By Naw Noreen 

Democratic Voice of Burma

December 22, 2014

A 50-year-old local woman was killed and at least four other villagers seriously wounded after protestors clashed with riot police near the site of Latpadaung copper mine in Sagaing Division on Monday afternoon.

A resident from Sete village, situated inside the mining project site, said Myanmar Wanbao company staff arrived with police security on Monday morning to lay fences across land plots that villagers have refused to give up [by not accepting compensation].

“The police stood in a line, armed with riot shields, and warned the villagers they would be shot if they did not move,” said the Sete villager. “The protestors tried to block them from entering the plots and refused to give in.

“The police killed a woman named Khin Win from Mogyopyin village. She was shot in the head,” he said.

DVB has learnt that protestors had launched stones from slingshots at the police and that the security forces had responded in kind before shots were fired.

Khin San Hlaing, a union parliament MP from nearby Pale Township, said she was informed by locals that Khin Win was shot dead by police.

“I was told by the villagers that Daw Khin Win was shot in the head when the police opened fire. The photos we received showed a bullet wound entering her forehead and exiting through the back of her head,” she told DVB by telephone at 3:30pm local time.

“Her body was still lying in the sesame field and no one had the courage to go pick it up,” the MP added. “We were also informed that another villager, U Hmine, from Mogyopyin village was shot in the thigh and was bleeding out. But he was yet to be taken to hospital.”

She added that a third villager, a woman named Ma Kyu, was injured in the eye.

Pho La Pyae, a resident from Mogyopyin village, said around 200 farmers from Myogyopyin, Sete and Tonywa villagers had confronted the police that morning and prevented them from coming onto their land. He said that 20 people were injured by police gunfire.

So far, no government official, police spokesperson or representative of Myanmar Wanbao has made an official statement.

Zaw Myo Nyunt, the administrator of nearby Yinmarbin village, told DVB by phone about an hour after the incident that he was unaware of any violence.

A DVB reporter at the scene said the protestors were dispersed from the area at around 4pm, whereby mining staff resumed erecting fences around the 1,000 acres of land in question.

The incident follows an official press release on 22 December by Myanmar Wanbao, a joint venture between military-backed Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings and China’s Wanbao Company. The company stated that it would soon commence work on an extended area of land allotted by the Burmese government for use in the copper mine project.

“Myanmar Wanbao Mining Copper Limited is pleased to announce that, under the direction of the Myanmar Government, the company will be extending its working area in the Letpadaung copper project to comply with requirements of its investment permit granted by the Myanmar Investment Commission. Construction is proceeding as a result of broad community support for the project.”

In addition to claiming that the project has the overwhelming backing of the local people, the firm went on to detail the amount it is has paid to villagers as compensation for assuming their land, and said that it has donated much money into the local community, as well as creating jobs and investing in local infrastructure.

Hundreds of local villagers and their supporters have been protesting the Latpadaung copper mine since its inception more than 10 years ago. Many have been displaced to make way for the project which was originally contracted to a Canadian firm, Ivanhoe Mines.

The controversial mine was temporarily suspended when activists and monks staged a mass sit-in protest in 2012. The protest was broken up brutally by riot police on 29 November that year when some 80 protestors were injured, including several Buddhist monks, many with horrific burns that experts have attributed to white phosphorous bombs.

A subsequent investigation headed by opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi failed to pronounce anyone guilty for the violent crackdown, and to many villagers’ dismay, recommended to the government that the project be resumed.

By Colin Hinshelwood

Democratic Voice of Burma

December 20, 2014

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has identified 220 journalists imprisoned around the world in 2014, a slight increase from the year before.

The Burmese government is currently ranked as the eighth most repressive regime for jailing reporters; with ten media workers listed behind bars, it is surpassed only by China, Iran, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Egypt and Syria.

“The fact that Burma is among the ten worst global jailers of journalists underscores the abrupt reversal of President Thein Sein’s earlier press freedom promises. Reporters in Burma now face the same level of threat they did under the previous military junta,” said Shawn Crispin, the senior Southeast Asia representative for CPJ, speaking to DVB on Friday.

“With ten journalists now languishing behind bars, proponents of the country’s supposed democratic progress should wake up and take notice of the authoritarian reality that still governs the country. The use of anti-state charges to jail journalists has restored the culture of fear and self-censorship that was pervasive under the previous ruling junta.

“If Western governments based their decisions to lift or suspend sanctions on previous progress on press freedom, they should now consider reimposing those punitive measures in response to the jailing of journalists,” he added.

According to the report by the international journalists’ watchdog, on the date of the CPJ census, at least 10 journalists were imprisoned in Burma, officially known as Myanmar, all on anti-state charges.

“In July, five staff members of the Unity weekly news journal were sentenced to 10 years in prison each under the 1923 Official Secrets Act. Rather than reforming draconian and outdated security laws, President Thein Sein’s government is using the laws to imprison journalists,” the report by CPJ news editor Shazdeh Omari said.

The five were found guilty of exposing state secrets after a January report in Unity alleged the existence of a secret chemical weapons factory in Magwe Division, central Burma.

On 2 October, the regional court reduced the sentences of the five Unity personnel to seven years following an appeal.

In July, more than 50 journalists and their supporters were charged under the Peaceful Assembly and Peaceful Procession Act for participating in an unauthorised demonstration where they taped their mouths and held a vigil outside the government-backed Myanmar Peace Centre in Rangoon.

The charges were later dropped.

In October, five staff members of the now defunct Bi-Mon Te Nay weekly news journal were found guilty of sedition charges and sentenced to two years each.

The five – two editors, one reporter and two publishers – were sentenced under Article 505(b) of the penal code for “defamation of the state”after the journal had published a report in July repeating an activist group’s claims that Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi had teamed up with several ethnic politicians to form an interim government.

The conviction of the ten Unity and Bi-Mon Te Nay journalists prompted a domestic and international outcry, with warnings that the country could be backsliding on promises of press freedom.

