Why Junta’s proposed ‘New Constitution’ should be reviewed? (Part-I)

Introduction:

In a regular meeting held on 12^th of March 2009, the leader of the 'Committee Representing People's Parliament' (CRPP)* of Burma – Mr. Aye Thar Aung announced that they will not contest the Junta’s proposed 2010 general elections unless the constitution is amended and reviewed. He further elaborated that, “the main point that needs to be amended is lack of democratic fundamentals especially the No. 6 point in the basic principles which says 'enabling the Defence Services to be able to participate in the National political leadership role of the State and many points under this principle must be amended.” (1) On the same day of 12^th March, the leader of CRPP – Aye Thar Aung indicated in his press release that, the SPDC has been encouraging business owners to set up parties and contest the election, as well as carrying out surveillance activities on some NLD township offices. (2) The doubts raised by CRPP become later true, when the AFP news appeared after two weeks on 31^st of March 2009, that, Burma’s Prime Minister - Thein Sein told at an annual meeting of the Union of Myanmar Federation of Chamber of Commerce and Industry in the capital Naypyidaw that businessmen should help the government for forthcoming planned election. (3) The news of mobilizing business houses by Junta to manipulate 2010 election also appeared in other media sources, that, ‘Burmese authorities have instructed businessmen with ties to the ruling junta to show support for the government by running as candidates in 2010 general elections and businessmen who have agreed to stand for election include Yuzana U Htay Myint from Mergui, Ko Zaw Zaw from Yekyi, U Than Lwin from Khayan, Zegabar U Khin Shwe from Kawhmu, U Chit Khaing from Danubyu, and U Win Myint from Tantze. (4) Another doubt raised by CRPP leader that NLD and pro-democracy supporters regularly face surveillance and harassment in Burma is a well known fact and it also gets confirmed with the prolonged detention of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other 2100 political prisoners in Burma including – Min Ko Naing and ethnic leaders against many UN /ASEAN resolutions call to free them before the May 2008 referendum, which facilitated the creation of Junta’s proposed constitution.   

 

Even one of the major ethnic armed resistance groups – Karen National Union (KNU) and its un-surrendered armed wing - Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) has urged the international community to intervene in Burma Affairs to unlock the democratic deadlock. KNU’s Vice President - Saw David Takapaw in his latest press release also stated that, “regime should first convene a tripartite dialogue and amend the constitution”, (5) as demanded by the exiled – democratic groups and NCGUB. However, interestingly, Burma’s military regime which accuses democratic groups for hobnobbing with foreign element in their official media themselves called for foreign help inviting Thailand to solve the Karen ethnic problem? Although, the ethnic problem in Burma could have been sorted peacefully & politically internally without any foreign help, if Daw Aung San Suu Kyi would haven been given freedom to travel and interact with Burmese people and world media?

 

US Common Burma strategy with Asia and Junta’s Constitution?

United States administration, which is presently engaged in reviewing Burma policy, had earlier rightfully officially – “condemned the Junta’s referendum and constitutional process drafted in a closed manner by a hand-picked committee dominated by senior regime officials”. The then White House Press Secretary - Dana Perino told reporters on February 11, 2008, that, “the Burmese government is showing a “lack of seriousness about an open and fair process for the restoration of democracy.” (6) Although, the present Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg recently said, that, the “United States wanted a “collaborative and constructive” approach on Myanmar, saying nations with sway over the junta should avoid “recreating a mini version of the Great Game”, suggesting six-way talks with North Korea could be a model, having a common Myanmar strategy with Asia. (7) However, the best practical and pragmatic course on Burma had been suggested by a Senior Republican Senator – Judd Gregg in his article published in ‘Boston Globe’ entitled – ‘standing firm on Burma’. (8) Mr. Jim Steinberg must be realizing the implications of recent communication satellite launch programme announcement of North Korea and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s regular overtures about President Obama published in Fox News and other world media as well as China’s recent statement on United States published in UPI News channel.

