Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Burma): Workers' rights advocates given long jail terms
 

UPDATE (Burma): Workers' rights advocates given long jail terms

September 10, 2007

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

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Update on Urgent Appeal

11 September 2007

[RE: UA-248-2007: BURMA: Six persons illegally jailed and charged for talking about workers' rights]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-121-2007: BURMA: Workers' rights advocates given long jail terms

BURMA: Illegal arrest and detention; denial of fair trial; denial of rights to assembly & association; threats to human rights defenders; un-rule of law
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) regrets to inform you that six labour rights advocates in Burma have been given long jail terms by a special tribunal in the central prison. They were not represented, as their lawyers quit in protest after being constantly harassed by the prison authorities. Their imprisonment comes after a number of other cases in which persons engaged in human rights education and protection in Burma have been jailed, and at a time of increasing open discontent with the military regime.

As the AHRC reported previously (UA-248-2007), on 1 May 2007 a group of workers' rights advocates in Rangoon were illegally arrested by unknown persons in plain clothes and taken away on Dyna vans and other transport to a special interrogation centre after organising some discussions to mark May Day. Such methods of "arrest" have since been used repeatedly during the current protests against the August 15 fuel price hike (see AS-201-2007; and, Burma Protests 2007 page: http://campaigns.ahrchk.net/burmaprotests).

Out of 33 persons originally arrested, six were held and charged, namely: Ko Thurein Aung, Ko Way Lin, Ko Kyaw Min (a.k.a. Ko Wanna), Ko Myo Min, Ko Nyi Nyi Zaw, and Ko Kyaw Kyaw.

According to information from the Yoma 3 news service (Thailand) and other sources, on Friday, September 7, the six were all found guilty of sedition and illegal organising by a special tribunal inside the central prison, and sentenced to 20 to 28 years in jail.

As the lawyers for the six had already resigned due to constant harassment by the prison officials, it is not clear as to whether or not, or how, the six might lodge appeals against their sentences.

According to information earlier received, the hearings had been scheduled to be completed and a judgment given on September 30; it is not known as to why the judgment was given earlier than scheduled. 


ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

This case comes at a time of a number of other cases reported on by the AHRC where human rights defenders have been targetted and jailed simply for holding talks and other very limited activities in Burma. See in particular the jailing of Ko Min Min (UP-108-2007) on a charge of giving illegal tuition, and also of six rights defenders in the delta region (UP-105-2007). The AHRC submitted a letter of concern on Ko Min Min's case to the secretary general of the Association of South East Asian Nations: AHRC-PL-030-2007.

The AHRC has called on the UN special expert for human rights defenders to do much more to address the worsening situation in Burma for these persons: AHRC-OL-025-2007. It has also spoken of the growing use of thugs and unconventional groups to handle government opponents and persons organising on human rights principles: AS-173-2007; AS-125-2007.

On August 9 the AHRC also submitted an open letter to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) on this case: AHRC-OL-027-2007. It has since been informed by the ILO that it has been closely following the case.

The charges and handling of the case also bear a strong resemblance to that of the group of Shan nationality leaders given life sentences for high treason and sedition earlier in 2007 (UP-016-2007; UP-008-2007; UA-017-2007; see also Pyithu Hittaing, vol. 2, no. 2).

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

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the Attorney General and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to call for a review of the judgment in this case in view of the fact that the men were not tried in open court and did not have lawyers representing them for much of the proceedings.

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.

To support this appeal, please click here:

Sample letter:

Dear ___________,

MYANMAR: Long jail terms for six workers' rights advocates breach domestic and international law

Details of convicted persons:
28 years for sedition, illegal movement across border and participating in an illegal organisation [Penal Code sn. 124A; Burma Immigration (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1947, sn. 13(1); Unlawful Association Act, 1908, sn. 17(1)] --
1. Ko Thurein Aung, 32, event organiser, resident of Hlaingthayar Township, Yangon
2, Ko Way Lin, 24, event organiser resident of Mangaleit village, Kunchankone Township,    Yangon Division
3. Ko Kyaw Min (a.k.a. Ko Wanna)
4. Ko Myo Min
20 years for sedition, Penal Code sn. 124A --
5. Ko Nyi Nyi Zaw, 25, May Day events organiser, resident of Thukhayeithar, Hlaing Township, Yangon;
6. Ko Kyaw Kyaw, 29, junior lawyer, resident of Ward 20, South Dagon Township, Yangon
Detained & interrogated by: Deputy Superintendent Zaw Lin Naing and other personnel of Kyaik-kahsan interrogation camp, Myanmar Police Force, on 1 May 2007
Further details: Charges lodged by Deputy Superintendent Myo Thant, hearings commenced in Insein Prison Special Court, Yangon on 16 July 2007; subsequently at North Yangon District Court, but then transferred back to the prison court; judgment given on 7 September 2007

I am greatly disturbed to hear that six men in Myanmar have been given long jail terms for sedition and other grave offences simply for organising a discussion about basic workers' rights.

