Organizations Around the World Statements on Boycott 2010 Election in Burma

8/14/2019 Organizations Around the World Statements on Boycott 2010 Election in Burma

1/155

2008 Constitution must be revised until it is Done!

25 December 2009

Burma Democratic Concern (BDC) today welcomes the United Nations

General Assembly resolution calling on the military junta to embark on a

transparent and inclusive review of the 2008 Constitution.

We are very glad to learn that the international community recognisethe flaws of the juntas 2008 Constitution and its sham adopting

process, said Myo Thein, the Director at the Burma Democratic Concern

(BDC).

The 2008 Constitution must be revised by cancelling:

the impunity provisions, and the other provisions which solidify the rule of the military


2/155

the other provisions which solidify the rule of the military

- ()

() ()

( )

(working committee)


3/155

Joint Statement on 2010 Election Boycott

1. We, the undersigned alliances of the movement for democracy and rights of ethnic

nationalities, believe that the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC)s undemocratic plan

of 2010 elections have absolutely no potential to resolve the current political, social and

economic crises in Burma, unless necessary benchmarks towards national reconciliation are met.

2. It is clear that with this new election, the SPDC aims to abolish the results of the 1990 election

when the democratic opposition won in a landslide and to entrench the military power legally.

3. These aims are backed by the 2008 Constitution, undemocratically drafted and forcibly

ratified against the will of the people of Burma, including ethnic nationalities. Not only does the

constitution lack any guarantee of basic rights for the ethnic nationalities in our union, such as

equality and self-determination, it was also drafted to systematically ensure impunity for the

human rights crimes committed by the military against Burmas people, particularly ethniccommunities.


4/155

1. National Council of the Union of Burma- National Democratic Front

- Democratic Alliance of Burma

- National League for Democracy (Librated Area)

- Members of Parliament Union

2. Nationalities Youth Forum

3. Students and Youth Congress of Burma

4. Women's League of Burma

5. Forum for Democracy in Burma

Date October, 10th 2009

Contact Persons:

1. Myint Thein (NCUB) 668996055472. Dr. Naing Aung (FDB) 668188372303. Lway Aye Nang (WLB) 66801159598


5/155

-/()/

()

()


6/155

()

()

()


7/155

()([email protected])


8/155

We Will Boycott Election: CRPP

The Committee Representing the Peoples Parliament (CRPP) will not participate in nextyears general election in Burma unless political prisoners are released and the juntaagrees to a review of the constitution, according to Aye Thar Aung, a spokesman for thecommittee, who spoke to The Irrawaddy on Friday.

The release of political prisoners is the first step toward democracy, he said. Thesecond is to allow for a review of the new constitution. If not, we will not be involved in

the election.

The announcement came after a meeting was held in Rangoon on Thursday betweenrepresentatives of the five political parties that comprise the CRPP coalition: theNational League for Democracy (NLD), the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy,the Mon National League for Democracy, the Arakan League for Democracy, and ZomiNational Congress.

Between them, the five parties took 89 percent of the electoral votes at the 1990 generalelectionsome 433 of the parliaments 485 seatswith the NLD winning a landslidevictory.

However, the elected representatives were never allowed to take power and many oftheir members were subsequently arrested and imprisoned by the military junta.

Despite the announcement, Nyan Win, a spokesperson for the NLD, refused to comment

to The Irrawaddy on Friday about the CRPP decision or the 2010 election.

The NLD has previously called on the Burmese military regime to review the newi i d l ll li i l i i l di i l


9/155

CRPP rejects juntas election challenge

Jul 10, 2008 (DVB)U Aye Thar Aung of the Committee Representing the Peoples Parliament has saidCRPP members have no interest in participating in the 2010 election announced by the junta.Aye Thar Aung is secretary of both the CRPP and the Arakan League for Democracy and an ethnicpeoples representative.He was speaking in response to a call in the state-run New Light of Myanmarfor the National Leaguefor Democracy to join hands with the people and then stand for the 2010 election in line with thelaws instead of longing for the result of the 1990 election.

The article dismissed the NLDs victory in the 1990 election as illegal and said it was obsolete nowthat the military regimes new constitution has been enacted.Aye Thar Aung said the regime had not directly approached CRPP members about contesting theelection."We still have not heard anything from the government about us participating in the elections, hesaid.Besides, we are not interested and we are not in a position to participate in the elections."The CRPP secretary said he did not believe the military regime was going the right way aboutbringing democracy to Burma.

"We are not interested in the elections because we do not see either the recent referendum or theupcoming elections as the necessary procedures for Burma, Aye Thar Aung said. The real necessary step is to develop national reconciliation to bring a true democratic system to ourcountry."Aye Thar Aung called instead for trilateral talks to bring about national reconciliation."The SPDC rulers should sit around a table with the National League for Democracy and the ethnic

parties and discuss how to lay out guidelines for the future," he said.

Source:http://english.dvb.no/news.php?id=1521
http://english.dvb.no/news.php?id=1521http://english.dvb.no/news.php?id=1521http://english.dvb.no/news.php?id=1521http://english.dvb.no/news.php?id=1521


10/155

All Burma Monks Alliance

The 88 Generation StudentsAll Burma Federation of Student Unions

No: 5/2009

Date: September 21, 2009

We Oppose the Military Regimes Use of Violence against Ethnic Nationalities, and

Demand That the Regime Stops Forcibly Enacting of the 2008 Constitution, Which Is

Not accepted by the People of Burma---- through the 2010 Election

(1) The battles that occurred in Kokang Region of Shan State in late August clearly

highlighted the insincere attitude of the regime over the ceasefire agreement between it and

ethnic revolutionary groups, which lasted over 20 years. Furthermore, by attacking and

defeating Kokang troops and occupying the Kokang Region, the regime has threatened other

ceasefire groups to choose one of the two options, subordinate to the regime, or being

defeated.

(2) Building peace requires mutual respect and trust, as well as basic sincerity, understanding,discussion and compromise with patience among the parties concerned. All parties concerned

must take responsibility to keep the existing peace. The eruption of violence in the Kokang


11/155

(6) We also demand that the regime releases all political prisoners immediately andunconditionally, announces a nationwide ceasefire and stops preparation for war. We also call

on the regime to start a meaningful and time-bound dialogue with the National League for

Democracy, led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and ethnic representatives. This is the best way

to solve Burmas problems, including politic, economic, social and ethnic nationality affairs,

peacefully.

(7) The use of violence by the regime destroyed the peace and broke stability and security in

the region. The continued pressure and attacks by the regime against ethnic ceasefire groupswill increase the loss of lives, lands, and personal belongings of ethnic nationals, and create

more instability and insecurity in the region. The regimes current policy towards the

ceasefire groups will lead to more human rights violations and more refugees.

(8) Hence, we will continue to work together with all the people of Burma for emergence of

democracy and human rights, as well as equality among all ethnic nationalities, and self-

determination.

At the same time, we seriously appeal to the international Community, including countries in

the region, and especially the United Nations Security Council, to effectively intervene in our

country in time to stop the violence and unilateral acts pursued by the Burmese military

regime, and to realize peaceful negotiation among all parties concerned.

All Burma Monks Alliance

The 88 Generation Students

All Burma Federation of Student Unions

Rangoon, Burma


12/155

COLLECTIVE STATEMENT ON 2010 ELECTIONSCalling for Genuine Political Reconciliation Before Elections in Burma

December 10, 2009

We, the united voice of people, communities, and organizations from Burma and around theglobe, strongly reaffirm the necessity for genuine political reconciliation before the 2010 electionsand call on the international community to take immediate action to ensure viable democraticchange occurs in Burma. The people of Burma are entitled to have a genuine choice and theinternational community has an obligation to ensure that the people get this choice.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 21) states, The will of the people shall be the basisof the authority of government; however, the military regime in Burma continues to use coercivemeasures to hold onto power. Activists, community leaders, journalists, and monks continue to be arrestedand harassed for voicing independent thought. Villages continue to be subjected to crimes againsthumanity under the regimes brutal policy of controlling ethnic communities. The regime continues tomanipulate the political sphere in order to secure their victory in the 2010 elections based on the 2008Constitution that was crafted by the military regime in order to perpetuate impunity and prolong their holdon power. Inclusive solutions proposed by democracy and ethnic leaders have been discarded with severe

persecution. Once again, the regime is poised to repeat its systematic use of force, manipulation, andcorruption during the 2008 constitutional referendum.

