Whenever I think of my situation that I was an ignored person, I really couldn’t bear. There were times that I got too much depressions and tensions for my life. If I lead my life just like that for another one year, it would surely affect my mental and physical health. I wish that the other fellow would not suffer like me, I wish that the UNHCR would not repeat the same thing like the way they treat on me.
The Case of That Ci Lian
Name : That Ci Lian
Age : 22 Yr
Sex : Male
Ethnicity : Chin
Religion : Christian
Marital status : Single
Date of Interview: 10/11/2002
Place of Interview: Janak Puri, New Delhi
Date of arrival in India : 12/04/2000
CHRO: Tell us about your life in Chin State, Burma?
That Ci Lian: I was born on 27/12/1980 in Thantlang Township, Chin State. I am the fifth son of Pu Than Cung and Pi Par Men. I passed my matriculation in 1999. After I had passed my 10th, the university student leaders and I strongly against the military for there were so many human rights violation in Chin State.
CHRO: Why did you leave from your home country?
That Ci Lian: I have left my country because of my insecure life in there. On 27/04/2000 Command Commander Hla Myint Tun was supposed to have a round to Thantlang Township. So, some of the youth and I planned to make a poster and paste it in front of their office. The poster was all about the human rights violations in Chin state like the junta destroyed the Cross, our sacred symbol, order for banning of construction of churches. When we had a secret meeting for that issue on 26th night, the news broke out and the junta came to know about our plot. The soldiers came to the house where we hold the meeting and tried to arrest us. Somehow I could manage to escape from their hands but three of my friends were arrested.
CHRO: How is your status now after you had fled from Burma?
That Ci Lian: I arrived to Mizoram on 12th April 2000. When the YMA arrested the foreigners, I again set forth to Delhi and I got here on 14th May 2000. As soon as I got here I sought a legal protection from UNHCR and was interviewed on 09th August 2000. I was on the pending state for months, 9 months to be exact. When my result was not known for a long time, I did hunger strike demonstration for seven days. It affected and was called again for re-interview but soon after I was rejected. Since then I am neglected by the UNHCR office though I tried several ways like making a call to the office, lodging appealing letters, sending faxes for taking my case into their consideration. But it was all in vain.
CHRO: How do you survive without the financial assistance from the UNHCR Office? Are you employed now?
That Ci Lian: Because of my lack of knowledge in Hindi and English languages, I could not work permanent at one place. Because of my different face and look from other Indian it is very difficult to get a job. They didn’t believe me at first. Sometimes I washed the dishes in tea stall. I got Rs.700 per month for doing that. Even in that job, I am sacked if the Indian are there to do that. I live my life without job for several days. At those times, I survived by the helps of my friends from our community who has already got financial assistances from the UNHCR. They would share me from their SA when they draw Rs.1400 each per month. In our locality, there are the night bazaars on every Monday, Wednesday and Friday night and I collect the wasted and unwanted vegetables that are thrown by the sellers. This is how I survive here.
CHRO: Do you want to return to Burma?
That Ci Lian: Of course, why not!! This is my ever-wanted wish; this is what I wanted to do first. But there is no question for that because obviously, I would certainly be arrested by the military if I go back to Burma. Oh…I really miss my family.
CHRO: How do you feel about your mental and physical security without having the legal protection?
That Ci Lian: I passed several nights without having a wink of sleep. I am so worried even if my employers scold me because I am afraid that I have no legal documents to stay here. Given the fact that I have no UNHCR Certificate and visa, I can be deported by the Indian government at any time, any second. This make me feel going wild in sometimes.
CHRO: Till now, your country does not seem on the way to democracy and you haven’t got the UNHCR certificate. So, how do you plan for your further survival?
That Ci Lian: There is no way for returning back to Burma until and unless our country gets freedom from the junta. In here also, I don’t say that my life is secure but things are better in here. Anyhow I still can earn my livelihood. Until and unless I am deported by the Indian Government and my country gets democracy, I would fight for my survival. I would always try to get the legal protection from the UNHCR.
The Long and Winding Road to Asylum
Burmese refugees in New Delhi have traveled a hard road in their pursuit of legal recognition. The agency responsible for assisting these asylum-seekers has not made their lives any easier.
By Tony Broadmoor/New Delhi
( Report about refugees from The Irrawady News November 2002)
"The road for a refugee is only as long as you make it," reads a poster hanging in the lobby of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) office in New Delhi. Outside, over 200 asylum seekers from Burma are protesting in front of the compound, pleading for interviews, for recognition as a refugee, and for a simple piece of paper confirming their status as a "person of concern", which would allow them to stay legally in India.
