Home / News / Urgent Appeals / BURMA: Illegal detention and torture of man accused of links with armed group

BURMA: Illegal detention and torture of man accused of links with armed group

July 17, 2012

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-132-2012

17 July 2012
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BURMA: Illegal detention and torture of man accused of links with armed group

ISSUES: Arbitrary arrest; illegal detention; torture
---------------------------------------------------------------------

AHRC WEBSITE: BURMA PAGE
http://www.humanrights.asia/countries/burma

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

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received details of a case of a man who is currently being held in jail in upper Burma after being accused of connections with an armed group active in the region. According to witnesses, Lahtaw Brang Shawng is an ordinary villager displaced by civil conflict who has been illegally detained and severely tortured in order to give a forced confession of crimes that he did not commit. When a judge saw his injuries caused by torture, he refused to record the confession; however, the next day another judge took it and a case is now proceeding against the victim.

CASE NARRATIVE:

On the night of 17 June 2012 a group of around ten men led by a police station chief and a civilian official came to a relief camp for people affected by armed conflict in Kachin State and told Lahtaw Brang Shawng that they needed to question him over three explosions. They handcuffed him and took him away, promising to let him go in 24 hours if they were satisfied that he had no involvement in the crimes. However, instead they sent him to a military intelligence facility where he was held incommunicado and severely tortured.

The methods of torture allegedly used included holding the flat side of a hot knife to his face, hitting his head with bamboo, stabbing his thighs, and running a bamboo roller along the back of the thighs. Brang Shawng also says that an intelligence officer threatened to kill him and ordered him to dig his own grave.

On June 20 officers brought Brang Shawng back to the relief camp in order to force him to do a reenactment to use against him in court. People who saw him at the camp said that he had visible injuries, including bruises and swelling, over his body.

After one week Brang Shawng's case was for the first time brought to court, where a judge remanded him in custody. On June 28, he was brought to the court to give a confession to the same judge. When the judge saw that Brang Shawng had a black eye he asked how it had happened and Brang Shawng replied that he had fallen from a motorcycle. Because it did not look like a motorcycle accident injury the judge asked him to lift up his shirt and then he saw that a recording device had been taped to the defendant's body. He had photographs taken of it and then refused to record a confession. Despite this obvious effort to set up the confession and ensure that the defendant told what he had been tutored to tell the judge, the next day officials again brought Brang Shawng to court and this time another judge recorded the confession.

Brang Shawng was then held in solitary confinement at the town prison. Members of a church group that visited him have called for his release. The armed group with which he is supposed to be involved, the Kachin Independence Army, has also denied any affiliation.

Further details of the case are provided in the sample letter below as usual.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Brang Shawng had relocated from his village on the Waimaw-Laisa road about one year previously, due to fighting between the state armed forces and the Kachin Independence Army. He was assisting the relief camp officials by carrying out some responsibilities concerned with camp administration. He cannot speak Burmese well and would not understand many points put to him in a police interrogation.

The arrest of Brang Shawng has not only affected him and his family but has also made people in the relief camp afraid that others could be arrested and detained at any time.

Since the collapse of a ceasefire between the government and KIA, many incidents of gross human rights abuse have been reported from the region. The AHRC has previously issued an appeal on the abduction and forced disappearance by government troops of a woman villager in the region: AHRC-UAC-240-2011. Although lawyers lodged a writ of habeas corpus application over her abduction in the Supreme Court this year, the court rejected the application on grounds that her abduction by the army could not be proved. This is even though the court failed to call two eyewitnesses to her abduction.

To browse hundreds of other Burma-related appeals issued by the AHRC, go to the appeals homepage and type "Burma" or "Myanmar" into the search box http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/.

The AHRC Burmese-language blog is updated constantly for Burmese-language readers, and covers the contents of urgent appeal cases, related news, and special analysis pieces.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the persons listed below to call for the release from custody immediately of Lahtaw Brang Shawng and for investigations into the persons responsible for his illegal detention, torture and recording of a forced confession. Please note that for the purposes of the letter Burma is referred to by its official name, Myanmar.

Please be informed that the AHRC is writing separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Myanmar, on the independence of judges and lawyers, and on torture; 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: Man illegally detained and tortured for alleged links with armed group

Details of victim: Lahtaw Brang Shawng, 25, daily wage labourer, father of three children residing in building 2 of the Jan Mai Kawng relief camp for internally displaced people affected by fighting in Kachin State, Myitkyina

Details of alleged perpetrators: Number 1 Police Station chief, Myitkyina Township, Ward Officer U Maung Maung; Captain Kyaw Swa Lin, Military Affairs Security; Police Sub Inspector U Aung Mya Than, attached to district police command, and other police and military intelligence personnel

Date of arrest: 17 June 2012, 9pm

Details of case brought against victim: Myitkyina Township Court, Criminal Case No. 1199/2012, case brought by Captain Kyaw Swa Lin, Judge U Myint Htoo presiding; charged under section 17(1) of the Unlawful Associations Act, 1907; first hearings on 4 and 11 July 2012

I am writing to inform you of a case of illegal detention and torture of a man in the north of Myanmar who has been wrongly accused of involvement with an armed group that is currently fighting against the government.

According to the information that I have received, at about 9pm on 17 June 2012 a group of around ten men led by the station chief for Police Station No. 1 in Myitkyina Township, northern Myanmar, and a ward official came to a relief camp for people affected by armed conflict in Kachin State and told Lahtaw Brang Shawng that they needed to question him over three explosions registered for investigation at the police station (FIR No. 122/2012). They said that if they questioned him and found no reason to hold him then they would release him within 24 hours as required by law. Then they handcuffed him and took him away.