The six were among some 33 persons detained as they had arranged a meeting to commemorate May Day at the American Center in Rangoon. After being held at a special interrogation centre, they were transferred to the central prison, where they were reportedly held in separate buildings, denied visits, and also subjected to cruel and inhuman treatment.

The case opened against the six on July 16 at the central prison premises. Relatives were not admitted to the first hearing but were able to attend the subsequent hearings from July 20, at an outside court. However, after that the hearings were transferred back to the prison premises, where outsiders have been unable to get access. Thus, two lawyers for the accused, U Aung Thein and U Khin Maung Shin, on August 2 sought for the case to be transferred back to open court, in accordance with section 2(e) of the Judiciary Law 2000, that "dispensing justice [should be] in open court unless otherwise prohibited by law". However, due to constant harassment as they entered and left the court premises, the two lawyers withdrew from the case in protest on August 4. Thus the defendants had no attorneys appearing for them throughout the remainder of the trial, and nor when they were sentenced to 20 to 28 years in jail on September 7.

I find it outrageous that the court system in Myanmar is being so blatantly misused and perverted for the purpose of imprisoning persons whose only "offence" was to discuss and promote workers' rights in accordance with standards to which the government of Myanmar is supposed to be in compliance. This case is particularly ironic coming at a time that the government has recently renewed its agreement for cooperation with the International Labour Organisation, and I expect that the latter is following the case closely and it will also be highly concerned by the treatment of these men.

I therefore call for the attorney general of Myanmar to see that the concerned law office personnel review the case without further delay in accordance with the Attorney General Law (2001), sections 4(b) and 9(h), in particular in view of the facts that the case was not conducted in open court and the accused were not represented, in violation of their basic rights (Attorney General Law, section 3[i]).

I am also aware that this is one of a number of such cases involving illegal arrests and needless persecution of human rights defenders and others in Myanmar during recent times. I take this opportunity to call for the cessation of such actions by the government and persons acting on its behalf, and in particular demand the release from imprisonment of jailed former tuition teacher Ko Min Min and the six members of the Human Rights Defenders and Promoters group in Henzada Township.

Yours sincerely

---

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. 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

2. 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

PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:

1. Lt-Gen. Thein Sein
Acting Prime Minister
c/o Ministry of Defence
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 1 372 681
Fax: + 95 1 652 624

2. Maj-Gen. Maung Oo
Minister for Home Affairs
Ministry of Home Affairs
Office No. 10
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 412 040/ 069/ 072
Fax: +95 67 412 016/ 439
E-mail: ddg.gad@gad.gov.mm

3. Brig-Gen. Khin Yi
Director General
Myanmar Police Force
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 1 549 196/ 228/ 209

4. U Aung Bwa
Director-General, ASEAN-Myanmar
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Pyinmana
MYANMAR
Tel: +951 229 214; 221 191
Fax: +951 222 950; 221 719
E-mail: dgaseanmofa@myanmar.com.mm

5. Mr. Patrick Vial
Head of Delegation
ICRC
No. 2 (C) - 5 Dr. Ba Han Lane
Kaba Aye Pagoda Road, 8th Mile
Mayangone Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel.: +951 662 613 / 664 524
Fax: +951 650 117
E-mail: yangon.yan@icrc.org

6. Mr Steve Marshall
Liaison Officer (Myanmar)
International Labour Organization (ILO)
4, route des Morillons
CH-1211 Geneva 22
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 798 8685
E-mail: marshall@ilo.org

7. Professor Paulo Sergio Pinheiro
Special Rapporteur on Myanmar
Attn: Mr. Laurent Meillan
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: + 41 22 9179 281
Fax: + 41 22 9179 018 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR MYANMAR)
E-mail: lmeillan@ohchr.org

8. Ms. Hina Jilani
Special Representative of the Secretary General on human rights defenders
C/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 93 88
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS)

9. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
Attn: Mr. Safir Syed
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 9179016 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TORTURE)

10. Mr. Homayoun Alizadeh
Regional Representative for Asia-Pacific of OHCHR
UNESCAP
UN Secretariat Building, 6th Fl., Room A-601
Rajdamnern Nok Ave.
Bangkok 10200,
THAILAND
Tel: +662 288 1496
Fax: +662 288 3009

11. Mr. Ong Keng Yong
Secretary General
ASEAN Secretariat
70A, Jalan Sisingamangaraja
Jakarta 12110
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 7262991/ 7243372
Fax: +62 21 7398234/ 7243504
Email: public@aseansec.org; termsak@aseansec.org; amelia.b@aseansec.org


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-121-2007
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.