Nearly half of the demonstrators say that their asylum applications have already been rejected by the UNHCR for unknown reasons. Others continue to wait for the organization to hear their cases despite arriving in New Delhi months ago.
Asylum seekers, human rights lawyers and Indian activists say that besides the confusing application process, the mission in New Delhi also lacks accountability, offers no support system for refugees whose asylum status is pending—for over one year in some cases—and is trying to implement unrealistic programs of self-reliance for the refugees. To make the recognition process run more smoothly, demonstrators say refugees deserve greater attention and compassion from UNHCR officials. Moreover, they say the influence of the Indian government now pervades all facets of the refugee’s existence.
"Without UNHCR recognition you are liable to be arrested at any time," says Soe Myint, editor of the New Delhi-based Mizzima News Service, an online newspaper covering India-Burma relations.
The UNHCR in New Delhi recognized its first Burmese refugee in 1990 and now the city is home to the largest recognized urban refugee population in the world, including nearly 1,000 from Burma. The vast majority of the 13,000 recognized refugees in the capital hail from Afghanistan.
But since 1990, much has changed politically inside and outside India, including the more engaging line New Delhi has taken with Rangoon. Also, the UNHCR’s budget is feeling the effects of year-on-year cuts, causing critics to charge that the organization is disengaging from the international stage.
"The UNHCR’s problems are more than bureaucratic," says Indian human rights lawyer Nandita Haksar, who has been working for refugee rights in New Delhi for nearly 15 years. "They have withdrawn from the international scene due to massive funding cuts."
The New Delhi mission agrees that this year’s budget of US $1.2 million, down 20 percent from last year, is inadequate and that the cutbacks are having a direct impact on the condition of the refugees. They stop short, however, of acknowledging that they are gradually shifting the responsibility of caring for the refugees to NGOs.
The most conspicuous effects of the budget cuts include a lengthened recognition process for asylum seekers and an increase in the number of rejected applicants, although some blame these problems on the Indian government’s influence over the UNHCR. During the wait, the refugees are at their most vulnerable as they lack money with no opportunity to earn an income. Their financial problems are particularly acute in New Delhi where poverty is already rampant among its homegrown population.
Loom Na, 26, arrived in New Delhi from Kachin State, Burma in August and must wait until the end of this year for her case to be heard. Here, her fate is uncertain, but Loom Na has no alternative to staying in New Delhi as she faces arrest back home for her political activities. She now lives with nearly 30 other refugees in a one-room flat in Vikas Puri slum. Even as a group, it is difficult to pay the $30 monthly rent, and the protracted application process has only added to their financial burden. Some have resorted to scavenging vegetables and looking for handouts at nearby markets. "My security is very important to me," Loom Na says of her immediate concerns. "But now we are facing a lot of problems. We don’t have blankets, food or facilities."
But the UNHCR says it is not their responsibility to provide assistance to asylum seekers during the application process. Instead, refugees like Loom Na must ensure their own survival.
"They do what they have to do," says Wei-Meng Lim-Kabaa, the Deputy Chief of Mission at the UNHCR office in New Delhi. "It is not our concern. Except for their protection concerning deportation… they have to fend for themselves." She adds that exceptions are made, but that it is difficult to assess the needs of refugees awaiting verdicts concerning asylum status while providing for them during the waiting period drains resources.
Sources in New Delhi say the Indian government has told the UNHCR to curtail the number of recognized Burmese refugees, an accusation the UNHCR categorically denies.
The UNHCR, whose mandate does not cover the India-Burma border in the northeast, agrees that warming bilateral relations may have affected the situation there. In the mid-1990s, refugee camps along the border were disbanded and thousands were repatriated to Burma, but an estimated 50,000 remain. This is not the case in New Delhi, however, which the UNHCR says still holds a "tolerant attitude" towards refugees.
India has not ratified any UN convention on refugees nor have they passed legislation of their own to deal with their burgeoning refugee population. According to a report issued by the New Delhi-based South Asian Human Rights Documentation Center (SAHRDC), this legislative lacunae has "led to the use of refugees as pawns in regional geo-politics" by the Indian government. SAHRDC cites incidents of forced repatriation by Indian authorities to support their claims.
"The Indian government is playing footsies with the Burmese regime and it is affecting refugees," says Ravi Nair, executive director of the SAHRDC. He adds that the UNHCR has been ineffective in staving off this external influence. "They [UNHCR] are always looking over their shoulder to see what the Indian government and Geneva [UNHCR headquarters] are saying."
