Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Burma): Two police to go to court over alleged rape
 

UPDATE (Burma): Two police to go to court over alleged rape

January 24, 2006

UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME
Update on Urgent Appeal

24 January 2006

[RE: UA-141-2005: BURMA: Alleged rape of a woman by two police officers in Twente Township]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-008-2006: BURMA: Two police to go to court over alleged rape

BURMA: Rape; Impunity; Violence against women; Corruption; Human rights defenders
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received news that two police officers in central Burma have been charged with rape by a local court, despite attempts by the police to bribe and intimidate the victim to withdraw the charges.

According to the information received, the Twente Township Court decided after preliminary hearings that the two officers, Tin Ko Oo & Kyaw Myo Min, together with a civilian named Naing Min, should be tried for the alleged rape of Ma Soe Soe on 12 June 2005 (see UA-141-2005).

Despite attempts by the alleged perpetrators to bribe and threaten the victim, she has refused to stop the legal action and has reportedly said that she is acting to defend the dignity of all women in Burma.

Although it is a good sign that the case is going to court, the AHRC is gravely concerned for the safety of the victim and key prosecution witnesses in the case. In other instances where complaints have been successfully lodged against government officers, counter legal action and extra-legal measures have been taken to silence and punish the complainants and their supporters. Therefore, please write to the Attorney General and international agencies to ensure that the case is properly handled, and regard paid to Myanmar's obligations the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, to which it is a party.

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

UPDATED INFORMATION:

The AHRC earlier reported that two police officers in Twente Township, Rangoon, Burma, allegedly raped a 30-year-old mother of three named Ma Soe Soe on 12 June 2005, together with one other person. They also chased a number of eyewitnesses and were able to catch and detain one of them (full details at UA-141-2005).

Although the local authorities reportedly tried to stop action being taken on the case, Ma Soe Soe insisted upon lodging a criminal complaint, and has been supported by the witnesses and medical reports.

According to the information available to the AHRC, after Ma Soe Soe lodged the complaint the three perpetrators each offered to pay two million Burmese kyat, totaling six million kyat (USD 5000), for Ma Soe Soe to withdraw the case. Ma Soe Soe's family is extremely poor: she works carrying sacks of paddy husks and struggles every day to feed and clothe her children, for which she would earn less than one US dollar per day. She would not dream of being able to get such an enormous amount of money. However, she refused to accept the money. According to U Maung Maung Hein, a stringer with Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB) radio

"The authorities in Burma --police, soldiers--are like this. The people with power frequently abuse women and then just pay some settlement money to end the case... [Ma Soe Soe] cannot accept this situation. Another thing is that everywhere [in Burma] these days women are in a weak position. Local people have said that she wants to fully prosecute these police as a stand against this type of abuse..." 

Due to her refusal to withdraw the case, Ma Soe Soe and witnesses on her side have reportedly faced various forms of harassment and intimidation. On August 23 during the questioning of witnesses, Deputy Superintendent Ngwei Htun of Twente Township Police Station reportedly threatened to have her arrested, and showed his handcuffs. The witnesses were also treated very abusively and not in accordance with correct procedure. For instance, Ma Soe Soe herself was questioned among other witnesses and government officers, rather than being questioned in private. So all persons present could hear all the details of what happened to her.

The case came into the court for preliminary hearings in September. Among the witnesses for Ma Soe Soe were two of the men who were eyewitnesses: Poe Cho, who was caught and detained by the alleged rapists, and Ko Myo Thant, who managed to escape after being chased. They testified to hearing her cries for help and went to look, after which the police chased them. Also testifying was the couple with whom Ma Soe Soe was walking when accosted by the police. In total 12 witnesses were examined by the court.

The court also received a medical report based upon a forensic examination of the garments worn by Ma Soe Soe on the night, which supported the accusation of rape.

On 2 January 2006 the Twente Township Court, Judge U Zaw Zaw Thein presiding, posted the case to full trial on charges of gang rape under sections 376, 377 and 34 of the Penal Code. He identified three principal witnesses for further opening inquiries.

PRESENT SITUATION:

While it is a good sign that the case is going to full trial, the AHRC is gravely concerned for the security of the victim and her witnesses and other supporters. In other cases where ordinary civilians have lodged complaints against the authorities in Burma, they have been subjected to punitive sanctions and threats as a consequence. The case of Ma Su Su Nwe, which is due to go to the Supreme Court (UP-006-2006), is indicative. In that case, witnesses have allegedly been repeatedly intimidated and legal action initiated against some to remove their properties from their possession. In other cases also local authorities that have faced complaints by residents have sought various ways to obtain revenge (see for instance UA-175-2004 and UP-64-2004).

Rape is both a non-bailable and non-compoundable offence under Schedule II of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Burma. Therefore, the two defendants cannot seek to settle the case such as by offering money, and they must be arrested and detained. The AHRC is at present attempting to confirm that the accused police officers are now being held in detention.

