Si no hay comida cuando se tiene hambre, si no hay medicamentos cuando se está enfermo, si hay ignorancia y no se respetan los derechos elementales de las personas, la democracia es una cáscara vacía, aunque los ciudadanos voten y tengan Parlamento.
Nelsón Mandela
jueves, 21 de enero de 2010
Informe Mundial 2010: Los abusadores atacan a los mensajeros de derechos humanos
Los gobiernos que respetan los derechos humanos deben abogar por la protección de los defensores. Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch
(Washington, DC, 20 de enero de 2010) - Los gobiernos responsables de graves violaciones de los derechos humanos han intensificado durante el último año los ataques contra defensores de derechos humanos y las organizaciones que documentan los abusos, dijo Human Rights Watch hoy en la publicación de su Informe Mundial 2010.
El informe de 612 páginas, que constituye el vigésimo examen anual de la organización sobre las prácticas globales de derechos humanos, resume las tendencias principales de los derechos humanos en más de 90 naciones y territorios de todo el mundo, sobre la base del extenso trabajo de investigación realizado en 2009 por el personal de Human Rights Watch. El capítulo introductorio de esta edición, a cargo del director ejecutivo Kenneth Roth, argumenta que la capacidad del movimiento de derechos humanos para ejercer presión en representación de las víctimas ha crecido enormemente durante los últimos años, y que este desarrollo ha generado una reacción por parte de los gobiernos abusivos que se intensificó particularmente en 2009.
"Los ataques contra defensores de los derechos pueden ser vistos como un homenaje perverso al movimiento de derechos humanos, pero eso no atenúa el peligro", señaló Roth. "Bajo diversos pretextos, los gobiernos abusivos están atacando las bases mismas del movimiento de derechos humanos".
Los ataques contra los observadores de derechos humanos no se limitan a los gobiernos autoritarios como Birmania y China, dijo Human Rights Watch. En los países con gobiernos electos que se enfrentan a insurgencias armadas ha habido un fuerte aumento de ataques armados contra los observadores de derechos humanos. Aunque el conflicto armado de Chechenia se ha atenuado, hubo una serie devastadora de asesinatos y amenazas contra abogados y activistas que luchan contra la impunidad en el Cáucaso septentrional.
Human Rights Watch señaló que algunos gobiernos son tan abusivos contra las personas y organizaciones que ningún movimiento nacional de derechos humanos puede funcionar, como es el caso de Eritrea, Corea del Norte y Turkmenistán.
La introducción del informe dice que además de Rusia y Sri Lanka, otros países donde observadores de derechos humanos fueron asesinados con el fin de silenciarlos incluyeron a Kenia, Burundi y Afganistán.
Human Rights Watch mencionó a Sudán y China como países que habitualmente clausuran a grupos de derechos humanos, y a Irán y Uzbekistán como países que hostigan abiertamente y detienen arbitrariamente a trabajadores de derechos humanos y a otros críticos. Colombia, Venezuela y Nicaragua amenazan y acosan a los defensores de derechos. Defensores de derechos humanos se enfrentan a la violencia en países como la República Democrática del Congo y Sri Lanka. Algunos gobiernos como el de Etiopía y Egipto utilizan leyes extremadamente restrictivas para debilitar la labor de las organizaciones no gubernamentales. Otros países utilizan la suspensión de las licencias profesionales de los abogados (China e Irán, por ejemplo), los cargos criminales - a menudo falsos derivados de ataques simulados (Uzbekistán y Turkmenistán), y las leyes penales sobre el libelo (Rusia y Azerbaiyán) para silenciar a los críticos.
Grupos locales e internacionales de derechos humanos que trabajan en Israel han experimentado un clima más hostil que nunca, después de documentar los abusos cometidos por Israel, así como por Hamas, durante los enfrentamientos de diciembre 2008 - enero 2009 en Gaza e Israel, y en relación con el bloqueo en curso de Israel sobre Gaza.
Roth dijo que la única manera en que los gobiernos abusivos terminarán su asalto contra los defensores de derechos es si los otros gobiernos que apoyan los derechos humanos convierten a los derechos una parte central de sus relaciones bilaterales.
"Los gobiernos que apoyan los derechos humanos necesitan levantar su voz, convertir el respeto a los derechos humanos en la base fundamental de su diplomacia - y de sus propias prácticas", señaló Roth. "Necesitan demandar un cambio real por parte de los gobiernos abusivos".
Roth dijo que el gobierno de Obama, en particular, enfrenta el desafío de restablecer la credibilidad de Estados Unidos en materia de derechos humanos. Hasta ahora, Roth afirmó, los resultados son mixtos, con una mejora notable en la retórica presidencial, pero una traducción incompleta de la retórica a la política y la práctica.
El Gobierno de Estados Unidos ha terminado el programa coercitivo de interrogación de la CIA, pero para cumplir con el derecho nacional e internacional contra la tortura aún necesita investigar y enjuiciar a aquellos que hayan ordenado, facilitado o llevado a cabo la tortura y otros malos tratos, agregó. Se venció el plazo para el cierre del centro de detención en Guantánamo, pero la cuestión más importante es cómo va a ser cerrado. Human Rights Watch y otros han instado al Gobierno ya sea a enjuiciar a los sospechosos detenidos ante los tribunales federales ordinarios, o de manera segura repatriarlos o reasentarlos en algún otro lugar. El gobierno de Obama ha insistido en mantener las comisiones militares que proporcionan una justicia deficiente y en continuar deteniendo a sospechosos por un tiempo indefinido sin cargos ni juicio, ambas situaciones conllevan el riesgo de perpetuar el espíritu de Guantánamo, dijo Roth.
Human Rights Watch también afirmó en la introducción de su informe que un nuevo sistema de justicia internacional, que incluye a la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI), ha sido el foco de ataque. El asalto se desarrolló después de que la Corte emitiera en marzo una orden de arresto contra el presidente de Sudán Omar al-Bashir por crímenes de guerra y crímenes contra la humanidad cometidos por las fuerzas sudanesas y las milicias aliadas en contra la población civil de Darfur.
Después de que la Corte emitió la orden, muchas democracias africanas eligieron inicialmente la comodidad de la solidaridad regional en lugar de tomar una posición de principios en apoyo a la justicia internacional, afirma la introducción del informe.
En lugar de aplaudir a la Corte Penal Internacional por tomar medidas para desagraviar el asesinato en masa y el desplazamiento forzado de tantos africanos en Darfur, la Unión Africana decidió en julio no cooperar con la ejecución de la orden de detención. Algunos de los dirigentes africanos fueron más allá al decidir proteger a Bashir en lugar de a las víctimas de los abusos de Darfur.
La investigación de Human Rights Watch durante el año pasado abarcó una amplia gama de abusos en prácticamente todas las regiones del mundo.
Un ensayo adicional del informe, titulado "Maltrato a los pacientes", describe las políticas de salud gubernamentales que someten a los pacientes a la tortura o a malos tratos, y el fracaso de las sociedades médicas nacionales e internacionales en evitar la complicidad de los proveedor de servicios médicos en esos abusos. El ensayo se basó en la investigación de Human Rights Watch en Egipto, Libia, Jordania, Kurdistán iraquí, China, Camboya, India y Nicaragua.
En muchos países, Human Rights Watch documentó las violaciones de los derechos humanos sufridas por mujeres y niñas, incluidas las relacionadas con el embarazo, el parto, y el papel de las mujeres como cuidadoras y proveedoras. Por ejemplo, la mortalidad materna evitable y la discapacidad como consecuencia de las políticas y leyes negligentes matan y mutilan a más mujeres al año que el impacto los conflictos armados, señaló Human Rights Watch.
En Irán, Human Rights Watch investigó la continua represión gubernamental de activistas pacíficos después de la disputada elección presidencial de junio de 2009. Human Rights Watch documentó la detención de miles de personas ordinarias y de alto perfil, proporcionando cuentas detalladas de la violencia estatal contra los manifestantes pacíficos, la detención arbitraria de defensores de derechos humanos, y el abuso y la tortura en centros de detención ilegales de Irán.
En China, además de su labor constante de documentar el acoso y encarcelamiento de defensores de derechos humanos, Human Rights Watch publicó un informe en el que se describe la operación secreta de "cárceles negras", donde las autoridades detienen a personas que secuestran de las calles de Beijing y otras grandes las ciudades. La mayoría de los detenidos son peticionarios que buscan reparación por abusos que van desde la corrupción del Gobierno hasta la tortura policial.
En Cuba, Human Rights Watch documentó cómo el gobierno de Raúl Castro, en vez de desmantelar el aparato represivo de los años de Fidel Castro, lo ha mantenido firmemente en su lugar, conservando a decenas de presos políticos detenidos y arrestando a docenas de disidentes.