But refugees are not the only group to come under fire since the government’s policy shift. Over the last two years, two prominent Burmese journalists working on Indian soil have been arrested. Although both have since been released, their activities continue to be monitored. Neither has received any support from the UNHCR, says Soe Myint, who was mysteriously re-arrested in April, 12 years after hijacking an airplane with a bar of soap disguised as a bomb—a move he hoped would win international support for Burma’s democracy movement.
"The UNHCR advised me to tell Soe Myint to ease up on his activities," charges his lawyer, Haksar. "They asked, ‘can’t you tell him to stop?’ As a human rights lawyer I can’t ask a journalist to not write."
Other critics in New Delhi say that rather than fulfilling their mandate in protecting refugees, the UNHCR is more concerned with maintaining its presence and positive rapport with the Indian government—a relationship they say is not in tune with democratic principles. "The UNHCR is colluding with the government in restricting press freedoms," says Nair, when asked about the two Burmese journalists. "The UNHCR has nothing to do with bloody protection."
The UNHCR, however, maintains that they only advise Burmese journalists to keep a low profile so as not to ruin it for the other Burmese here. "We don’t encourage them to take up political activities," says Wei-Meng. "Why should a couple of people jeopardize the whole community? They are staying here on the goodwill of the Indian government."
Indian activists say this is a central reason they became involved in helping the Burmese refugees. They say it is imperative to supply refugees with resources to help strengthen their political skills instead of following the UNHCR line, which they say could stunt their political growth. "When the UNHCR does not take the issue of refugees seriously, someone else must become involved," says E Deenadayalan, general secretary of the New Delhi-based The Other Media, a research group that follows politically sensitive issues. "We have to help sharpen and broaden their political consciousness."
Refugees who have been recognized by the UNHCR here also say the organization has not been doing enough and that their vision of self-reliance for asylum seekers in New Delhi is unrealistic given the lack of jobs.
Most single Burmese asylum seekers receive 1,400 rupees (US $30) per month; wives and children of married men receive an additional 600 rupees per month. But according to the SAHRDC, some recent arrivals have been denied a subsistence allowance (SA). And as part of the new self-reliance scheme, the UNHCR has been reviewing cases to assess who they feel no longer needs to receive SA. However, critics say the UNHCR has revoked SA without notice, leaving refugees few options to ensure their survival.
"The UNHCR always threatens to take our SA away," says Dr Ro Ding, an active Burmese dissident in New Delhi. "We all want to work but it is very difficult."
According to the UNHCR’s policy on refugees in urban areas: "[U]nassisted refugees cannot be regarded as ‘self-reliant’ if they are living in abject poverty and are obliged to engage in illicit activities in order to survive.… Refugees who have very limited access to public services and social support systems cannot realistically be expected to attain self-reliance."
Critics of the program say that self-reliance is unattainable for most refugees and that it is shortsighted to think otherwise. "They [UNHCR] have done really inhumane things," says Haksar. "They cut stipends without notice, putting refugees out on the streets, and they are not accountable to the refugees at any point in time."
However, the UNHCR says they have new proactive programs that remain in their "embryonic" stages that will allow for greater self-sufficiency among refugees. "We don’t want to see people live on handouts forever," says the UNHCR’s Wei-Ming. "I think we have embarked on a new procedure to cultivate self-reliance." But when asked whether the agency has been guilty of cutting SA without notice, the Deputy Chief of Mission replied, "I don’t think so…. I don’t know, we are moving towards a new system."
Nobody disputes that the UNHCR’s job is difficult, but the role the UNHCR is attempting to play is no longer plausible, especially given the budget cuts and resource constraints. "The UNHCR is the only protection a refugee has," says Haskar.
Whether the UNHCR implements a new scheme to alleviate the refugees’ burden is unclear, but if they fail to do so, the long, hard road for Burmese refugees in India will most likely lead to nowhere.
Refugees and Displaced Persons
(By Human Rights Watch)
Who
A refugee is someone with a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion, who is outside of his or her country of nationality and unable or unwilling to return. Refugees are forced from their countries by war, civil conflict, political strife or gross human rights abuses. There were an estimated 14.9 million refugees in the world in 2001 - people who had crossed an international border to seek safety - and at least 22 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) who had been uprooted within their own countries.
What
Enshrined in Article 14 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the right "to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." This principle recognizes that victims of human rights abuse must be able to leave their country freely and to seek refuge elsewhere. Governments frequently see refugees as a threat or a burden, refusing to respect this core principle of human rights and refugee protection.