While major media reforms, such as the disbandment of Burma’s notorious pre-publication censorship board in August 2012, caused a wave of early optimism, disputes over new regulations and an apparent targeting of reporters began to cast doubt on Naypyidaw’s commitment to establishing a free media.

According to the CPJ report, 44 journalists languish behind bars in China, a jump from 32 the previous year. Almost half of those jailed are either Tibetan or Uighur.

The increased imprisonment of journalists in China “reflects the pressure that President Xi Jinping has exerted on media, lawyers, dissidents and academics to toe the government line,” said CPJ. “In addition to jailing journalists, Beijing has issued restrictive new rules about what can be covered and denied visas to international journalists.”

Iran is second worst offender, according to CPJ, although its record continues to improve. Thirty media workers are currently recorded in Iranian prisons, down from 35 in 2013, and a record high of 45 in 2012.

According to international watchdog Reporters Without Borders, 66 journalists were killed around the world in 2014, 15 of who were in Syria. One slain reporter was recorded in Burma – Par Gyi, who was killed by the Burmese army in September under opaque circumstances.

By Naw Noreen

Democratic Voice of Burma

December 17, 2014

By Ko Htwe

Democratic Voice of Burma

December 8, 2014

A Burmese army officer was jailed for two years after he signed a petition to amend Burma’s Constitution.

Maj. Kyawzwar Win was sentenced by a military court on 5 December after photos emerged of him signing a petition to amend Article 436.

The ruling is believed to be the first case of its kind within the three years Burma has undergone transition from military to civilian government.

Kyawzwar Win, an army engineer, was officially court-martialled for insubordination and breaking military rules.

“I was sentenced to jail because I signed the petition while the NLD [National League for Democracy] was collecting signatures for the constitutional amendment,” he said before being taken to prison, Radio Free Asia reported. “There is an order in the army to not get involved in amending Article 436.”

Article 436 is controversial among pro-democracy activists. The article states that constitutional amendments require approval of 75 percent of parliament, and as the military controls 25 percent of seats it effectively allows the military power to veto constitutional amendments in Burma.

Aung San Suu Kyi’s NLD and civil society movement 88 Generation Peace and Open Society ran a petition calling for amendments to the article from May to July, claiming around 5-million signatures in support. Both claim the petition represents Burmese people from all sectors of society.

Kyaw Thiha, an NLD MP from Mandalay Division, said the Kyawzwar Win was sentenced the same day military commander-in-chief Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing came to the Defence Services Academy graduation in the town.

“We heard from his wife that he [Kyawzwar Win] was sent to Obo prison – we are exploring options to help file an appeal for him,” Kyaw Thiha said.

By Aye Nai

Democratic Voice of Burma

December 3, 2014

By Guy Horton

Democratic Voice of Burma

November 19, 2014

Last year, when I was in Ma Ja Yang in Northern Kachin State, Burmese fighter bombers, at the height of the peace process, had just flown low over the nearby IDP camp. Two terrified children dug themselves into an earth bank for refuge. In heavy rains the bank collapsed and they suffocated to death: two unrecorded deaths in a sixty year old war involving, arguably, the deaths of millions. But this year these two children may have surfaced, along with millions of others, in the most unlikeliest of places: the government’s 2014 census. Burma’s population, it turns out, is about nine million below what was expected. These two children, and nine million others, are not there. No one is commenting on this. No one is asking why. The most significant and extraordinary information to have come out of the country for decades, identifying 20 percent of Burma’s expected population is “Missing,” is disregarded.

This figure cannot be explained away by the flawed methodology of the census, which, albeit inadvertently, exacerbated the intimidation, persecution and dehumanisation by the Rohingya. It is the result itself which needs to be examined. The census may in fact have come up with an inconvenient Truth: millions of people may be missing in Myanmar who were expected to be alive based on the perfectly modest realistic estimates of the 1983 census which predicted an annual 2 percent growth rate.

Exculpatory explanations for some of the missing millions can, admittedly, be made. Many people were simply not counted, including the Rohingya and some Kachin; so called economic migrants, in reality often refugees escaping persecution, were, by their very nature, out of the country; others were inaccessible; AIDS and drug addiction have probably substantially contributed to many premature deaths; one hundred and thirty thousand perished during Cyclone Nargis and its aftermath; cultural practices, such as celibacy and monasticism, may have lowered birthrates; the1983 census may itself have been flawed. Finally, the global media’s failure to expose decades long destruction may have contributed to the disregard of the result: people slowly dying over decades do not fit the media’s 24 news cycle, especially when most victims have disappeared in remote jungle mountainous terrain far from journalists and diplomats. These factors, amongst others, may help explain away some of the missing millions and the disregard of the result: they do not, however, fully account for millions of missing people.

The elephant in the room is government policy. Widespread, systematic human rights violations, i.e. crimes against humanity, have been identified and condemned by successive UN Special Rapporteurs and General Assembly Resolutions since 1992. The country was specifically placed on the UN Genocide Watch list back in 2005 and, I understand, still remains so. The outgoing UN Special Rapporteur, Tomas Ojea-Quintana, affirmed “Elements of genocide” apply as recently as June 2014. Genocide, we should remind ourselves, involves the physical “Destruction of ethnic, racial, religious or national groups in whole or,” significantly, “In part.” If even a small fraction of these millions of missing people have disappeared due to government policies, the Genocide Convention would apply.

The decades long systematic violations targeting mostly ethnic civilians with destruction need to be seen in their historical context. UN condemnations have been explicit and specific. Special Rapporteur, Rajsoomer Lallah QC in 1998, condemned widespread, systematic violations, including “The killing of women and children,” as:

“The result of policy taken at the highest level entailing legal and political responsibility.” (Situation of Human Rights Myanmar, para. 59, Report to the UN Economic and Social Council, July, 1998.)

Systematic and widespread violations, inflicted for decades have inevitably caused the deaths of many people; the two aforementioned children died as a consequence of the Burma army’s military attack.