We call on the international community to insist that the regime meets crucial benchmarks inorder to bring peace and stability to Burma before the elections, i.e.:

1. Release all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Khun Htun Oo, and MinKo Naing.

2. National Reconciliation: Inclusive dialogue with key stakeholders from democracy groupsand ethnic nationalities, including a comprehensive review of the 2008 Constitution.3. Cessation of systematic human rights abuses and criminal hostilities against ethnic


13/155

Actions Birmanie BrusselsAll Burma Democratic Lusei Women Organization

Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (Altsean-Burma)Arakan League for Democracy (Exile - India)Arakan Liberation PartyASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC)Asian Center for the Progress of PeoplesAsia Pacific Solidarity CoalitionAssociation Suisse-BirmanieAustrian Burma Center

Back Pack Health Worker TeamBirmania por la Paz (Burma Campaign Spain)Burma Action IrelandBurma Aktion GermanyBurmese American Democratic AllianceBurma Campaign AustraliaBurma Campaign KoreaBurma Campaign UK

Burma Centre DelhiBurma Community Resource CenterBurma Democratic ConcernBurma Info (Japan)Burma Information TeamBurma Lawyers CouncilBurma Lusei UnionBurma Medical Association

Burma MobilizeBurma PartnershipBurma Point


14/155

Free Burma Campaign (Korea)Free Burma Campaign SingaporeFree Burma Campaign, South Africa

Free Burma Coalition-PhilippinesFriends of Burma, MalaysiaFriends of Burma, ThailandFriends of the Third WorldHealth Equity Initiatives, MalaysiaHong Kong Coalition for a Free BurmaInfo Birmanie (France)Initiatives for International Dialogue

International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)International Womens Partnership for Peace and Justice (IWP)Jamalpur Gandhi AshramKaren Womens OrganizationKuki Students Democratic ForceKuki Women Human Rights OrganizationLamkang Naga Students UnionLamkang National Council

League for Democracy in Burma (Japan)Members of Parliament UnionNaga National League for DemocracyNaga Senior Citizens' ForumNaga Students Union DelhiNaga Youth OrganizationNational Council of the Union of Burma New Zealand OfficeNational League for Democracy (Liberated Area)

National League for Democracy (Liberated Area) Korea BranchNationalities Youth Forum

All Arakan Students and Youths Congress


15/155

Students and Youth Congress of BurmaAll Arakan Students and Youths CongressAll Burma Students Democratic Front

All Burma Students LeagueAll Kachin Students and Youth UnionArakan League for Democracy - Youth Wing (Exile)Democratic Party for a New Society - YouthKaren Youth OrganizationKayan New Generation YouthKuki Students Democratic FrontMon Youth Progressive Organization

National League for Democracy Liberated Area, YouthNaga National League for Democracy YouthPa-O Youth OrganizationTa'ang Students and Youth OrganizationTavoyan Youth OrganizationZomi Students and Youth OrganizationStudent Federation of ThailandShwe Gas Movement

Taiwan Free Burma NetworkWomen League of Chin-landWomen Rights and Welfare Association of BurmaZanniat Youth OrganizationsZomi Community CommitteeZomi National CongressZomi Reunification OrganisationZomi Women Union


16/155

JOINTSTATEMENTON 2010 ELECTION BOYCOTT

We, undersigned organizations and communities for democracy, human rights, peace, justice

and tranquility in Burma reaffirm that emergence of immediate and genuine reconciliation

among all ethno-religious and political groups before the 2010 elections in Burma as follows:

1. We believed that there is no potentiality to resolve the current political, social and

economic crises in Burma as the plan of the State Peace and Development Council

(SPDC) for 2010 election is absolutely undemocratic.

2. The so-called election in 2010 is aimed to abolish the results of the 1990 election

when the democratic opposition met a landslide victory with a view to legitimize

the dictatorial power of military regime and put the ethnic nationalities in

systematic impunity for human rights, equality and self-determination as well.

3. It is also true that the regime is obviously stepping forward to committing crime

against humanity through its brutal policy of controlling ethnic minority communities,

while manipulating the political sphere in order to ensure their victory in 2010 election

that based on the sham Constitution that was undemocratically drafted by military and

forcibly ratified against the will of the people of Burma.

4. The recent accusation against ethnic nationalities of bomb blast is undermining


17/155

3. Arakan Rohingya Organization-Japan (JARO)

4. Arakan Rohingya Refugee Committee (ARRC), Malaysia

5. Rohingya Youth Development Forum (RYDF), Arakan-Burma

6. Arakan Rohingya Ulama Council (ARUC), Malaysia

7. Burmese Rohingya Association in UAE

8. Myanmar Muslim Council (MMC), KSA

9. World Rohingya Congress (WRC), USA

10. National Council for Rohingya (NCR), Malaysia

11. Canadian Burmese Rohingya Organization (CBRO), Canada

For further information, please contact:-

(1) Aung Naing (Tel: + 60 163094599)

(2) Kyaw Soe Aung (Tel: + 1-414-736 4273)


18/155

An Appeal to all political forces of Burma, both inside and in exile,

The Central Leading Committee of Democratic Party for a New Society (DPNS)

"The one voice among all political forces inside and in exile being heard is imperative."

We pay due respect to all of those who sacrificed their lives and those who have

committed to the movement for democracy for more than 20 years.

(1) The movement for democracy since 1988 has yet to move on to the next step as we

expected. The 'Shwe-Gone-Tine Declaration' of leading party of the movement, namely

the National League for Democracy (NLD) has constantly been bombarded with obstacles

and has not materialized. The efforts made by the United Nations (UN) and international

organizations to put pressure on the Burmese military government, calling itself the

State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), have been unproductive. Under such

circumstances domestically and internationally, it is possible that the SPDC governmentmay go ahead with the plan of holding the "2010 Elections" as it did unilaterally with the

2008 Referendum.

As history taught us, the people of Burma toppled the one-party dictatorial rule and its

1974 Constitution by means of mass struggle, the 1988 mass movement for democracy.

Likewise, the SPDC military government and 2008 Constitution must be overthrown by a

nation-wide mass movement as there is no alternative.


19/155

without any constraint imposed by undemocratic constitution like that of the "2008

Constitution" . The pro-democracy forces at that time decided to take part in the 1990

elections under the tactical move of supporting the NLD against the National Unity Party

- NUP (formerly, Burmese Socialist Programme Party - BSPP) in order to gain the

legitimate support of the people for the movement for democracy. At the 1990

elections, the NLD won a landslide victory. However, the ruling military regime failed to

honour the election result, convene parliament and hand over power to the peoples

representatives, because the result of the election was not what they wanted. Besides,

the regime has constantly attempted by many different means to crack down the NLDand its leadership in order to weaken the movement for democracy.

Today, faced with another election, the "2010 Elections", the tactical choice of

participation in the elections as in 1990, is not feasible. There is no alternative but to

boycot the "2010 Elections". In the context of Burma's political development, the pro-

election argument of "something is better than nothing" and its protagonists must be

strongly opposed.

In fact, the 2010 Elections will be held under the 2008 Constitution which the SPDC

military government unilaterally and undemocratically adopted. This election is being

held with the purpose of the regime to hang a veil of legitimacy over their illegitimate

rule for more than 20 years and endure its military dictatorial rule.

It is thus essential to overthrow the "2008 Constitution" and prepare to boycott the

coming "2010 Elections". In doing so, as stated above, the one voice among all political


20/155

Ethnic Chin group rejects junta's 2010election plans

Aizawl (Mizzima) The ethnic rebel group Chin National Front announced today they will not

accept the junta's planned general election scheduled for 2010.

The CNF passed the resolution during their Fourth Congress held on the Indo-Burma borderfrom the 8th to the 13th of this month, according to the organization.

"We are facing real challenges in politics now. There may be changes too. So it is very important

to us regarding how to respond to the 2010 election. We would like state our position on the

election to the people in advance," CNF General Secretary Paul Sitha told Mizzima.

The Congress also urged the Chin people to fulfill their wills and desires if they wish to compete

in the election either through the establishment of a political party or as individuals.

The CNF said they do not accept the junta's political roadmap and want only to pursue progress

via the tripartite dialogue, which comprises various ethnic representatives and democratic forces

in addition to the junta.

"We shall continue our protest against the SPDC's [Burmese military government's] roadmap.

Especially I'd like to urge other opposition forces to join with us in this protest," Paul Sitha said.

