Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been closely following and documenting the detentions and trials in Burma following last September’s mass protests. In this appeal we bring you the case of Zaw Min, who was accused of having sent news abroad, although no independent witnesses or evidence have been brought to the trial against him. The non-legality and abuse in his case follows the same pattern as others of its type on which appeals have already been issued.
CASE DETAILS
Zaw Min, also known as Paung Paung, 39, was detained at the end of November 2007 and has been charged with upsetting public tranquility for having sent “false news” abroad about the protests and conditions for detainees afterwards.
The case was not brought to the court until 26 March 2008 before which time Zaw Min was held illegally, apparently in the custody of military intelligence where he is believed to have been tortured.
The list of prosecution witnesses in his case consists only of five Special Branch officers, including the officer bringing the case. As in other similar and related cases (including that of Win Maw: AHRC-UAC-200-2008) the police have brought no evidence to match the elements of the charge against the accused, and in fact no evidence at all. They allege that they had arrested Zaw Min in possession of a memory stick with photographs on it but they could not produce the memory stick in court. Nor could they produce documents in court to show that he had produced any false news.
The absence of evidence can be partly explained by the fact that as in other cases of its sort, the police were not actually the ones to have made the arrest of the accused. Rather, it was the military intelligence that took and interrogated Zaw Min and then gave the case to the police with instructions on how to prosecute it, even though this is against the law.
The police officer handling the case also presented a confession to the court obtained from Zaw Min while he was in custody, probably through the use of torture, and read it to the court in order to “refresh his memory” which violates the Evidence Act not only as such confessions are not allowed but also because material brought to refresh the memory of a witness must be that which the witness wrote him or herself.
Zaw Min was previously imprisoned from 1991 to January 2007 on charges of involvement in student politics.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
The AHRC has been documenting cases of illegal arrest, detention and prosecution since the nationwide protests in Burma last September and has in recent months also issued a number of other recent cases of young women imprisoned under similar circumstances and on similar charges, including blogger Nay Phone Latt (AHRC-UAC-204-2008), the cases of three men who harboured a monk (AHRC-UAC-188-2008), Kam Lat Koat and two others (AHRC-UAC-177-2008), Ko Htin Kyaw (AHRC-UAC-146-2008), U Ohn Than (AHRC-UAC-131-2008), Honey Oo and Aung Min Naing (AHRC-UAC-083-2008), Ko Thiha (AHRC-UAC-052-2008) and Khin Sanda Win (AHRC-UAC-022-2008).
Similarly, it has been following the growing number of arrests and legal actions taken against persons who have launched their own cyclone relief operations since May. See on the arrest of human rights defender U Myint Aye and two others: AHRC-UAC-183-2008.
For links and other material on the protests in Burma of August and September 2007 see: http://campaigns.ahrchk.net/burmaprotests/
See also the comprehensive reports “Burma, political psychosis and legal dementia” and “Saffron Revolution imprisoned, law demented” issued by the AHRCs sister organisation, as well as the 2007 AHRC Human Rights Report chapter on Burma.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the persons listed below to call for the charge against Zaw Min to be dropped. Please note that for the purpose of the letter, the country should be referred to by its official title of Myanmar, rather than Burma.
Please be informed that the AHRC is writing a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Myanmar and independence of judges and lawyers as well as the UN Special Representative on human rights defenders, the UN Working Group on arbitrary detention and the regional human rights office for Southeast Asia, calling for interventions into this case.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear ___________,
MYANMAR: Man arrested and charged for having contact with overseas radio
Details of accused:
Zaw Min (a.k.a. Paung Paung), 39, resident of Payakone Village, Thanlyin Township, Yangon Division
Primary officials involved:
1. Police Major Ye Nyunt, No. La/58188, Special Branch
2. Inspector Thet Naing, No. La/114384, Operations, Special Branch
3. Police Captain Kyaw Soe, No. La/59054, Special Branch
4. Inspector Myint Aye, No. La/127086, Internal Affairs, Special Branch
5. Inspector Kyaw Than, No. La/128907, Special Branch
Charge and trial: Charged under section 505(b) of the Penal Code with upsetting public tranquility, Felony Case No. 112/2008 Sanchaung Township Court, Judge Daw Than Htay (Special Power), Assistant Township Judge, No. Ta/2043 presiding
I am writing to you concerning the patently illegal arrest and unfair trial of a man accused of having sent “false” news abroad during 2007 and I am appealing to you for his immediate release.
According to the information that I have received, Zaw Min was arrested around the end of November and has been charged with upsetting public tranquility for having sent “false news” abroad about the rallies in Myanmar during September and conditions for detainees afterwards. However, his case was not brought to the court until 26 March 2008 before which time Zaw Min was held illegally.
Unfortunately, this is only the first of many breaches of law in his case to which I feel obliged to draw your attention, specifically, numerous breaches of the Evidence Act:
1. No material evidence of any kind: The police allege that they had arrested Zaw Min in possession of a memory stick with photographs on it but they could not produce the said memory stick in court. Nor could they produce documents in court to show that he had produced any false news as claimed.
2. No independent witnesses or eyewitnesses: The five prosecution witnesses listed are all Special Branch police officers. There are no independent witnesses at all. None of the five police officers have been able to give direct oral evidence of the offence as required under the act (section 60), because they themselves did not conduct the investigation but instead are apparently acting under orders from Military Affairs Services personnel.
3. Unlawful confession: The police also presented a confession to the court obtained from Zaw Min that was obtained while he was in custody, believed to have been extracted through the use of torture, and read it to the court in order to refresh his memory which violates the act not only as such confessions are not allowed but also because material brought to refresh the memory of a witness must be that which the witness wrote him or herself (sections 26, 159).
4. Irrelevant facts submitted to court: The police testified that the accused had previously been convicted and that he has a bad character even though this was not relevant to the case and again a violation of the act (section 59).
In light of this patent lack of evidence I urge that the court close the case and release the accused immediately. In the event that the court itself fails to do so I urge the Supreme Court of Myanmar to give directions to this effect in accordance with its powers as established by the new Constitution of Myanmar 2008.
With regards to the court process itself I also wish to express my dissatisfaction that this and other cases like it are being heard behind closed doors, in this case within the prison itself, which is in violation of the Judiciary Law 2000, section 2(e), and call for any such trials, irrespective of other factors, to be conducted in open court.
I likewise call for the Attorney General to review the case and instruct the concerned law office to withdraw the case from the court as per section 4(b) of the Attorney General Law 2001, and for the Minister of Home Affairs and Director General of Police also to look into the matter both with a view to seeing the case withdrawn and also in order to review the work of their subordinates.
Finally, I take this opportunity to remind the Government of Myanmar of the need to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross access to places of detention and not least of all, access to those persons and forcibly disrobed monks and nuns who have been held in violation of criminal procedure and without charge or trial since the events of last September.
Yours sincerely
—
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Maj-Gen. Maung Oo
Minister for Home Affairs
Ministry of Home Affairs
Office No. 10
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 412 079/ 549 393/ 549 663
Fax: +95 67 412 439
2. Lt-Gen. Thein Sein
Prime Minister
c/o Ministry of Defence
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: + 95 1 372 681
Fax: + 95 1 652 624
3. 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
4. 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
5. Brig-Gen. Khin Yi
Director General
Myanmar Police Force
Ministry of Home Affairs
Office No. 10
Naypyitaw
MYANMAR
Tel: +95 67 412 079/ 549 393/ 549 663
Fax: +951 549 663 / 549 208
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)