However, after 24 hours the police had not released Brang Shawng and nor had they sent him before a magistrate to remand him on charges as required by law. Instead they transferred him to a detention facility of military intelligence, Military Affairs Security, where he was held incommunicado and severely tortured up to June 24. The methods of torture allegedly used included holding the flat side of a hot knife to his lips, hitting his head with bamboo, stabbing his thighs, and running a bamboo roller along the back of the thighs. Brang Shawng also says that intelligence officer Captain Kyaw Swa Lin told him that, "I will kill you", and ordered him to dig his own grave in an attempt to intimidate him into admitting to crimes.

On June 20 officers brought Brang Shawng back to the relief camp in order to force him to do a reenactment to use against him in court. People who saw him at the camp said that he had visible injuries, including bruises and swelling, over his body. According to camp officials, many people are now fearful to stay in the camp and are trying to move elsewhere out of fear that others may be arrested and tortured also.

Only after one week, on June 24, was Brang Shawng's case for the first time brought to court, where Deputy Township Judge U Zaw Min remanded him in custody. On June 28, he was brought to the court to give a confession to the same judge. Because military intelligence officers are not supposed to bring accused people to court and the confession is supposed to be done away from security personnel, they allegedly dressed in plain clothes. When the judge saw that Brang Shawng had a black eye he asked how it had happened and Brang Shawng replied that he had fallen from a motorcycle. Because it did not look like a motorcycle accident injury the judge asked him to lift up his shirt and then he saw that a recording device had been taped to the defendant's body. He had photographs taken of it and then refused to record a confession.

On June 29 Brang Shawng's lawyer had still not been able to meet with him. He went to the police headquarters for the state to urge that he be allowed to see his client; however, on the same day officers brought the accused to court again so as to give a confession and this time a confession was recorded by Additional Deputy Township Judge U Zaw Lin Htun. Afterwards the accused was transferred to the Myitkyina Prison, where he has since reportedly been held in solitary confinement. When some members of a church group were allowed to visit him, according to them, aside from his other injuries, Brang Shawng cannot hear from his left ear as a result of the torture that he suffered in order to force him to give a confession.

When the court case against Brang Shawng opened, his lawyer asked that a record of his physical injuries be made on the court record, that he also be sent for specialist medical examination, and that photographs also be taken and included on the court record. However, the judge agreed only to make a note of the injuries on the court record and declined the other two requests, saying that any medical examination could be undertaken only at prison. This response is clearly inadequate, since medical staff in Myanmar's prisons only do the minimum amount of work possible to satisfy requirements of procedure and do not prepare or submit reports of use for the purpose of investigating allegations of torture, and are also not trained in the undertaking of inquiries of this sort.

State news reports in Myanmar described Brang Shawng as captain of the Kachin Independence Army, which is currently fighting against government forces in the north of the country; however, when the case came to court the police described him as a sergeant. According to his family and officials at the relief camp he is an ordinary villager who was doing daily labouring jobs in order to earn a subsistence wage with which to feed his family. The Kachin Baptist Convention has called for his release. The KIA has itself also denied that he is affiliated with it.

It is apparent to me from the above that security forces in Myanmar have illegally detained an innocent man and have tortured him to confess to one or more crimes that he did not commit. As they could not fabricate a case against him over alleged bombings, rather than release him from custody they are preparing to lodge one or more other cases against him.

In light of this information, I strongly urge the relevant authorities in Myanmar to order the release of Lahtaw Brang Shawng at the earliest possible date, and for the dropping of criminal charges against him. I also call for a special investigation into the military and police and officers involved, and for rehabilitation and financial redress to be extended to the victim without delay. Furthermore, I urge that an inquiry be undertaken into the manner in which confession was taken by the second judge a day after the previous judge had refused to record a confession because it had obviously been extracted through torture.

I also wish to register my serious concern that at this time of political change in Myanmar, military intelligence appears to be continuing to play an extra-legal role in the investigation of criminal cases. So long as military intelligence personnel continue to be able to act with impunity as in cases of this sort that are matters for the police and not the armed forces, it will not be possible for Myanmar to enter into a period of genuine democratic change. Therefore, I urge that steps be taken to ensure that the MAS remains outside of the criminal justice process in cases of this sort, and others, in the future.

Lastly, I call on the government of Myanmar to ratify the UN Convention against Torture and introduce a law to prohibit torture at the earliest possible opportunity, consistent with the terms of the Convention.

Yours sincerely,

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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. U Hla Min
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. U Thein Sein
President of Myanmar
President Office
Office No.18
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR

3. U Tun Tun Oo
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. Dr. Tun Shin
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. U Kyaw Kyaw Htun
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

6.Thura U Aung Ko
Chairman
Pyithu Hluttaw Judicial and legislative Committee
Pythu Hluttaw Office
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR.

7.U Aung Nyain
Chairman
Pyithu Hluttaw Judicial and Legislative Committee
Committee for Public complain and appeals
Office of Amyotha Hluttaw
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR

8. U Win Mra
Chairman
Myanmar National Human Rights Commission
27 Pyay Road
Hlaing Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel: +95-1-659668
Fax: +95-1-659668

9. Ko Ko Hlaing
Chief Political Advisor
Office of the President
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel-+951532501ext-605
Fax-+951 532500

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-132-2012
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.