Home / News / Urgent Appeals / BURMA: Court refuses to act on death due to torture in custody
 

BURMA: Court refuses to act on death due to torture in custody

June 28, 2005

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM

29 June 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-110-2005: BURMA: Court refuses to act on death due to torture in custody

BURMA: Death, Torture, Death in Custody, Impunity, Illegal Arrest, Un-rule of law
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from reliable sources about the torture and death of a man in Hlaing Township, Rangoon, Burma. On 1 May 2005 30-year-old Aung Hlaing Win, was arrested by four security agents in civilian clothing. The victim was illegally detained and handed over to the military intelligence for interrogation. Nine days later on 10 May, Lt. Col. Min Hlaing notified the family that he had died from a heart attack during the interrogation. The victim's family lodged a complaint with the Mayangone police station over her husband's death in custody and non-return of the body, but the court threw the case out and allegedly refused to give copies of the judgment and other court records to the family and advocates.

Please immediately send a letter to Attorney General to order a thorough and impartial investigation so that the perpetrators of this heinous crime are duly punished. All military intelligence officers responsible for the victim's death should be immediately suspended from duty and arrested. The victim's family should be adequately compensated.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
---------------------------------------------------------

DETAILED INFORMATION

Name of the victim: Aung Hlaing Win, age 30 years, a National League for Democracy (NLD) youth member, of Hlaing Township, Rangoon
Alleged perpetrators:
1. Captain Sai Aung Win and seven other officers, including police and officers of the Military Intelligence Base No.1, Rangoon
2. Lt-Col. Min Hlaing, Commanding Officer, Military Intelligence Base No.1, Rangoon
Date of the incident: 7 May 2005
Place of the incident: Military Intelligence Base No.1, Rangoon

Case Details:

On 10 May 2005, family members of Aung Hlaing Win were notified by the commander of an interrogation centre, Lt-Col. Min Hlaing, that Aung Hlaing Win died from a heart attack on May 7 during interrogation. Aung Hlaing Win was reportedly arrested by four plain-clothes military intelligence agents on May 1 while eating at a restaurant called "Lucky".

Upon notifying the victim's family, Lt-Col. Min Hlaing also allegedly offered the family 100,000 Kyat (USD 100) as compensation to pay for funeral arrangements, but the offer was declined by the victim's family. They demanded the agents to return Aung Hlaing Win's corpse, which was cremated secretly by the Military Intelligence (MI) to cover up the likely death by torture he suffered during his interrogation. The family was also told that he had already been buried the previous day, on May 9.

According to one of the four doctors who examined the victim's body, Dr. Zaw Zaw Oo from Mayangone hospital, Aung Hlaing Win was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital, where he was brought by a military intelligence officer on the night of May 7. It is believed he died in transit to the hospital. Dr. Zaw Zaw Oo filed a report on June 7 stating that the victim had numerous bodily injuries including 24 external bruises, three broken ribs, a bruised heart, swollen throat and an infected stomach and intestines.

On May 18, the victim's wife, Ma Hnin Sandar lodged a complaint with the Mayangone police station over her husband's death in custody and non-return of the body. The hearing of a case against Captain Sai Aung Win and seven other officers of the police and military intelligence stated in the Mayangone Township Court on June 1.  All the doctors who examined the victim's body went to testify, but the court concluded that the victim had died of chronic heart, liver and kidney diseases. The court also reportedly refused to accept questions from Ma Hnin Sandar as to why her husband's body was not returned to the family. It also allegedly refused to give copies of the judgment and other court records to the family and advocates. The family was also allegedly denied the right to appoint an advocate of their choice.


SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send a letter to the Attorney General, urging him to order immediately an impartial investigation into this incident. Please also call for the appropriate actions taken to see that police and military intelligence officers are properly punished. A suggested letter follows. Please note that for the purposes of this letter, the country should be referred to as Myanmar, rather than Burma, and the capital Yangon rather than Rangoon.

Sample letter:

Dear Dr. Tun Shin,

Re: TORTURE TO DEATH OF AUNG HLAING WIN AND CASE IN MAYANGONE TOWNSHIP COURT

Name of the victim: Aung Hlaing Win, age 30 years, a National League for Democracy (NLD) youth member, Hlaing Township, Yangon
Alleged perpetrators:
1. Captain Sai Aung Win and seven other officers, including police and officers of the Military Intelligence Base No.1, Yangon
2. Lt-Col. Min Hlaing, Commanding Officer, Military Intelligence Base No.1, Yangon
Date of the incident: 7 May 2005
Place of the incident: Military Intelligence Base No.1, Yangon

I am deeply concerned to hear of the torture and death of Mr. Aung Hlaing Win in Hlaing Township, Yangon.

Mr. Aung Hlaing Win was reportedly having a meal at a local restaurant called "Lucky" on 1 May 2005 when he was arrested by four security agents in civilian clothing. Mr Aung Hlaing Win was illegally detained and handed over to the military intelligence for interrogation. On May 10 the family members of Aung Hlaing Win were notified by the commander of Military Intelligence Base No.1, Lt-Col. Min Hlaing that Aung Hlaing Win had died of a heart attack during the interrogation. Aung Hlaing Min is survived by his wife Ma Hnin Sandar and his three-year-old daughter, Shan Shan.

The victim's body was allegedly never returned to his family. I have also received information that on May 18, the victim's wife, Ma Hnin Sandar lodged a complaint with the Mayangone police station over her husband's death in custody and non-return of the body. It was alleged that all the doctors who examined the victim's body went to testify, but the court concluded that the victim had died of chronic heart, liver and kidney diseases. From other information I have received, it also allegedly refused to give copies of the judgment and other court records to the family and advocates. The family was also allegedly denied the right to appoint an advocate of their choice.

Given the severity of this case, I write to you asking for your intervention. Please take steps to ensure that a thorough and impartial investigation can be conducted so that the perpetrators of this heinous crime are duly punished. All military intelligence and police officers responsible for the victim's death should be immediately suspended from duty and arrested. The testimonies of the doctors that examined the victim's body, and the records of judgment that the court refused to distribute must be immediately released to the concerned parties. The victim's family should be adequately compensated and the perpetrators should be made to pay the compensation.

Finally, I urge the Government of Myanmar to ratify the UN Convention against Torture (CAT) and introduce it into domestic law without delay.

I look forward to your intervention.

Yours sincerely,


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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

Dr Tun Shin
Director General
Office of the Attorney General
101 Pansodan Street
Kyauktada Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Fax: + 95 1 371 028 / 282 990 / 282 449

PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:

1. Lt General Soe Win
Prime Minister
c/o Ministry of Defence
Signal Pagoda Road
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 1 372 681
Fax: + 95 1 652 624

2. Maj-Gen Maung Oo
Chairman
Myanmar Human Rights Committee
c/o Ministry of Home Affairs
Corner of Saya San Street and No 1 Industrial Street,
Yankin Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Fax: +95 1 549 663 / 549 208

3. Mr Paulo Sergio Pinheiro
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar
Attn: Ms. Ryan
Capacity Building and Field Operations Branch
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights,
3-071 Palais Wilson,
Rue des Paquis 52, Geneva
SWITZERLAND
Fax:      + 41 22 9179 018

4. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the question of torture
Attn: Mr. Safir Syed
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (general)
E-mail: ssyed@ohchr.org

5. Mr. Leandro Despouy
Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers
Att: Sonia Cronin
Room: 3-060
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9160
Fax: +41 22 917 9006
E-mail: scronin@ohchr.org

6. Mr. Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions
Attn: Lydie Ventre
Room 3-016
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9155
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (general)


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-110-2005
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.