We need to reflect on nine million missing people: the number is about the same as the population of Sweden. It is about one and a half times the number of Jews who perished in the Holocaust. It is nearly twice the number who died as a result of Stalin’s inflicted famine in the Ukraine. In Burma nearly one in five people is not alive who was expected to be alive based upon a modest estimate of the two per cent population growth rate. Despite its significance, the news does not chime with the media’s brave new world: “Burma Unbound”, “Burma booming”, the “Mandela-like transition.” The figure is met instead with silence.

A connection between systematic, widespread human rights violations and possible missing millions exists, however. Martin Smith, generally regarded as a leading authority on Burma’s ethnic peoples, identified a dramatic “Slump in birth rates” back in 1990, opining:

“The birth rates of most minority races (and not just the Mons and the Karens) have inexplicably slumped.” (“Burma, Insurgency and the Politics of Ethnicity,” page 38, Zed Books, 1991)

We should note his use of the word “Slump,” i.e. a sudden and dramatic fall.

This “slump” in birth rates, moreover, has been accompanied by some outright “Collapses in population” as identified by Amnesty International:

“In some areas complete collapse in ethnic populations has occurred, such as in Kunhing Township in Shan State where a 70 percent drop in population was recorded.” (“Atrocities in Shan State”, Amnesty International, 1998.)

Smith estimated 10,000 dying a year for four decades back in 1990 which would make 400,000. Extrapolated forward to 2014 the figure would approach 550,000, a figure which would be unlikely to include the hundreds of thousands who have died indirectly from denial of shelter, food and medicines, nor would it include the hundreds of thousands of Rohingya forced to flee, and often die, in the Indian Ocean and elsewhere. The Transnational Institute cited a figure of 600,000 casualties in 2005.

“The true death toll,” Smith wrote, quoting former SLORC Chairman General Saw Maung vack in the 1980′s, “Would reach as high as millions”. (“Burma”, Zed Books, 1990 ed. p.101)

Specific evidence of widespread destruction has been documented, often graphically, in Karen, Karenni, Chin, Kachin, Shan, Mon, Delta, Karen, Rohingya areas over the decades. Mass forced location of the Bamar population, we should remember, was also inflicted in lowland Burma during the 1990′s.

These “slumps in birth rates”, and local “collapses in population,” contrast with earlier “Prolific high birth rates of ethnic peoples” identified in the unique, in depth, detailed bench mark study carried out just before Burma’s civil war began by W.D. Hackett. He explains

“The minorities . . . are more prolific than the Burman population and increasing at a very rapid rate.” (The Pao People of Shan State, p. 3, W.D. Hackett, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cornell, 1953.)

Although Smith does state the slump in birth rates as being “Inexplicable,” observation of what has been inflicted in conflict areas; analyses of infant and maternal mortality rates documented by, amongst others, the Mae Tao Clinic; detailed mapping of widespread, systematic destruction in eastern, western, northern regions and the Delta, including satellite imagery, and numerous reports, demonstrate the destruction must have inevitably resulted in the deaths of large numbers of people.

Moreover, these “collapses in population” and “slumps in birth rates” is certain to be greatest in so called ethnic areas. If the full regional breakdown of the results of the 2014 census is ever revealed, it will probably confirm this. Latest reports, however, indicae this information is not being released indicative of a cover up.

We need to ask, however, what government strategies have contributed to the slump in birth rates and much lower than expected population figure. The central strategy outlined by Smith is known as the Four Cuts strategy which is explicitly intended to destroy the civilian base of resistance. Ethnic civilians are thus the target.

The first circle: killing

Successive military juntas, and the current hybrid civilian/military successor, have been killing and causing deaths for decades.

In January 2013 I was in Kachin State. A young boy, sitting on a wall, described to me how soldiers had come to his mother’s kitchen and shot her while he looked on from the edge of a sugar cane field. An old man sobbed hysterically next to him: he had just described his daughter bayoneted to death through the left breast. Nearby two small boys had dug themselves into a mud wall to hide from fighter bombers. It collapsed and suffocated them to death. These small boys, the old man’s daughter and the boy’s mother are part of Myanmar’s missing millions. In this case they died as a result of a systematic onslaught- not “Ethnic conflict”- by the Burma army. This attack occurred just after President Thein Sein had formally announced a ceasefire on prime time television, supported by a vote of the whole lower house, and dutifully echoed by the global media and Ban Ki Moon.

Along “The ceasefire line” human wave attacks were carried out on Kachin positions involving tens of thousands of troops, helicopter gun ships and fighter bombers. Jane’s Intelligence reportedly estimated five thousand Burmese troops and one thousand Kachin were killed. (That’s double the number estimated killed in the 1988 student uprising.) These deaths predictably remain disregarded, downplayed, understated or denied. They don’t fit the narrative of democratic transition, or the assumptions of top down, urban, Burman centred journalists, politicians and diplomats whose views have been co-opted by the rhetoric of “Transition”. (Needless to say young Burmese conscripts, forced to fight and die are also victims and just as deserving of our compassion, as ethnic victims.)

Let’s rewind to the autumn of 2000 when I was in the mountainous areas of Karen State. Four women were brought into our encampment who had just been forced to watch their husbands being beheaded in front of them. Nearby in a burning village two toddlers had been thrown into the flames. Their dying screams were heard in the surrounding hills for minutes. An old lady, unable to move, burnt to death silently. In a nearby village a Baptist pastor was beaten for three days, his Bible shredded and then beheaded. I could go on.

These people were murdered by the Burmese army. This has been going on for decades, and is still going on. These dead are part of the missing nine million.

These killings include not just individuals, but massacres such as in the Delta in September 2001 and Dooplaya district. Karen State in May 2002 (“Dying Alive,” Images Asia, 2005)

The second circle : cyclone Nargis 

About 130,000 people, more than the victims of the Hiroshima atomic bomb, died in the Delta as a result of Cyclone Nargis. Many of these deaths resulted from the Junta’s criminal negligence failing to warn the population and impeding relief efforts. We can infer that the population of the Delta would now be higher if the government had carried out its responsibilities effectively.