Where
The global refugee crisis affects every continent and almost every country. In 2001, 78 percent of all refugees came from 10 areas: Afghanistan, Angola, Burma, Burundi, Congo-Kinshasa, Eritrea, Iraq, the Palestinian territories, Somalia and Sudan. Palestinians are the world's oldest and largest refugee population, and make up more than one fourth of all refugees. Asia hosts 45 percent of all refugees, followed by Africa (30 percent), Europe (19 percent) and North America (5 percent).
When
Throughout history, people have fled their homes to escape persecution. In the aftermath of World War II, the international community included the right to asylum in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In 1950, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was created to protect and assist refugees, and, in 1951, the United Nations adopted the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, a legally binding treaty that, by February 2002, had been ratified by 140 countries.
Why
In the past 50 years, states have largely regressed in their commitment to protect refugees, with the wealthy industrialized states of Europe, North America and Australia - which first established the international refugee protection system - adopting particularly hostile and restrictive policies. Governments have subjected refugees to arbitrary arrest, detention, denial of social and economic rights and closed borders. In the worst cases, the most fundamental principle of refugee protection, nonrefoulement, is violated, and refugees are forcibly returned to countries where they face persecution. Since September 11, many countries have pushed through emergency anti-terrorism legislation that curtails the rights of refugees.
How
Human Rights Watch believes the right to asylum is a matter of life and death and cannot be compromised. In our work to stop human rights abuses in countries around the world, we seek to address the root causes that force people to flee. We also advocate for greater protection for refugees and IDPs and for an end to the abuses they suffer when they reach supposed safety. Human Rights Watch calls on the United Nations and on governments everywhere to uphold their obligations to protect refugees and to respect their rights - regardless of where they are from or where they seek refuge.
LETTER & PRESS RELEASE
CHRO’s Letter to Chin Churches and Communities Overseas
Chin Human Rights Organization
To all international Chin Churches/Communities and Fellowship.
December 18, 2002
Reference: Chin Refugee in Delhi, India
Dear Compatriots,
I am writing on behalf of Chin Human Rights Organization to appeal to your esteemed Church/Fellowship to consider the possibility of making contribution towards assisting Chin refugees in New Delhi, India who are currently facing acute humanitarian crisis there.
Chin refugees started arriving to New Delhi after fleeing persecution under the military regime in Burma to seek international legal protection from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Although it has been a slow yet steady flight from the Chinland, the massive outflow of refugee claimants from Chinland occurred during the last few months, making it difficult for those already settled in New Delhi as recognized refugees to accommodate all the new arrivals.
Most of these newly arrived Chin refugees have not been recognized as refugees by UNHCR, making them ineligible to receive any form of social and financial assistance provided by the UNHCR Office. Currently, there are at least 400 individuals facing acute humanitarian crisis as a result of not being eligible to receive any form of assistance due to not haing been recognized as UNHCR mandated refugees. Initial assessment conducted by Chin Human Rights Organization shows the need for urgent relief assistance for them to continue surviving while they await their applications to be approved by UNHCR.
Our field assessment shows that most of these refugees are living off the generosity and helps of their fellow recognized refugees in New Delhi, struggling through the most precarious social conditions.
In trying to find ways to ameliorate their situation, we have explored a number of options. We have held a meeting with responsible UNHCR officials to boost their chances of being accepted as mandated refugees. Although we have obtained assurances from the UNHCR Chief of Mission in India regarding his office commitment to making quick and reasonable determination of refugee status for Chin refugees, we obtain no assurance towards helping them with their humanitarian needs while they await this process.
Based on the result of this meeting, and the assessment we conducted among the refugees, we found that there is an urgent and immediate assistance for those not yet been recognized as refugees by UNHCR in New Delhi.
On behalf of the Chin refugees, we therefore implore your kind financial and material assistance in meeting the needs of the Chin refugees in crisis in New Delhi.
If your Church/Fellowship decides to make any kinds of assistance towards this purpose, please feel free to contact us and we will let you know the ways in which you could make assistance to these persons in need.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sd/
Victor Biak Lian
Interim Refugee Coordinator
Chin Human Rights Organization
FACTS & ARGUMENTS:
Mizo Hnahthlak (or) Mizo Group
By: R. Vanlawma (Zalen Cabin)
The Mizo group of people who occupy the hills areas between India and Burma are called by Burmese as Chin and by the Bengalese or Indian as Kukies. We knew very little about them before they had settled in the hills areas between India and Burma.
According to the book the structure of the Chin society written by F.K. Lehman, Head of History Department of Illinois University, U.S.A., in chapter 1, in AD 1397, we first hear of the Shan fortress city of Kalay (the Burmese Kalaymyo)…we do not know, of course whether the Chin of these plains were, as LUCE has suggested pushed up into the hills” Though he could not ascertain how and when the Mizo group were pushed up in the hills, it appeared that the Shan occupied the area after the Mizo group left the areas. So we can presume that the MIZO groups enter the hills in or about 1400 A.D.
