[NOTICE: The AHRC has recently developed a new automatic letter-sending system. However, in this appeal, we could not include e-mail addresses of some of the Burmese authorities. We encourage you to send your appeal letters via fax or post to those people. Fax numbers and postal addresses of these authorities are attached below with this appeal. Thank you.]
BURMA: Denial of freedom of expression; denial of fair trial; illegal detention; un-rule of law
———————————————————————
Pyithu Hittaing Vol. 1. No. 6 OUT NOW
http://burma.ahrchk.net
———————————————————————
Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from the Yoma 3 news service (Thailand) that a villager in the Irrawaddy Delta region of Burma has been jailed for supposedly insulting government officers over an agricultural project. The conviction was groundless and based completely on hearsay. The case follows many other similar reports of arrest and jail on allegations of “insulting government authorities” in Burma, speaking to the severe lack of freedom to speak out on any issue there.
The AHRC has obtained detailed information and documents on the case of U Tin Kyi, a 65-year-old villager in Kyaung Gone Township. According to these, on 10 April 2006 the chairman of the Kyaungsu village area council sent four men to clear land for a castor oil plantation near to Kanthayar village, in accordance with government agricultural policy. The men allege that Tin Kyi came to where they were working and abused and threatened them and the council chairman, pulling up his sarong to expose his anus at them. After that they went to tell the chairman, who lodged a complaint at the local police station. The police then charged Tin Kyi with obscenity and intimidation.
On August 4 the case went to the court. Although the case was brought by the council chairman, who himself never heard or saw anything, and despite the court having no evidence upon which to convict Tin Kyi–even only two of the supposed witnesses came to testify–he was sentenced to four months’ jail. Strangely, everything was finished in the same day: giving and recording of testimony, the judgment and all other documentation. Normally, it takes about one month to complete hearings, pass judgment and do paperwork in an ordinary criminal trial in Burma. This suggests that the decision of the court in this case was rigged beforehand.
The reason for the legal attack on Tin Kyi appears to relate to land usage. According to the latest information, he and two other local farmers have been named in a summons of August 25 alleging that they were responsible for destruction of crops which had in fact been damaged by natural causes. Charges are due to be laid against the three tomorrow, September 7. The Ayeyashwewar Company is said to be intent upon taking over the area for growing castor oil plants. The company is reportedly owned by Aung Thet Mann, son of General Thura Shwe Mann, who is a member of the ruling military council. The AHRC will issue an update on the further legal action once all details are available.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
The AHRC has reported on many cases in recent times that speak to the total destruction and control of the courts in Burma by the military and other authorities there. Whereas outside attention is usually focused on high-profile cases involving celebrated political prisoners, in fact most of the cases of persecution through the courts in Burma are of the type described in this case: petty local officials using the state apparatus at their disposal for their own reasons, such as for personal gain or for revenge. Other such cases include:
UA-285-2006 — Betel nut vendor Nyi Nyi Htun was jailed without evidence on a charge of selling illegal lottery tickets
UA-155-2006 — Farmer U Tin Nyein was jailed for complaining about the destruction of his crops due to incompetent government officials
UA-119-2006 & UP-139-2006 — Lawyer U Aye Myint was jailed for helping farmers to make a complaint about land usage by the government, and was released only after intense pressure from the International Labour Organisation (ILO)
UA-071-2006 & UP-054-2006 — Farmers U Aye Min and U Win Nyunt were jailed for complaining about local corruption
UA-50-2006 & UP-017-2006 — U Thein Zan, Ko Zaw Htay & U Aung Than Htun have been prosecuted for helping villagers to complain about the death of a man on a government forced labour project
www.ahrchk.net/susunwe — Villager Ma Su Su Nwe was jailed for complaining about forced labour and also released only after intense pressure from the ILO, for which she has been given the 2006 John Humphrey Freedom Award
This case also again speaks to the many coercive government practices faced by farmers in Burma, which were documented in detail in the 1999 Voice of the Hungry Nation report of the People’s Tribunal on Food Scarcity and Militarisation in Burma. Farmers such as U Tin Kyi have difficulty in retaining tenure over their land, which technically belongs to the state, and often are coerced or obliged to grow particular crops–such as castor oil plants–according to badly-planned and executed schemes imposed by the central government.
Further discussion on these and related topics can be found on the AHRC Burma homepage: http://burma.ahrchk.net.
______________________________
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the Attorney General calling for a review of this case. 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 Irrawaddy as Ayeyawaddy.