The third circle: sexual violence

If systematic killing is the first circle, denial of aid the second circle, widespread, systematic rape and sexual violence represents the third. The UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights, Rajsoomer Lallah QC, condemned it as being a “Regular, routine feature” and “The result of policy” as far back as 1998. It has been condemned in most UN reports. This form of targeted violence of women undermines birth rates because, amongst other things, it often destroys women’s desire and ability to marry and have children.

The fourth circle : indirect destruction 

This encompasses those subjected to slow, indirect violence, defined in the Rome Statute as: “The deliberate deprivation of resources indispensable for survival, such as food, medical services, or systematic expulsion from homes.”(Rome Statute, Genocide, Article 6c).

Burning people out of their homes, like the 3,600 villages documented by the Thai Burma Border Consortium in eastern Burma, or what has been inflicted in Rohingya and Kachin areas recently, leads, indirectly, to death because people lack shelter or basic services. I remember the gloves of a back pack medic being destroyed in order, presumably, so that babies could not be born hygienically and die as result. I recall a report of a man shot through the leg for carrying antibiotics in 2005.The denial and destruction of medical services and supplies, deprivation of clean water and food, often inevitably results in death. (The Rohingya are particularly victimised by this slow motion, low intensity form of genocide.) Very many people have died prematurely and unnecessarily over the decades as a result of these deliberately inflicted conditions. Maternal and infant mortality rates in particular, documented by the Mae Tao Clinic and others, resulting from these conditions have been some of the highest in the world. We should note that two hundred and fifty thousand people, a quarter of a million, have been terrorised out of their homes since “the democratic transition” began and “Peace” broke out.

The fifth circle : persecution

In the fifth circle there are the millions who over the decades have been forced to flee persecution, i.e. the denial of their fundamental rights Many of those in the refugee camps, or those fleeing into the Indian Ocean, or into China, India, Malaysia etc., are not economic migrants, but victims of systematic Persecution. In the case of the Rohingya, as the former Special UN Rapporteur asserted, the conditions they are escaping include “Elements of genocide.”

The sixth circle : enforced migration

In the sixth circle we do admittedly find very many economic migrants working in foreign countries. Many of these have, however, not really made free choices but have had to escape the extreme poverty resulting from government policies which have failed to provide people with, amongst other things, adequate medical and educational services.

The seventh circle : general poverty

Here are the great majority of the Burmese people who are mired in the poverty resulting from governmental negligence. Such conditions can lead people to put off, or not marry, or have smaller families than they otherwise would have had, which leads, in turn, to a probable reduction in birth rates.

In conclusion, decades long State inflicted violence and deliberate deprivation of the necessities for life must have resulted in at least hundreds of thousands, and if former SLORC Chairman General Saw Maung was right “Millions”, of premature deaths. The numerical qualifying criteria of what comprises the attempted destruction of a part of a people to justify a charge of genocide is: “substantial”.

Those two young children should not have died, nor should hundreds of thousands, and possibly millions, be allowed to disappear into a vortex of complicit silence. A Truth Commission should be set up to find out what has really happened. Perpetrators should be held to account.

Guy Horton has worked on Burma and its border areas since 1998. His 2005 report, “Dying Alive” and supporting video footage, received worldwide coverage and contributed to the submission of Burma to the UN Security Council in January 2007. As a result of the report, the UN Committee on the Prevention of Genocide carried out an investigation and placed Burma/Myanmar on the Genocide Watch list.

Since 2005 Guy Horton has focussed on establishing a coalition of governments, funders, institutions and leading international lawyers with the aim of getting the violations investigated and analysed so that impunity can be addressed. He is currently a researcher at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

He was short-listed for the post of UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Myanmar 2014. He can be contacted at: ghrtn7@gmail.com

By Binny Mary Paul

Democratic Voice of Burma

October 30, 2014

As Burma prepares to welcome US President Barack Obama to Naypyidaw in November, human rights groups and activists have been urging Obama to press Burma’s government to improve the country’s socio-political environment.

US-based activist organization United to End Genocide (UEG), for example, is making extensive efforts to lobby the president to address the plight of the Rohingyas during his visit to Burma.

As part of its lobbying efforts, UEG has launched a campaign called #justsaytheirname, which is designed to encourage President Obama to address the Rohingya issue and thereby reaffirm their right to self-determination and self-identification.

The NGOs campaign is inspired by UN Special Rapporteur Yanghee Lee’s recent decision to use the word “Rohingya” in her report on Burma’s human rights situation—defying pressure from the Burmese government, which prefers to use the term “Bengalis.”

Ms. Lee presented her report on Burma’s human rights situation in a speech to the UN General Assembly on 28 October. During the speech, she said: “I am acutely aware of the sensitivity around the use of the term ‘Rohingya’ that is not recognised by the [Burmese] government.”

Lee also pointed out that being forced to identify as “Bengali” was a violation of their basic rights: “I am concerned about the Rohingyas being required to identify themselves as ‘Bengali’ and if they do not they are excluded from the citizenship verification process that is being rolled out in Arakan state,” she said.

EUG President Tom Andrews said, “As President Obama prepares to make his second trip to Burma in November, he should follow the Special Rapporteur’s lead, speak out against the systematic abuse of the Rohingya and just say their name when he does so.”

Mr. Andrews then added, “It is more than just a name. It is 1.3 million people being persecuted and a culture in danger of being erased in Burma.”

Among the many rights denied to Rohingyas in Burma is the right to self-identification and self-determination, both of which are fundamental human rights enshrined in international law.

Ever since March 2014, when the Burmese government back-tracked on an earlier policy andstruck the term “Rohingya” out of census list—insisting that the group be referred to as “Bengali” instead—the political conundrum surrounding this issue has escalated.

Subsequently, Presidential Spokesperson Ye Htut said, “It will be acceptable if they write ‘Bengali’—we won’t accept them as ‘Rohingya’.”

Ms. Lee also pointed out that it was the responsibility of the Burmese government to preserve the Rohingya community’s rights. “I note that the right of minorities to self identify is related to the obligation of the state to ensure non-discrimination against individuals and groups,” she said.