Before the backdrop of an exodus of many Chin nationals due to unjust restrictions, repressions


21/155

Collective Statement on 2010 Elections

10 Dec 2009

Calling for Genuine Political Reconciliation Before Elections in BurmaWe, the united voice of people, communities, and organizations from Burma and around the globe, stronglyreaffirm the necessity for genuine political reconciliation before the 2010 elections and call on the internationalcommunity to take immediate action to ensure viable democratic change occurs in Burma. The people of Burmaare entitled to have a genuine choice and the international community has an obligation to ensure that the peopleget this choice.The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 21) states, The will of the people shall be the basis of theauthority of government; however, the military regime in Burma continues to use coercive measures to hold on topower. Activists, community leaders, journalists, and monks continue to be arrested and harassed for voicing

independent thought. Villages continue to be subjected to crimes against humanity under the regimes brutalpolicy of controlling ethnic communities. The regime continues to manipulate the political sphere in order tosecure their victory in the 2010 elections based on the 2008 Constitution that was crafted by the military regimein order to perpetuate impunity and prolong their hold on power. Inclusive solutions proposed by democracy andethnic leaders have been discarded with severe persecution. Once again, the regime is poised to repeat itssystematic use of force, manipulation, and corruption during the 2008 constitutional referendum.We call on the international community to insist that the regime meets crucial benchmarks in order to bring peaceand stability to Burma before the elections, i.e.:1. Release all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Khun Htun Oo, and Min Ko Naing.2. National Reconciliation: Inclusive dialogue with key stakeholders from democracy groups and ethnic

nationalities, including comprehensive review of the 2008 Constitution.3. Cessation of systematic human rights abuses and criminal hostilities against ethnic groups, political activists,journalists, and civil society.If the election is allowed to go ahead without these changes, then it will only serve to institutionalize one-partyrule, with military still holding the strings of power. Even in the unlikely event that the elections are free and fair,they will not bring any real change to Burma because the fundamentally flawed Constitution that allocates vastpowers to military, lacks any checks and balances, al lows for the ongoing discrimination and persecution ofethnic nationalities, gender discrimination, and lacks protection of human rights. Such a Constitution is dangerousfor a country emerging from conflict and post-conflict situations, and will continue to push Burmas vast problemsinto neighboring countries and throughout the region if necessary measures arent taken.

The inclusion of genuine democratic opposition parties in the democratic and constitutional process would notonly assure political pluralism and a more effective representation of the people of diverse ethnicity, it would offera sustained solution to decades-long political crisis. The Burmese opposition forces on Burma borders area and


22/155

OFFICE OF THE SUPREME HEADQUARTERS

KAREN NATIONAL UNION

KAWTHOOLEIKaren National Union Statement on 2010 Elections

April 26, 2009

1. Defying the requests of the United Nations and democratic forces in Burma, the State Peace andDevelopment Council (SPDC) is pushing ahead with elections in 2010.

2. Internal repression is at an all time high. Burmese Army attacks against ethnic civilians continue. There are more political prisoners than at any time for 20 years. All media is censored. There is no right of freedom of assembly. There is no right of freedom of speech. Political parties cannot be formed without permission from the SPDC. Existing political parties supporting human rights and democracy are severely restricted, and

members who are not in jail face regular harassment. Other political parties, especially ethnic political parties, such as the Karen National Union, are

b d


23/155

8. It is incorrect to state this could be a step on a path to reform. No change of the constitution can be made

without 75 percent approval of parliament. As the SPDC will have a minimum of 25 percent of seats inParliament, they can block any reform. Even if Parliament did vote for change, the army can veto the changeon grounds of national security.

9. There will be no democratic space opened up by having a Parliament. The military parties and their allies willdominate the Parliament, and the military parties will decide the agenda of the Parliament. Media remainscensored so there will not be any open political debate in media. Those naive enough to argue that there willbe political space in the Parliament should look at the National Convention, which will no doubt be used asmodel by the SPDC. At the National Convention no free debate or discussion was allowed. The UnitedNations Special Rapporteur on human rights in Burma described the delegates as being under virtual housearrest. Delegates were even told what to eat, and when to take a bath.

10. Regardless of the Parliament, the civil service and economy of Burma has been militarised. Militarypersonnel, their families, or their allies, control the ministries and all key sectors of the economy. They areresponsible for the day to day running of the country, and there will be no change in this sphere.

11. Attacks against ethnic people will continue. There is no reason to think that the current military attacksagainst ethnic people in Eastern Burma, which the United Nations has described as breaking the GenevaConventions, will end.

12. It is clear that the elections and constitution will not bring about peace, democracy, human rights and stabilityto Burma. Rather, oppression will continue.

13. In fact, by not addressing demands for freedom, democracy, or granting any ethnic rights, resistance willcontinue, destabilising the country as long as dictatorship, in whatever guise, exists. Further, the failure togrant any ethnic rights, and pressure on some ethnic ceasefire organisations to disarm, could lead to divisionwithin them, and some may split or return to armed struggle.

14. Only true democracy, basic human rights, including equality for ethnic people, will bring peace and stability toBurma. We therefore call on the international community to work for these goals, rather than accept the fraudb i t t db th SPDC


24/155

The Statement of Palaung State Liberation Front on the

47th Anniversary of Palaung National Revolution Day

1) Today is an important day for the Palaung Nation because it marks 47 years of

resistance against the dictatorship of the State Peace and Development Council.

2) We appreciate and respect all those Palaung civilians, leaders, and comrades who

have given their lives and blood for our struggle during the last 47 years.

3) This year is a crucial year for the Palaung Nation and the freedom-loving people

of Burma. We must all be prepared to sacrifice everything to free ourselves fromslavery under the junta.

4) The Palaung self-rule outlined in the juntas 2008 Constitution is not genuine.

After the 2010 elections, the Palaung Nation will continue to suffer under the

oppressive rule of the military junta. We must oppose the 2010 elections that

will make us slaves under the military. According the Palaung peoples desire

to oppose the 2010 elections, the Palaung State Liberation Front (PSLF), Palaung

Women Organization (PWO), Taang Student Youth Organization (TSYO) andthe Palaung people vow to work together against the elections.

5) We urge all citizens of Burma to oppose the military through armed resistance,

civil disobedience and diplomatic efforts, in collaboration with opposition groupsand political organizations working for democracy, human rights, self-rule and

equality. Together we can build peace and the federal union that the people of

Burma want and need.

6) In conclusion, on 47th Palaung National Revolution Day, the Palaung State


25/155


26/155

THURSDAY, 07 JANUARY 2010 17:42

()

() ()

()

US EU UN ()

() (NLD)
http://yoma3.org/index.php?view=article&catid=41%3A2008-09-21-07-44-45&id=463%3A2010-01-07-10-43-29&tmpl=component&print=1&page=&option=com_content&Itemid=124http://yoma3.org/index.php?option=com_mailto&tmpl=component&link=aHR0cDovL3lvbWEzLm9yZy9pbmRleC5waHA/b3B0aW9uPWNvbV9jb250ZW50JnZpZXc9YXJ0aWNsZSZpZD00NjM6MjAxMC0wMS0wNy0xMC00My0yOSZjYXRpZD00MToyMDA4LTA5LTIxLTA3LTQ0LTQ1Jkl0ZW1pZD0xMjQ=


27/155

KARENNI NATIONAL PROGRESSIVE PARTY

OFFICE OF HEADQUARTERS

P.O Box 20, Mae Hong Son, 58,000 Thailand. Phone & fax: (66)53 611 573, Email: [email protected]

&ufpGJ? 2009 ckESpf/ atmufwdkbmv(12)&uf

xkwfjyefausnmcsuftrSwf 0509u&ifeDtrsdK;om;wdk;wufa&;ygwDtaejzifh Armjynf. vmrnfh 2010 taxGaxGa&G;aumufyGJESif h ywfoufjyD;oabmxm;&yfwnfcsufudk atmufygtwdkif; xkwfjyefausnmvdkufygonf?

1? ArmjynftwGuf etzrS a&;qGJjyXmef;vdkufonhf zGJ@pnf;ykHtajccHOya'tm; 2008 ckESpfwGif jynfvkH;u|wfvlxkqENcH,lyGJusif;yjyKvkyfjyD;aemuf xGufay:vmaom twkta,mif&vm'ftay: u&ifeDtrsKd; om;wdk;wuf

a&;ygwDrS vkH;0vufrcHa=umif; vlod&Sif=um;today;cJhjyD; jzpfonf? tqdkyg &vm'frSm etzrS tcdkiftrmajymqdkaeouJhod k@ rJqEN&Sifrsm;. qENoabmxm;tppftrSefudk a&mifjyef[jcif; r&SdbJ ppftm%m&SiftkyfcsKyfr_udkvkHjcKHpdwfcsap&efESifh w&m;0ifr_&Sdvmap&efwdk@twGuf twif;t=uyftwnfjyKvdkufjcif;yif jzpfonf?

