Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from a local partner organization, Human Rights Defenders and Promoters, that the police, a municipality officer, and a village administrative officer from Kangyi Daunk Township, Ayeyawady Region, arrested a villager without giving any reason and tortured him. When the case was brought to court, the judge found the perpetrators not guilty. The judge dismissed the case against the police as the officers involved had purportedly been punished under the Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law.
CASE NARRATIVE:
On 2 July 2014 around 2 p.m., Thet Paing Tun, who lives in Paybingyi village in Kangyi Daunk Township, was returning from the paddy field where he works. He stopped to watch a billiards game in the village. While he was there, U Htay Hlaing, a 100 household head (a high-level municipality officer), and two other men arrived. They proceeded to handcuff and arrest Thet Paing Tun. When Thet Paing Tun asked them why they were arresting him, they told him that he should already know what he did wrong, but nothing more. Then, they brought him to village administrative officer U Zaw Min Htwe’s office. When he reached to the administrative office, he again asked why he was detained, but he got no answer. One police officer then took off his shoe and struck Thet Paing Tun on his cheek four or five time with it. When Thet Paing Tun begged the police not to strike him, the other policeman kicked his back several times. As they attacked him in this manner, he coughed up blood. Later, when administrative officer U Zaw Min Htwe saw the blood, he told the police to remove the handcuffs. Then, household head U Htay Hlaing and U Zaw Min Htwe forced the victim to bow to them and finally released him.
After Thet Paing Tun reached home, he felt pain in his chest. So, his family took him to Pathein General Hospital, where he stayed for 6 days before being discharged. On 7 July 2014, his mother tried to lodge a case against the perpetrators in Kan Ywar Police Station. However, station head police officer Tun Tun Win refused to open a case. The officer apologised on behalf of the perpetrators and offered 10,000 Kyats ($10 USD) for medical expenses. Thet Paing Tun’s mother did not accept the money.
When the police station refused to accept the case, the victim opened a case by direct complaint to Kangyi Daunk Township Court. During the trial process, Kangyi Daunk Township Police Station submitted a letter dated 18 September 2014 that the Myanmar Police Force punished the police who were involved in the crime under Section 22 of the Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law. They requested to have their names removed from both the court record and the criminal case file and the court did so. In the judgment on 2 October 2014, it said that the court cannot find evidence that the household head and administrative officer had been involved in beating the victim, and that the police had been punished in accordance with the Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law. Therefore, the court decided to dismiss the case.
As Thet Paing Tun can’t afford to get a lawyer to advocate for him, he cannot appeal the unjust judgment. Additionally, he is still afraid of the perpetrators and fears for his safety and his life.
Further details are provided in the sample letter below.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In Burma, torture is widespread in police stations, where it most commonly takes the form of beatings and other blunt methods intended to cause pain and obtain a confession. In normal criminal cases like murder, rape, and robbery, police have to take immediate action and give a report to the higher authorities promptly. The policemen usually look for an easy target and use torture to get a confession or otherwise make the detainee do what they want.
In previous urgent appeals the AHRC has express concern over police and military intelligence torture, sometimes resulting in death, such as in the cases of Soe Lin, Zaw Gyi, U Nyunt Tun, U Than Tun, Aung Hlaing Win, Myo Myint Swe, and Nan Woh Phan. In most cases the court has ignored the evidence of torture, to convict the accused.
Torture is not a criminal offence in Burma and the police are rarely held to account for the abuses committed on detainees in their custody. A member of parliament, in March 2013, made a statement on the need for a law against torture and for Burma to join the UN Convention against Torture, but no action has been taken in this regard.
For many more cases and issues concerning human rights in Burma, visit the AHRC’s country homepage: http://www.humanrights.asia/countries/burma
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write a letter to the following government authorities to urge that all those responsible for the torture of Thet Paing Tun be prosecuted in an ordinary court of law for criminal offences.
Please note that for the purpose of the letter Myanmar is referred to by its traditional name, Burma.
Please also be informed that the AHRC is writing separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteurs on human rights in Myanmar, on torture, and, the regional office in Bangkok, calling for their interventions into this matter.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear ___________,
MYANMAR: Police and village leaders torture a villager without apparent reason
Names of victims:
Thet Paing Tun, 19, resident of Paybingyi village, Kangyi Daunk Township
Names of persons involved:
U Htay Hlain, 100 household head, Paybingyi village, Kangyi Daunk Township
U Zaw Min Htwe, village administrative officer, Paybingyi village, Kangyi Daunk Township
U Tun Tun Win, Police officer, Kangyi Daunk Police Station Head
U Lin Aung, Police Corporal, Kangyi Daunk Police Station
U Lin Lin Zaw, Police Lane Corporal, Kangyi Daunk Police Station
Date of incident: 2 July 2014
Place of incident: Paybingyi village, Kangyi Daunk Township, Ayeyawady Region, Myanmar
Cases (against victim): Criminal Case No. 200/2014, Kangyi Daunk Township Court. Rge case has been dismissed without any charges.
