UPDATE (Burma): Case of jailed tuition teacher to go to Supreme Court 

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been informed by the Myint Moe Media Group (Thailand) that next Monday, February 20, the case of jailed tuition teacher U Aung Pe is to go to the Supreme Court of Burma. Although Aung Pe was jailed under on charges of illegal tuition, in fact he was targeted by local authorities ostensibly for teaching politics to his students. The AHRC is concerned that his case will be thrown out of the Supreme Court in the same way that recently happened to an appeal lodged by human rights defender Ma Su Su Nwe.

The AHRC reported briefly on the case of U Aung Pe in an earlier appeal relating to the case of Ma Su Su Nwe (UP-132-2005; see also Ma Su Su Nwe webpage: www.ahrchk.net/susunwe).

U Aung Pe, a 49-year-old teacher, was arrested on 12 February 2005 and charged with giving private tuition classes illegally. On August 25, Aung Pe was sentenced to three years in jail. It is also reported that on September 30 he was beaten up by a jail gang that is being used by the authorities to intimidate prisoners. His appeals in lower courts have been summarily thrown out in the same manner as those of Su Su Nwe.

Aung Pe’s case will be brought to the Supreme Court of Burma on Monday, February 20. Su Su Nwe’s appeal was thrown out by the Supreme Court on February 1 (UP-017-2006). The only recourse left for appeals rejected by the Supreme Court is to apply for a special appeal before the full bench.

Meanwhile, the Myint Moe Media Group sent the AHRC a copy of the August 25 judgment by the Twente Township Court sentencing Aung Pe to jail, as well as his testimony to the court. A complaint that Aung Pe was teaching without a permit was lodged by U Sein Lwin, Twente Township Education Head. Aung Pe had held a permit for two years, but in 2004-05 he did not take one. After he engaged in “political” activities by speaking about independence hero General Aung San and hanging a t-shirt bearing a picture of Aung San’s daughter, democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, he was called to the township council offices on 13 February 2005. He was then taken by a police officer to the district headquarters, where he was questioned. He was returned to the township office and charged that night with illegal tuition under section 23 of the Tuition Law 1984.

In his defence, Aung Pe said that he was giving tuition for free. He had rented a room to teach orphans and underprivileged children who could not pay for tuition outside of school hours. But he had not obtained the permit in 2004-05 because every year the township education authorities change and demand so many “extra fees” to issue permits. He said it should normally cost over 3000 Burmese kyat (USD 2.80) to get the permit, but on top of that there were too many other “charges” that he could not pay, as he was working for free. He admitted to lecturing on Aung San to mark Union Day, which he pointed out is customary for all teachers in Burma, and also hanging the t-shirt of Aung San Suu Kyi, which is not against the law.

However, Judge U Zaw Zaw Thein convicted Aung Pe to three years in prison with hard labour for “having hung a t-shirt bearing an image of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi” while giving lessons, under section 23 of the Tuition Law.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

The judgment against U Aung Pe speaks to what has rightly been called the “un-rule of law” in Burma. Although it would have been sufficient for the court to convict Aung Pe of having practiced tuition without a permit, it went so far as to stipulate that the reason for the charges being laid and conviction was the perceived political act of hanging the t-shirt while talking about Aung San, despite the fact that this is of no relevance to the charge lodged against him.

Apart from the case of Ma Su Su Nwe mentioned above, the AHRC has in recent times issued a number of appeals on other cases that speak to the un-rule of law in the country. See for instance: UP-029-2006; UA-050-2006; UA-044-2006 and UP-008-2006. It has obtained court records and other documentary evidence on numerous other cases and will be releasing appeals on these cases in coming weeks and months.

__________________________

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Burma calling for the court to open this appeal for consideration, rather than dismiss it summarily as in the case of Ma Su Su Nwe. Please note that for the purpose of the letter, the country should be referred to by its official title of Myanmar, rather than Burma.

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER