Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Burma): Further information on the imprisonment of Mar Mar Aye

UPDATE (Burma): Further information on the imprisonment of Mar Mar Aye

September 21, 2009

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-024-2009

21 September 2009

[RE: AHRC-UAC-116-2009: BURMA: Woman imprisoned after one-day trial for having some T-shirts]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BURMA: Further information on the imprisonment of Mar Mar Aye

ISSUES: Rule of law; military government; judicial system; illegal detention
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has obtained further and more detailed information on the case of Ma Mar Mar Aye, on whose imprisonment we recently issued an appeal. According to this information, the primary reason for her imprisonment was not the T-shirts that the police removed from her house, as previously reported, but that she had spoken to a number of monks in her hometown to ask about politically-related matters.

CASE DETAILS:

As reported previously (AHRC-UAC-116-2009), on 15 August 2009 two police officers took 46-year-old Ma Mar Mar Aye from her house and on August 17 they lodged a charge against Mar Mar Aye for allegedly causing fear and alarm in the public. They also confiscated items from her house, including T-shirts to vote No in the 2008 referendum on a new constitution, and some with Aung San Suu Kyi's picture.

According to the additional information that the AHRC has now obtained regarding this case, the police accused Mar Mar Aye of agitating local monks to do something about the renewed detention of Aung San Suu Kyi. However, when the case came to court none of the monks mentioned as being witnesses were called and only some government officials appeared. As noted previously, Mar Mar Aye was not represented by a lawyer, was unable to call any witnesses in her defence, and was sentenced to two years' imprisonment after a perfunctory hearing.

Further details of the case are provided in an updated sample letter below; for additional information on related cases, please see the previous appeal (AHRC-UAC-116-2009).

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please again write to the persons listed below to call for the release of Mar Mar Aye. 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 Bago rather than Pegu.

Please be informed that the AHRC is writing a separate letter 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: Woman imprisoned after patently unfair trial

Details of accused: Ma Mar Mar Aye, 46, National ID No. 7/KaPaTa(Naing)004130, resident of Hsettainggone Ward, Kyopinkauk Township, Bago Division, Myanmar
Date of arrest: 15 August 2009
Officials involved:
1. Inspector Myint Kyaw (prosecuting officer)
2. Deputy Inspector Tin Ohn (prosecution witness)
3. Deputy Inspector Soe Kyaw (arresting officer)
4. Female Constable Ni Ni Mar (arresting officer)
5. Police Captain U Htun Kyi
6. Police Sergeant Thein Lwin (station clerk)
(All police from Kyopinkauk Township Police Station)
7. U Chit Lwin, Chairman, Seichi-taung Ward Peace & Development Council, Kyopinkauk Township (prosecution witness)
8. U Win Thein, officer, Bago Division (West) Department of Religious Affairs (prosecution witness)
Charge & trial: Penal Code section 505(b); Kyopinkauk Township Court, Judge Mya Thein (Special Powers) presiding, charges lodged on 17 August 2009, Felony No. 1188/2009, heard on August 26, defendant sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment on August 28

I have learned of additional facts concerning the imprisonment of Ma Mar Mar Aye, who was taken into custody on 15 August 2009, and on August 16 police searched her home and removed a number of T-shirts with slogans to vote No for the 2008 constitution, and with images of democracy-party leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

According to the police, on 11 and 12 August 2009 Mar Mar Aye went to see monks at temples in her town to ask if they had received DVDs and other materials documenting the 2007 monk-led protests, and whether or not they would do anything about the renewed detention of Aung San Suu Kyi. Thereafter, local authorities obtained assurances from the monks that they would not be doing anything other than religious practice, and arrested and charged Mar Mar Aye.

During the perfunctory trial, a number of police and government officers appeared as witnesses for the prosecution but none of the monks who were the eyewitnesses to the supposed offensive behaviour of the accused were called. The defendant did not have a lawyer and was also not able to call any witnesses, in violation of her right to a defence under section 2(f) of the Judiciary Law 2000.

I am greatly concerned that this is another case in Myanmar where a person who has committed no offence but against whom the authorities are keen to produce some sort of charge has found herself imprisoned in a patently illegal process of arrest and trial. Accordingly, I urge that the Attorney General at once order a review of this case as per section 4(b) of the Attorney General Law 2001, and for the Minister of Home Affairs and Director General of Police also to look into the matter with a view both to seeing that the unfairly and illegally imprisoned accused is released and also that disciplinary action is taken against the officers concerned with the handling of the case in a manner contrary to law.

I note that Mar Mar Aye is reported to suffer from heart disease and arthritis and that she has already lost weight during the short time that she has been detained. I urge the prisons authorities concerned to ensure that all necessary steps be taken to ensure that her condition does not deteriorate during her incarceration. In this regard, I also 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

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 (AHRC) (ua@ahrc.asia)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
AHRC-UAU-024-2009
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.