Home / News / Urgent Appeals / BURMA: Journalist jailed on wrong charge for shooting video of referendum vote
 

BURMA: Journalist jailed on wrong charge for shooting video of referendum vote

April 8, 2009

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-040-2009

9 April 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BURMA: Journalist jailed on wrong charge for shooting video of referendum vote

ISSUES: Rule of law; rights to liberty and security; military government; judicial system; illegal detention; freedom of expression; torture
---------------------------------------------------------------------

NEW BLOG NEW BLOG NEW BLOG
PYITHU HITTAING: AHRC BURMESE-LANGUAGE BLOG
http://burma.blog.humanrights.asia/  

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

Last week the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) issued an appeal on the case of two journalists jailed in Burma for trying to help people left homeless after Cyclone Nargis to visit international agencies. In this appeal we bring the case of another journalist jailed in Burma, in his case for taking video of voting at the constitutional referendum lat year. Although he was charged with a completely unrelated offence for which the police could not give any details and of which they had no evidence, a court sentenced him to three years' jail.

CASE DETAILS:

On 10 May 2008, the day of the referendum on a new army-arranged constitution in Burma, Aung Htun Myint came to see and record proceedings at a polling booth in Hmawbi, a few miles from Rangoon. He had been working as a reporter for the Seven Day news journal, and had with him two video cameras that he was using for that purpose.

However, an on-duty policeman and local council official stopped Aung Htun Myint and accused him of illegally taking footage of the voting and also of damage in the area as a result of Cyclone Nargis a week before. They took him to the local police station and then he was sent to the district security unit.

The police charged him not with anything he was doing in Hmawbi, but with illegally travelling to Thailand in January 2008 for video training. In fact, they had no evidence against him of this charge, which was totally unrelated to his being in Hmawbi. They also took five days to lodge a complaint against him, during which time they held him in illegal detention. The police chief admitted that the district security took him away for the first two days and returned him after that.

In court, the police presented the video cameras and other items that Aung Htun Myint had in his possession at time of arrest as material evidence of his offence. But the video cameras and other items related to his trip were irrelevant to the charge. They also said that it "had emerged" during interrogation that he had gone to Thailand illegally. But, they could give no evidence of this. The police chief could not say what day Aung Htun Myint had supposedly gone, for how long he had stayed or where he had stayed.

In his defence Aung Htun Myint said that just because he had a card with a phone number in Myawaddy, a town adjacent to Thailand, the police had decided that they would accuse him of going to Thailand illegally, and he was tortured in the Western District Police Station of Rangoon to have him confess, but he did not. However, the judge concluded that she found his account unbelievable and sentenced him to three years' imprisonment.

There are more details of the case in the sample letter below. We kindly request you to sign and send it.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

The AHRC last week issued an appeal on the case of two journalists jailed for trying to assist homeless victims of Cyclone Nargis visit international agencies (AHRC-UAC-033-2009).

See also the comprehensive report on Burma: "Burma, political psychosis and legal dementia" issued by the AHRC’s sister organisation and the 2008 AHRC Human Rights Report chapter on Burma.

For recent updates and news in Burmese, see the new AHRC blog: http://burma.blog.humanrights.asia/

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the persons listed below to call for the charges against the nine persons to be reviewed and for them to be released without delay. Please note that for the purpose of the letter, the country should be referred to by its official title of Myanmar, rather than Burma, and Rangoon as Yangon.

Please be informed that the AHRC is writing a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Myanmar, independence of judges and lawyers, torture, and human rights defenders, as well as the UN Working Group on arbitrary detention and the regional human rights office for Southeast Asia, calling for interventions into this case.