UEG is also accusing foreign governments of succumbing to pressure from Naypyidaw on the Rohingya issue, noting that many countries have avoided using the term “Rohingya” in order to maintain favorable diplomatic ties with Thein Sein’s government.

UEG’s Tom Andrews said, “Incredibly, governments of the world are bending to pressure by the Thein Sein government of Burma to no longer use the term ‘Rohingya’ when referring to the Rohingya ethnic minority.”

“Even Secretary of State John Kerry obliged the government by not mentioning the Rohingya by their name when he last visited Burma,” he said.

By Democratic Voice of Burma

September 17, 2014

Only eight percent of displaced Muslim children in western Burma’s Arakan State have access to secondary education, according to a senior education coordinator.

While the figure is up slightly from seven percent earlier this year, education provided to internally displaced persons (IDPs) remains minimal and informal.

“At the moment, the majority of children are receiving just two hours of emergency education a day, which is [Burmese] language and mathematics. The teachers are not certified or recognised,” said Arlo Kitchingman, who works for Save the Children and serves as Burma’s “education cluster coordinator”.

As such, he oversees international organisations that implement emergency education programmes in Arakan and other conflict-affected areas.

A Strategic Response Plan produced by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) in 2013 estimated that 17,500 out of 23,500 primary-aged Muslim IDPs could regularly access education, but the new figures indicate that once they reach the 11-17 age bracket those numbers tend to nosedive.

In contrast, access for non-Muslim children in the same age bracket is “much higher”, but remains “quite low” in comparison to other parts of Burma.The level of education reaching the camps is extremely basic, said Kitchingman, with few teachers who volunteer at temporary learning places set up inside the camps.

Another shadow looming over the state’s education providers is whether the curriculum will be recognised by government schools in the event that IDPs can leave the camps and return home.

“We’re still not sure whether — if the situation changed — whether the learning taking place, which is actually minimal… would be recognised in government schools,” said Kitchingman.

Emergency education providers plan to expand the current curriculum to include subjects that mirror the government’s and to boost the quality of education.

By Alex Bookbinder

Democratic Voice of Burma

September 14, 2014

Restoring citizenship rights for more than 800,000 stateless people in Arakan State is the “key issue” the United Nations wants resolved, the UN’s Assistant Secretary-General Haoliang Xu told DVB in an interview on Friday.

“In my view, the question is, what’s the best way to ensure that people in IDP camps – and [the] majority of the Muslim population outside the camps – have secure citizenship?” Xu said. “At the end of the day, this is what will move the situation forward, and everybody can focus on development. Developing a better life, developing a better country. This, to us, is key.”

Most Rohingya were stripped of their citizenship under Burma’s 1982 Citizenship Law, despite the fact that many claim roots in Burma that date back generations. Roughly 140,000 live in camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) around the state, and most – both inside and outside the camps – are subject to significant restrictions on their freedom of movement.

Xu, who is also the assistant administrator for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and its director for the Asia-Pacific region, concluded a week-long visit to Burma on Friday. Along with John Ging, the director of the Coordination and Response Division of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA), Xu met with senior officials in Naypyidaw and spent two days in Arakan, where the pair met with state government officials and local leaders.

In late June, the government launched a pilot “citizenship verification” project in Myebon Township, part of its “Rakhine [Arakan] Action Plan” – currently a work in progress – which is intended to address issues surrounding refugee resettlement, development and humanitarian assistance.

But those seeking citizenship have been told that they must declare themselves “Bengalis” in lieu of “Rohingya”, denying them the right to self-identification. In a July speech, the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights in Burma, Yanghee Lee, deemed this to be a violation of international human rights law and “not in line with international standards”.

But Xu cautioned against focusing on terminology while the pressing issues of statelessness, humanitarian access and development go unaddressed. He claimed that doing so runs the risk of fuelling tensions. “The [term] ‘Rohingya’ has been used in UN documents … there is even a UN General Assembly resolution that uses this terminology,” Xu said. “But we have to recognise the impact the terminology can have, and not necessarily as a facilitator, but as probably an impediment to focus on the real issue that is citizenship.

“We want to focus on the issue of … a solution. How can people get the rights [they] need. That’s really our focus.”

Arakan is the second-poorest state in Burma, and the development needs of both Buddhist and Muslim communities are profound. In recent years, UN agencies and international NGOs have come under intense criticism for a perceived bias towards Muslim communities in the state. In late February, relief agency Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) was forced to suspend its operations, which provided life-saving front-line care to hundreds of thousands. This week, MSF signed a new memorandum of understanding with the government, but has not as yet resumed normal operations.

“The … international community has been geared towards supporting the Muslim groups, and I think that, over the last 20 years, the majority of support has been geared towards [providing for] their basic needs,” Xu said. “That helps to create emotions among the Rakhine community that the international community is biased. This is one issue that needs to be addressed; you need to address the emotions when you try to address such a difficult humanitarian situation.”

Xu believes that development plays a crucial role in bridging the divide between the two sides, and that many of their grievances are the same.

“This point came out very loud and clear in discussions throughout our trip. [Both sides] know that humanitarian action is not a long-term solution … to reduce the perceived inequality between the two communities,” Xu said. “The state government supports this view: they would like us to work on humanitarian issues, but also really scale up our development efforts.”

By Democratic Voice of Burma

September 10, 2014

As the 27th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council convened this week, a legal advisory group has warned that Burma’s police force still uses torture during interrogations.

The Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental organisation that holds general consultative status with the UN, submitted twelve notices to the council on Monday, each pertaining to endemic abuses in various parts of Asia.

The group said that they have new documentation of police torture in Burma, and that the country’s law enforcement mechanisms are not adequate to solve the problem in a quick enough manner. Protection and support for detainees are also critically weak.

“The practice of police torture in Myanmar [Burma] remains unchanged despite the efforts and work of countless individuals across the globe,” read the statement, which went on to detail six cases documented since January 2013. The group said that there are “far more incidents” and that “the practice of torture by law enforcement agencies has been standard operating procedure through the interrogation process”.