I am disappointed to hear that village leaders and police from Kangyi Daunk Township arrested and tortured Thet Paing Tun without explanation. It is especially distressing to hear that when the victim tried to open a case against his attackers, the police station didn’t accept the case and Thet Paing Tun had to complain directly to court.
Without any lawyer to advocate for the victim, and on the basis of a letter submitted by the police station regarding administrative punishment having purportedly been handed to the police personnel involved, the case was dismissed on 2 October 2012.
According to the information I have received, on 2 July 2014 around 2 p.m., Thet Paing Tun, who lives in Paybingyi village, Kangyi Daunk Township, was coming back from the paddy field where he works. He stopped to watch a billiards game in the village. While he was there, U Htay Hlaing, a 100 household head (a high-level municipality officer) and two other men arrived. They handcuffed and arrested Thet Paing Tun. When Thet Paing Tun asked them why they arrested him, they told him that he should already know what he did wrong, but nothing more.
Then, they brought him to village administrative officer U Zaw Min Htwe’s office. When he reached to the administrative office, Thet Paing Tun again asked why he was detained but got no answer. One police officer then took off his shoe and struck the victim on his cheek four or five time with it. When he begged the police not to strike him, the other police kicked his back several times. As they kicked and attacked him, he coughed up blood. Later, when administrative officer U Zaw Min Htwe saw the blood, he told the police to remove the handcuffs. Then, household head U Htay Hlaing and U Zaw Min Htwe forced the victim to bow to them and finally released him.
After Thet Paing Tun reached home, he felt pain in his chest, so his family took him to Pathein General Hospital, where he stayed for 6 days before being discharged. On 7 July 2014, his mother tried to lodge a case against the perpetrators in Kan Ywar Police Station. However, station head police officer Tun Tun Win refused to open a case. The officer apologised on behalf of perpetrators and offered 10,000 Kyats ($10 USD) for medical expenses. But the victim’s mother did not accept the money.
When the police station refused to accept the case, the victim opened a case by direct complaint to Kangyi Daunk Township Court. During trial process, Kangyi Daunk Township Police Station submitted a letter dated 18 September 2014 that the Myanmar Police Force punished the police who were involved in the crime under Section 22 of the Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law. They requested to have the names of these police personnel removed from both the court record and the criminal case file. The court did just so.
The judgment on 2 October 2014 stated that the court cannot find evidence that the household head and administrative officer had been involved in beating the victim, and that the police had been punished in accordance with the Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law.
Therefore, the court decided to dismiss the case.
The victim knows the judgment was unjust, and the acquittal of perpetrators has him fearing for his life. People in remote areas often respect and fear their village leaders, who they believe will protect them. But, in this case, the situation and judgment shows that there is no rule of law that can protect the citizen’s basic rights when those leaders turn on them.
Therefore, I urge the court to reopen the case. The perpetrators must be punished in accordance with criminal law. I also urge the government to ensure that judges give independent judgment.
In closing, I remain very concerned that impunity is still widely enjoyed by state agents who have committed torture in Myanmar, despite the government’s recent political reforms.
I have learned that groups inside the country have called on its parliamentarians to pass a law to criminalize torture, and that in March 2013 a member of parliament also raised the matter in the national legislature. I urge that steps be taken to introduce such a law at the earliest opportunity.
Any such law needs to be in accordance with international standards. In this regard, a positive commitment to the prohibition of torture, as a matter of principle, would be for the government of Myanmar to at long last ratify both the UN Convention against Torture and its optional protocols, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
I look forward to your positive and effective response in this case.
Yours Sincerely,
—————-
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Lt-Gen. Ko Ko
Minister for Home Affairs
Ministry of Home Affairs
Office No. 10
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 412 079
+95 67 412 079
Fax: +95 67 412 439
2. U Thein Sein
President of Myanmar
President Office
Office No.18
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
3. U Tun Tun Oo
Chief Justice
Office of the Supreme Court
Office No. 24
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 67 404 080+ 95 67 404 080
Fax: + 95 67 404 059
4. Dr. Tun Shin
Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Office No. 25
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 404 088+95 67 404 088
Fax: +95 67 404 146/ 106
5. Police Major General Zaw Win
Director General
Myanmar Police Force
Ministry of Home Affairs
Office No. 10
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 412 079+95 67 412 079
Fax: +951 549 663 / 549 208
6. Thura U Aung Ko
Chairman
Pyithu Hluttaw Judicial and Legislative Committee
Pythu Hluttaw Office
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
7. U Aung Nyein
Chairman
Pyithu Hluttaw Judicial and Legislative Committee
Committee for Public Complaints and Appeals
Office of the Amyotha Hluttaw
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
8. U Win Mra
Chairman
Myanmar National Human Rights Commission
27 Pyay Road
Hlaing Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel: +95-1-659 668+95-1-659 668
Fax: +95-1-659 668
9. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
Chairwoman
Pyithu Hluttaw Rule of Law and Tranquility Committee
Office of the Pyithu Hluttaw
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)
