BurmaNet News: May 26-27 2003

[editor at burmanet.org]

May 26-27 2003 Issue #2245

INSIDE BURMA
AP: Myanmar pro-democracy activists sentenced to prison, Suu Kyi's party
reports harassment
Irrawaddy: Leaders Say No Talks with Suu Kyi
AFP: Myanmar's military junta tells opposition to accept protest
AFP: Myanmar's election result must be honoured, Suu Kyi says on poll
anniversary

ON THE BORDER
Thai Press Reports: Armed Insurgents Infiltrate Mae Hong Son Village
AFP: Myanmar warns of further attacks after border blasts killed four

REGIONAL
FT: Rebuke for Bangkok over human rights
Narinjara: Those Forgotten Rakhine Activists in Indian Island of Andaman

INTERNATIONAL
TV Myanmar: Burma's Than Shwe Receives Credentials from Czech, Spanish
Ambassadors
Mizzima: Activists for Burma’s democracy to gather in Sydney
The Herald (Glasgow): BAT follows troubled Burma road

EDITORIALS
WP: Act on Burma
Mizzima: Who's the real culprit behind bomb explosion in Pyu cinema?
FindLaw: Ashcroft's Justice, Burma's Crimes, and Bork's Revenge

STATEMENTS
NMG: Exiled MPs call for release of MPs in prisons


INSIDE BURMA

The Associated Press   May 26 2003
Myanmar pro-democracy activists sentenced to prison, Suu Kyi's party
reports harassment
By AYE AYE WIN, Associated Press Writer

A Myanmar court sentenced 10 democracy activists to prison terms ranging
from two years to life, and a pro-junta group threatened supporters of
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and hurled a brick at her car, her
party said Monday.

As the Nobel Peace laureate drove through central Myanmar, returning home
from a political tour, a group backed by the military regime forced her
waiting supporters to flee after threatening to run them over with cars,
said U Lwin, the spokesman for her National League for Democracy party.

The sentencing and the reported intimidation of Suu Kyi's supporters cast
further doubt on the junta's seriousness about allowing her party
political freedom, despite embarking on reconciliation talks with the
pro-democracy leader in October 2000.

In the past, Suu Kyi has been routinely harassed, and her supporters
intimidated and bullied by members of the Union Solidarity Development
Association, which claims to have 19 million members avowedly loyal to the
junta.

"Run for your lives or you will have to pick up your own corpses," U Lwin
said the USDA members shouted at crowds through loudspeakers as Suu Kyi's
car entered Kyidauk Pauk village, near Mandalay, Myanmar's second biggest
city, on Sunday.

Someone also threw a brick that hit Suu Kyi's car, but she was unhurt, he
said.

U Lwin said 100 people, many of them wielding sticks, knives and
catapults, also intimidated the supporters. One NLD member was injured in
the head, apparently hit by something fired from a slingshot, he said.

"This is a most serious incident. These people are very rowdy. They bully
the public and are extremely unruly," U Lwin said.

A government spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment. The
government denies it harasses Suu Kyi and opposition members.

Meanwhile, NLD officials said that 10 party members were sentenced last
week to between two years and life imprisonment for anti-government
activities and comments.

A court in the northern town of Monywa sentenced three men to two-year
prison terms Thursday for saying publicly that "dictatorship does not
exist in democracy." They were charged under a law that prohibits making a
statement "likely to cause fear or alarm to the public," said an NLD
official on condition of anonymity.

Last Tuesday, a court in Yangon convicted seven NLD members under various
laws for alleged anti-government activities including trying to stir
unrest, distribute anti-government leaflets and carry out attacks.

Two of them were sentenced to life imprisonment, one to 13 years and the
others to five years each, said NLD officials.

The military junta does not usually announce the schedules or outcome of
political trials. Government officials were not immediately available to
confirm the sentences.

The current junta came to power in 1988 after crushing a pro-democracy
movement. It called elections in 1990 but refused to hand over power to
the NLD party, which won by a landslide.
____________

The Irrawaddy   May 27, 2003
Leaders Say No Talks with Suu Kyi

Rulers of Burma’s military regime yesterday denied reports of possible
talks with the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD).