Dr. Lehman also mentioned that “ so Chin have recently resettled the Kalay valley (see Hobbs, 1956)” what Mr. Hobbs meant are those who returned at the Kalay valley from the present Mizoram under Sailo chief who thought that it would be better to live in the areas where is no regular famines called Mautam or Thingtam. In or about 1930 after Thingtam famine, they made habitation at Tahan near kalaymyo and Khampat near the old side of Khampat fortress believes to be the place occupied by the Shan people after the Mizo group left their plain areas.
When they were in Lentlang areas they were divided into many clans, each having its own language and leaders and fought each one another for clan supremacy. So it can be presumed some clans left the areas by crossing Tiau Rivers even before 1600 A.D. The latest group who crosses the Tiau was Lushai clan under at a place called Selesih under the Chairmanship of Kawhla at about 1350 A.D. Some clans who preferred the Sailo chiefs to be their leaders were Ralte and Fanai in addition to Lushai clan. Small fraction of other clans also included in the list, so Selesih was a very of great settlement having a great influence to those who first crossed the Tiau river and easily occupied the whole of the area covered by the present Mizoram. They claimed that all the area from the Tiau river were their territory which the Falam and other leaders of the east. Respected and never offended against the Sailo chief since sailo controlled various clans, the people under them called themselves as MIZO.
The British, who control the whole of India, when they came in contact with the Sailo chiefs did not like to occupy the area but simply make tea gardens in Cacher safe in 1871. But when they put the whole of Burma under their control in 1885, they could not but decide to occupy the hills area between Burma and India. In 1890 they defeated the greatest Mizo chief Lianphunga. They also occupied the present Chin Hills almost at the same times.
Although the Mizo in India sides were known as Kuki the British knew that the rulling clan was Lushai, so they called it Lusei but mispelt it as Lushai. So all of them were officially known as Lushai and the Land was named Lushai Hills.
The British were very lenient to the hill people between India and Burma, in order to protect them from the assimilation of the more civilized plain peoples, they made inner line regulation were applicable to the Mizo areas.
Then after about 50 years of British rule in the Mizo areas second great World War erupted in 1944 Mahatma Gandhi demanded British withdrawal from India, under the pressure of United States of America, Mr. Churchill, prime minister of British Government conceded and promised to leave India, there were some problems which might delay the date of leaving India fully even after the war. One of his points was the problem of the Hills people between Burma and India.
He announced that the hills people between India and Burma were independence before British ruled over them. They were not under Indian, nor Burmese, nor under any government of the world they were Christians at that time, and it would not be fair to leave them under the Hindu or Buddhist rule. The British Government should help them to stand by their own feet before they had to leave them.
The governor of Assam who administered them was given more power to prepare special administration to suit the future; the post of adviser to the Governor was created to be more effective. Mr. Churchill, hoping to get more votes a time the war with the Japanese was gong on decided to called for election in August 1946, but the U.S.A. was suspicious of Mr. Churchill’s, delaying tactic for withdrawal from India decided to side with Labour Party. So, Conservative party, under the leadership of Mr. Chulchill was defeated in that election, in that way his proposal for the Mizo people was over ruled by making by India independent Act 1947.
When the proposal of Mr. Churchill was known to us “I tried my best to organized apolitical party called government creation of Greater Mizoram, by diong away the International boundary of Tiau river between the East the superintendent, Lushai Hills, Mr. A. Macdonald, ICS the in all authority over the district on the 9th April 1946. And the party soon overwhelmingly spread not only in Lushai Hills but in to the Mizo areas of Manipur and Tripura in India.
Then came “the Indian Independent Act, 1947” sponsored by the Labour party under the leadership of Mr. Atlee, the new Prime Minister. In section no. 7 (c) of that Act, it was started that “ any treaties or agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act between His Majesty and any persons having authority in the tribal areas lapses.” In that Act instead of helping us for any length of time so as to enable us to become independent in due course, the British government preferred to leave us alone to have the right to self determination.
Our benefactor, Mr. A. Macdonald gave us his advice that the British Government would not be in a position to become independent, any one of the three Government, India, Pakistan or Burma might invade and force us to become satellite. In his opinion it will be advantage to talk to the India Union to join them under the Scottish pattern. Scotland, though they joined England, they are still be enforced without the sanction of the Scottish people. But for
|
Publications 
