Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received the updated information that courts and police did not take any action even though they found that U Than Htun’s death, which occurred while detained in police custody in Burma, was not natural. In the post mortem inquiry, the lower courts decided that the death was not unnatural, even though the medical record showed evidence of extensive injuries. But in the high court, the court reversed the order of the lower court and said that the death was not natural. Accordingly, police and lower courts should reopen the case. However, after more than three months since the high court order, still no action was taken to investigate.
CASE NARRATIVE:
As we described in our original appeal (AHRC-UAC-098-2013), U Than Htun was tortured to death while detained in police custody in Pyi, Burma. Although, the police officers claimed that the victim died from hitting himself with an iron pole during interrogation due to the effects of alcoholism, the doctor confirmed that none of the organs of the deceased were in a condition that would cause his death. The post mortem examination showed that the skin of his two wrists was torn apart due to prolonged handcuffing. The remark of the doctor was that he had died over bleeding inside the lungs (Haemothorax) due to the broken right side ribs and trauma.
Due to the death, the victim’s wife, Daw Myint Htay, opened a case against the commander of the police station. She complained lodged to Pandaung Court and judge made an order that they needed permission to sue and dismissed the complaint. She also applied to Pyi District Court however they decided same as the Pandaung Court did and dismissed on that the day she applied.
Meanwhile, the township court also made a post mortem inquiry under criminal procedure. It also found that there was not enough evidence to show that the death was unnatural. But, in the Pegu Region High Court, the judge overturned the order and said that the death was not natural and that it had been caused by someone.
Although the high court gave a decision that the death was not natural, it did not give any order for action by the lower courts or police. So, there was no action upon the case at all till now, in three months since the order was given. Therefore we urge everyone to send letters of support calling for action in this case.
Further detail can be found in the sample letter below.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Subsequent to the last appeal, the AHRC also learned that prior to the death in custody of Than Htun he was among a group of around 17 farmers involved in a land dispute (as described in the original appeal) who the police allegedly had threatened with violence. According to one witness statement, Constable July Moe (a male constable) had told the farmers that if they met in the lock up then they would learn a good lesson. Although this statement has also been submitted to officials no investigation has been made of the threats.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Our original appeal letter, with full details of the case supplemented by updated information, is below. Please use it or write your own letter to the persons listed at the end of this update to call for the investigation and prosecution of this case to be reopened.
Please note that for the purposes of the letter Burma is referred to by its official name, Myanmar, and Pyi, Pyay; Pegu, Bago.
Please also be informed that the AHRC is writing separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteurs on human rights in Myanmar; on torture, on extrajudicial killings, and on the independence of judges and lawyers; 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: Court finds torture victim was killed, but no action taken
Name of victim: U Than Htun, 42, resident of Kyar Inn Block (New),Dandalun Tract, Pandaung Township, Pyay District, Bago Region, Myanmar.
Names of persons involved:
1. U San Lin, Chief, Pandaung Township Police Station
2. Sub-inspector Nay Lin Aung
3. Sub-inspector Aung Naing
4. Sub-inspector Hla Min
5. Constable July Moe
All of Pandaung Township Police Station
Date of incident: 22 May 2013
Place of incident: Pandaung Township Police Station, Pyay, Myanmar
Court cases:
1. Post mortem inquiry: Criminal (Minor) Case No 27/2013, Pandaung Township Court (Nan Yin May, Township Judge), order passed 12 July 2013; Criminal Revision Case No 249 (A)/ 2013, Bago Region High Court (Kyi Thein, Judge), order passed 7 October 2013
2. Application for prosecution of police: Criminal Case No 238/2013, Pandaung Township Court, application rejected 28 May 2013; Criminal Revision Case No 48/2013, Pyay District Court (Hla Thein, Deputy District Judge, Pyay District Court), application rejected 10 July 2013
I am dismayed to hear that a man, U Than Htun, taken into police custody on 17 May 2013 died from torture on 23 May 2013 and that police have been claiming that despite all evidence pointing to the contrary he assaulted himself as a result of the effects of alcoholism. The doctor confirmed that none of the organs of the deceased were in a condition that would cause his death. The post mortem examination showed that the skin of his two wrists was torn apart due to prolonged handcuffing. The remark of the doctor was that he had died over bleeding inside the lungs (Haemothorax) due to the broken right side ribs and trauma (Myanmar Police Medical Report TTH/02/13, Pandaung Township Surgeon).
The victim’s wife, Daw Myint Htay, opened a case against the commander of the police station. She complained to Pandaung Court to take action upon her husband’s unnatural death. The judge made an inquiry in Criminal Case No 283/2013 on 28 May 2013 and made an order that they needed permission to sue and dismissed the application. She also applied to Pyay District Court and they accepted the appeal by Criminal Revision Case No 48/2013 on 10 July 2013 however they decided same as the Pandaung Court did and dismissed the application on the day she applied.
I have also learned that prior to the death in custody of Than Htun he was among a group of around 17 farmers involved in a land dispute who the police allegedly had threatened with violence. According to one witness statement, Constable July Moe (a male constable) had told the farmers that if they met in the lock up then they would learn a good lesson. Although this statement has also been submitted to officials no investigation has been made of the threats.
Meanwhile, the township court also made a post mortem inquiry under section 176 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It also found that there was not enough evidence to show that the death was unnatural. But, in the Bago Region High Court, the judge overturned the order and said that the death was not natural and that it had been caused by someone.
Even though the high court gave a decision that the death was not natural, it did not give any order for action by the lower courts or police. So, there was no action upon the case at all till now, in three months since the order was given.
For that reason, a full high-level investigation should be taken to find the responsible person for the killing and for their prosecution as the family has requested. I also urge that a full investigation be conducted into the attempts to cover up the murder, and that action be taken against the persons involved in that aspect of the crime. I strongly urge that the investigation be conducted by police from the Criminal Investigation Department from Yangon because police in the locality will continue to cover up the crime.
Additionally, the lower courts should now reopen the application by the family of the dead man to have a criminal case begin against the police officers. From the information available to me it is clear that enough evidence exists to open a case in court. The order from the High Court also makes clear that a crime has been committed and as the dead man was last in the custody of the police it is also obvious that they are the most likely perpetrators of the murder.
I am aware that many people die in police custody in Myanmar but police are rarely prosecuted. It is of the utmost importance that an example be set in this case that they can indeed be held to account for their crimes, in order that the incidence of such crimes is reduced as quickly as possible.
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/ 549 393/ 549 663
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/ 071/ 078/ 067 or + 95 1 372 145
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/ 090/ 092/ 094/ 097
Fax: +95 67 404 146/ 106
5. U Kyaw Kyaw Htun
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
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
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)