 

In addition, regarding US Deputy Secretary of State – Jim Steinberg’s recent statement of common approach with Asian nations on Burma’s democratic crisis. There is already UN body of ‘Group of Friends of the Secretary-General on Myanmar’ consisting of fourteen nations viz. Australia, Indonesia, Russia, United States, China, Japan, Singapore, Viet Nam, France, Norway, Thailand, India, Portugal and the United Kingdom, and the majority overwhelmingly supports the view of NLD and NCGUB. And among Asian nations of group of friends on Burma– Indonesia, China, Japan, Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand and India, majority of them viz. Indonesia, Japan, Singapore, Thailand openly supported many a times early release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and criticized Burma’s ruling military regime for late democratic change. The other important Asian nation – Philippines holds the same view against military junta on democratic issue. So the reason of deadlock lies elsewhere, which Senator – Judd Gregg attempted to describe briefly in his concluding paragraph of article written for Boston Globe entitled –‘Standing firm on Burma’.  

 

Moreover, European Union’s earlier resolution no. P6_TA-PROV (2006)0607, dated: 13.12.2006 had been also not obeyed by the Junta, which “Refuses to recognize the legitimacy of any constitutional proposals produced by the National Convention so long as it does not include the NLD and other political parties; and urges the National Convention to present a road map to democracy that genuinely reflects the wishes of the Burmese people instead of consolidating the military's stranglehold on power.” (9) Now question emerges that military regime word’s should be accepted regarding their proposed constitution or not, which has a track record of disobeying resolution of UN and ASEAN many-a-times? Or, why the world community should not accept junta’s proposed constitution in present form and its review is necessary?

 

Why the ‘New Constitution’ should be reviewed? :

 

The major known argument, which Burma’s ruling military junta officially announce about the ‘newly framed constitution’ after the referendum held in May 2008 in the midst of devastating cyclone Nargis is that, the constitution has been accepted by the overwhelming support received by people’s mandate. It is 92.48 per cent of the total eligible voters who had voted in favour of the draft Constitution. In addition, the SPDC’s silence practically rejects the demand of reviewing the constitution by democratic groups on the very basis of ‘people’s mandate’. Moreover, also till now, it hasn’t accepted the demand of CRPP regarding constitutional review of reserving seats of defence personnel’s in the future Burmese Parliament and State Legislatures on the basis of so called ‘people’s mandate’, which reserves twenty-five percent seats of defense personnel in the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw , Amyotha Hluttaw and State Hluttaw  (peoples elected representative body’s).

 

Burma’s Senior General – Than Shwe in his rare public appearance on 27^th March 2009 at ‘Armed Forces Day’ stated that, “Democracy in Myanmar today is at a fledgling stage and still requires patient care and attention”. He also lambasted major boycotting democratic political group of National Convention that, “Some parties look to foreign countries for guidance and inspiration, follow the imported ideologies and directives irrationally”, and also indicated that the demand of reviewing the new constitution by NCGUB and others are western design to reject it as a sham constitution. (10) He further stated that, “country should not expect a well established democracy overnight”, (11) indicating that realization of restoration of democracy may go beyond 2010 election, if world community stick to realize the true course of participatory people’s democracy in Burma as demanded by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, NLD and NCGUB?

 

Now the big question emerges, whether constitutional referendum held in Burma on 10^th of May 2008 in two hundred seventy eight township (278) and again in forty-seven (47) severely devastated area by Cyclon Nargis on 24^th May 2008 was genuinely people’s mandate or not? Or it is a pre-planned political maneuverings by ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) to control future democratic political structure through the institution of military by reserving twenty five percent seats? And the big answer lies itself in the official documents of Burma’s ruling military regime and their official answers submitted to the office of the United Nations Secretary General besides other technical aspect of the new constitution.

 

Burma’s official Permanent Representative to the United Nations – Mr. Kyaw Tint Swe informs United Nations Secretary General (UNSG) – Mr. Ban Ki-moon through his letter written on 17^th October 2008, about the progress achieved by the nation concerning human rights, constitutional referendum and other issues. Mr. Kyaw Tint Swe writes to UNSG informing about the referendum process that, The Commission for the Convening of the National Referendum announced the voting results on 26 May 2008 as follows:

 

– The total population of Myanmar — 57,504,368;

– Number of eligible voters — 27,288,827;

– Number of votes cast — 26,776,675;

– The overall voter turn-out — 98.12 per cent;

– Votes in favour — 24,764,124, And,  92.48 per cent of the total eligible voters voted in favour of the draft Constitution, stressing that, “in approving the new State Constitution through a nationwide referendum, the people of Myanmar have expressed their will by an overwhelming majority.” (12)