One case detailed in the report was of a rickshaw driver arrested in July 2014 on charges of stealing fuel. The man was reportedly tortured in custody as police tried to obtain a confession. Upon his release, he was admitted to hospital and died from his injuries on 7 July. The ALRC said that the man’s family was threatened by authorities not to contradict official accounts of the ordeal.

“The police often know that the victims of torture are innocent,” the report continued. “The police may be acting to protect actual offenders, may not know who the actual offenders are, or do not have the means or inclination to find them within the short time available to solve cases in order to satisfy requirements for administrative efficiency dictated by their superiors.”

While many officials in Burma still adamantly deny the use of torture during interrogations, some have conceded that it does sometimes occur. Brig-Gen Win Khaung, Burma’s national police chief, told DVB that “there are still some officers who want to get the facts fast, or who act compulsively. We cannot say that such offenses are nonexistent.”

The ALRC recommended that the UN work with the Burmese government to implement counseling, case documentation and awareness programmes for relevant institutions like the police force and the judiciary.

Judicial weaknesses are of particular concern, according to Phil Robertson, Asia’s deputy director for Human Rights Watch (HRW).

“The Burmese judiciary is the Achilles heel of the reform movement because basic issues in enforcing rule of law fall to them – and frankly, the judges are nowhere close to ready to take up that challenge,” Robertson told DVB on Tuesday.

“Rather than standing up to stop abuses and enforce accountability, the judges shrink away, either because they are corrupt, or they are afraid to make a confrontational ruling, or more likely, a bit of both,” he added.

Burma is not a signatory to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, though the Burmese government did show some intention to ratify the agreement during planning discussions earlier this year. Despite that positive signal, the ALRC said that “in practice, there is no change.”

By Alex Bookbinder

Democratic Voice of Burma

September 9, 2014

A senior United Nations delegation departed for the Arakan State capital of Sittwe on Monday to “take stock of the ongoing humanitarian and development situation in Rakhine [Arakan] State and review priorities for the UN system,” according to a statement.

Assistant Secretary-General Haoliang Xu, who is also the assistant administrator for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and its regional director for Asia and the Pacific, is accompanied by John Ging, the director of the Coordination and Response Division of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA).

The visit is part of a weeklong visit to the country, Xu’s first in his official capacity. Xu and Ging will subsequently meet with Burma’s vice president, Dr. Sai Mauk Kham, and other senior ministers in Naypyidaw later this week. The pair will depart Burma on Friday.

The visit will focus on the implementation of the UN’s development and humanitarian assistance programmes in the restive state, which has witnessed a surge of communal violence since 2012. In recent months, Arakanese Buddhist nationalists have voiced significant opposition to the activities of UN agencies and international NGOs in the state, which they claim are biased towards Muslims.

“The UN is looking at Rakhine in a more holistic manner,” said Pierre Peron, UNOCHA’s public information officer in Burma. “It’s one of the poorest states in the country.”

In late July, the regional government invited NGOs and UN agencies to help implement an “Action Plan for Peace, Stability and Development in Rakhine State.” Formulated with input from NGOs, UN agencies, civil society actors and foreign diplomats, it is expected to address issues surrounding humanitarian aid, the resettlement of internally displaced persons (IDPs), and the government’s development priorities, but its contents have not been made publicly available.

A controversial cornerstone of the government’s new strategy in Arakan is a “citizenship verification” programme launched in June, intended to give stateless individuals – primarily Rohingya Muslims – the chance to acquire citizenship. But the programme compels individuals who identify as Rohingya to register as “Bengalis,” nomenclature that implies “alien” origins in neighbouring Bangladesh. It is a designation rejected by the vast majority of Rohingya, whose presence in the restive region dates back generations.

Many Rohingya were stripped of their citizenship under Burma’s restrictive 1982 Citizenship Law, which allows individuals to become “naturalised citizens” if they can prove their ancestors resided in Burma prior to independence in 1948. The burden of proof for “full” citizenship is higher, with a cutoff date of 1823, the beginning of British colonial rule in Arakan. For most Rohingya, their family histories are difficult to document, owing to a lack of a paper trail befitting the government’s exacting requirements.

Last Thursday, a delegation led by Sai Mauk Kham, which included government ministers, INGO officials, and the ambassadors of Turkey and Brunei, visited two IDP camps near Sittwe. He was quoted in state media as saying that IDPs should be relocated to areas close to where they were displaced from, and that the “initial step” for resettlement would be “when the two communities can accept the same conditions for stability and the citizenship scrutiny measures being taken by the government.”

But the notion that citizenship should be contingent on the rejection of Rohingya identity earned the government’s policies a stern rebuke from the newly-appointed UN special rapporteur on human rights, Yanghee Lee. In July, she asserted that, under the principles of international law, minorities have the right “to self-identify on the basis of their national, ethnic, religious and linguistic characteristics.”

She criticised the 1982 Citizenship Law, claiming that it should not “be an exception” immune from amendment during Burma’s current process of legislative reform, despite the substantial level of domestic support the law enjoys.

By Shwe Aung

Democratic Voice of Burma

September 8, 2014

Several political parties in Burma have reacted with frustration to the election commission’s decision to cancel by-elections this year, while others — notably the National League for Democracy (NLD) — shrugged off the polls as unnecessary and “a burden”.

Arakan League for Democracy (ALD) Chairman Aye Thar Aung slammed the Union Election Commission (UEC), saying it was “sowing confusion” among political parties by axing the by-elections, which were slated for November or December.

“First, they say they will hold by-elections, then they cancel them,” he told DVB on Sunday. “It seems to me that they are testing the political parties. It sows confusion, because we have already started planning and choosing candidates to contest the seats.”

The ALD chairman’s perspective was echoed by Ye Htun, a Shan Nationalities Democratic Party MP representing Thibaw Township, who said that although he accepted the decision to cancel the by-election, he believed the UEC had acted in an indecisive manner.