2? xdk@tjyif rdrdwdk@taejzifh 2010 ckESpfwGif usif;yjyKvkyf&ef pDpOfxm;onhf taxGaxGa&G;aumufyGJonfvnf;ppfrSefonhf vlxkudk,fpm;vS,frsm;jzifh zGJ@pnf;oGm;rnhf jynfol@vGwfawmf (ygvDref)wpf&yfudk ay:xGef;vmap

rnfr[kwfa=umif; wif=udK_jrifxm;ygonf?3? wzef a&;aumufcHxm;&aom ud,fpm;v,frsm;. ajyma&;qdcifEif vyfydifciftm%mrsm;rm 'Drdua&pD


28/155

47 ESpfajrmuf (yavmif) wtmif; trsKd;om;awmfvSefa&;ae@yavmifjynfe,fvGwfajrmufa&;wyOD;. oabmxm;xkwfjyefa=unmcsuf1? yavmif trsKd;om;acgif;aqmif}uD;rsm;u yavmifwrsKd;om;vHk;tm%m&SifzdESdyfr_atmufrS vGwfajrmuf&eftwGuf vufeufpJGudkif+yD;

ppftm%m&Sifudk pwifwGef;vSefwdkufcdkufvmcJh=uonfrSm 47 ESpfwif;wif; jynfhcJh+yDjzpfonf? trsKd;om;a&;/ vlr_a&;/ bmoma&;tppt&m&m zdESdyfcHae&onfudk acgif;iHk@cHraeyJ tzdESdyfcHb0rS vGwfajrmufa&;/ wef;wlnDr#a&;/ trsKd;om;udk,fydkifjyXmef;cGifh&&Sda&;/vl@tcGifhta&;ESifh'Drdkua&pD&&Sda&;twGuf yavmifwrsKd;om;vHk;wdk @ &nfrSef;csufyef;wdkifodk@ra&mufrcsif; awmfvSefa&;opPmjzifh pnf;vHk;nDnGwfpGm qufvufwdkufyJG0if&ef E_d;aqmfwyfvSef@vdkufaom yavmiftrsKd;om;wdk@. ae@xl;aejrwfjzpfygonf?

2?yavmiftrsKd;om;wdk @. trsKd;om;awmfvSefa&;c&D; 47 ESpfwm umvtwGif; toufaoG;ac|;/ tdk;tdrfpnf;pdrfrsm;pGmudk ay;qyf&if;ESD;vSL'gef;cJh=uaom rsKd;cspfyavmifjynfolvlxkESifh yavmiftmZmenf acgif;aqmifrsm;/ &Jabmf&Jartm; yavmifjynfe,fvGwfajrmufa&;wyfOD;rS OD;nGwf*k%fjyK rSwfwrf;wiftyfygonf?

3? 2010 ckESpfonf yavmiftrsKd;om;rsm;tygt0if vGwfvyfa&;udkjrwfEdk;aom wdkif;&if;om;jrefrmvlrsKd;wdkif;twGuf pdefac:r_}uD;rm;onfhESpfjzpf+yD; ppfu|efb0rSvGwfajrmuf&ef pGef@vGwfr_aygif;rsm;pGm ay;qyfpGef@vGwfum tm%m&Sifudk jywfjywfom;om; qef@usifawmfvSef&rnfh tcsdefjzpfonf? tm%m&Sifppftkyfpkudk z,f&Sm;wGef;vSef&ef rdrdwdk@tqHk;pGeftxd ay;qyf=u&tHk;rnfjzpfonf?

4? 2008 zJG@pnf;yHktajccHOya'yg yavmifudk,fydkiftkyfcsKyfcGifha'oonf twkta,mifomjzpf+yD; 2010 a&G;aumufyJGjyKvkyf+yD;v#if yavmifwrsKd;om;vHk; ppftkyfpk.pkd;rdk;cs,fvS,fr_udk ydkrdkqdk;&Gm;pGmcHpm;=u&vdrfhrnfjzpfonf [laom a'ocH yavmifrdbjynfol wdk@. zGifhqdkwifjycsufonf [I

Palaung State Liberation Front

yavmifjynfe,f vGwfajrmufa&;wyfOD;PO Box. 368, Chiang Mai 50000, Thailand, Tel: 66 084 807 2900 E-mail: [email protected]


29/155

U Win Tin Editorial: Why Elections In Burma Are Not A Good

Idea

byERICA LIEPMANN, Causecast Associate Editor

In his recent editorial for The Washington Post, National League for Democracy

leader U Win Tin criticizesU.S. Senator Webbs diplomatic approachand

explains why pushing for 2010 elections arent the right strategy for Burma.

While unwaveringly promoting democracy, U Win Tin suggests a strategy

focused on engaging constructive dialogue with the military junta.

Keep up with CausecastsFreedom to Leadpage for more information on thesituation in Burma, the National League for Democracy and Daw Aung San Suu
http://www.causecast.org/member/ericaliepmannhttp://www.causecast.org/member/ericaliepmannhttp://www.causecast.org/member/ericaliepmannhttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8865-john-yettaw-to-be-released-webb-meets-with-aung-san-suu-kyihttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8865-john-yettaw-to-be-released-webb-meets-with-aung-san-suu-kyihttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8865-john-yettaw-to-be-released-webb-meets-with-aung-san-suu-kyihttp://freedomtolead.causecast.org/http://freedomtolead.causecast.org/http://freedomtolead.causecast.org/http://freedomtolead.causecast.org/http://www.causecast.org/news_items/8865-john-yettaw-to-be-released-webb-meets-with-aung-san-suu-kyihttp://www.causecast.org/member/ericaliepmann


30/155

and a democratic form of government that is representative of all Burmaspeople.

Photo byAsela, flickr.

Source:http://www.causecast.org/news_items/8948-u-win-tin-editorial-why-elections-in-burma-are-not-a-good-idea
http://www.flickr.com/photos/asela/1516542083/http://www.flickr.com/photos/asela/1516542083/http://www.flickr.com/photos/asela/1516542083/http://www.causecast.org/news_items/8948-u-win-tin-editorial-why-elections-in-burma-are-not-a-good-ideahttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8948-u-win-tin-editorial-why-elections-in-burma-are-not-a-good-ideahttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8948-u-win-tin-editorial-why-elections-in-burma-are-not-a-good-ideahttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8948-u-win-tin-editorial-why-elections-in-burma-are-not-a-good-ideahttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8948-u-win-tin-editorial-why-elections-in-burma-are-not-a-good-ideahttp://www.causecast.org/news_items/8948-u-win-tin-editorial-why-elections-in-burma-are-not-a-good-ideahttp://www.flickr.com/photos/asela/1516542083/


31/155

Burmas UNconstitution

Reading Than Shwes latest literary disaster, *The Constitution of 2008, you must ask yourself,

how far beyond stupid is that? Filled with double speak and thinly veiled power points where the

junta retains power its as worthless as the new money Than Shwe has begun printing. There is no

constitution since it simply gives ultimate power to the junta, pardons or gives amnesty to

murders rapist and criminals against humanity Its a get out of jail free card for the most
http://buffalohair.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/burma%e2%80%99s-unconstitution/http://buffalohair.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/burma%e2%80%99s-unconstitution/


32/155

many hit lists and thats an understatement. The ones with the longest knives will win the day

when vendetta echoes through the ranks. Major divisions between the officer and soldier are

terminal at best. With desertions at an all time high it is clear loyalty has become a novelty.

Its open season on NLD members, opposition and monk these days as the juntas kangaroo courts

dole out prison terms equal to death sentences underneath the worlds noses. Rape and genocide

continue unabated throughout the ethnic regions. The mass exodus of refugees to centers along

the Bangladesh, Thai and Chinese borders should be an indicator. Camps are filling beyond

capacity in many regions and shortages of food and medication are rampant. But its business as

usual as the world panders to empty gestures, fruitless words and jumps through hoops while

Than Shwe quietly commits genocide. The new constitution does not address Burmanization.

Thats the systematic process by soldiers of raping ethnic woman under Than Shwes Moto, Leave

Your Blood. The constitution does not include ethnic groups. The 2010 Election is nothing more

than a stage act and the constitution is just a pointless script filled with rhetoric and

contradictions. Generals have the final say lock, stock and tomahawk.