Please also note that–as many readers will be aware–government ministries in Burma have in recent times been relocated to the new capital of “Naypyitaw” in the centre of the country. Until such a time as the AHRC has reliable contact information for ministries there, we are continuing to use the addresses in Rangoon.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear ___________,
MYANMAR: Wrongful conviction of U Tin Kyi in Kyaung Gone Township Court Criminal Case No. 705/06 under sections 294(b)/506 of the Penal Code
Name of victim: U Tin Kyi, 65, farmer, son of U Han Tin, residing in Kanthayar village, Tehseit Village Tract, Kyaung Gone Township, Ayeyawaddy Division
Convicted under: Sections 294(b)/506 of the Penal Code, in Kyaung Gone Township Court, Criminal Case No. 705/06, decided on 4 August 2006; convicted to one month and three months in prison respectively
Names of persons involved in the case:
1. U Kyin Htun, 46, son of U Htun Win, ID No. 14 KaKaNa (Naing) 033262, Chairman of the Kyaungsu Village Peace & Development Council, Tehseit Village Tract, Kyaung Gone Township
2. Police Superintendent Thein Win (No. La 168756), Kyaung Gone Township Police
3. Judge Daw Aye Aye Sein (No. Ta 1679), Kyaung Gone Township Court
I am greatly disturbed to hear of yet another case of unjust persecution of a farmer by local authorities in Myanmar.
According to the information I have received, Kyaungsu VPDC Chairman U Kyin Htun on 10 April 2006 lodged a police complaint against U Tin Kyi for threatening and insulting him. The accusation was based on what was reportedly said by four men sent by him to clear some 43 acres of land for a castor oil plantation near Kanthayar village: U Wa Kyi and U Nyein Han from Chaungwa village; U Myint from Nyaungtaing village, and U Htun Yi of Asheisu village. Police Superintendent Thein Win received the case from his superior on July 6 and prosecuted U Tin Kyi (Case No. 158/06) on July 26. On August 4 the accused was sentenced to four months' jail by the Kyaung Gone Township Court.
There are many problems in this case that cause me to doubt that it was properly investigated or that U Tin Kyi obtained a fair trial:
1. The complaint and conviction were based solely on hearsay. There was no evidence to convict the accused. In fact, the complainant himself did not even hear or see anything: the information was given by his subordinates. No one else was with them at the time that could verify or deny the facts. This in itself also raises questions about whether or not the location where the incident occurred can even be classed as a "public place" in accordance with the relevant sections of the law.
2. There were a number of serious procedural flaws. First, there does not appear to have been any police investigation at all: just doing the necessary paperwork for the matter to go before court. Secondly, not all witnesses testified. Only U Myint and U Nyein Han deposed before the court; U Wa Kyi and U Htun Yi did not. Thirdly, the prosecutor asked at least one threatening and inappropriate question of the defendant.
3. The judgment appears to have been prepared in advance of the hearing. The witnesses were heard, paperwork was done and judgment was given all on August 4. However, I am well-aware that ordinarily courts in Myanmar take some weeks to complete all of these steps. The fact that everything was finished and U Tin Kyi convicted on the same day causes me to suspect that he did not obtain a fair trial and that the judgment had been prepared even before the case was heard.
I understand that the real reason for the conviction of U Tin Kyi may be that a company with connections to the government is interested to occupy his land and use it to cultivate castor oil plants there also. I am informed that he together with two other farmers may shortly be subjected to further legal action with this intention.
Sadly, this is yet another conviction speaking to how the judicial system in Myanmar has become completely perverted for the purposes of persons in authority, rather than the maintenance of justice. I urge you to take steps to stop the further degradation of your institutions, and persistent denial of even the most basic rights to citizens of Myanmar.
With regards to this case I urge you to see that the Kyaung Gone Township Law Office files for a review in accordance with section 9(l) of the Attorney General Law 2001. I also urge you to seek a review of the handling of the case by both Police Superintendent Thein Win and Judge Daw Aye Aye Sein, with a view to disciplining or dismissing either from office if found to have violated criminal procedure. Similar measures should be taken especially against all judges who are found to have acted contrary to the law. Such measures may go some small way to instill a measure of public confidence in the performance of Myanmar's judiciary, which today is better known abroad as an "injustice system".
Yours sincerely
---
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
U Aye Maung
Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
101 Pansodan Street
Kyauktada Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Fax: + 95 1 371 028/ 282 449 / 282 990
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 for 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. Brig-Gen. Khin Yi
Director General
Myanmar Police Force
Saya San Road
Yankin Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 1 549 196/ 228/ 209
4. U Aung Toe
Chief Justice
Office of the Supreme Court
101 Pansodan Street
Kyauktada Township
Yangon
MYANMAR
Tel: +951 372 249 / 253 066
5. 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
6. Mr. Leandro Despouy
Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers
Attn: Sonia Cronin
Room: 3-060
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9160
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR JUDGES & LAWYERS)
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) (ahrchk@ahrchk.org)
