Home / News / Urgent Appeals / BURMA: Young man brutally tortured, held in solitary confinement and unfairly tried

BURMA: Young man brutally tortured, held in solitary confinement and unfairly tried

August 23, 2010

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-033-2010

23 August 2010

[RE: AHRC-UAC-112-2010: BURMA: Young man unlawfully detained and accused over bombing]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BURMA: Young man brutally tortured, held in solitary confinement and unfairly tried

ISSUES: Administration of justice; arbitrary arrest and detention; fabrication of charges; right to fair trial; torture
---------------------------------------------------------------------

U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
ALRC SPECIAL REPORT ON BURMA

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

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been closely following the case of a young man whom the authorities in Burma have accused of involvement in a bombing during April. Phyo Wai Aung has alleged that he was brutally tortured for nine days to force him to confess. He has also been held in solitary confinement and is being tried in a closed court in the main prison. Phyo Wai Aung has denied any involvement in the crime. He has alibis, but people who could testify to his whereabouts during the incident were allegedly threatened by the police to lie.
 
CASE NARRATIVE:

In a previous appeal and statement the AHRC already expressed concerns over the case of Phyo Wai Aung, 31, who was arrested on 22 April 2010, a week after the explosions at the annual water festival, and whom the police chief in a press conference declared a terrorist (STM-089-2010; UAC-112-2010). The AHRC has obtained further details of the case, and in particular, the alleged torture of the detainee.

AHRC-UAU-033-2010-1According to Phyo Wai Aung, after he was taken from his house around midnight on April 22, he was interrogated and tortured for nine days continuously at a special interrogation camp in Rangoon. The torture included that the police forced him to stand partly naked or fully naked for long periods while being questioned with his hands cuffed and sometimes blindfolded. They made him sit on the floor like a jockey riding a horse and hit and kicked him in the head, hit him with a broom, and boxed his ears. At other times they forced him to kneel on sharp gravel. They also burned his genitals and dripped hot wax onto them. He was not allowed to sleep; the police worked in shifts and officers were constantly present to question and torture him further. 

Throughout this time, the detention was totally illegal. The police also showed an attitude of complete impunity by threatening him in various ways that "If you die it's nothing to us", and that, "We'll call your family and torture you in front of them."

After Phyo Wai Aung could not tolerate the torture any longer he agreed to confess. Only then the police let him sleep and gave him food for three days, then tutored him on how to confess and threatened him that if he said something wrong "it will hurt". After that, they took him to the court where he confessed on 3 May 2010 and was then taken to the central prison.

At the central prison Phyo Wai Aung was put in solitary confinement. His family could visit him for the first time since arrest on May 11, and because he told them that he was innocent and that he was at work, giving details of others who could be witnesses that he was nowhere near the bombing scene, the following day the police again came and interrogated him for another six days straight. The police also allegedly used the names of his two alibis and made them come and give advance testimony in court that he was not at work on the day. Although there are many other people who could testify that he was there, the court has not allowed any more witnesses from his workplace.

Throughout the time that Phyo Wai Aung has been kept in prison he has been held in solitary confinement and for the first two months he was not once allowed outside. After that he was allowed out for just one hour every two weeks. He is also forced to sleep in a place in the cell that he gets wet if it rains.

The police warned Phyo Wai Aung not to hire a lawyer, and although he got one, he has not been able to meet and talk with him freely. Anything they discuss, the prison personnel or police take notes. The lawyer has not been able to get access to many of the case file documents and a police officer even ridiculed the defendant during testimony in court, saying that he had no need for a lawyer and what is true or false God alone will know. Also during the trial, when the lawyer tried to cross examine a witness the judge became angry and reportedly said that, "You can do as you like in other special courts but you cannot in my court. I won’t allow you to ask." For this and other reasons, Phyo Wai Aung has tried to ask for a change of judge, but when a lawyer and relative went to apply to transfer the court, none of the officials would agree to complete the paperwork with which to make an application.

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

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The AHRC has documented a range of cases in Burma where people accused in bombing plots have been brutally tortured and forced to confess. Recently, these have included Nyi Nyi Htun (OLT-009-2010) and Than Myint Aung (UAC-108-2010), although in the case of the latter, the police later altered the charges to unrelated offences.

For some details of other recent cases in which the defendants have allegedly been seriously tortured to confess see: ALRC-CWS-13-09-2010.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

All urgent appeals on Burma can be accessed by going to the appeals homepage and typing "Burma" or "Myanmar" into the search box: http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/. For further discussion see articles and special reports on the article 2 website:http://www.article2.org/search.php again search for Burma/Myanmar; and, see the 2009 AHRC annual report on Burma.

The Asian Legal Resource Centre recently released a special report on rule of law and human rights issues in Burma in the lead up to the Universal Periodic Review process for the country at the United Nations in Geneva. The report and annexe are available on the ALRC website at: http://www.alrc.net/doc/mainfile.php/upr/ (scroll to bottom of page).

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 of Phyo Wai Aung and for investigation of the alleged torturers. 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, Yangon.

In the sample letter below, we have included a list of police who allegedly tortured Phyo Wai Aung. These officers are different from those who are bringing the case into court. For that list of officers, please see the previous appeal: UAC-112-2010.