* http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/wpcontent/uploads/2009/01/myanmar_constitution-

2008-en.pdf

Your Devils Advocate

Buffalohair
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/wpcontent/uploads/2009/01/myanmar_constitution-2008-en.pdfhttp://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/wpcontent/uploads/2009/01/myanmar_constitution-2008-en.pdfhttp://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/wpcontent/uploads/2009/01/myanmar_constitution-2008-en.pdfhttp://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/wpcontent/uploads/2009/01/myanmar_constitution-2008-en.pdfhttp://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/wpcontent/uploads/2009/01/myanmar_constitution-2008-en.pdf


33/155

L T S E N

B U R M AA L T E R N A T I V E A S E A N N E T W O R K O N B U R M Ac a m p a i g n s , a d v o c a c y & c a p a c i t y - b u i l d i n g f o r h u m a n r i g h t s & d e m o c r a c y

BN 2009/1052: May 30, 2009

SPDCS 2010 ELECTIONS:UPHEAVAL IN THE MAKING

Burmas State Peace and Development Councils (SPDCs) preparations toensure full control over the 2010 election is fueling instability, withconsequences that will dramatically intensify the cross-border economic andsecurity issues already adversely affecting the region.

The expected outcome of Daw Aung San Suu Kyis trial, coupled with lengthyjail terms imposed on about 300 activists in the past year, will exclude themost viable pro-democracy opposition candidates from the electoral process.

This has destroyed hopes that the 2010 elections, despite its obvious flaws,would somehow lead to incremental steps towards democratization andurgently-needed reforms. Those who have grudgingly accepted the 2010elections will now be pressed to choose between resistance and surrender.

The SPDCs recent ultimatum to key ethnic ceasefire groups to surrendercontrol of their forces and participate in the elections is expected to provokea resumption of armed conflict.

Growing political and military tensions between the junta and ethnic groupsand continued aggression against ethnic civilians is projected to create new


34/155

ELECTIONS WITHOUT OPPOSITION

The international community, including ASEAN and the UN, has repeatedly demanded that

the junta conduct free and fair elections as part of a credible, transparent, and inclusive

political process. In October 2008, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in BurmaToms Ojea Quintana urged the SPDC to release all political prisoners as part of the four

core human rights elements that the regime should implement before the 2010 elections.1

Unfortunately, the SPDC has not heeded the UN Special Rapporteurs recommendation.

Following his call for the release of all political prisoners, the SPDC embarked on a

crackdown on political opponents that resulted in the imprisonment of about 300 dissidents.2

On 18 May 2009, the regime put Daw Aung San Suu Kyi on trial on charges of having

violated the conditions of her house arrest following the intrusion of an American man intoher compound.3 If convicted, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi faces a maximum of five years in

prison.4

[For more information on the latest arrest and trial of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi please

visit http://www.altsean.org/Research/DASSK/May2009.php]

The trial of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is the juntas latest ploy to ensure that the most viable

pro-democracy candidates will be unable to run in the elections. The junta-drafted

constitution prohibits individuals who are serving prison sentences for any offence from

standing for election to Parliament.

5

Many leaders and activists in the pro-democracy movement have been convicted of offences

No referendum or elections can be fair, no transition to democracy can be effective,without the release of political prisoners, the authorization for all political parties to

operate, and the protection of the basic civil and political freedoms, all non-existent inMyanmar. UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Burma, Paulo Sergio Pinheiro,

March 2008


35/155

dialogue with pro-democracy forces and ethnic nationalities parties in order to solve Burmas

ongoing political crisis.8

The NLD position echoed demands made by

other pro-democracy forces and ethnic

groups. On 26 April, the Karen National

Union (KNU) issued an 18-point statement

that called for genuine tripartite dialogue

facilitated by the UN as a condition for

holding general elections.9

The NLD position on the 2010 elections isconsistent with the partys previous calls for

genuine political dialogue and the release of

all political prisoners.

The last time the NLD was able to hold a

general meeting was in September 1997.10

Following that meeting the NLD called for

meaningful dialogue with the junta as theonly way to solve the nations problems.

11

More recently, on 12 February 2006, the

NLD offered to recognize the military

regime as the countrys legitimate

transitional government if the junta freed

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and convened the parliament in accordance with the 1990 election

results.

12

The NLD proposal received unanimous support from ethnic groups, other pro-democracy organizations inside and outside Burma, and many legislators from around the

world.13

However, the SPDC rejected the NLD proposals for dialogues and described it as

UNPOPULAR ELECTIONS

Political parties, pro-democracy groups, and ethnicorganizations that have opposed the SPDCs 2010elections plan:

Karen National Union

United Nationalities Alliance Committee Representing Peoples Parliament Shan Nationalities League for Democracy

Arakan League for Democracy

Zomi National Congress Mon National League for Democracy

Palaung State Liberation Front Palaung Womens Organization

Taang Student and Youth Organization

Kachin National Organization Kachin Independence Organization Mon National Democratic Front

New Mon State Party

Shan State ArmySouth

Ethnic Nationalities Council

National Coalition Government of the Union ofBurma

National Council of the Union of Burma Women's League of Burma

Forum for Democracy in Burma

Nationalities Youth Forum Student and Youth Congress of Burma


36/155

DISSATISFACTION GROWS FROM WITHIN

According to the SPDCs constitution, the Armed Forces commander-in-chief is given thepower to appoint 25% of the seats in both the upper and lower houses of Parliament.15

As a

result of this provision, the 2010 elections are likely to widen the gap between SPDC Armys

top officers and the rank and file. Once appointed to the Parliament, the 166 high-ranking

military officers will gain additional influence, power, and money-making opportunities. By

contrast, the SPDC Armys rank and file will remain in their miserable and increasingly

deteriorating situation.

The SPDC Armys rank and file suffers from inadequate rations and insufficient salaries.16

Underpaid and undersupplied soldiers are expected to depend on extortion, confiscation, and

forced labor to survive.17

In March, the SPDC Ministry of Defense replaced the Army

privates food rations with an 800-kyat (US 80 cents) weekly allowance.18

The new system is

likely to cause increased extortion, arbitrary confiscation, and abuses against villagers and

civilians who live in the vicinity of SPDC Army camps.

Other factors contribute to low morale among the rank and file. Undisciplined and corrupt

army officers routinely abuse their subordinates.19

Religious and ethnic discrimination prevent

non-Buddhist officers as well as officers with non-Buddhist spouses from being promoted tohigher ranks or holding command positions.

20HIV/AIDS and hepatitis infections among

armed forces personnel represent a serious health issue and contribute to poor conditions. It is

estimated that more than 4% of the armed forces are infected with HIV or Hepatitis B.21

The rank and files debilitating conditions has resulted in an increasing rate of desertions.

During the four-month period proceeding September 2006, 9,497 troops were lost from

service. This was up 8% from the same period in 2005, when 8,760 troops were lost from

service.22

During the same period, battalions were operating at less than 20% of their fullstrength, with some frontline units staffed by as few as 15 troops (less than 2% of the

prescribed capacity)23


37/155

Burmese people. Given the failure by the SPDC to deliver the promised benefits of ceasefire

agreements for meaningful political, social, and economic development to ethnic nationalities,

ethnic ceasefire groups are skeptical of the juntas election promises.

The SPDC-drafted constitution does not provide for a decentralized political system that

grants a degree of autonomy to Burmas ethnic nationalities.The constitution provides for theestablishment of parliaments and the appointment of chief ministers in every State and

Division. However, the charter grants very limited legislative and executive powers to local

bodies.27

The central legislative and executive bodies retain exclusive power to make laws

and govern on matters affecting ethnic nationalities, such as land administration, the use of

natural resources, health, education and the administration of justice.28

In addition, the

appointment of the chief ministers of states and divisions by the President of the Union also

goes against federal principles.29

Against this backdrop, the upcoming 2010 elections have become a source of increased

tension between the SPDC, ethnic ceasefire groups, and many ethnic armed opposition groups

- relations that have been tenuous at the best of times. Following the adoption of the new

constitution in 2008, the SPDC issued an ultimatum to all ethnic ceasefire groups - disarm and

participate in the elections.30

Key ethnic ceasefire groups, specifically the United Wa State

Army (UWSA), the New Mon State Party (NMSP), and the Kachin IndependenceOrganization (KIO), have openly refused to comply.

31

Ethnic ceasefire groups have resisted the SPDCs demands for disarmament because they

believe without arms, it would be impossible to have any leverage in negotiations with the

junta and to protect their people.32

Many ethnic organizations also voiced their objections

over the undemocratic nature of the 2010 elections.33

Following the ethnic ceasefire groups refusal to disarm, the SPDC appeared to have changedits tactics to end the armed ceasefire groups existence. In late April, senior SPDC Army

officials held meetings with representatives from KIO New Democratic Army - Kachin


38/155

Burma.38

The offensives have systematically targeted the civilian population in ethnic-

inhabited areas. This has resulted in the displacement of over half a million civilians and the

destruction or forced relocation of more than 3,200 villages between 1996 and 2007.

39

Another factor that could further destabilize the situation along Burmas border areas is the

recruitment by the SPDC Army, its proxies, and armed resistance groups of returning

unemployed Burmese migrant workers.40

Reports have already surfaced of pro-junta

Democratic Karen Buddhist Army' (DKBA) attempts to recruit Burmese migrant workers

returning from Thailand.41

ECONOMIC WOES

In 2007, economic protests eventually snowballed into a nationwide uprising that would come

to be known as the Saffron Revolution. As 2010 approaches, the rapidly deteriorating

economic situation coupled with the SPDCs failure to address the Burmese peoples

economic woes, is likely to trigger renewed social unrest.

Despite SPDC statements to the contrary, the global economic crisis has not spared Burma.42

Reduction in global demand for goods has caused factories in Burma to shut down, forcing

thousands into unemployment.43 Job loss also hit the over two million Burmese migrantworkers across the region.

44This has caused a significant decrease in foreign remittances sent

back into Burma from relatives abroad, down 30% from Thailand alone.45

In addition, the

appreciation of the kyat against the dollar and most Southeast Asian currencies has decreased

the value of foreign remittances sent into Burma from relatives abroad.46

The appreciation of

the kyat reduces the value of a crucial source of income for hundreds of thousands of families

in Burma.47

On 17 April, the Asia Development Bank (ADB) predicted that Burmas economic growthwill falter in 2009 because of weaker performances by the countrys key trading partners,

namely China Thailand and India The International Monetary Fund (IMF) noted that the


39/155

BURMESE CONSTITUTIONAL

REFERENDUM:NEITHERFREE NORFAIR

Report


40/155


41/155

PILPG Report Constitutional Referendum in Burma, May 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary 2

Statement of Purpose 4

Introduction 4

International Standards and the Constitutional Referendum in Burma 5

The Right to Vote 6The Right to Vote in Burma 6

Secret Ballot 8

Secret Ballot in Burma 8

Freedom of Opinion and Freedom from Coercion 9

Freedom of Opinion and Freedom from Coercion in Burma 10

The Right to Information 11The Right to Information in Burma 12

Freedom of the Media 13

Freedom of the Media in Burma 13

Electoral Monitoring 14

Electoral Monitoring in Burma 15

Independent Electoral Administration 16

Electoral Administration in Burma 16Legal Structure 18


42/155


BURMESE CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENDUM: NEITHERFREE NORFAIR

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this report is to analyze whether the State Peace and

Development Council conducted the 10 May 2008 constitutional referendum in

Burma in accordance with basic international standards for referendums. The

report finds that the referendum was not free or fair, as it was not conducted in

accordance with international law or basic democratic standards.

Introduction

On 10 May 2008, just one week after Cyclone Nargis tore through Burmas

Irrawady Delta killing an estimated 100,000 people and leaving at least one million

others homeless, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), the Burmese

military regime, held a referendum on its draft constitution.

The constitutional referendum is part of the SPDCs seven step Roadmap to

Democracy, which the military regime launched in 1994 as a military-controlled

democratization process. The constitution put to vote in the referendum was

drafted through a process called the National Convention.

International law, state practice, and fundamental principles of democracyprovide clear basic standards for referendums. These basic standards have been


43/155


At the end of this document, there is a brief overview of the National

Convention, the constitution-drafting process that produced the SPDCs proposedconstitution, and the constitution put to vote in the referendum.

International Standards and the Constitutional Referendum in Burma

International organizations, including the United Nations, the Council of

Europe, the African Union, and the Organization of American States, have

developed legal standards that govern the holding of a free and fair referendum.1Guidelines developed by international organizations and instances of state practice

have further defined standards for a free and fair referendum process.2

A free and fair referendum process provides for universal, equal, free, and

secret suffrage, with monitoring of the voting process and mechanisms for appeal

should any concerns arise over the process or the results. In the specific case of aconstitutional referendum, voters must have open access to the constitution,

unbiased media coverage related to the constitution, and forums to discuss the

1Universal Declaration for Human Rights, art. 2, 20-21 (Dec. 10, 1948), available at

http://www.un.org/Overview/

rights.html (last visited Apr. 12, 2008); International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights, art.

2-3, 19, 21-22, 25 (Mar. 23, 1976), available athttp://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_ccpr.htm(last visited Apr. 12, 2008); International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial


44/155


constitution freely. Voters in a free and fair referendum are also provided adequate

information so they may understand the question on the ballot and the implications

of their vote.

In the run up to the referendum in Burma, the SPDC failed to meet a single

basic international standard for a free and fair referendum process. Instead the

SPDC affirmatively deprived Burmese citizens their basic democratic rights.

According to reports from individuals and organizations working inside Burma, the

SPDC used coercive and threatening measures to press individuals to vote in favor

of adopting the constitution, denied voters access to information on the draftconstitution to be put to vote, and criminalized criticism of the draft constitution.

The Right to Vote

The right to universal suffrage is one of the most basic tenants of democracy.

International law requires that every citizen of legal voting age must be providedthe right to vote.3

To implement this right, states must institute a registration

process that enables all eligible voters to register easily and quickly.4

States must

further provide every voter the right to cast one vote, and only one vote, regardless

of ethnicity, race, gender, language, culture, political beliefs, location, or any other

distinguishing feature.5

The Right to Vote in Burma


45/155


voting, the government issued temporary identification cards to some eligible

voters. Reports indicate that the SPDC issued temporary I.D. cards to visiting

Chinese citizens in the hope that this would increase the number of votes in favorof the draft constitution.

7

On the day of the referendum, in Hmaw Pi, Rangoon Division, a civil

servant from Phoo Gyi Water Providing Project went to the polling station but his

ballot had already been cast.8

In Kyone Pyaw Township in Irrawaddy Division;

Zee Gone, The Gone, and NattaLin Townships in Pegu Division; Sa Lin and Yay

Nan Chaung Townships in Ma Gway Division; Mon Ywar in Sagaing Division;and in quarters no 1, 2 and 3, of Hmaw Pi, Rangoon Division election officials in

charge of polling stations filled out ballots ahead of the referendum. Voters were

given ballots pre-marked with yes votes and allowed to place them in the ballot

box.9

The right to vote was further distorted in Burma with election authoritiesasking and sometimes forcing individuals to cast representative votes, in which

the individual would vote for other members of their family, even when that family

member was able and planning to vote for himself or herself.10

This was reported

in Hmay Pi and Hle Gu, Rangoon Division.11

Secret Ballot


46/155


International law and the fundamental principles of democracy require not

only that the state provide every citizen the right to vote, but that each citizen must

be provided the right to vote in secrecy, without fear that his or her identity or votewill be revealed.

12Implementation of this right requires a voting process where a

person marks their ballot alone in a voting booth then places it in the ballot box

without anyone else seeing his vote or being able to identify his ballot after the

voting.13

The secrecy of the votes of illiterate people, those voting at embassies,

and members of the military are subject to special considerations and possible

coercion.14

Secret Ballot in Burma

Ballots in the constitutional referendum in Burma were not secret. Some

voters were required to provide identifying information on their ballots, and, in

reported cases, identifying information was even printed on ballots beforehand,

meaning that voters were provided with their ballot at the polling station.

15

Many voters reported that agents of the SPDC regularly observed voters as they

voted, telling people to vote yes and even pointing to the yes box to ensure that

voters filled out their ballots correctly.16

Prior to the referendum, the SPDC

distributed sample ballots. These ballots included spaces for the voters name and

address, which many voters understood to mean that the vote would not be secret.17

12 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 25(b).13


47/155


Voters reported that the day before the referendum in Hnaw Kone Kyaing

Pite village, U Htee Doe, chairman of the Ward Peace and Development Council,

the secretary and his nephew took the ballot box to each house with ballots onwhich they had already ticked a yes vote and forced people to cast yes votes.

18

Election officials also used subtler means to trick people into revealing their

vote. In Yaynan Chuang, Magway Division, polling officials told voters if you

want to vote yes, vote here, or if you want to vote no, you have to go inside the

polling booth.19

This confused voters, as following those instructions would

identify their vote, and many voters did not know what to do. 20

Freedom of Opinion and Freedom from Coercion

Key to democratic participation is the freedom of opinion. All citizens have

right to form an opinion freely, without coercion or pressure, and to express their

wishes freely.