En Zimbabue, los investigadores continuaron la supervisión y documentación de las violaciones de los derechos por el partido del ex presidente Robert Mugabe contra sus socios y partidarios en un Gobierno de coalición. Human Rights Watch también documentó tácticas brutales del Ejército y la Policía en los campos de diamantes de Marange para controlar el acceso a los campos y hacerse cargo de la extracción y el comercio de diamantes sin licencia.
Un informe sobre Birmania documenta los casos de docenas de activistas políticos prominentes, monjes budistas, activistas sindicales, periodistas y artistas detenidos desde las protestas políticas pacíficas de 2007 y condenados a penas draconianas después de juicios injustos.
En Gaza e Israel, Human Rights Watch documentó violaciones de las leyes de la guerra tanto por Israel como por Hamas. El asalto militar de Israel en Gaza hace un año incluyó el uso ilegal de municiones de fósforo blanco, el asesinato de civiles con misiles lanzados por aviones teledirigidos, y los disparos contra civiles que agitaban banderas blancas. Hamas y otros grupos armados palestinos lanzaron cohetes en centros de población israelí, y Hamas mató a presuntos colaboradores y maltrató a opositores políticos durante la guerra.
En Libia, Human Rights Watch publicó un informe crítico del Gobierno en una conferencia de prensa en Trípoli. El evento fue la primera conferencia de prensa abierta en Libia. El informe señala que aunque algunas mejoras limitadas se encuentran en curso, las cuales incluyen un espacio más amplio para la libertad de expresión, las leyes represivas continúan sofocando a la libertad de expresión y de asociación, y los abusos de la agencia de Seguridad Interna siguen siendo la norma.
En la República Democrática del Congo, Human Rights Watch documentó el asesinato deliberado de más de 1,400 civiles, un patrón de violaciones atroces, y otros abusos cometidos por fuerzas gubernamentales y rebeldes durante las dos sucesivas operaciones del Ejército congoleño contra una milicia hutu de Ruanda, en el este del país . Human Rights Watch también informó de graves deficiencias en la operación de mantenimiento de la paz de la ONU en el Congo que limitan su capacidad para proteger eficazmente a los civiles.
En Guinea, Human Rights Watch elaboró un informe detallado sobre los asesinatos, agresiones sexuales y otros abusos en un mitin de la oposición en la capital, cometidos principalmente por miembros del cuerpo élite de la Guardia Presidencial. La evidencia sugiere que los ataques fueron planeados de antemano y alcanzaron la categoría de crímenes contra la humanidad.
Human Rights Watch dijo que a pesar del crecimiento del movimiento de derechos humanos, los defensores de derechos humanos siguen siendo vulnerables y necesitan grandemente el apoyo de los gobiernos que respetan los derechos.
"Los gobiernos que se consideran defensores de los derechos humanos suelen guardar silencio frente a estos abusos por parte de aliados, argumentando prioridades diplomáticas o económicas", señaló Roth. "Pero ese silencio los hace cómplices en los abusos. La única respuesta adecuada a las violaciones graves de los derechos humanos es ejercer presión sobre los autores".
miércoles, 20 de enero de 2010
Birmania- Elecciones 2010: la NLD plantea reformas del Comite Central
The party of Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, the National League for Democracy (NLD), has taken the next step in its ongoing effort to revitalize itself, according to party sources.
On Monday, the party's Central Executive Committee (CEC) held it first meeting since adding nine new members a week earlier and resolved to reorganize its second-line leadership in the Central Committee (CC).
 |
| NLD CEC member Khin Maung Swe releases a dove at the party's headquarters to mark the 62nd anniversary of Burma's Independence Day on Jan. 4, 2010. |
“The party will reorganize the CC in the near future. After the CEC meeting on Monday, we told our chairman, U Aung Shwe, about our plan,” said NLD spokesperson Win Naing, who is also one of the new CEC members.
“We did this in line with party regulations—it has nothing to do with the election,” he added. “Actually, it is something that we have been planning to do since Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was released from house arrest for the first time in 1995.”
The move comes just one week after the party's first major internal shake-up since it was founded in 1988. On Jan. 11, the CEC chose nine new members—all in their 60s and 70s—expanding its total membership to 20.
Win Naing said that when the new CC is formed, it will consist of 80 to 120 members from all of the country's states and divisions. He added that the party hasn't had a CC since 1991, when it was abolished under orders from the ruling junta.
When the NLD was formed in 1988, the CEC had 12 members, with four from each of the party's three factions, led by General Secretary Aung San Suu Kyi, Chairman Aung Gyi and Deputy Chairman Tin Oo. The CC had 30 members, evenly divided among the three factions.
Win Naing said that plans to expand the CC membership did not contravene the NLD constitution, which says that the CC can have a maximum of 120 members.
Win Naing said nothing about plans to reform other influential NLD committees, such as the party's youth and women's working groups—which played key role in the party's electoral victory in 1990—but said that the party aimed to carry out thorough reforms nationwide.
At its meeting on Monday, the newly formed CEC received a letter from Chairman Aung Shwe saying he was “glad about the reorganization of the CEC” and urging its members to stand by the NLD’s Shwegondaing Declaration, which calls for the release of all political prisoners, genuine dialogue between the ruling junta and the democratic opposition, a review of the 2008 Constitution and acknowledgment of the result of the 1990 election.
The plan to enlarge the NLD leadership was first raised when detained party leader Suu Kyi met with ailing NLD leaders in December. At the time, Suu Kyi told the party elders that she wanted to reorganize the party's leadership.
This meeting came after Suu Kyi offered to meet with the regime to discuss the issue of sanctions. In October, the junta allowed her to meet with its liaison officer, ex Maj-Gen Aung Kyi, and Western diplomats. She held her latest meeting with Aung Kyi at a government guest house in Rangoon last Friday.
Suu Kyi’s lawyer, Nyan Win, who is now a member of the CEC, has also recently been given permission to meet with her to discuss a legal appeal against the extension of her house arrest last year. Besides her court case, it is likely that Suu Kyi and Nyan Win have also discussed the current political situation, including the NLD's reorganization.
Suu Kyi met Nyan Win most recently on Jan.12, just three days ahead of her latest meeting with Aung Kyi and six days before this week's CEC meeting.
Another reason for the NLD reorganization was the release of some leaders from long-term imprisonment. Prominent leader Win Tin and others such as Khin Maung Swe, May Win Myin and Than Nyein were released in September 2008. Shortly after their release, the former inmates attempted to hold a regular meeting of the NLD leadership. All are now CEC members.
Win Tin is now in Mandalay to attend a memorial ceremony marking the 100th anniversary of the birth of late well-known Burmese journalist U Hla. NLD sources said this is Win Tin's first long trip since his release in 2008, and that the authorities have not interfered so far.
Birmania- Elecciones 2010: India Can Move the Needle on Burma
By KELLEY CURRIE
Burma is back in the news amid reports that the ruling military junta has set its upcoming "elections" for October 2010 and is making serious efforts to secure short-range ballistic missiles. Taken with the lack of results from the Obama administration's attempted engagement with the junta, these developments highlight the need for stepped-up regional activism in favor of democracy in Burma, especially from its democratic neighbors.
India in particular faces an increasingly untenable balancing act in maintaining its current accommodation of the junta, and will be under growing pressure this year to move toward a policy that better aligns its values and interests. Such a shift would be a boon to those supporting democratic reforms in Burma, as well as to India's own interests and its regional leadership aspirations.
Since 1993, India has steadily deepened its engagement with the Burmese junta, setting aside ties to Burma's democratic past and moral qualms about this odious regime. Indian foreign policy elites defend this unprincipled policy by pointing to cooperation between the Indian and Burmese militaries on their restive common border, and the growth in trade between the two countries. They also claim that the relationship is an important strategic counterweight to the junta's close relationship with authoritarian China.
But in reality India's benefits from cooperation with the junta have been disappointingly small on both the economic and security fronts. The Burmese regime plays India and China off of each other, protecting its own interests above all. But when forced to choose, the Burmese junta invariably favors Beijing.
A case in point was the 2005 decision to award China a 30-year contract to develop the most valuable blocks of the Shwe natural gas fields despite India putting in a higher bid. Senior General Than Shwe and his ilk may dislike and fear Chinese hegemony, but they know Beijing will suffer no attacks of conscience or domestic political pressure over the junta's human-rights abuses.
Recent security-related developments should give India's "realists" further pause. Last week, Australia's Lowy Institute published a report by Burma expert Andrew Selth on the junta's alleged long-running efforts to secure Scud-type short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) from North Korea and other sources. Mr. Selth writes that the junta is more interested in obtaining SRBMs than nuclear weapons technology and posits that much of the evidence cited in media and intelligence community reporting about Burma's nuclear ambitions is more likely attributable to its pursuit of SRBMs.