 

However, in the same letter, Mr. Kyaw Tint Swe admits and describes the devastating effect of cyclone Nargis in Burma and writes – “On 2 and 3 May 2008, one week before the people of Myanmar were scheduled to cast their votes in the national referendum on a new State Constitution, the devastating ‘cyclone Nargis’ slammed into the Ayeyarwady Delta. It was the worst natural disaster in the recorded history of Myanmar, and left unprecedented death and destruction in its wake.” He gives further the list of casualties and effect of devastation in Burma to the office of UNSG for urgent help and officially states – ‘the total no. of 84,537 people killed, 19,359 injured and 53,836 reported missing. Due to the cyclone and the resulting storm surge, 450,000 houses were totally destroyed and 350,000 damaged. The damage and cost incurred is on a scale similar to that felt in Indonesia due to the tsunami in 2004, particularly at the household and community level. 75 per cent of health facilities in the affected areas were destroyed or severely damaged; around 4,000 schools were destroyed. The cyclone and the storm surge wiped out the livelihoods of families overnight; 600,000 hectares of agricultural land were flooded; up to 50 per cent of draft animals were killed; fishing boats were destroyed; food stocks and farming implements were swept away. Recovery needs for the next three years is estimated to be over US$ 1 billion. The most urgent need is for food, agriculture, housing, basic services and support to communities for restoring their livelihoods and rebuilding assets.” (13) This was the horrific devastating painful situation of ‘cyclone Nargis’, which SPDC themselves admits in their official letter written to the office of UNSG.

 

However, the nation ravaged by the natural calamities of such a gigantic scale finds fit for referendum after three weeks in the devastated area on 24^th May 2008 to go for people’s mandate to reserve seats for defence personal in Burma’s future parliament? Burma, which still demand large fund for rebuilding the nation from international institutions founds their population psychologically fit to cast their vote for the newly framed constitution?

 

If we rely on the figures given by Burma’s official Permanent Representative to the UN regarding directly affected total no. of eight lakhs houses (4, 50,000 + 3, 50,000) by the ‘cyclone Nargis’, constitutes a sizable no. of voting population. Moreover, Burma which is a part of Asia and predominantly enjoys joint family system (even in urban areas, despite the growth of materialism) constitutes having minimum of ten members in a family. So in a rough calculation of eight lakhs houses multiplied by ten makes eighty lakhs people directly affected by the cyclone Nargis out of the total official population of — 57,504,368, who have been forced to participate in referendum. If we minus the no. of killed and missing person in Cyclone Nargis -84,537+53,836 – eighty lakhs, it comes more then seventy-eight lakhs people facing the direct devastation of cyclone Nargis.

 

Moreover, SPDC’s also claims that reserving seats of defence personal in Burma’s future parliament /legislative body is people’s mandate drafted and accepted in the National Convention, which started in 1993 to consider basic principles of new State Constitution representing the whole cross-section of the country and successfully completed on 3 September 2007. Furthermore, it also submits to the United Nations on 10^th March 2008, “On 18 October 2007, the Commission for Drafting the State Constitution comprising 54 members has been formed. The Commission drafted the draft Constitution based on the basic principles and detailed basic principles adopted by the National Convention. The draft was successfully completed on 19 February 2008. And, On 9 February 2008, the State Peace and Development Council issued Announcement No.1/2008 concerning the National Referendum to seek the approval of the State Constitution to be held in May 2008 and Announcement No.2/2008 concerning the holding of the multi-party democracy general elections to be held in 2010. These two Announcements are the 4th and 5th step of the seven-step road map. (14)  SPDC also officially accuses NLD for their unilateral withdrawal from the Convention in November 1995, later making its adjournment in 1996, (%) as all wrongs have been committed by NLD through- Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

 

On the other side, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD states that they withdrew from the National Convention due to the undemocratic progression of Convention making it military controlled affairs, which gets proved in the official letter of UN permanent representative letter written to the office of UNSG in 1994 rejecting the myth of people’s mandate towards reservation of defence personal in Burma’s future Parliament. It also proves that, twenty five percent reservations of ‘tatmadaw’ or military in Burma’s future Parliament had been planned long before the completion of the National Convention on 3^rd September 2007. 