“I always thought they shouldn’t hold polls so close to the 2015 general election. We had a by-election in 2012, so we don’t need another so soon,” he said. “However, since they announced [in March] it would take place, they should stand by their decision. The Commission should not be so indecisive.”

Thirty-five seats remain vacant across both houses of parliament, as well as state and divisional assemblies. Most were vacated as MPs assumed alternate roles within the government; others because of deaths or resignations.

Speaking at Myanmar Peace Centre in Rangoon on Sunday, UEC Chairman Tin Aye announced that holding a by-election to contest just 35 seats was unnecessary for two reasons: first, with general elections slated for next year, it would be asking parties to finance and compete across the country in back-to-back elections, something many were unable to do. Second, he said, even if one party swept all or a majority of the seats in the by-election, it would not affect the overall make-up of parliament.

The NLD won 43 of 46 seats at the previous by-elections in April 2012 – elections which saw party leader Aung San Suu Kyi elected to parliament for the first time. However, its reaction to the cancellation of polling this time round was rather muted.

Nyan Win, an NLD central executive committee member who attended Sunday’s meeting, said that his party accepted the UEC’s decision.

“When the UEC originally announced the timeframe for by-elections, it did not take these [campaign] issues into account,” he told DVB. “Now the matter is pressing. Political parties believe the gap between elections is too close and the campaign rules are inconvenient. By cancelling, we feel there is less of a burden on us.”

Federal Union Party Vice-chairman Saw Than Myint said that everything the government does, including the cancellation of these by-elections, is based on the decision of the ruling party.

“I would say frankly that it all depends on what the ruling [Union Solidarity and Development Party] wants. If by-elections are in its interest, it will pressure the commission to hold them,” he said. “It’s all political opportunism. These are the tricks of the ruling party. They control everything.”

DVB spoke to several non-political players about the UEC announcement.

Maw Linn, the editor of Pyithu Khit Journal, said the reasons for cancelling the by-elections were as yet unclear.

“I can’t say clearly why the UEC did this,” he said. “First, they said no by-elections, then they scheduled them for the end of this year. Now they have cancelled them. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has said in parliament that by-elections should be held, and at that time, the UEC was working towards that goal.

“Now they have cancelled the by-election. I think this shows they are not reflecting seriously enough on what is happening in the country. It seems they are trying to solve problems one by one. It’s difficult to say what really lies behind the decision-making.”

Ko Mya Aye, a member of the 88 Peace and Open Society civil society group, offered a disheartened response.

“I simply don’t know what to say. First, they [UEC] announce they will do something, then they don’t. I don’t know what they are doing,” he said. “I think they don’t have a clear policy on how to navigate the country in a straight direction. It is very difficult to see what they are trying to do.”

In its statement on Sunday, the UEC said it had consulted with “concerned individuals and organisations” before making its decision to cancel the by-elections.

By Feliz Solomon

Democratic Voice of Burma

September 7, 2014

The tragic story of Burma’s boatpeople is now known the world over; countless Rohingya Muslims pay brokers to transport them by boat to neighbouring countries, in a desperate attempt to escape poverty and violence. Many die on harsh seas, others fall into the hands of human traffickers. The United Nations estimates that tens of thousands of people in the region — many of them stateless Rohingya Muslims — risked their lives to flee by boat since just the start of this year.

But this story goes back much, much further. Before Burma’s reforms began and steered the world’s attention to the once-isolated Southeast Asian nation, and before a rash of riots beginning in June 2012 caused a sudden, mass exodus of Rohingyas, people were already fleeing and someone was paying attention.

Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian (known by her nickname, Oi) run a small, online news website based in Phuket, Thailand. As editor and reporter, respectively, they are currently the entire staff of Phuketwan. Morison and Chutima were among the first journalists to report on Rohingya asylum seekers crossing the Andaman Sea en route to Malaysia. They became known as a consistent and trustworthy source of information on the obscure topic, and hence were often contracted by international media to assist with reporting.

Their years of reporting and assisting other journalists were relatively unhindered until July 2013, when they published an article quoting excerpts from a Reuters investigative report about the smuggling of Rohingyas. The Royal Thai Navy brought defamation charges against the pair, who now face up to seven years in jail. Their trial will begin in March 2015, and Morison, an Australian, is bound to remain in-country on a criminal visa until a verdict is reached. His visa status could cause the publication to shut down.

Reuters, a London-based news agency, is not facing charges over the disputed content and has been silent about the case against Phuketwan. To make matters more awkward, news soon emerged that Chutima was hired by Reuters to facilitate parts of their investigation, which wasrecently awarded one of journalism’s highest honours: a Pulitzer Prize.

Some speculate that the pair is being singled out and punished for their work, which ultimately helped to bring this horrendous story of abuse and neglect into the global conscience. DVB spoke with Morison and Chutima about their work, their charges, and the responsibilities of a free and professional press.

Q: Before Reuters reached out to you, Phuketwan was already well known for breaking the story of Thailand’s ‘push back’ policy, a short-lived directive to send asylum seekers back to sea with no assistance. How did this story come about?

CS: We were doing an interview with a commander in 2008. We asked if there were any concerns about security in the Andaman Sea, and he mentioned the Rohingya. After that, we decided to come back. I tried to ask for permission from the Thai navy to get on the patrol boats, because I wanted to know more about the Rohingya. But they wouldn’t give me permission.

Some months later, the Navy, after I pushed them very hard, they sent me a picture. They said, ‘Ok, here’s a picture of the Rohingyas that we arrested yesterday at Surin Island.’ It was a picture of them laid out on the beach. And I thought, ‘Jeez, this is a very good story!’

I went to my university, one of my friends — he is an officer — he also knew about the Rohingya. He’s the one I started the investigation with. He said he saw that they have a new policy to deal with the Rohingya by the Internal Security Operations Command [ISOC, a unit of the Thai military]. So any police station that had any Rohingyas in their custody had to transfer them all to the ISOC in Ranong province. So we just went to Ranong and we scanned every area. This side, that side, the top of that mountain, whatever.

