Home / News / Urgent Appeals / BURMA: A human rights defender jailed for helping farmers over land disputes with officials

BURMA: A human rights defender jailed for helping farmers over land disputes with officials

November 13, 2009

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-156-2009

13 November 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BURMA: A human rights defender jailed for helping farmers over land disputes with officials

ISSUES: Rule of law; judicial system; human rights defenders
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received details of a new case brought against a human rights defender who has for some years worked to support the land rights of farmers in Burma. U Aye Myint, was sentenced to two years' imprisonment this September on a spurious charge of threatening to injure a public servant.

CASE DETAILS:

According to the forestry department in Aunglan, upper Burma, U Aye Myint threatened a forest manager on 11 and 14 August 2009, saying that he would have him and other officials sacked for having lodged a criminal complaint against two villagers after they had cut eucalyptus plantations in a reserve area in order to make charcoal. In reality, the so-called reserve was previously the farmers' land but officials had allegedly confiscated it from them and then charged them with destroying public property when they had encroached.

Although the case against Aye Myint was completely without evidence and brought on the hearsay of one forestry officer, the presiding judge on September 24 convicted him to two years' imprisonment. During the trial, defence witnesses said that no such event occurred, but the judge said that the defence witnesses had not been able to show that the accused had not said the things of which he was accused, even though it is up to the prosecution, not the defence, to prove the case.

The real reason that Aye Myint was convicted and imprisoned is that he has been fighting for the rights of local farmers and there are a number of cases that have been going through the courts in which he has been active. These include the case against 13 farmers in a nearby village who were arrested over the authorities' confiscation of some 2000 acres of land for a sugarcane plantation in 1993: the International Labour Organisation and ministerial officials investigated the case and some parcels of land, but these farmers were still fighting for over a hundred acres. They were convicted of trespassing and causing damage in October, and sentenced for periods of up to five years in jail.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
U Aye Myint worked closely with Ko Zaw Htay, who was earlier this year sentenced to ten years for taking video footage of army-confiscated land; his lawyer, U Phoe Phyu, was also imprisoned for four years on a charge of having contact with unlawful associations: AHRC-UAC-009-2009. 

Aye Myint’s namesake, a lawyer also named U Aye Myint, was previously imprisoned for helping farmers in Aunglan to fight against forced labour and report cases to the International Labour Organisation, which has an office in Burma under agreement with the government. He was released in 2006 after nearly a year in jail, and after strong interventions from the ILO; however, his licence to practice law was revoked (AHRC UP-139-2006).

For other cases on Burma, go to the appeals homepage and type "Burma" or "Myanmar" into the search box: http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/. Two special reports have also been issued in the article 2 periodical, "Saffron Revolution imprisoned, law denied" (vol. 7, no. 3, September 2008) and "Burma, political psychosis and legal dementia" (vol. 6, no. 5-6, December 2007). There are also a number of related sites, including the AHRC Burmese-language blog, Pyithu Hittaing, and the 2008 AHRC Human Rights Report chapter on Burma.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the persons listed below to call for the immediate release of U Aye Myint. 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 and the independence of judges and lawyers, 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: Rights defender jailed for helping villagers over land disputes with officials

Details of accused:
U Aye Myint, deputy chairman, National League for Democracy (NLD), resident of Seyone Ward, Aunglan Township, Magwe Division, Myanmar; detained at Thayet Prison, Magwe
Key officials involved:
1. U Aung San, officer, Forestry Department, Aunglan Township (complainant)
2. U Hpone Aung, forest manager, Forestry Department, Aunglan Township
Charge & trial: Threat of injury to public servant, section 189, Penal Code; Felony No. 428/09, Aunglan Township Court, Judge Win Myint presiding, sentence of two years' imprisonment on 24 September 2009

I am disturbed to hear that a human rights defender who has for some years worked to support the land rights of farmers in Myanmar has been imprisoned for a second time on spurious grounds.

According to the information that I have received, the forestry department staff accused U Aye Myint of threatening a forest manager, U Hpone Aung, on 11 and 14 August 2009 after U Aung San, another official, had made a criminal complaint against local villagers, whom he accused of cutting eucalyptus plantations in the Bwegyi Reserve in order to make charcoal. In fact, the officials had allegedly confiscated the "reserve" land from farmer U Nyan Myint and his son, Ko Thura Aung, and had charged them with destroying public property after they had gone to work in the area like before.

During the trial, the witnesses for the prosecution said that they had seen Aye Myint berate Hpone Aung at a teashop on those two dates, saying that he had firm evidence to support the accused villagers and that he would get all the officials sacked, and later angrily asking if the officials had a plot to get the villagers arrested, warning them to release the accused in another case. The witnesses for the defence said that no such events had occurred.

Although the case against Aye Myint was based on the say-so of some government officials and people whom they had brought to the court as witnesses, Judge Win Myint sentenced him to prison. In giving his decision, the judge said that the defence witnesses had not been able to show that the accused had not said the things of which he was accused, but this is not the job of the defence: it is up to the prosecution to prove the case.

Even if Aye Myint had said the things of which forestry officials accused him, there is nothing in any of these to bring a charge under section 189, which requires a clear threat of injury that was absent from the statements that witnesses gave to the court.

From what I understand of the case, the real reason that Aye Myint was convicted and imprisoned is that he has been fighting for the rights of local farmers, including in the case against U Than Soe and 11 other farmers in Sankale village who were arrested over the authorities' confiscation of some 2000 acres of land for a sugarcane plantation in 1993: the International Labour Organisation and ministerial officials investigated this case, and some of the land was returned, but the farmers of Sankale were still fighting for over a hundred acres. The authorities charged them with criminal trespass and causing damage to property and the same judge, Win Myint, sentenced them variously from three months to five years in jail on 16 October 2009.

I have learned that Aye Myint's appeal to the Thayet District Court was summarily dismissed and that the case is now to go before the Magwe Divisional Court. I urge that all responsible authorities take prompt action to see that this person, who is innocent of any offence other than that he has an honest desire to work for the betterment of villagers in Myanmar, be released without delay. I also strongly urge that the illegal confiscation of farmers' lands, harassment and frivolous criminal charges be ceased, so that villagers in Aunglan are able to earn their livelihoods honestly and fairly.
 
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 places of detention, in accordance with its globally recognized mandate, without any further delay.

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

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) (ua@ahrc.asia)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-156-2009
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.