 

The official letter written by Mr. Win MRA (then Burma’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations) to the United Nations Secretary General on 2nd November 1994, one year after the start of nascent National Convention and before the withdrawal of NLD from it; proves SPDC’s long planned ploy of reserving seats of defence personnel in Burma’s future parliament & reasons of NLD’s withdrawal from it. As the letter written by Mr. Win MRA states, which has been also placed in the Forty-ninth session of UN General Assembly, Third Committee meeting describes the future planned role of ‘tatmadaw’ against democratic values and I quote, “Concern has been expressed with regard to the participation of the armed forces in a leading role in the future political life of the State. The true situation is that the role envisaged for the Tatmadaw (armed forces) is a role in keeping with Myanmar’s historical traditions. The history of modern Myanmar is synonymous with the history of the Tatmadaw. Since the time of the Myanmar struggle for national independence, it has been in the forefront of national politics. The Tatmadaw has always stayed above party politics. But it has always shouldered its primary responsibility of ensuring the non-disintegration of the Union, the non-disintegration of national solidarity and the consolidation of national sovereignty. To deny the leading institution of the country the corresponding role in the political life of the State will be unrealistic and illogical,” unquote. (15) Later, the so called ‘concern’ had been raised by NLD ultimately resulting to its withdrawal from the junta sponsored suffocating National Convention.

  

The letter of Win MRA to the UNSG in 1994 unfolds the myth of people’s mandate and political design of SPDC’s back-door entry into Burmese Parliament through indirect means of reservation long before the conclusion of National Convention in September 2007. How the maker of ‘Burma’ & ‘Tatmadaw’ – Bogyoke Aung San would have reacted in seeing the political view of–‘denying tatmadaw’s role in the political life of state will be ‘unrealistic’ and ‘illogical’ could be well understood by any students of Modern Asian History?   

 

Endnotes:

 

* CRPP represents Burma’s major political parties and winner of May 1990 election – National League for Democracy, Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD), Arakan League for Democracy (ALD), Zomi National Congress (ZNC) and Mon National League for Democracy etc.

 

1. Nem Davies, Major parties not to contest polls unless constitution is revised, Mizzima News, New Delhi, Friday, 13 March 2009.
2. Pro-democracy committee tells UN to stay away from 2010 elections, Democratic Voice of Burma News, 13^th March 2009. Oslo, Norway.
3. Myanmar PM asks businessmen for unity ahead of elections, AFP News, 31^st of March 2009.
4. Kyaw Kyaw Aung translated by Soe Thinn, Businessmen Urged To Run, Radio Free Asia News, 31 March 2009.
5. Salai Pi Pi, KNU demands international community rescue Burma, Mizzima News, Thursday 2 April 2009.
6. United States Denounces Burmese Constitution Referendum as Sham, US State Department Press Release, 12 February 2008.
7. US wants common Myanmar strategy with Asia, AFP News, 2 April 2009.
8. Judd Gregg, Standing Firm on Burma, Boston Globe, 1 April 2009.
9. European Parliament Resolution on Myanmar, Europa Press Release, No. B6-0647/2006, EU, dated:13 December 2006.
10. Myanmar leader warns on democracy at parade, AFP News, 28 March 2009.
11. Myanmar junta chief sets guidelines for 2010 polls, AFP News, 29 March 2009.
12. Letter dated 17 October 2008 from the Permanent Representative of Myanmar to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary General, United Nations General Assembly, Distr.: General, 20 October 2008, Sixty third session, Third Committee, Item 64 (c), Document No. A/c.3/63/4., New York, USA, p.7.
13. Ibid., pp. 4-5.
14. Note verbale dated 10 March 2008 from the Permanent Mission of Myanmar to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed to the secretariat of the Human Rights Council, United Nations General Assembly, Distr.: General, 10 March 2008, Human Rights Council, Seventh session, Agenda Item 4 (c), Document No. A/HRC/7/G/8, New York, USA, p.3.
15.  Letter dated 2 November 1994 from the Permanent Representative of Myanmar to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, United Nations General Assembly, Distr.: General, 10 November 1994, Forty Ninth Session, Third Committee, Agenda Item 100 (c), Document No. A/C.3/49/15, New York, USA, p.3.

 

Continued…..

 

(Note: the next post will examine the other flawed technical aspect of the constitution as well as the solution of the democratic crisis. Rajshekhar, Burma Review.)

 

**************************************