If Burma's generals get SRBMs, which have a range of 700 miles, India is a potential target. In light of the junta's closer relationship with Beijing, and the links the Chinese have endeavored to build between the Burmese and Pakistani militaries, Indian defense planners are unlikely to be comforted by Mr. Selth's prediction that Burmese missiles would be pointed at Thailand.
The regime's planned elections this year provide a fitting opportunity for India to change its approach. Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper and the Democratic Voice of Burma radio service have reported that junta officials have scheduled the elections for Oct. 10, 2010 (a date consistent with their penchant for numerology). The regime reportedly plans to permit the National League for Democracy to compete in the elections, even though NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi will likely be prohibited from participating and many party activists will remain in prison. These polls will take place against a backdrop of fear and repression under a constitution designed to institutionalize military rule, thus ensuring they fall far short of any standard for a credible election.
Such a blatantly manipulated election presents a serious policy challenge for India. China's unelected leadership can pronounce the Burmese junta's most deeply cynical electoral efforts to be a triumph of democracy with a straight face, but Indian leaders will and should be held to a higher standard. Giving their stamp of approval to a farcical election would undermine the ideals that animate Indian national identity.
New Delhi should be more clever about using its own values and role as a leader within Asia to change the regional calculus on Burma. This means working with fellow democracies in the region such as Indonesia, Japan and Thailand to press for political reform and improvement on human-rights, economic and internal security issues that have external consequences for the region.
These democratic countries occupy a privileged position that gives them unique prerogative to address the quality of Burma's electoral processes, and they should use their status to full effect in the coming months. The additional weight of India's voice to this group, particularly if raised through Asian venues such as the Bali Democracy Forum, would undoubtedly move the center of gravity within Asia. China would be forced to adapt or find itself outside the regional consensus.
By embracing its values and the leadership role that naturally follows, India can better protect its interests, while undermining China's present advantage in Burma. Unlike India's present failing approach, such a policy has the advantage of being smart—and the right thing to do.
Ms. Currie is a fellow with the Project 2049 Institute, a think tank in Washington.
Birmania: Elecciones 2010- Una entrevista con U Win Tin
Mizzima News - In 1989 he was sentenced to prison, without any proof of having committed a crime. He was released almost 20 years later, in September 2008, though he does not see it that way himself. He did not want to be released out of pity for his old age, but only on the basis of the charges against him. This is one of the reasons why he still wears his blue prison shirt. He may be outside the prison walls, but he still is not free to do as he wants in his country.
U Win Tin is one of Burma's most well-known journalists, an opposition leader and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's right hand man. Famous both inside and outside of Burma, many people campaigned for his release. He is known as Burma's longest serving political prisoner, though he says, “There are many young people who spend more than twenty years in jail and who are hardly known by the people.”
He spent almost twenty years in one of Burma's most notorious prisons, Insein in Rangoon. For long periods of time he was kept in isolation and even in former dog cells. He kept himself sane by writing poetry and solving mathematical problems. He is now 80 years old and his health is starting to fail. Because of a lack of medical care during his incarceration, existing medical conditions worsened. He suffers badly from asthma, underwent a heart operation last August, suffers from spondylitis of his spine and has failing eyesight. But from the moment he was released he resumed his old duties for the opposition party NLD (National League for Democracy). In his own words: “I am not bedridden so I can walk. But anyhow, I work everyday and I meet people and I talk with the media. Sometimes I am tired. But I continue.”
A brave man with a vision and a dream of a free Burma; a comparison with South Africa's anti-apartheid hero and former president Nelson Mandela comes to mind. U Win Tin's struggle is purely non-violent. He believes this is also a part of the character of the Burmese people. I asked him whether he thinks that maybe at some point, violence will be necessary to create change in Burma.
U Win Tin: I do not think it is necessary to use violence because people in Burma are really – because of their religion – mild and very docile. Their will, their desire, is not to use a violent way. Even to use a violent word is frowned upon in Burmese society. The people like to be very polite and very quiet and they do not express their will in a violent way.
I think the nonviolent way is possible, though there might be some violence, or a violent phase in our struggle. Of course the ruling power in the country is too big. There is a very strong army and they have modernized and spent a lot of money on the military. They have built up their military power over the years. One army regiment is like 1,000 people or something like that. They are very modernized, live in big houses, own plantations and inside their compounds there might even be some factories. So they are very strong, you see, among the people. Of course the soldiers themselves are suffering too. But they are suffering much less than the ordinary people. They earn more money and they have more facilities.
We are nonviolent all the time. We go out on the streets but we never use violence. I just think it is not in the Burmese people's will to use violence. It is not their style of expressing their will, political thinking and opinions. People are very nonviolent now. But maybe tomorrow, I don't know.
He then elaborated on the violent suppression of the 2007 Saffron Revolution.
U Win Tin: The military is very strong and suddenly they will shoot, even the monks. All the people are giving homage to the monks, but they shoot them. In 2007, monks were shot for no reason. Even in the time of colonial rule there was political movement by the monks, political demonstrations and so on. But nowadays, say for instance in 2007, the monks are nonviolently and nonpolitically rallying against the government by just reciting the metta suttra, which is about loving kindness. And still they were shot. They are still unsure how many monks were killed. People believe more than 100 were killed. People are shocked by this and do not like it.
When I do get hold of him – I am referred to a different number a few times, as he has no permanent place of residence due to the junta repossessing his house during his detention and pressure placed on landlords not to rent to him – I am surprised by his eloquent and energetic sounding voice. He is witty and sharp and talks a lot. He has no fear that conversations like ours might cause him danger.
U Win Tin: You see, if you speak like this in Burma, some action or something you have done cannot bring danger for you at the present time, but it might be dangerous for you at a later time. They keep a record of your actions, and then when you are sent for trial these things will become evidence of you being guilty.
But I do not mind. I am always talking to the media: VOA, BBC, DVB, Irrawaddy. I am very outspoken and I have no restraints about my opinions. Recently, I was telling everybody that Burma at this moment is like a jail, like a prison. The whole country is a prison and people are suffering. We talk about human rights violations and about the 2,000 political prisoners in jail now, but all people are prisoners. They are prisoners in their own country, in their own towns and homes. Whenever I go to my office or to a friend's house or even to a funeral, you see, there are some two or three motorcycles following me. It is almost impossible to see a free man in Burma at this moment.
When asked about his opinion on the recently announced alms boycott and whether he thinks it is effective, his answer is long and passionate, it is obvious he admires the monks and is a devout Buddhist.
U Win Tin: This pattanikkujjana (alms boycott) is very effective. For a Buddhist, when you are under a pattanikkujjana you are no longer a Buddhist. For the government it is very effective. They are Buddhist – nominally of course – and the pattanikkujjana has a very bad effect on them. As Buddhists, they play the religion card. They assume they are the guardians of the religion. They are the promoters of the religion. They put up big pagodas and give support to the monasteries.
But, although it is effective, in order to have a pronounced change more is needed. The monks, according to Buddhist teachings, do not act as politicians. Burmese monks are always out of politics because they are the religious people, so they are not concerned with voting. Anyhow, they have a very strong tradition of political activity and leadership, even as far back as the colonial days.
Although the government promotes religion so that people will regard them as the guardians of the religion, they try too hard. So you see, this pattannikujjana action happened and they were very shocked. In a situation like this, the monks could make a movement if they were a political party, but they are not. They are not a political party, so they have to wait and just provide people with information and tell people that this government really has no authority and that the monks are suppressed.
Things have not changed for the better since the peaceful demonstrations by the monks were violently stopped in 2007.
U Win Tin: Every week we hear news about monks being arrested and taken from their monasteries. Even, for instance, if I want to ask a monk to give some offering at my house, his monastery will be asked not to go to my house. The government's suppression of religious people will not go unnoticed, because in the foreign press and media people are reporting these incidents. So, although there is not so much activity by the monks as a political force, they are still there. The force is going on everyday and they work everyday.
Because they have to collect their meals, they go around and talk to the people. They are in contact with the people. In that way they are more political than us, because we do not go to people's houses everyday. They have to go out and collect their meals early in the morning or in the daytime. They are in close contact with the people and can exchange ideas and opinions. Their influence on the people is very high, because they are their friends. And in those talks there might be some political matters or talk about suffering.
We talk about the United States' recent policy of dealing with the Burmese junta: engagement coupled with sanctions. How does U Win Tin feel about this new approach? According to him, a lot of the sanctions are not very effective, but he feels engagement with the military regime will not be very effective either.