Several days later, we found a kitty boat, a Rohingya boat, in a village. The people there told us, ‘This is from the Rohingya’, so we checked it out. We found that the boat had stopped at Red Sand Island.

Q: Before that time, were you aware that there was a problem of Rohingya smuggling?

CS: No, no, we weren’t aware of smuggling, but I had read some information on the Internet about violence in Burma, and that they [Rohingyas] weren’t citizens.

At the time, we wanted to send a message back to their families because nobody was covering this, and many people were drowning on these boats. You know, the high sea, the monsoon, many people ended up dead.

Q: So those that do make it to Thailand, what happens to them?

AM: There were about 2,000 Rohingyas in detention here for quite some time. After the discovery of women and children on the boats [in January 2013], Thailand changed its policy and, for a time, took Rohingya into detention centres. About six months later they found that they couldn’t find a solution. They had to somehow get rid of these people quietly, without too much attention.

That’s when they started the practice of ‘soft deportation’.

All of Thailand’s intentions to do right by those people just fell by the wayside; they couldn’t find a third country, in the end they didn’t know what to do with them so they developed the policy of soft deportation, and they all just disappeared.

Oi and I spent a night up in Ranong because we had been told by somebody that a convoy [of detained Rohingyas about to be deported via land crossing] was coming. We were waiting for these buses to turn up, I think there were three buses, and sure enough it was Rohingya who had been captured down south and trucked up to the Ranong immigration detention centre.

We were there when the buses arrived in the middle of the night, around 2am. They had to be fingerprinted and go through all the normal checks, and treated as Burmese would be who are being deported. But with the Rohingya it’s a little bit different, they don’t actually go back to Burma, they drop them off on the beach.

Q: Is there no documentation of these deportations?

AM: There would be, in Ranong. There would be a record that they’d all been sent back to Burma, but they’re just left on a beach.

A ‘soft deportation’, I would say, is dropping people off at a beach in Burma and either letting human traffickers pick them up or leaving them to their own devices, rather than handing them back to officials.

Q: Subsequent investigations have concluded that some asylum seekers are intercepted by human traffickers, who keep them captive in jungle camps and demand ransom for their passage to Malaysia. Have you been to any of these camps?

AM: Oi has. She’s raided some of the camps, but I think they seldom find any people in them because the word gets around and the locations are shifted. What we’ve heard lately is that the camps are now becoming less accessible to everybody and guarded by more people. They have the guards further out so no one can get in. It’s more difficult these days for the authorities to get at them, as well.

Q: You’ve clearly been very active on these issues. Phuketwan reported consistently on the arrival of the boats in January 2013, which you mentioned a moment ago. Has the lawsuit affected your ability to carry out your work?

CS: It has burned a lot of energy; it takes up a lot of our time.

But also, the military is involved in every issue in Thailand. It [the lawsuit] makes things difficult, because I still have to report what happens, what’s going on. I can’t avoid them, because they are in charge of the country. There are some officers that just intimidate us. It’s not that all of them are bad, but just some.

Q: In April, a Reuters spokesperson told DVB that your role in the agency’s investigation was ‘very limited’. How, exactly, were you involved in the Reuters investigation?

CS: They emailed Alan because they were looking for someone who was working on the Rohingya issue. I was working for them as a fixer, and they used all my material, all my contacts. I accompanied them for parts of the investigation.

Q: What do you think about how Reuters has reacted to your case?

CS: They ignored me [laughs]. I’m very disappointed. Very disappointed. They should stand for the principle of support for the press and for free media in Thailand.

AM: The way Khun Oi’s role as fixer was dismissed by Reuters was a disgrace, unbecoming behaviour from Pulitzer Prize-winners. Oi worked with Jason [Szep] twice, I believe. All the other international teams she has worked with haven’t been so reluctant to recognise that Khun Oi’s contacts on the Rohingya saga in Thailand, built up over the years, allowed them to quickly get to the people involved.

Reuters have let the little guys take the rap. It’s their 41 words, not ours. But they are nowhere to be seen. We have enormous amounts of support from every rights group and media body with even the vaguest interest in the case, except for Reuters.

By Colin Hinshelwood

Democratic Voice of Burma

September 6, 2014

The Burmese Muslim Association (BMA) has vehemently condemned a statement by Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri in which he announced an intention to launch an active cell in the Indian subcontinent and Burma.

“Burmese Muslim Association vehemently condemns the statement of the Al-Qaeda leader who threatened Burma in his latest video,” the group said in a statement on 5 September. “The marginalised minority Muslims in Burma will never accept any help from a terrorist organisation, which is in principle a disgrace and morally repugnant.”

The BMA also lashed out at the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, saying its “inhumane actions are totally contrary to Islamic beliefs and teachings.”

In a 55-minute video on Wednesday, Egyptian cleric Zawahiri announced Al-Qaeda’s intention of launching of a new cell called “Qaedat al-Jihad”, which would be active in Burma and the Indian subcontinent with the aim of expanding jihad to the region.

Zawahiri tops the most wanted terrorist list in the US, with a US$25 million bounty for his apprehension.

The BMA immediately disassociated themselves from Zawahiri’s comments and said they rejected terrorism.

“Muslims are fully integrated into the fabric of Burmese society and belong and support the Burmese nation,” BMA said. “The Burmese Muslims will not tolerate any threat to their motherland. The Muslims in Burma have proved their loyalty to the country throughout the history of Burma with exceptional bravery and with tremendous courage.”

Calling for peaceful coexistence and human rights in Burma, the London-based Muslim organisation also noted its concern at the “silence” of religious organisations and political parties in Burma while Muslims in the country face “ethnic cleansing”.

It called on the Burmese government to stop supporting extremist Buddhist organisations that are promoting anti-Muslim hatred.

Meanwhile, Burmese newspaper Daily Eleven cited an anonymous official at the President’s Office in Naypyidaw stating that Burma, or Myanmar, is cooperating with other governments in the region and around the globe to prevent terrorist attacks by al-Qaeda through an early warning system and the sharing of information on the group’s activities.