Speculation mounted last week after Thai Foreign Minister Surakiart
Sathirathai told reporters that talks were expected between Burma’s
military and the opposition within a few weeks. Surakiart’s comments came
after he met the junta’s Secretary-One, Gen Khin Nyunt, in the Thai-Burma
border town of Tachilek last week.

According to reports in the Thai media, Khin Nyunt told Thai counterparts
that talks with opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi would begin soon.

Exiled activists were excited about the news, but more seasoned Burma
watchers warned that Thai leaders had a reputation for spreading unfounded
rumors.

At a press conference yesterday, military intelligence officer Col Than
Tun said, "It could be an exaggeration by the media. I don’t think the
General [Khin Nyunt] himself would have said that."

Dialogue between the opposition and the military government has come to a
standstill. NLD Spokesman U Lwin, says the junta’s liaison officer stopped
contacting the opposition in October last year.

In recent weeks, Suu Kyi has faced harassment, intimidation and threats
from junta supporters while touring Upper Burma to meet supporters and
re-open party offices. The military’s political arm, the Union Solidarity
Development Association (USDA) is said to be behind the aggravation and
attacks.

U Lwin told the Associated Press that as Suu Kyi was entering a village in
Upper Burma to meet supporters, USDA members came towards her car in a
dozen vehicles. According to U Lwin, USDA members shouted at the crowds
through loudspeakers: "Run for your lives, or you will have to pick up
your own corpses!"

"This is a most serious incident. These people are very rowdy. They bully
the public and are extremely unruly," he said.

Back in the capital today, the NLD was celebrating 13 years since the last
general election, which the NLD won by a landslide but was never honored.
According to U Lwin, Suu Kyi sent a letter to be read at an official party
ceremony confirming that the only path to democracy is through a
multi-party election.

Suu Kyi says the incidents of harassment that she has encountered on her
trips through the country only prove that the people of Burma need
democracy and greater freedom.

The UN special envoy to Burma, Razali Ismail, is due to visit Burma early
next month, but political analysts don’t hold much hope for a positive
outcome.

The situation is now one of despair and pessimism. "We’ve not only come to
a political dead-end, but there could also be serious life-threatening
attacks on Suu Kyi and her people," said an NLD supporter in Rangoon.
_____________

Agence France Presse   May 27, 2003
Myanmar's military junta tells opposition to accept protest

Myanmar's military junta Tuesday admitted violent clashes had occurred
between Aung San Suu Kyi's party and "non-supporters" during her current
political tour, but said the opposition must accept that some people did
not support them.

Aung San Suu Kyi departed on a month-long visit of northern Myanmar on May
6, the first anniversary of her release from 19 months of house arrest by
the country's ruling military junta.

Her National League for Democracy (NLD) party has since reported several
clashes with the junta-sponsored Union Solidarity Development Association
(USDA), a social organisation claiming some 19 million members.

USDA members have wielded weapons including knives and stakes to protest
the democracy leader's arrival in several towns, according to the NLD. The
junta statement failed to acknowledge who was behind the violence.

"We would like to urge local authorities to see that the local populace
are more understanding and forgiving towards the NLD," the junta's
statement said.

However it told the NLD it should accept that there are "those who support
the NLD, there are also those who do not".

"We urge that the NLD be broad-minded about this and act accordingly," it
said.

"We have no complaints about Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD party members
going about their party-related activities ... but in doing so they will
have to take special care not to destabilise peace or cause physical harm
to anybody."

In one of the worst incidents, a dozen vehicles forced NLD supporters to
flee as they waited along the roadside to greet her in Sagaing, in
northern Myanmar's Mandalay division.

Aung San Suu Kyi's car was struck and a youth sitting beside her was
injured by a missile thrown from a catapult, according to NLD spokesman U
Lwin.