U Win Tin: It has been proven that sanctions are not effective and they know that. But they will keep them as long as there is no improvement in the current situation. Engagement is not effective either, as it has already been tried by other countries such as Russia. Nowadays the US government uses this engagement and sanctions approach together. They are attacking with one gun that is not very effective and now they are using another gun that is also not very effective. Whether they have one gun or two guns it does not matter.
Although I do not think this American action of engagement and sanctions will be very effective, we are still hopeful. At least now there are two weapons and they are engaging in Burma, so people in political parties and political forces are encouraged and we are rather hoping for something.
He switches to the subject of the upcoming elections in 2010.
U Win Tin: Without political dialogue the upcoming elections will be nothing. They will be a sham. This election is built upon the framework of the 2008 constitution, which will be enacted after this election. This constitution will prolong military rule for many years. There are no peoples’ rights, no democratic rights, nothing at all. For instance, according to this constitution (article 6), the military is the leader of politics. I cannot agree with that.
Another difficulty is that there is no political will on the part of the junta. They have no idea of the country's problems and are only thinking of their own will, which is to prolong their rule. They have no plans at all to make any contact, to make any dialogue, with political forces or ethnic nationalities. So, we use this American initiative as a tool to move and go through the election. The election is a sham without the participation of the ethnic nationalities and opposition parties. We need to have political dialogue before the election; with nationalities, with ourselves and with opposition forces. That will be the only way.
One of the demands of the United States government and also one of the conditions for the NLD to partake in the upcoming elections is the release of all political prisoners. Amnesty International estimates there are currently more than 2,000 political prisoners languishing in Burma's prisons. Many of them were involved in the 1988 uprising and the 2007 Saffron Revolution. Nearly 200 monks and nuns are believed imprisoned. U Win Tin feels the US might have some influence on the release of these prisoners.
U Win Tin: If the US shows some positive thinking and initiative, the military will know how to react to this. One of these reactions can be the release of political prisoners. As a sign of goodwill they might release some students but they will not release all political prisoners. They will keep some as hostages. They want to show the world that they are not that bad, by releasing prisoners. When I was released in September 2008, they released many prisoners, most of whom were criminals and not political prisoners.
U Win Tin believes the junta is not interested in the political process. A person with ties to a foreign country cannot participate in the election. This was invented to prevent Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, whose husband was British and sons live abroad, from playing a legitimate role in politics.
U Win Tin: The government has no intention to give her a role to play in Burmese politics. She is a very good leader. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has many activities and much influence, but still she is restricted. She can do a lot and she can assert her experiences on the people. But, if she is not allowed to go outside of Rangoon or to meet the press or something, then it is almost impossible for her to play a very big role in politics.
U Win Tin is one of Burma's most well-known journalists, an opposition leader and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's right hand man. Famous both inside and outside of Burma, many people campaigned for his release. He is known as Burma's longest serving political prisoner, though he says, “There are many young people who spend more than twenty years in jail and who are hardly known by the people.”
He spent almost twenty years in one of Burma's most notorious prisons, Insein in Rangoon. For long periods of time he was kept in isolation and even in former dog cells. He kept himself sane by writing poetry and solving mathematical problems. He is now 80 years old and his health is starting to fail. Because of a lack of medical care during his incarceration, existing medical conditions worsened. He suffers badly from asthma, underwent a heart operation last August, suffers from spondylitis of his spine and has failing eyesight. But from the moment he was released he resumed his old duties for the opposition party NLD (National League for Democracy). In his own words: “I am not bedridden so I can walk. But anyhow, I work everyday and I meet people and I talk with the media. Sometimes I am tired. But I continue.”
A brave man with a vision and a dream of a free Burma; a comparison with South Africa's anti-apartheid hero and former president Nelson Mandela comes to mind. U Win Tin's struggle is purely non-violent. He believes this is also a part of the character of the Burmese people. I asked him whether he thinks that maybe at some point, violence will be necessary to create change in Burma.
U Win Tin: I do not think it is necessary to use violence because people in Burma are really – because of their religion – mild and very docile. Their will, their desire, is not to use a violent way. Even to use a violent word is frowned upon in Burmese society. The people like to be very polite and very quiet and they do not express their will in a violent way.
I think the nonviolent way is possible, though there might be some violence, or a violent phase in our struggle. Of course the ruling power in the country is too big. There is a very strong army and they have modernized and spent a lot of money on the military. They have built up their military power over the years. One army regiment is like 1,000 people or something like that. They are very modernized, live in big houses, own plantations and inside their compounds there might even be some factories. So they are very strong, you see, among the people. Of course the soldiers themselves are suffering too. But they are suffering much less than the ordinary people. They earn more money and they have more facilities.
We are nonviolent all the time. We go out on the streets but we never use violence. I just think it is not in the Burmese people's will to use violence. It is not their style of expressing their will, political thinking and opinions. People are very nonviolent now. But maybe tomorrow, I don't know.
He then elaborated on the violent suppression of the 2007 Saffron Revolution.
U Win Tin: The military is very strong and suddenly they will shoot, even the monks. All the people are giving homage to the monks, but they shoot them. In 2007, monks were shot for no reason. Even in the time of colonial rule there was political movement by the monks, political demonstrations and so on. But nowadays, say for instance in 2007, the monks are nonviolently and nonpolitically rallying against the government by just reciting the metta suttra, which is about loving kindness. And still they were shot. They are still unsure how many monks were killed. People believe more than 100 were killed. People are shocked by this and do not like it.
When I do get hold of him – I am referred to a different number a few times, as he has no permanent place of residence due to the junta repossessing his house during his detention and pressure placed on landlords not to rent to him – I am surprised by his eloquent and energetic sounding voice. He is witty and sharp and talks a lot. He has no fear that conversations like ours might cause him danger.
U Win Tin: You see, if you speak like this in Burma, some action or something you have done cannot bring danger for you at the present time, but it might be dangerous for you at a later time. They keep a record of your actions, and then when you are sent for trial these things will become evidence of you being guilty.
But I do not mind. I am always talking to the media: VOA, BBC, DVB, Irrawaddy. I am very outspoken and I have no restraints about my opinions. Recently, I was telling everybody that Burma at this moment is like a jail, like a prison. The whole country is a prison and people are suffering. We talk about human rights violations and about the 2,000 political prisoners in jail now, but all people are prisoners. They are prisoners in their own country, in their own towns and homes. Whenever I go to my office or to a friend's house or even to a funeral, you see, there are some two or three motorcycles following me. It is almost impossible to see a free man in Burma at this moment.
When asked about his opinion on the recently announced alms boycott and whether he thinks it is effective, his answer is long and passionate, it is obvious he admires the monks and is a devout Buddhist.
U Win Tin: This pattanikkujjana (alms boycott) is very effective. For a Buddhist, when you are under a pattanikkujjana you are no longer a Buddhist. For the government it is very effective. They are Buddhist – nominally of course – and the pattanikkujjana has a very bad effect on them. As Buddhists, they play the religion card. They assume they are the guardians of the religion. They are the promoters of the religion. They put up big pagodas and give support to the monasteries.
But, although it is effective, in order to have a pronounced change more is needed. The monks, according to Buddhist teachings, do not act as politicians. Burmese monks are always out of politics because they are the religious people, so they are not concerned with voting. Anyhow, they have a very strong tradition of political activity and leadership, even as far back as the colonial days.
Although the government promotes religion so that people will regard them as the guardians of the religion, they try too hard. So you see, this pattannikujjana action happened and they were very shocked. In a situation like this, the monks could make a movement if they were a political party, but they are not. They are not a political party, so they have to wait and just provide people with information and tell people that this government really has no authority and that the monks are suppressed.
Things have not changed for the better since the peaceful demonstrations by the monks were violently stopped in 2007.
U Win Tin: Every week we hear news about monks being arrested and taken from their monasteries. Even, for instance, if I want to ask a monk to give some offering at my house, his monastery will be asked not to go to my house. The government's suppression of religious people will not go unnoticed, because in the foreign press and media people are reporting these incidents. So, although there is not so much activity by the monks as a political force, they are still there. The force is going on everyday and they work everyday.
Because they have to collect their meals, they go around and talk to the people. They are in contact with the people. In that way they are more political than us, because we do not go to people's houses everyday. They have to go out and collect their meals early in the morning or in the daytime. They are in close contact with the people and can exchange ideas and opinions. Their influence on the people is very high, because they are their friends. And in those talks there might be some political matters or talk about suffering.
We talk about the United States' recent policy of dealing with the Burmese junta: engagement coupled with sanctions. How does U Win Tin feel about this new approach? According to him, a lot of the sanctions are not very effective, but he feels engagement with the military regime will not be very effective either.