21

All citizens have the further right to seek and share informationand opinions without coercion or interference, through conversation, in writing, or

through other media.22

The freedom of opinion extends to the right of peaceful

assembly.23

Freedom of Opinion and Freedom from Coercion in Burma

Citizens and the media reported that SPDC and its agents used threats,coercion, misinformation, deception, and violence to sway or force voters to


48/155


approve the draft constitution. In the weeks prior to the referendum, SPDC

representatives visited numerous townships and conducted mandatory town

meetings, telling voters that if they failed to adopt the draft constitution the SPDCwould stay in control of the country for another 20 years. If they approved the

draft constitution, however, the SPDC would only remain in control of the country

for another five years.24

SPDC representatives frequently utilized threats to secure votes in favor of

the constitution. In the Gawatalit Ward of Bahan Township, village headmen were

told that they must secure an 80 percent yes vote in their villages or the SPDCwould cut water and electricity to their ward.

25In South Dagon Township, citizens

were told that they would be arrested if they did not vote to approve the draft

constitution.26

Similar threats were used in Rangoon, where the police telephoned

one family to tell them they would go to jail for three years if they did not vote

yes.27

In Insein Township, teachers from the No. 2 high school were told that

their students must vote in favor of the draft constitution, and that only thosestudents who voted in favor of the draft constitution would be allowed to pass the

24 Federation of Trade Unions Burma, Violations Related to 10 May Referendum in Burma,May 1, 2008, Release No. 2/2008, available at

http://www.ftub.org/files/LatestNews/Violations%20Related%20to%2010%20May%20Referendum%20in%20Burma%20-%20Release%20No%202.pdf (last visited May 9,2008); Federation of


49/155


10th

grade.28

Civil servants were told that they must vote in favor of the

constitution or they would lose their jobs.29

On election day there were reports that six people at the Thayet Cement

Factory who voted no were arrested for their vote at the Yone Gyi quarter

polling station.30

Voters reported that in Tharrawaddy Township, Pegu Division,

authorities seized identity cards from voters and only returned the cards to those

who voted yes.31

The Right to Information

In order to freely form an opinion prior to a referendum, voters must have

access to adequate information. International standards require that voters be

provided access to enough basic information that they may freely form an opinion

on the issue to be subject to the referendum.32

Internationally established codes on

conducting a free and fair referendum require that authorities provide objectiveinformation by providing explanatory reports or balanced campaign material from

both the draft constitutions supporters and its opponents.33

Authorities must make

these materials available in advance of the referendum by publishing them in

official newspapers, sending the materials directly to citizens, printing them in all

28 Federation of Trade Unions Burma, Subject: SPDC Continues Coercive Acts and MisleadingPropaganda for its Vote Yes Campaign, Violations Related to 10 May Referendum in Burma,


50/155


the states official and minority languages, and imposing sanctions where

authorities violate the duties of neutrality and free access of information.34

Access to information not only serves to educate voters about the specific

provisions they are to vote on in the referendum, but access to information also

allows voters to cast their ballots free from the influence of discrimination and

prejudice. This freedom ensures that the referendum process will encourage

tolerance and understanding through the voting process.35

The Right to Information in Burma

Within Burma, many voters did not feel that they were provided adequate

information to develop an informed opinion on the draft constitution. In a poll of

2,000 Burmese voters conducted just days prior to the referendum, 69 percent of

those surveyed reported that they had no awareness of the details of the proposed

Constitution.

36

Such results are not surprising, as the SPDC officially releasedthe 194-page draft constitution only one month prior to the referendum,37

and, as

noted below, media analysis of the document was extremely limited. Further, the

constitution was released primarily in print form, and the SPDC charged voters

1,000 kyat for the document.38

The information that was provided on the draft constitution was regularly

biased in favor of the document. State-run television ran a media campaign thattold the public the approval of the draft constitution is the responsibility of every

39


51/155


The National League for Democracy organized a vote no campaign to

encourage people participating in the referendum to reject the draft constitution.The SPDC systematically disrupted opposition attempts to encourage people to

vote no. In Aung Lan, Magway Division, at the polling station in the Zay Gone

quarter, people who were wearing vote no t-shirts were forced to remove them.40

In Sanchuang quarter, seven people were arrested for distributing vote no

pamphlets.41

Freedom of the Media

The freedom of the media is founded on the freedom of individuals to seek,

receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of

frontiers.42

This right is broad, but it is subject to restrictions that are provided

by law and necessary, which protect the reputations of others, national security,

public order, public health or morals.

43

The freedom of the media extends to mediaof all kinds from oral, writing or print . . . or through any other media of [the

individuals] choice.44

The freedom of the media is a broad-based right that

facilitates the flow of information and enables the individual to make informed

decisions.45

Freedom of the Media in Burma

In the run up to the referendum, the SPDC systematically stifled all


52/155


53/155


during, and after the election.52

By ensuring that all interested parties are able to

observe the process, domestic partisan observers are able to watch the actions of

the other partisan observers while observing the voting process.

Electoral Monitoring in Burma

Despite offers and appeals from Burmese democratic leaders and the

international community, the SPDC refused to allow independent electoral

monitors to observe the referendum voting in Burma. Critics of the SPDC note

that there are ample opportunities for the SPDC to rig the referendum results,making such observers particularly important. In particular, critics have noted that

the SPDC plans to announce the referendum results from the capitol Naypidaw,

rather than announcing them from each polling station, as was done in the 1990

elections.53

Members of pro-democracy groups report that police prevented them from

monitoring polling stations. On the day of the referendum, National League for

Democracy leaders Thakhin Soe Myint and Dr. Myo Aung were traveling to

Hmaw Pi Township to observe the polls, but the police stopped them and forced

them off the public bus, sending them back to the NLDs headquarters.54

They

were prevented from monitoring the election.

In contrast, reports indicate that those supporting the constitution were notkept from polling stations. For example, in Hmaw Pi, Rangoon Division, a civil


54/155


inside the polling stations, contrary to official rules, and forcing voters to cast

yes votes.57

Independent Electoral Administration

A free and fair referendum process requires an election administration at all

levels [that acts] in a professional and neutral manner.58

The administration of

elections includes the counting of votes, which should be visible and verifiable

from the polling station up to the national level.59

Participants in the election,

including candidates, parties and voters, should be able to obtain prompt andeffective redress for violations of human rights or national law, with the

possibility of review by an independent judiciary.60

The availability of redress in

fair, transparent, and credible ways increases the confidence of stakeholders in the

electoral process.61

Ultimately, an election law should provide a means for the

partial or complete invalidation of election results where election misconduct

makes the results unsalvageable.62

The power to invalidate an election is

frequently confined to the highest electoral authority and reviewable by the states

highest judicial court.63

Electoral Administration in Burma

In contrast to international standards, electoral administration in Burma was

not neutral or independent at any level. According to the National League for


55/155


Democracy, the National Convention Convening Work Committee (NCCWC),

the Constitution Drafting Commission, and Commission for Holding Referendum

for the Approval of the Draft Constitution are all chaired by the same person,64

UAung Toe, who also serves as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

65

At the local level, Burmese voters reported that local electoral officials were

instructed to secure a large percentage of yes votes, with some officials going to

far as accompanying voters as they filled out their ballots and instructing them on

where and how to mark the ballot.66

In the brick making factory in Hmaw Pi,

Rangoon Division, the manger forced 100 workers to cast a yes votes, howeverthere was one no vote. The manager said he would have to pay 100,000 kyat to

compensate for that no vote.67

With regard to the counting of ballots, Burmese law, established by the

SPDC, requires that at least 10 eligible voters oversee the counting of ballots in the

polling station,68

but there are no provisions for security in the transport of ballots

from the polling station to the central locations where votes were compiled. In

Magway Division, U Toe Lone, chairman of the Aung Lan Quarter Peace and

Development Council took ballot boxes to Magway town without counting them in

front of the last ten voters in the polling station.69

The ballots from Thayet District,

Thayet Division, were also sent to the Magway Commission Office in Magway

without being counted in front of the last ten voters in the polling station.70

Voters reported that they did not access to avenues of redress for even small


56/155


provide pens or pencils to mark ballots, people were afraid to request pens so they

returned their ballots without marking their votes.71

When a female activist

refused to cast a representative vote on behalf of her mother, the SPDC demandedher name and address for interrogation.