The Nobel peace laureate has already complained about routine harassment
from the USDA. Her current trip is being viewed as a test of whether the
regime will attempt any serious disruption.
____________

Agence France Presse   May 27, 2003
Myanmar's election result must be honoured, Suu Kyi says on poll anniversary

Myanmar's democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi Tuesday marked the 13th
anniversary of her party's landslide 1990 election win, which was never
recognised by the military government, calling the junta's action an
"insult".

Aung San Suu Kyi called on the people of Myanmar to continue to strive for
democracy in a message to activists holding a ceremony at the National
League for Democracy's (NLD) Yangon headquarters.

"The NLD must stand up firmly to achieve the result of the elections of
1990. To ignore the result of the 1990 elections is to have total
disrespect for the people and is also an insult to the people," the Nobel
Peace Prize-winner, who is currently touring the north of the country,
said in the message.

Her party won 392 of 485 contested seats in the elections, considered free
and fair by the international community, but the result was never
recognised by the ruling junta. Four seats were won by other pro-democracy
parties.

"During my travels I have seen what the people have suffered because of
the lack of democracy," Aung San Suu Kyi said.

"So the NLD must do its best to fulfill the aspirations of the people who
have given them their full trust by voting for them... I would like for
NLD members to work 100 percent for the benefit of the people."

In a separate anniversary statement, the NLD said the ruling State Peace
and Development Council (SPDC) had broken promises by not convening
parliament.

"They have broken the legally binding promise undertaken by them. It is
not for the NLD to be repeatedly asking for parliament to be convened,"
the statement said.

"The political, economic and social problems facing the nation today can
best be solved by convening and working through the People's Parliament."

The party also complained about the failure of UN-brokered national
reconciliation talks between the junta and Aung San Suu Kyi since October
2000 to progress beyond the confidence-building stage.

"We are prepared to speedily set in motion a meaningful political
dialogue," the statement said.

It noted that 17 members of parliament-elect remained in jail.

More than 200 democracy supporters, including NLD and other pro-democracy
party members, and diplomats attended the ceremony, which included one
minute's silence for those who have died fighting for democracy.


ON THE BORDER

Thai Press Reports   May 27, 2003
Armed Insurgents Infiltrate Mae Hong Son Village

Volunteers have been asked to beef up security around the Mae Hong Son
border area after reports that armed insurgents from Myanmar have
infiltrated the Mae Hong Son village of Baan Mai Sape.

Mr Saman Wongworayuth, Muang Mae Hong Son district chief, said today that
he had asked volunteer border forces from Muang district to coordinate
with the Baan Mai Sape village head to monitor the group of around 10
insurgents who entered the village last night. The police and army had
also been called in to see what this group of insurgents wanted in
Thailand, he said.

Describing Baan Mai Sape as a border village which was frequently
infiltrated by armed groups from Myanmar, the district chief speculated
that the latest group had entered Thailand to procure provisions. The
group was probably a new one headed by Win Nai U, who commands around 30
members.

Mr Saman also called on local residents to alert the authorities if they
discovered the group in question, so that the security forces to be called
in.
____________

Agence France Presse   May 26, 2003
Myanmar warns of further attacks after border blasts killed four

Myanmar's military government on Monday warned of further attacks after a
series of bombings killed four people on the border with Thailand last
week.

Military intelligence chief General Kyaw Thein said officials had been
ordered to look out for "suspicious loiterers" after four blasts in the
border town of Tachilek last Wednesday. "More of these bombings and
sabotage acts targeting innocent people are expected in the future and we
appeal to the general public to join hands with our security forces to
help uncover them," Kyaw Thein told a press conference.

The general repeated his claim that Shan State Army rebels, also known as
the Shan United Revolutionary Army (SURA), were behind the attacks, which
he said were carried out with the support of unnamed Thai military and
civilian figures.

"Despite denying responsibility we have concrete evidence that this was
the work of the SURA, whose unit commander Sam Thit had sneaked across the
common border to commit these acts of terror," Kyaw Thein said.

He said a mysterious "third party" in Thailand and elsewhere had supported
the attacks in the hope of causing a rift between Bangkok and Yangon.

Colonel Hla Min of the military intelligence foreign relations department
called on the Thai government of Thaksin Shinawatra to clamp down on these
"criminal elements".