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ___________,

MYANMAR: Journalist imprisoned because of taking video of cyclone damage

Convicted person: Aung Htun Myint (a.k.a. Aung Aung), 30, freelancer with Seven Day journal, residing in Ward 22, South Dagon Township, Yangon
Primary officials involved:
1. Inspector Min Hsu Oo, Officer No. La/153284, Station Commander, Hmawbi Police Station, Yangon Division
2. Sub Inspector Nyo Tin, Hmawbi Police Station (arresting officer)
3. U Myat Ko Ko, Member, Village Tract Peace and Development Council, Tatgyigone, Hmawbi
4. Security personnel at the Western District Police Station, Yangon Division
Charge and trial: In Hmawbi Township Court, Judge Daw Amar (Special Power) (Judge No. 2274) presiding, decided on 27 August 2008, Felony No. 226/2008, section 13(1), Immigration (Emergency Provisions, Temporary) Act 1947, 3 years' rigorous imprisonment

I both sorry and puzzled to hear that a journalist who went to document voting in Myanmar's constitutional referendum last 10 May 2008 has been imprisoned on a completely different charge and call for a prompt review of his case in order that he be released without delay.

According to the information I have been given, Aung Htun Myint came to see and record proceedings at the Tatgyigone polling booth in Hmawbi around 1pm on May 10, for Seven Day news journal, and had with him two video cameras that he was using for that purpose. However, Sub Inspector Nyo Tin and U Myat Ko Ko stopped Aung Htun Myint and accused him of illegally taking footage of the voting and also of damage in the area as a result of Cyclone Nargis a week before. They took him to the township police station and then sent him to the district security at around 5pm, who held him for around two days before returning him to the township police.

The police charged Aung Htun Myint not with anything he was doing in Hmawbi, but with illegally travelling to Thailand in January 2008 for video training. In fact, they had no evidence against him of this charge, which was totally unrelated to his being in Hmawbi. They also took five days to lodge a complaint against him, during which time they held him in illegal detention.

In court, the police presented the video cameras and other items that Aung Htun Myint had in his possession at time of arrest as material evidence of his offence. But the video cameras and other items related to his trip were irrelevant to the charge. They also said that it "had emerged" during interrogation that he had gone to Thailand illegally. But, they could give no evidence of this. Inspector Min Hsu Oo could not say what day Aung Htun Myint had supposedly gone, for how long he had stayed or where he had stayed.

In his defence Aung Htun Myint said that just because he had a card with a phone number in Myawaddy, a town adjacent to Thailand, the police had decided that they would accuse him of going to Thailand illegally, and he was tortured in the Western District Police Station of Rangoon to have him confess, but he did not. However, Judge Daw Amar concluded that she found his account unbelievable and sentenced him to three years' imprisonment, even though there was no reasoning or proper explanation for the sentence.

In view of the patent flaws in this case, I call for the Minister of Home Affairs and the Attorney General and other concerned officials to review it promptly with a view to seeing the accused released without delay. I also call for the responsible authorities to review the performance of the Hmawbi Law Office, Hmawbi Township Police and Judge Amar respectively in light of the many errors and flaws in this case.

Finally, I take this opportunity to remind the Government of Myanmar of the need to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross access to prisons to ensure that detainees like Aung Htun Myint and others are held in sanitary and humane conditions.

Yours sincerely

---
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Maj-Gen. Maung Oo
Minister for Home Affairs
Ministry of Home Affairs
Office No. 10
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 412 079/ 549 393/ 549 663
Fax: +95 67 412 439

2. Lt-Gen. Thein Sein
Prime Minister
c/o Ministry of Defence
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 1 372 681
Fax: + 95 1 652 624

3. U Aung Toe
Chief Justice
Office of the Supreme Court
Office No. 24
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 67 404 080/ 071/ 078/ 067 or + 95 1 372 145
Fax: + 95 67 404 059

4. U Aye Maung
Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Office No. 25
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 404 088/ 090/ 092/ 094/ 097
Fax: +95 67 404 146/ 106

5. Brig-Gen. Khin Yi
Director General
Myanmar Police Force
Ministry of Home Affairs
Office No. 10
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 412 079/ 549 393/ 549 663
Fax: +951 549 663 / 549 208

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-040-2009
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.