U Win Tin: It has been proven that sanctions are not effective and they know that. But they will keep them as long as there is no improvement in the current situation. Engagement is not effective either, as it has already been tried by other countries such as Russia. Nowadays the US government uses this engagement and sanctions approach together. They are attacking with one gun that is not very effective and now they are using another gun that is also not very effective. Whether they have one gun or two guns it does not matter.
Although I do not think this American action of engagement and sanctions will be very effective, we are still hopeful. At least now there are two weapons and they are engaging in Burma, so people in political parties and political forces are encouraged and we are rather hoping for something.
He switches to the subject of the upcoming elections in 2010.
U Win Tin: Without political dialogue the upcoming elections will be nothing. They will be a sham. This election is built upon the framework of the 2008 constitution, which will be enacted after this election. This constitution will prolong military rule for many years. There are no peoples’ rights, no democratic rights, nothing at all. For instance, according to this constitution (article 6), the military is the leader of politics. I cannot agree with that.
Another difficulty is that there is no political will on the part of the junta. They have no idea of the country's problems and are only thinking of their own will, which is to prolong their rule. They have no plans at all to make any contact, to make any dialogue, with political forces or ethnic nationalities. So, we use this American initiative as a tool to move and go through the election. The election is a sham without the participation of the ethnic nationalities and opposition parties. We need to have political dialogue before the election; with nationalities, with ourselves and with opposition forces. That will be the only way.
One of the demands of the United States government and also one of the conditions for the NLD to partake in the upcoming elections is the release of all political prisoners. Amnesty International estimates there are currently more than 2,000 political prisoners languishing in Burma's prisons. Many of them were involved in the 1988 uprising and the 2007 Saffron Revolution. Nearly 200 monks and nuns are believed imprisoned. U Win Tin feels the US might have some influence on the release of these prisoners.
U Win Tin: If the US shows some positive thinking and initiative, the military will know how to react to this. One of these reactions can be the release of political prisoners. As a sign of goodwill they might release some students but they will not release all political prisoners. They will keep some as hostages. They want to show the world that they are not that bad, by releasing prisoners. When I was released in September 2008, they released many prisoners, most of whom were criminals and not political prisoners.
U Win Tin believes the junta is not interested in the political process. A person with ties to a foreign country cannot participate in the election. This was invented to prevent Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, whose husband was British and sons live abroad, from playing a legitimate role in politics.
U Win Tin: The government has no intention to give her a role to play in Burmese politics. She is a very good leader. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has many activities and much influence, but still she is restricted. She can do a lot and she can assert her experiences on the people. But, if she is not allowed to go outside of Rangoon or to meet the press or something, then it is almost impossible for her to play a very big role in politics.
Birmania, 2010: ¿elecciones libres y justas? por Concha Pinós
En
Mientras que la urgencia de una reconciliación política en el país ha sido durante mucho tiempo una prioridad, no puedo ocultar mi preocupación sobre algunos temas críticos relacionados con el proceso de elecciones que puede afectar el desarrollo de unas elecciones libres y justas. Por ejemplo, en una reunión con el Primer Ministro de Tailandia, Abhisit Vejjajuva en
Para asegurar unas elecciones libres y justas, tendría que existir monitores independientes extranjeros a lo largo del país al comienzo del periodo de campaña electoral. Así como media internacional Porque la línea divisoria entre campaña y manipulación es a menudo turbia en las elecciones, es esencial introducir una lista de criterios claves para llevar a cabo unas elecciones libres y justas.
TRATAMIENTO DE LAS ELECCIONES: La credibilidad de un proceso electoral , depende del manejo del mecanismo administrativo electoral, el cual debe de ser independiente e imparcial.
Sin embargo, hubo un resultado libre y justo en las elecciones de 1990, y fue reconocido localmente e internacionalmente. Hubo tres razones para eso: el alto nivel de gente en desacuerdo con el gobierno militar, la debilidad de la junta para el control administrativo a nivel comunidad en dos años siguientes, y la relativamente justa administración de EC a nivel aldeas. El EC usualmente comprende tres personas respetadas de las comunidad, más un profesor de escuela y un administrador del régimen.
De manera, que la junta está extremadamente en desacuerdo de permitirse a si misma sufrir una derrota otra vez (en 1990,
FINANCIACIÓN DE LOS PARTIDOS: A pesar de que hubo un resultado justo en las elecciones de 1990, hubo muchas situaciones que un observador independiente habría juzgado “injustas”, especialmente con respecto al acceso a recursos de los partidos políticos y al sistema de intimidación a nivel nacional por parte del régimen durante el periodo de campaña y el día de las elecciones.
Mientras que el NLD enfrento una escasez de fondos, y gente que los apoyaba temian donar dinero al partido por miedo a las represalias, El Partido de Unión Nacional (NUP), un poder del partido socialista, tuvo la capacidad de financiarse y utilizar una importante suma de dinero y tenía accedo a vehículos que eran propiedad del gobierno.
Durantes las últimas dos décadas, mientras el NUP y otras organizaciones respaldadas por el régimen han gozado de privilegios económicos, el régimen ha estropeado eficazmente la procedencia de fondos y recursos del NLD a través del control represivo sobre las oficinas del partido y sus recursos financieros. Todas estas disparidades minan cualquier noción de que las elecciones de 2010 sean justas y libres.
EDUCACIÓN DEL VOTANTE: Aunque 236 partidos políticos fueron registrados en Birmania en 1988, solo 93 formaron parte en las elecciones de 1990. Existen únicamente 10 partidos políticos registrados oficialmente en Birmania, si bien docenas de nuevos partidos saldrán a la luz después de que el régimen declare la nueva ley electoral y de registro para partidos políticos. Que será en Abril del 2010
En una elección con varios partidos políticos participando, la educación al voto y el acceso a diversos mensajes de los partidos es vital si se pretende alcanzar la democracia. En las elecciones de 1990, el régimen militar tomo un papel de un gobierno preocupado y se retractaron oficialmente de estar involucrados en el proceso político. De cualquier manera, el régimen limitó estrictamente el uso de medio estatales con fines politicos.
Los Partidos políticos independientes tuvieron que contar con sus propios periódicos, panfletos y postres durante el periodo de campaña. Con los recursos severamente limitados, también tuvieron que tomar responsabilidad de educar a sus voluntarios respecto al registro del votante, compra de votos y trampas. Los partidos tuvieron que estar seguros de tener suficientes miembros para monitorizar las estaciones y observar el conteo de los votos.
La gente de Birmania tradicionalmente sabe que el signo de (√) significa “de acuerdo o apoyo” y el símbolo (X) significa “desacuerdo”. En las elecciones a nivel mundial (X) se utiliza para marcar el partido elegido. El día de las votaciones la gente comete errores cuando están votando. La edad y el analfabetismo son particularmente susceptibles.
En las elecciones de 1990, el 12.3% de las papeletas, o alrededor de 1,858,900 votos fueron descalificados por las comisiones electorales como inválidos. Comparado con las elecciones más recientes en otros países del a región (Bangladesh: 0.89%, Malasia: 2.17%, Tailandia: 3.66%), el único país con un porcentaje mayor de votos inválidos es Camboya con el 26.06%, según
A la fecha, los medios privados y del Estado de Birmania han ofrecido un indicio proceso democrático para el 2010. Más allá, a pesar de reservar el 25% de lugares en el parlamento bicameral, el régimen formará indudablemente nuevos partidos políticos y camuflará a sus candidatos como independientes.
Es justo decir también que el régimen ha empezado ya la campaña para las elecciones de este año utilizando las facilidades del estado y recursos.
FRAUDE ELECTORAL: Los numerosos casos de descarados fraudes vistas en el referéndum constitucional de 2008 parece que serán repetidas este año. Los violadores clave serán de nuevo las fuerzas locales de seguridad, el EC y las organizaciones respaldadas por la junta como:
En 2008, se instruyeron casos de una persona votando por todos (as) los miembros de su familia y papeletas que fueron rellenadas en ausencia de los votantes. La peor ofensa de todas es el recuento en secreto de los votos, las Agencias internacionales de monitorización, como
Por encima de estos ejemplos comunes fraudes en las casillas de votación, el referéndum del 2008 se obtuvo por amenazas e intimidación. En muchos casos documentados, las autoridades locales dijeron que confiscarían las plantaciones de arroz o pondrían a los votantes en la cárcel si votaban que “NO”. O utilizando
El fraude electoral es una práctica común que se pueden ver ejemplos en los países vecinos como Tailandia y Camboya de partidos cambiando votos por dinero, premios o donaciones. En Tailandia, frecuentemente ofrecen préstamos, que podrán ser cancelados después si el partido gana. A esto se le conoce como “cosecha verde” en Tailandia.