"Mr. Thaksin's government is not to be totally blamed for the present
problems inherited from the previous government but neverthless has the
responsibility to solve this issue for the good of both nations," Hla Min
told AFP.

Myanmar has long called for Thailand to act against anti-Yangon groups
such as the Shan State Army, an ethnic rebel force, which it says are
operating inside its territory. Thailand denies the accusations.


REGIONAL

Financial Times   May 27, 2003
Rebuke for Bangkok over human rights
By Amy Kazmin in Bangkok

A United Nations human rights rapporteur on Tuesday voiced deep concern
over "repressive trends" and a deteriorating human rights situation in
Thailand, where social activists face intense pressure to stop criticising
government policies.

Hina Jilani, the UN special representative on human rights defenders, said
on Tuesday that non-governmental organisations in Thailand now faced a
"very difficult" working environment, particularly if they challenged the
administration of Thaksin Shinawatra, prime minister, or business
interests.

Activists working on social, environmental, human rights and
anti-trafficking issues have faced threats and intimidation, money
laundering investigations and attempts to cut off access to foreign funds.

At the same time the ability of citizens to exercise their rights to free
expression, assembly and protest had been significantly eroded.

"I sensed a level of insecurity among non-governmental organisations and
human rights defenders that ranges from a general unease to actual fear,
depending on the issues they are raising," Ms Jilani said at the end of a
nine-day official visit to Thailand.

"This climate of fear is created by statements publicly made at the
highest level of government attacking the credibility of NGOs. . . [and]
the use of state security apparatus to intimidate - and the judicial
process to harass - human rights defenders, through false or unjust
prosecution," she said.

Activists who have raised questions about human rights violations during
Thailand's recent counter-narcotics campaign - during which more than
2,200 people were killed - feel particularly vulnerable.

Ms Jilani also expressed dismay over the worsening conditions for Burmese
political dissidents sheltering in Thailand, who have faced a crackdown on
their activities since Bangkok sought to improve relations and conduct
more business with Burma's military junta.

"Many of the Burmese human rights defenders feel very insecure with regard
to their freedom of movement inside Thailand," she said.

In the 1990s Thailand earned a reputation as a relative bastion of civil
liberties and democratic freedom in a region dominated by authoritarian
regimes. Successive Thai governments also provided sanctuary for Burmese
political dissidents, many of whom continued to monitor conditions in
their secretive homeland.

Since Mr Thaksin took power two year ago Thai authorities have denounced
some NGOs as "traitors to Thailand" and agents of foreign powers. The
offices of many Burmese exile groups have been raided and shut down, and
Burmese dissidents have been threatened with deportation.

Ms Jilani urged the government to recognise that "civil society is an
irreplaceable component of democracy", and end harassment of activists.
____________

Narinjara news   May 26 2003
Those forgotten Rakhine Activists in Indian island of Andaman: “Release us
or allow us to go elsewhere”

New Delhi:  May 9th this year was the date to produce before the
magistrate thirty-four Rakhine detainees from Burma in the Indian town of
Port Blair in the Andaman Islands.  The detainees were held more than five
years ago on 11th February 1998 by a combined forces operation dubbed as
“Operation Leech” conducted by the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force.

As in previous occasions though the detainees were brought into the Port
Blair court, the CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) either could not
produce any evidence or bring any charge sheet against them or
intentionally resorted to not to produce any charge sheet against them. 
The background on which the Burmese nationals were kept under detention
itself was a shady ‘operation’  an operation conducted what the Indians
said a ‘to nab a gang of gunrunners to India’s troubled north-east
insurgency’ that later boomeranged, since the ‘gunrunners’ themselves had
maintained a close and steady relation with at least some high-ranking
military officials of the Indian Army.