Please be informed that the AHRC is submitting a special dossier on this and two other cases to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Myanmar, on the independence of judges and lawyers, and on torture; the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the regional human rights office for Southeast Asia, calling for strong interventions.

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ___________,

MYANMAR: Alleged brutal torture, inhumane treatment, arbitrary detention and unfair trial of young man accused over bombing

Details of accused: Ko Phyo Wai Aung, a.k.a. Mohammad Sharvan, 31, electrical engineer/ contractor, resident of Ward 2, Pazundaung Township, Yangon, Myanmar

Date of arrest: 22 April 2010

Alleged torturers: all but no. 8 at Aungthapyay Interrogation Camp, Yangon
1. Police Major Tin Kun 
2. Inspector Khin Maung Yi
3. Inspector Swe Linn
4. Sub Inspector Aye Min Naing
5. Sub Inspector Aye Kyaw
6. Sub Inspector Bo Bo
7. Sub Inspector Si Thu
8. Inspector Kyaw Sein Htun (at Insein Central Prison)

Charges and trial: Unlawful Associations Act, 1908, section 17(1); Immigration (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1947, section 13(1); Penal Code, sections 302, 307, 326 read with 114 (abetting murder, attempted murder and hurt); Explosive Substances Act, 1908, section 3, Yangon Western District Court, Criminal Case Nos. 102-105/10

I am writing to express my grave concern over the alleged brutal torture, illegal detention and unfair trial of a man in Myanmar over the April 15 blasts at the water festival in Yangon that officially killed 10 and injured 168.

I am informed that although the police chief in a press conference on 6 May 2010 declared that the accused, Phyo Wai Aung, is a terrorist even before his case had gone to trial, the defendant has denied the charge and said that he was tortured at the Aungthapyay Interrogation Camp for nine days in order to have him confess.

The torture allegedly included that the police forced him to stand partly naked or fully naked for long periods while being questioned with his hands cuffed and sometimes blindfolded. They made him sit on the floor like a jockey riding a horse and hit and kicked him in the head, hit him with a broom, and boxed his ears. At other times they forced him to kneel on sharp gravel. They also burned his genitals and dripped hot wax onto them. He was not allowed to sleep; the police worked in shifts and officers were constantly present to question and torture him further. 

Throughout this time, the detention was totally illegal. The police also showed an attitude of complete impunity by threatening him in various ways that "If you die it's nothing to us", and that, "We'll call your family and torture you in front of them."

After Phyo Wai Aung could not tolerate the torture any longer he agreed to confess. The police let him sleep and gave him food for three days, then tutored him on how to confess and threatened him that if he said something wrong "it will hurt". After that, they took him to the Hlaing Township Court where he confessed on 3 May 2010 and was then taken to the Insein Prison.

At the central prison Phyo Wai Aung was put in solitary confinement. His family could visit him for the first time since arrest on May 11, and because he told them that he was innocent and that he was at work, giving details of others who could be witnesses that he was nowhere near the bombing scene, the following day the police again came and interrogated him for another six days straight. The police also used the names of his two alibis and made them come and give advance testimony in court that he was not at work on the day. Although there are many other people who could testify that he was there, the police has not allowed any more witnesses on this matter.

Throughout the time that Phyo Wai Aung has been kept in prison he has been held in solitary confinement and for the first two months he was not once allowed outside. After that he was allowed out for just one hour every two weeks. He is also forced to sleep in a place in the cell that he gets wet if it rains.

According to further information that I have received, the police warned Phyo Wai Aung not to hire a lawyer, and although he got one, he has not been able to meet and talk with him freely. Anything they discuss, the prison personnel or police take notes. They have not been able to get access to many of the case file documents and a police officer even ridiculed him during testimony in court, saying that he had no need for a lawyer and what is true or false God alone will know. Also during the trial, when the lawyer tried to cross examine a witness the judge became angry and reportedly said that, "You can do as you like in other special courts but you cannot in my court. I won’t allow you to ask." For this and other reasons, Phyo Wai Aung has tried to ask for a change of judge, but when a lawyer and relative went to apply to transfer the court, none of the officials would agree to do it.

In light of the seriousness of the above allegations, I urge that a special inquiry be set up into this case and that a complete reinvestigation be taken to identify the true facts and establish whether or not the accused has been set up and tortured as he has alleged. I urge that the trial be suspended pending the outcome of such an inquiry, and not only that the judge be changed but that the trial be held in open court in accordance with the 2000 Judiciary Law, rather than inside the prison. And I urge that the government of Myanmar take strong steps in all cases of torture to punish the perpetrators and rehabilitate the victims. In this regard I notice that the government has not ratified either the UN Convention against Torture or the Convention on Civil and Political Rights, but I would also point out that under international law the prohibition on torture is a universal one and it is not restricted to those countries that have joined human rights treaties.

Lastly, 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 as a matter of the utmost urgency. I can see no reason as to why the government has failed to agree to the ICRC mission in accordance with the terms of its international mandate and has for the last few years refused it access. The persistent refusal to allow the ICRC access to detainees like Phyo Wai Aung is one of the reasons that Myanmar's international reputation remains among the worst in the world, and it will continue to be that way until the Government of Myanmar changes its position on this matter. 

Yours sincerely,

----------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Maj-Gen. (Retd.) 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. (Retd.) 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-033-2010
Countries :
Campaigns :
Issues :
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.