En conclusión, las elecciones generas de Birmania que están por venir, serán diferentes de un simple, SÍ o NO votado en 2008, porque mucha más gente estará envuelta y habrá mucho más criterio de por medio para asegurar un nivel en el campo de juego.
Tomando en cuenta los 4 claves mencionadas arriba. La comunidad internacional tiene que enfatizar claramente que el clima presente de Birmania con conducirá a unas elecciones justas y libres este 2010.
Carta Abierta a Naciones Unidas, la Tortura Birmana
Press Release: Asian Human Rights Commission
Dear Prof. Nowak
MYANMAR: Extensive use of torture by police in recent cases
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has followed with concern reports of the most recent criminal cases targeting persons deemed threats to the state in Myanmar, and in particular the alleged use of grave forms of torture to extract confessions from them.
Among these is the case of Dr. Wint Thu and eight others accused over their involvement in a prayer campaign for the release of political prisoners, and of having had contact with groups abroad that the state has designated unlawful, whom it is alleged that from September to their trials in December the Special Branch held incommunicado and tortured.
Officers including Sub-inspectors Aung Thwin, Hsan Lin and Win Myint Htun allegedly forced Than Htaik Aung to stand with toothpicks inserted into his heels, to drink putrid drain water, and allegedly also came into his cell and urinated. Officers including Police Captain Zaw Lwin and Sub-inspectors Thet Wei, Kyaw Myo Hlaing and Kyaw Htoo Naing allegedly forced U Nandawuntha, a monk, to stand throughout two days of interrogation and then forced him to kneel on sharp gravel while an officer jumped up and down on his calves. If he didn’t give him the answers that they wanted then they hit him on the head with a wooden rod. Dr. Wint Thu and Ko Myo Han were also both allegedly forced to stand throughout interrogations of two and four nights respectively.
Four officers at the Aungthapyay interrogation facility in Yangon Division, including Sub-inspectors Win Myint and Soe Aung allegedly dripped candle wax onto the genitalia of co-accused Wei Hypoe, splashed him with boiling water and tied him to metal bars then assaulted him with bamboo rods. They also applied a stinging substance to his open wounds.
In a related case Special Branch officers Sub-inspector Thet Wei and Kyaw Htoo Naing alleged injected a detainee from Nyaung-U by the name of Ko Zaw Zaw with an unknown substance during interrogation.
All of the victims of alleged torture were sentenced to long jail terms in December, at a closed court inside a prison. Their convictions were reportedly based upon the confessions that the police obtained through the use of torture.
Although the Evidence Act and other parts of law prohibit the use of confessions obtained during police interrogation, the current Supreme Court of Myanmar has enabled their use and has thereby encouraged the practice of torture by virtue of a number of orders, including two rulings from 1991. In the first of these, the U Ye Naung case, the court overturned all previous precedent and effectively also the Evidence Act itself by allowing for evidence obtained during a Military Intelligence interrogation to be admitted to trial where the accused could not prove that it had been obtained through duress. Similarly, in the second, the Maung Maung Kyi case, the court placed the burden of proof onto the accused to show that he had not been tortured and threatened into making a confession.
The systemic consequences of these and other similar rulings are twofold: first, courts at all levels in Myanmar routinely accept as evidence confessions that have been obtained through the use of torture; and second, anecdotally the use of torture is now more widespread than at any time in recent decades. The AHRC has over the last couple of years received many reports of the use of torture, including extreme forms of torture normally associated with politically driven inquiries, in ordinary criminal cases. The making of payments to police officers to have them not torture detainees is also reportedly commonplace, although the making of such payments does not apply in cases like that of Dr. Wint Thu where the families of victims are not even able to locate the whereabouts of their loved ones, much less do anything to stop their suffering through the payment of money or by other means.
Once deeply embedded in a system of policing torture is, as you know, extremely difficult to remove. Whatever happens in Myanmar in coming years the use of torture will remain endemic. Clearly, it is not something that will be addressed through some modest international interventions or expressions of concern. Notwithstanding, the Asian Human Rights Commission takes this opportunity to urge you to take up the incidence of torture in Myanmar with the Special Rapporteur assigned to monitor the situation of human rights in that country and together with him to communicate your concerns with a view to impressing upon the members of the senior judiciary at the very least that until they reverse the earlier rulings that have enabled the sorts of practices described in this letter and instead issue orders to prohibit unequivocally the use of torture by police then they should be considered complicit in this abuse and should be subject to international scrutiny and censure in same measure a s the torturers themselve
Yours sincerely
Basil Fernando
Executive Director
Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO1001/S00342.htm
Dear Prof. Nowak
MYANMAR: Extensive use of torture by police in recent cases
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has followed with concern reports of the most recent criminal cases targeting persons deemed threats to the state in Myanmar, and in particular the alleged use of grave forms of torture to extract confessions from them.
Among these is the case of Dr. Wint Thu and eight others accused over their involvement in a prayer campaign for the release of political prisoners, and of having had contact with groups abroad that the state has designated unlawful, whom it is alleged that from September to their trials in December the Special Branch held incommunicado and tortured.
Officers including Sub-inspectors Aung Thwin, Hsan Lin and Win Myint Htun allegedly forced Than Htaik Aung to stand with toothpicks inserted into his heels, to drink putrid drain water, and allegedly also came into his cell and urinated. Officers including Police Captain Zaw Lwin and Sub-inspectors Thet Wei, Kyaw Myo Hlaing and Kyaw Htoo Naing allegedly forced U Nandawuntha, a monk, to stand throughout two days of interrogation and then forced him to kneel on sharp gravel while an officer jumped up and down on his calves. If he didn’t give him the answers that they wanted then they hit him on the head with a wooden rod. Dr. Wint Thu and Ko Myo Han were also both allegedly forced to stand throughout interrogations of two and four nights respectively.
Four officers at the Aungthapyay interrogation facility in Yangon Division, including Sub-inspectors Win Myint and Soe Aung allegedly dripped candle wax onto the genitalia of co-accused Wei Hypoe, splashed him with boiling water and tied him to metal bars then assaulted him with bamboo rods. They also applied a stinging substance to his open wounds.
In a related case Special Branch officers Sub-inspector Thet Wei and Kyaw Htoo Naing alleged injected a detainee from Nyaung-U by the name of Ko Zaw Zaw with an unknown substance during interrogation.
All of the victims of alleged torture were sentenced to long jail terms in December, at a closed court inside a prison. Their convictions were reportedly based upon the confessions that the police obtained through the use of torture.
Although the Evidence Act and other parts of law prohibit the use of confessions obtained during police interrogation, the current Supreme Court of Myanmar has enabled their use and has thereby encouraged the practice of torture by virtue of a number of orders, including two rulings from 1991. In the first of these, the U Ye Naung case, the court overturned all previous precedent and effectively also the Evidence Act itself by allowing for evidence obtained during a Military Intelligence interrogation to be admitted to trial where the accused could not prove that it had been obtained through duress. Similarly, in the second, the Maung Maung Kyi case, the court placed the burden of proof onto the accused to show that he had not been tortured and threatened into making a confession.
The systemic consequences of these and other similar rulings are twofold: first, courts at all levels in Myanmar routinely accept as evidence confessions that have been obtained through the use of torture; and second, anecdotally the use of torture is now more widespread than at any time in recent decades. The AHRC has over the last couple of years received many reports of the use of torture, including extreme forms of torture normally associated with politically driven inquiries, in ordinary criminal cases. The making of payments to police officers to have them not torture detainees is also reportedly commonplace, although the making of such payments does not apply in cases like that of Dr. Wint Thu where the families of victims are not even able to locate the whereabouts of their loved ones, much less do anything to stop their suffering through the payment of money or by other means.
Once deeply embedded in a system of policing torture is, as you know, extremely difficult to remove. Whatever happens in Myanmar in coming years the use of torture will remain endemic. Clearly, it is not something that will be addressed through some modest international interventions or expressions of concern. Notwithstanding, the Asian Human Rights Commission takes this opportunity to urge you to take up the incidence of torture in Myanmar with the Special Rapporteur assigned to monitor the situation of human rights in that country and together with him to communicate your concerns with a view to impressing upon the members of the senior judiciary at the very least that until they reverse the earlier rulings that have enabled the sorts of practices described in this letter and instead issue orders to prohibit unequivocally the use of torture by police then they should be considered complicit in this abuse and should be subject to international scrutiny and censure in same measure a s the torturers themselve
Yours sincerely
Basil Fernando
Executive Director
Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO1001/S00342.htm
lunes, 18 de enero de 2010
Mientras los birmanos mueren de hambre la Junta Birmana sigue vendiendo su Jade
Comienzan a tallar en Vietnam el buda de jade más grande del mundo
El jefe del Estado vietnamita, Nguyen Minh Triet, presidió la ceremonia organizada por la compañía Chau Ngoc Viet, en la que cientos de monjes budistas rezaron salmodias y ofrecieron bendiciones.