As demanded by the detainees they were engaged in a mission to set up a
‘base’ in Landfall Island of the Andamans, close to Burma, where they
would set up an anti-Burmese junta training facility and operational
command.  An Indian Colonel Grewal was the person the detainees could name
who lured the ‘freedom fighters of Rakhine (Arakan)’ to the Andamans in
promise for setting up of the base.  Major Saw Tun and Ran Naing of the
Arakan Army (AA), a major Arakanese rebel group, were brought in a flight
of the Indian Air Force from New Delhi to the Andamans where they would
receive Khaing Raza, the leader of Arakan Army, and 73 other forces. 
While at the Andamans, at least six of the top leaders including Major Saw
Tun and Ran Naing were believed to be shot and killed by the Indian
troops.  The move many believed was committed to finalize the cover-up. 
Later the entire outfit was announced as ‘major gunrunners’ for the Indian
northeastd and since then 36 of the outfit have been kept under detention
without any trial.  The rest were returned to Thailand as they were Thai
fishermen whose boats the rebels ‘hijacked’ for transportation of the
guns, according to an Indian weekly Sunday.  Last year two of the 36 went
missing while they were out to do some shopping.  ‘This only indicates
that the Indian defence department has more ruthless plans to eliminate
the detained Rakhine freedom fighters to cover up all their trickeries,’ a
Rakhine lawyer said to our correspondent.

‘Besides giving the 34 a chance of fair trial the Indian government,
considered as the greatest democracy on earth, did not only deny the
universal right of fair trial to them but also conducted a co-ordinated
effort to prove them as gunrunners and not freedom fighters’, he said. 
The way in which the guns (worth about US dollar one million) were brought
in also indicated that they were meant for ‘insurgency’ and not for
‘gunrunning’ since they were not in packages, marked a senior Indian
journalist.

At present the detainees are in fear of their life and security, living in
the Andamans, resulting from closer ties between Burma and India, and
requested all benevolent human rights organizations to request and exert
pressure on the Government of India either to release them or allow them
to go to a safe place.

Many of the detained Rakhine freedom fighters were college and university
students when they left their country in the aftermath of the 1988 popular
democracy uprising in Burma and joined the rebel group.

The next hearing for the case at Port Blair has been fixed on 27 June 03.


INTERNATIONAL

TV Myanmar, Rangoon, in Burmese May 22 2003
(picked up by BBC Monitoring International Reports, May 26 2003)
Burma's Than Shwe Receives Credentials from Czech, Spanish Ambassadors

Ambassador of Czech Republic designated to the Union of Myanmar Burma , Mr
Jiri Sitler, presented his credentials to Sr Gen Than Shwe, chairman of
the State Peace and Development Council SPDC of the Union of Myanmar, at
Zeyathiri Beikman, Konmyinttha at 1000 local time today.

Present on the occasion were SPDC Secretary-1 Gen Khin Nyunt, Minister for
Foreign Affairs U Win Aung, Deputy Minister U Khin Maung Win and
Director-General Thura U Aung Htet of the Protocol Department. Ambassador
of the Kingdom of Spain designated to the Union of Myanmar Burma , Mr Jose
Eugenio Salarich Fernandez de Valderrama name as received , presented his
credentials to Sr Gen Than Shwe, chairman of the SPDC of the Union of
Myanmar, at Zeyathiri Beikman, Konmyinttha at 1030 today.

Present at the occasion were SPDC Secretary-1 Gen Khin Nyunt, Minister for
Foreign Affairs U Win Aung, Deputy Minister U Khin Maung Win and
Director-General Thura U Aung Htet of the Protocol Department.
____________

Mizzima News (www.mizzima.com)  May 27, 2003
Activists for Burma’s democracy to gather in Sydney

New Delhi: Burma’s exiled activists and intellectuals are planning to meet
in Sydney in July this year with an aim of strengthening the struggle for
restoration of democracy in Burma.

According to the press release issued by the organizers, “The
International Burmese Students Conference” will be held in Sydney,
Australia on 4 and 7 July.

Although the title refers to the “students conference”, Mizzima News has
learnt that the conference is open to Burma’s student and political
activists, trade unionists, women activists, lawyers, human rights
activists, media professional and intellectuals.

The organizers are expecting that a large number of activists and
intellectuals from North America, Europe, Asia, Australia and New Zealand
will be also participating in the conference to discuss Burma’s democracy
struggle and its future activities.