Please also refer back to the original appeal in this case (see UA-141-2005) for a discussion on violence against women in Burma by government officials (under Additional Comments).

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the Attorney General to ensure that the case is properly pursued through the courts and the plaintiff and witnesses are fully protected. A suggested letter follows. Please note that for the purpose of this letter, the country should be referred to by its official title of Myanmar, rather than Burma.

Sample letter:

Dear Director General,

Re: MYANMAR: Rape case proceeding against two police officers in Twente Township Court

I am writing to you with regards to the rape case that is proceeding against two police officers in the Twente Township Court. 

You have previously been informed of the alleged rape of Ma Soe Soe, a 30-year-old mother of three children residing in Myathida ward, Twente Township, Yangon Division, Myanmar by Constables Tin Ko Oo & Kyaw Myo Min, together with another man named Naing Min, on 12 June 2005. The incident was witnessed by a number of persons, one of whom was subsequently detained by the alleged rapists.

According to the information I have received, although the perpetrators illegally offered to pay Ma Soe Soe six million kyat to withdraw the case she refused. Due to her refusal, Ma Soe Soe and witnesses on her side have reportedly faced various forms of harassment and intimidation. On August 23 during the questioning of witnesses, Deputy Superintendent Ngwei Htun of Twente Township Police Station allegedly threatened to have her arrested, and showed his handcuffs. The witnesses were also reportedly treated very abusively and not in accordance with correct procedure. For instance, Ma Soe Soe herself was questioned among other witnesses and government officers, rather than being questioned in private. 

Notwithstanding, on 2 January 2006 the Twente Township Court, Judge U Zaw Zaw Thein presiding, posted the case to full trial on charges of gang rape under sections 376, 377 and 34 of the Penal Code. He based the order on the testimonies of eyewitnesses for the prosecution, and a medical report backing the victim's allegations.

I am informed that offences under sections 376 and 377 are non-bailable and non-compoundable under Schedule II of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, I am seeking your assurance that the accused have been placed under arrest and will be kept in detention until the trial process is complete. I also am seeking your assurance that the necessary steps will be taken to protect the victim or other witnesses from intimidation, in order that the duties of the Attorney General are fulfilled in accordance with section 3(i) of the Attorney General Law 2001. These should include, where necessary, offers of protection for the victim and witnesses, and guarantees that no punitive actions will be taken against any of them by local authorities, as reported in other similar cases where ordinary civilians have complained against government officials. For this purpose, I urge you to instruct the staff of the Twente Township Law Office to ensure that the case is conducted as promptly and efficiently as possible.

I with to remind you of the many concerns felt in the international community regarding violence against women by government officials in Myanmar. I am aware that despite the fact that the Myanmar government has international obligations to provide remedies to the victims, including compensation and rehabilitation, in keeping with the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), most cases of rape by government officers never reach the courts. One of the reasons for this is due to the absence of effective legal remedies. Therefore, I urge you to recommend to the Government of Myanmar that it enact an enabling law in pursuance to the CEDAW in order that its provisions are properly enacted in Myanmar and the rights of women there are better protected.

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
E-mail: ago.h.o@mptmail.net.mm

PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:

1. Lt-Gen 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
Minister of Home Affairs
Ministry of Home Affairs
Corner of Saya San Street and No 1 Industrial Street,
Yankin Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel: +951 250 315 / 374 789
Fax: +951 549 663 / 549 208

3. U Aung Toe
Chief Justice
Office of the Supreme Court
101 Pansodan Street
Kyauktada Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel: +951 372 249 / 253 066

4. Major General Sein Htwa
Minister of Social Welfare, Relief & Resettlement
Chairman
Myanmar National Working Committee for Women's Affairs
64 Kabar Aye Pagoda Road
Yangon
MYANMAR
Fax: +95 1 650 002

5. Ms. Yakin Erturk
Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women
c/o Ms Lucinda Ohanlon
Room 3-042
OHCHR-UNOG, Palais Wilson,
8-14 Avenue de la Paix,
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9615
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (Attn: Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women)
Email: lohanlon@ohchr.org

6. Professor Paulo Sergio Pinheiro
Special Rapporteur on Myanmar
Attn: Ms. Audrey Ryan
Room 3-090
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: + 41 22 9179 281
Fax: + 41 22 9179 018 (Attn: Special Rapporteur on Myanmar)
E-mail: aryan@ohchr.org

7. Ms. Hina Jilani
Special Representative of the Secretary General for human rights defenders
Att: Ben Majekodunmi or Ms. Chlo? Marnay-Baszanger
Room 1-040, c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 93 88
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (Attn: Special Representative for human rights defenders)
E-mail: bmajekodunmi@ohchr.org; cmarnay-baszanger@ohchr.org

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-008-2006
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.