La empresa Chau Ngoc Vietn, que compró a Birmania hace cuatro años, por 1,45 millones de dólares (un millón de euros), las 35 toneladas de jade que se emplearán en la estatua, ha dicho que la obra estará concluida en dos años y servirá para promocionar Vietnam en el mundo.
Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea han impuesto sanciones al comercio de piedras preciosas y semipreciosas de Birmania (Myanmar) por las violaciones sistemáticas de los derechos humanos que comete el régimen militar que gobierna el país desde 1962.
El buda tallado más grande del mundo pertenece a China, fue excavado en el siglo VIII en la ladera de una colina en Leshan, en la provincia de Sichuan, mide 71 metros de altura y la UNESCO lo declaró patrimonio de la humanidad en 1996.
El Tribunal Supremo birmano estudia la apelación contra el confinamiento de Suu Kyi
Bangkok, 18 ene (EFE).- El Tribunal Supremo de Birmania (Myanmar) examinó hoy el recurso presentado por la líder opositora Aung San Suu Kyi a su condena de 18 meses de arresto domiciliario, última oportunidad para que salga en libertad por la vía judicial.
A la salida de la presentación de los argumentos, Kyi Win, del equipo de abogados de la defensa, aseguró que la ley está del lado de Suu Kyi, de 64 años, y que esperan que se pronuncie el fallo en las próximas semanas, antes de un mes.
La Nobel de la Paz en 1991 ha perdido hasta la fecha todos los recursos presentados contra su condena.
Argumentan sus abogados que se juzgó y condenó a Suu Kyi con una legislación contenida en la Constitución de 1974, que fue derogada por la Carta Magna aprobada en referéndum en 2008.
Los fiscales mantienen por su parte que siguen en vigor los artículos referentes a la seguridad nacional aplicados en este proceso.
El 11 de agosto pasado, Suu Kyi fue sentenciada a tres años de prisión y trabajos forzados por haber acogido en su casa a un intruso estadounidense, pero la pena fue conmutada por año y medio de confinamiento domiciliario por orden directa del jefe de la Junta Militar, el general Than Shwe.
Los birmanos están obligados por ley a comunicar a las autoridades si un extranjero pernocta en su casa.
Suu Kyi ha pasado 14 de los últimos 20 años bajo arresto domiciliario por pedir de manera pacífica reformas democráticas en su país, donde es popularmente conocida como "La Dama".
El Gobierno de Japón instó este fin de semana a la Junta Militar birmana a poner en libertad a la opositora de cara a las elecciones legislativas que se celebrarán este año.
En este sentido, el portavoz del partido Liga Nacional para la Democracia (LND) y también abogado de Suu Kyi, Nyan Win, indicó a una radio de la disidencia que los comicios que planea el régimen carecerán de legitimidad si su cliente no participa.
La comunidad internacional también ha pedido a las autoridades birmanas que de cara al plebiscito excarcelen a los cerca de 2.200 presos políticos.
Suu Kyi, cofundadora y jefa de la LND, y otras formaciones de oposición y minorías étnicas han anunciado que boicotearán estas elecciones porque no reconocen la Constitución de 2008, que concede al estamento castrense un cuarto de los escaños del Legislativo, entre otras cosas.
Birmania está gobernada por militares desde 1962 y no celebra elecciones democráticas desde 1990, cuando Suu Kyi y su partido ganaron con el 82 por ciento de los votos, resultado democrático que los generales derrotados nunca han acatado.
La Junta Militar de Birmania impone condenas de muerte por informar a la prensa
La Junta Militar que gobierna Birmania está imponiendo duras penas de cárcel a periodistas independientes, han intensificado las disposiciones de censura, para que el ejército controle el contenido, de periódicos y la toma de películas y videos, informa Mizzima News. En esta política represiva se han conocido dos condenas a muerte por informar a la prensa de detalles de la represión.
Hla Hla Win, una periodista que trabajaba para la estación con sede en Oslo Voz de la Democracia de Birmania (DVB), quien fue arrestada en septiembre de 2009 cuando trabajaba en una noticia relacionada con el segundo aniversario de la Revolución de Azafrán, ha sido condenada junto a su ayudante a veinte años de prisión, en un juicio en el que los abogados se mostraron titubeantes para representarlos debido al temor de represalias por parte de la policía local y las autoridades, informa la SEAPA.
Desde la Revolución de Azafrán de 2007, las fuerzas de seguridad han estado reprimiendo a los birmanos que envían fotos y video al extranjero, a medios noticiosos y grupos de oposición en el exilio, informa RSF. “The Irrawaddy” informa que un ex oficial militar y un funcionario de relaciones exteriores fueron sentenciados a muerte y otros funcionarios de relaciones exteriores fueron sentenciados a penas de cárcel de 15 y 20 años el 7 de enero por filtrar a medios de comunicación exiliados información y fotos sobre el viaje de un General a Corea del Norte.
Las condenas a muerte se pronunciaron el pasado 7 de enero contra Win Naing Kyaw, comandante retirado del Ejército, y Thura Kyaw, funcionario del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, juzgados por un tribunal militar en el interior de la prisión de máxima seguridad de Insein, a las afueras de Rangún.
viernes, 15 de enero de 2010
ASEN pide unas elecciones libres en Birmania
Myanmar minister pledges free election: ASEAN
2010-01-14 14:50
DANANG, Jan 14 (AFP) - Myanmar's foreign minister has told Southeast Asian counterparts that promised elections would be held this year and would be fair, the ASEAN secretary general said Thursday.
Surin Pitsuwan said the military-ruled state's Foreign Minister Nyan Win made the comments at a dinner Wednesday in Vietnam with his counterparts from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
"That was done last night and it was assured that it will be this year, and it will be free, fair and credible," Surin told reporters on the sidelines of an ASEAN foreign ministers' meeting.
"No date has been set, but everything is moving on course. That's what we were told."
Surin said the ASEAN ministers "have expressed their high hope that the issue of Myanmar will be resolved this year and that we can move on to the new era of ASEAN relations and cooperation with the international community."
ASEAN, which has a principle of non-interference in members' affairs, has long faced criticism for not taking a firmer stand on Myanmar.
Nyan Win refused to make any comment to AFP on Thursday.
The United States and the 10-member ASEAN bloc agreed in November that Myanmar's scheduled 2010 elections must be "free, fair, inclusive and transparent" to be credible.
The call came after President Barack Obama and Myanmar Prime Minister Thein Sein took part in the first-ever ASEAN-US summit, a reversal of a longstanding US policy of shunning the Myanmar regime.
Critics of the junta are demanding that detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's party, the National League for Democracy, be allowed to take part in in the ballot.
Last week the United States voiced doubts whether elections in Myanmar -- formerly known as Burma -- would be credible and urged the junta to engage the opposition and ethnic minorities.
The election would be the first since 1990. Suu Kyi's party won the last ballot by a landslide but was never permitted to take office.
Reclusive junta leader Than Shwe last week urged citizens to make "correct choices" at the polls. The regime has so far failed to set a date or issue election laws despite promising to hold the polls this year.
MySinchew 2010.01.14
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/33959
2010-01-14 14:50
DANANG, Jan 14 (AFP) - Myanmar's foreign minister has told Southeast Asian counterparts that promised elections would be held this year and would be fair, the ASEAN secretary general said Thursday.
Surin Pitsuwan said the military-ruled state's Foreign Minister Nyan Win made the comments at a dinner Wednesday in Vietnam with his counterparts from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
"That was done last night and it was assured that it will be this year, and it will be free, fair and credible," Surin told reporters on the sidelines of an ASEAN foreign ministers' meeting.
"No date has been set, but everything is moving on course. That's what we were told."
Surin said the ASEAN ministers "have expressed their high hope that the issue of Myanmar will be resolved this year and that we can move on to the new era of ASEAN relations and cooperation with the international community."
ASEAN, which has a principle of non-interference in members' affairs, has long faced criticism for not taking a firmer stand on Myanmar.
Nyan Win refused to make any comment to AFP on Thursday.
The United States and the 10-member ASEAN bloc agreed in November that Myanmar's scheduled 2010 elections must be "free, fair, inclusive and transparent" to be credible.
The call came after President Barack Obama and Myanmar Prime Minister Thein Sein took part in the first-ever ASEAN-US summit, a reversal of a longstanding US policy of shunning the Myanmar regime.
Critics of the junta are demanding that detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's party, the National League for Democracy, be allowed to take part in in the ballot.