72A military officer, dressed in civilian

clothing, excluded another female from the polling station without explanation

when she refused to vote yes in the referendum.73

The SPDC prohibited pro-

democracy activists from helping voters locate their names on voter registration

lists or answering any questions on the referendum process.74

Legal Structure

International standards require that states conducting referendums institute a

clear legal structure to govern the referendum process.75

The legal provisions

governing elections should provide effective mechanisms and remedies for

enforcing electoral rights.76

The legal structure should identify rights related to

elections, provide aggrieved parties the right to file a complaint, ensure that the

reviewing court or commission provides prompt and fair decision, and that the

hearing is reviewable by a higher court or commission.77

Legal Structure in Burma

Pro-democracy groups have expressed a number of concerns with regard to

the legal framework governing the referendum. The SPDCs failure to publicizethe draft constitution and referendum law in a timely manner prohibited authorities


57/155


58/155


The National Convention

Throughout the 14-year National Convention, pro-democracy groups reportedthat the SPDC excluded from the drafting process representatives from the

opposing National League for Democracy (NLD), as well as several other political

parties that won seats in the 1990 elections.81

Rather than providing for a broad

and inclusive political process, the SPDC handpicked each of the 1,100 delegates

to participate in the National Convention.82

Frank and open discussion on the

National Convention was prohibited by the SPDC. The government prevented

delegates from speaking to the press and limited their ability to make proposals.83Law 5/96, adopted in 1996, criminalized criticism of the National Convention,

subjecting those found guilty of criticizing the process to up to twenty years in

prison.84

Many international actors expressed concern over the lack of political

representation in the National Convention.85

Several political parties within

Burma boycotted the National Convention because of the control and intimidation

exercised by the SPDC.86

In 2004, the United Nations Special Rapporteur, Paulo

Sergio Pinheiro, dismissed the National Convention as a failure because it

81 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH,Human Rights Overview: Burma (2006), available at

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01/18/burma12268.htm (last visited Aug. 13, 2007).82

Seth Mydans, Myanmar Constitution Guidelines Ensure Military Power, THENEW YORKTIMES, Sept. 4, 2007, available at


59/155


lack[ed] national and international credibility.87

The United Nations General

Assembly has issued several resolutions expressing its concern over the legitimacy

of the National Convention.88

The United States, the European Union, andmembers of the Association of South-Eastern Asian Nations (ASEAN) have all

voiced similar concerns.89

In 2004, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan

released a statement calling upon the SPDC to incorporate the NLD and other

political actors into the process. The statement noted that:

It is the Secretary-Generals judgment that the National Convention

does not currently adhere to the recommendations made by successiveresolutions of the General Assembly. The Secretary-General believes

that, unless and until the views of the National League for Democracy

(NLD) and other political parties are sought and considered, the

National Convention and the road map process will be incomplete,

lacking in credibility and, therefore, unable to gain the full support of

the international community, including the countries of the region.90

87 Jack Barton, UN Rights Envoy Dismisses Myanmar Convention as a Failure, AGENCE FRANCE

PRESSE (Jun. 1, 2004).88

See e.g., U.N. General Assembly, The Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar, para. 2, UNDoc. A/RES/61/232 (Mar. 13, 2007), available at


60/155


The Draft Constitution

Pro-democracy groups and members of the international community haveexpressed similar concerns regarding the SPDCs draft constitution, the product of

the National Convention. The draft constitution would guarantee the military a

highly privileged role in the government in Burma and would exclude most leaders

in the pro-democracy movement. For example, under the draft constitution, the

military would be guaranteed one quarter of the seats in both houses of the

bicameral legislature91

and the Commander-in-Chief of Defense Services would

exert a high degree of control over the appointment of Ministers.92 Furthermore,the constitution would prevent Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from holding office on the

basis of her having married a foreigner, and most individuals elected in the 1990

elections would be prohibited from holding office because they had served time in

prisonprison sentences generally imposed for their pro-democracy activities.93

The United States, and other world leaders, have expressed concern that the

draft constitution fails to provide a framework for genuine democratic change in

Burma. United States Department of State Spokesman Sean McCormack said that

the draft constitution would appear intended only toperpetuate the rule of the

existing military regime in Burma. It does not provide for the kind of open, serious

and sustained dialogue with the democratic opposition forces in Burma that we as

well as other members of the international community have called for, and that for

example Aung San Suu Kyi has called for."94

The current ASEAN President,Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo, called the draft constitutions provision


61/155


Conclusion

The SPDC violated international standards for fair and free referendums inthe 10 May 2008 constitutional referendum, utilizing oppressive and secretive

tactics to try to ensure that the draft constitution would receive the support of a

majority of voters in the referendum.

Pro-democracy groups and members of the international community have

expressed concern over the failure of both the National Convention and the draft

constitution to allow for a democratic transition. The National Conventiondiscouraged contributions from democratic opposition groups and the SPDC

criminalized open criticism of the process. The draft constitution reinforces these

principles by proposing to guarantee the military a privileged role in the

government and to exclude most leaders from the pro-democracy movement.

The referendum failed to meet basic international standards for a free and

fair referendum. The SPDC denied Burmese the fundamental right to vote by

manipulating voter lists and preventing some voters from casting their ballots.

Although international standards guarantee a secret ballot, the SPDC printed

identification information on individual ballots and observed as Burmese voters

cast their ballots. The SPDC threatened that voters would lose their jobs and

access to water and electricity if they failed to support the referendum. The SPDC

also prevented the Burmese from reading and understanding the draft constitutionprior to the referendum by forbidding the media to publish critical reports of the

d f i i d b f ili k h d f i i il ibl


62/155

etz tajccHrlrsm;tm;qef;ppf csufetz tajccHrlrsm;tm;qef;ppf csufetz tajccHrlrsm;tm;qef;ppf csufetz tajccHrlrsm;tm;qef;ppf csufetz tajccHrlrsm;tm;qef;ppf csuf


63/155

PDC rS bmomjyefjzef@csDonf PDC rS bmomjyefjzef@csDonf

e j l s e se j l s e se j l s e se j l s e se j l s e s



64/155

H_;edrf hoGm;+yD;aemuf r=umcifwGifyif a&;qGJcJ hjcif;jzpfonf?f d f g D d f f f f

avmavmq,fY ppftpdk;&onf vufeufudkifvlrsKd;pkf d d D Y g f f d f f


65/155


a&G;aumufyGJtEdkif&ygwDodk@ tm%mv$Jray;&ap&ef ppftkyfpkonfupm;uGufopfwck. tpdwftydkif;tjzpf ESpfESpftcsdef,lcJh+yD;aemuf 4if;wdk hpdwf}udKuf zG J hpnf;yH ktajccHOya'qdkif&mtajccHrlrsm;udk csrSwfum tajccHOya'opfwck azmfxkwfEdkifa&;

twGuf 1993 ckwGiftrsKd;om;nDvmcH trnfwyfI pwiftoufoGif;cJ honf? TnDvmcHonf aocsmpGmcsKy fud ki fusif;yonfh nDvmcHjzpf+yD; wufa&mufol trsm;pkrSm pdwfudufa&G;xm;onfh yk*~dKvfrsm;jzpf=uonf? 1990 jynfhESpfwGif xkwfjyefcJhonfh ppftpdk;&. a=unmcsuf trSwf (1) t& a&G;aumufcHudk,fpm;vS,frsm;. wm0efrSm tajccHOya'opfw&yf a&;qGJ&ef[kqd kc J honf? od k @&mwGif ,ckt}udrfYvnf; ppftpd k;&onfrdrdukd,fwdkifxkwfjyefcJhonfh Oya'udk av;pm; vdkufemusifhoHk;jcif;r&Sdjyefay? trsKd;om;nDvmcH udk,fpm;vS,fpkpkaygif; 702 a,mufteuf a&G;aumufcHudk,fpm;vS,f 99 a,mufom&SdcJhonf? 1995ckwGif trsdK;om;'Drdkua&pD tzGJ hcsKyfrS a&G;aumufcH udk,fpm;vS,f

rsm;onf rdrdwdk@. oabmrwlnDrSKudk rSwfwrf;wifonfhtaeESifhnDvmcHYyg0ifaqmif&Gufr_udk &yfqdkif;cJhonf? xdktcsdefrSpItrsKd;om;nDvmcHud k tcsdeftuef@towfr&Sd a&$@qdkif;cJh&awmhonf?

tzGJ@tpnf;rsm;udk trsKd;om;nDvmcHY yg0ifap&ef odrf;oGif;pnf;Hk;aejcif;tm;jzifh ,if;nDvmcHudk taxmuftuljyK&efud;pm;aeonf? tajccHOya'opfwck azmfxkwf&mY wkd;wufr_&Sdaea=umif; jyoEdkif&eftwGuf ppftpdk;&ESifh typftcwf&yfpJxm;

onfjzpfap/ rxm;onfjzpf

Organizations Around the World Statements on Boycott 2010 Election in Burma

Documents

Transcript of Organizations Around the World Statements on Boycott 2010 Election in Burma