Last week the United States voiced doubts whether elections in Myanmar -- formerly known as Burma -- would be credible and urged the junta to engage the opposition and ethnic minorities.
The election would be the first since 1990. Suu Kyi's party won the last ballot by a landslide but was never permitted to take office.
Reclusive junta leader Than Shwe last week urged citizens to make "correct choices" at the polls. The regime has so far failed to set a date or issue election laws despite promising to hold the polls this year.
MySinchew 2010.01.14
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/33959
ELECCIONES 2010 EN BIRMANIA- DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI
Myanmar's National League for Democracy (NLD) opposition party on Thursday announced an expansion of its central executive committee, weeks after Aung San Suu Kyi called for reforms. The NLD has added nine new members to the existing 11-man central executive committee, which has led the party for two decades and includes several octogenarians.
The new party executives are Than Nyein, Ohn Kyaing, Win Myint, Tun Tun Hein, Win Naing, Nyan Win, Han Tha Myint, Thein Nyunt and May Win Myint, a relatively younger lot of elected members of parliament.Political observers said the move was a transitional step paving the way for the older NLD leaders to resign.
Aung San Suu Kyi, the NLD's imprisoned general secretary, was permitted to meet with three senior NLD executives on December 16 to discuss party reforms.Authorities escorted her from her Yangon house-cum-prison to a government guesthouse where she was allowed to meet with NLD central executive committee members Lun Tin, 88; U Lwin, 86; and Aung Shwe, 91.
The threesome are known locally as "the world's oldest active political party leaders.""Daw [Madame] Aung San Suu Kyi asked for permission to reform the NLD central executive committee, and the three top leaders agreed with her," U Lwin said after the meeting.
The leadership of Myanmar's 2-decade-old opposition party has been widely criticized for showing a lack of initiative and unity during the past six years as Suu Kyi was kept under detention in near-isolation from her party.
Suu Kyi, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for her leadership of Myanmar's pro-democracy movement, remains the only well-known NLD leader outside the country, a reflection of the lacklustre nature of the party's central committee.
It was still unclear whether the NLD would contest a general election planned this year by Myanmar's ruling military junta.Western governments have said the election would lack credibility if Suu Kyi and the NLD are not permitted to participate.
It was unlikely that Suu Kyi would be freed before the polls. Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house arrest and in August was sentenced to an additional 18 month of home detention.She was under house arrest when Myanmar held its last election in 1990, but if anything, her detention then helped the NLD romp to a landslide victory.
The success surprised the military, who blocked the NLD from taking power on the pretext that the country was not yet ready for civilian rule and needed a new constitution, which took 19 years to write.Myanmar has been under military rule since 1962.
La lucha por la libertad es la esencia misma de la libertad por Manuel Muñoz
Birmania,una nación cuyo gobierno es una junta militar que no aceptó la derrota en las primeras elecciones libres hace casi 30 años y sigue en el poder con la promesa de celebrar unas elecciones este año,tiene en prisión a los que se han opuesto a semejante tiranía. No entiendo por qué leyes internacionales o compromisos
las grandes potencias y las que son democráticas no se solidarizan contra el acoso del poder.
¿Las víctimas por la libertad no merecen atención? ZARGANAR es conocido como comediante,pero es un poeta, escritor y cineasta, que en la actualidad cumple injustamente una sentencia de 35 años en la cárcel de Mytkyina, además incomunicado, prohibidos sus escritos, le tienen separado de su familia...Su nombre es Maung Thura,hijo de dos escritores,nacido en l961.
Durante la Universidad y la escuela de Odontologí trabajó con varias compañías de teatro,danza y la comedia practicando el humor y la sátira contra los dirigentes militares de Birmania.
El escritor-actor se reafirmó como un líder en el movimiento pro-democrático estudiantil y fue detenido en diversas ocasiones. Tras una entrevista con la BBC que enfureció a los líderes militares fue encarcelado y torturado.
En junio de 2008 por hacer bromas acerca de la mala gestión del gobierno en los esfuerzos de alivio del ciclón Nargis padece cárcel y aislamiento total. ¿Defender los derechos humanos y censurar las mentiras del poder es delito? ¿Es tan peligroso el teatro para los que imponen la dictadura del poder? ¿Cuándo la abnistía para ZARGANAR que padece el peor de los castigos: La falta de Libertad? «La lucha por la libertad es la esencia de la misma libertad» (Ibsen).
las grandes potencias y las que son democráticas no se solidarizan contra el acoso del poder.
¿Las víctimas por la libertad no merecen atención? ZARGANAR es conocido como comediante,pero es un poeta, escritor y cineasta, que en la actualidad cumple injustamente una sentencia de 35 años en la cárcel de Mytkyina, además incomunicado, prohibidos sus escritos, le tienen separado de su familia...Su nombre es Maung Thura,hijo de dos escritores,nacido en l961.
Durante la Universidad y la escuela de Odontologí trabajó con varias compañías de teatro,danza y la comedia practicando el humor y la sátira contra los dirigentes militares de Birmania.
El escritor-actor se reafirmó como un líder en el movimiento pro-democrático estudiantil y fue detenido en diversas ocasiones. Tras una entrevista con la BBC que enfureció a los líderes militares fue encarcelado y torturado.
En junio de 2008 por hacer bromas acerca de la mala gestión del gobierno en los esfuerzos de alivio del ciclón Nargis padece cárcel y aislamiento total. ¿Defender los derechos humanos y censurar las mentiras del poder es delito? ¿Es tan peligroso el teatro para los que imponen la dictadura del poder? ¿Cuándo la abnistía para ZARGANAR que padece el peor de los castigos: La falta de Libertad? «La lucha por la libertad es la esencia de la misma libertad» (Ibsen).
El Máster de la Paz de la UJI denunciará mañana la dictadura y la vulneración de derechos humanos en Birmania
CASTELLÓN, 12 Ene. (EUROPA PRESS) -
Los seminarios interculturales del Máster Universitario y Doctorado en Estudios Internacionales de Paz, Conflictos y Desarrollo de la Universitat Jaume I se reanudarán mañana con la conferencia 'Birmania: dictadura, paz y reconciliación (escenario 2010)', que será impartida por Concha Pinós, de la ONG Birmania por la Paz, y en la que se denunciará la dictadura y la vulneración de derechos humanos en este país.
Los seminarios interculturales del Máster Universitario y Doctorado en Estudios Internacionales de Paz, Conflictos y Desarrollo de la Universitat Jaume I se reanudarán mañana con la conferencia 'Birmania: dictadura, paz y reconciliación (escenario 2010)', que será impartida por Concha Pinós, de la ONG Birmania por la Paz, y en la que se denunciará la dictadura y la vulneración de derechos humanos en este país.
El acto se realizará a partir de las 16.00 horas en el salón de actos del edificio de Postgrado y Consejo Social de la UJI, según informó la universidad de Castellón en un comunicado. En la conferencia, Concha Pinós presentará un análisis del actual y "grave" escenario vivido en Myanmar (antigua Birmania), el país del sudeste asiático con una de las dictaduras más antiguas del mundo.
Según la institución, actualmente más de 56 millones de birmanos continúan viviendo bajo el yugo de la Junta Militar y Daw Aung San Suu Kyi --la activista Premio Nobel de la Paz en 1991-- continúa en arresto domiciliario tras más de 17 años. En las cárceles birmanas hay más de 2.100 presos políticos y el país vive una dramática crisis social.
Entre las actividades promovidas por la ONG Birmania por la Paz con sede en Barcelona, Concha Pinós también presentará la campaña 'Birmania por la Paz' que se iniciará el próximo 30 de enero de 2010 en San Sebastián.
La campaña, que tiene carácter de denuncia, pretende realizar una gira por pueblos y ciudades de España y América Latina denunciando la situación vivida y promoviendo la paz, los derechos humanos y la democracia en Myanmar.
Durante todo 2010 la campaña seguirá en forma de Caravana de Pueblos por la Paz en Birmania y visitará varias ciudades y pueblos de España y América Latina (Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, Colombia y Brasil) donde se promoverán reuniones públicas de la ONG y sociedad civil con los gobernantes y Premios Nobel de estos países. La intención es estimular el debate y estructurar políticas para un programa de Solidaridad de Pueblos por la Paz y la democracia en Myanmar.
La Conferencia es gratuita y está abierta a todo el público interesado. El Programa de Posgrado Máster Universitario y Doctorado en Estudios Internacionales de Paz, Conflictos y Desarrollo se enmarca dentro de las actividades organizadas por la Cátedra UNESCO de Filosofía para la Paz de la Universitat Jaume I y cuenta con el apoyo de Bancaja-Fundación Caja Castellón.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)