“We want to break free of the current deadlock in Burma over the struggle
for democracy. We are looking for new ways to find a way to realize our
objective of bringing down the military dictatorship and achieving
democracy,” said U Zaw Naing, one of the organizers of the conference.

Various topics relating to Burma and its struggles are to be touched
during the four days conference. These include Democracy Transition,
National Reconciliation, Federal Union, Policies of Governments towards
Burma, Women in Politics, Media and Democracy and International Trade
Unions.

The theme of the conference is “Political Change as the First Priority
toward Democracy in Burma”.

This is the second time that the Burmese activists worldwide are trying to
gather in a conference to formulate effective strategies to speed up
national reconciliation process in Burma. The first meeting was held in
July 2001 at Indiana University in the United States.
_____________

The Herald (Glasgow)   May 26, 2003
BAT follows troubled Burma road;Fund manager seeks clear commitment on
human rights issues from tobacco giant
By Simon Bain

British American Tobacco is likely to come under renewed pressure from
shareholders over its presence in the pariah state of Burma.

Insight Investment has called on BAT to "establish clear and
well-justified boundaries for its decisions about whether and how to
operate in situations where human rights are in jeopardy".

The call comes as Tony Blair faces scrutiny by MPs and anti-smoking groups
over his personal friendship with Alain Dominique Perrin, whose company
owns 21% of BAT shares.

It is claimed that a government inquiry into whether BAT deliberately
stimulated the cigarette smuggling market to boost profits has been
delayed or diluted. BAT has a joint venture with a company owned by the
military junta in Burma, the state which three years ago became the first
to be "outlawed" by the International Labour Organisation.

Insight has met with BAT, which has responded that its operations are
managed to high human rights standards. It is playing a proactive part on
raising awareness in Burma, and to disinvest would do more harm than good,
BAT added.

Insight, which manages (pounds) 60bn and is the first major fund manager
to launch a campaign on global corporate responsibility, reports in its
first progress bulletin that abuses in Burma ''include the widespread use
of forced labour to build infrastructure, media censorship and imprisoning
union and opposition party members".

Insight says: "BAT's view that the tender shoots of progress towards
democracy may be vulnerable to divestment seems to have some plausibility.
However, we understand from the Foreign Office that there has been
disappointingly little progress towards democracy in recent months. As
further progress becomes more and more unlikely, this particular concern
about BAT's divestment loses its force."

After last month's annual meeting, which featured a strong protest by the
Burma Campaign, BAT said: "In our view undermining the Burmese regime is a
political objective and should be pursued through political channels."

However, BAT has told Insight it is "currently reviewing its business
principles" and will include a consideration of human rights issues in
general.

Ken Clarke, the former Cabinet minister who is BAT's deputy chairman, has
admitted he is "uncomfortable" with the Burmese venture.

Insight concludes: "Concerns about tobacco health risks, ongoing US
litigation, questionable marketing practices and cigarette smuggling have
undermined the tobacco industry's reputation. Widely-held concerns about
corporate involvement in Burma expose BAT to unwelcome additional
reputational risk".

Insight launched its campaign for global business principles late last
year by writing to leading fund managers and to the chief executives of
the FTSE-100 companies. It now reports that 29 companies, representing 59%
of the index by market value, have made commitments to one or other of
three key international standards: the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles on Multinational
Enterprises and Social Policy, and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises.

Insight says: "We were disappointed that a number of large companies that
have international exposure to human rights and sustainable development
issues do not yet appear to have made a commitment to respect
international standards. This includes companies from the utilities,
armaments, chemicals, banking and tobacco sectors.

"Insight will approach these companies in due course to discover their
reasons for not acknowledging these codes and encourage them to do so."

Dr Craig Mackenzie, head of Insight's investor responsibility team,
commented: "Five years ago, there were perhaps two or three companies in
the 100 which made explicit commitments to international standards. We are
quite optimistic that within a year or two the majority will have made
some kind of public commitment."

He added: "Within the traditional corporate governance agenda this started
out as a box-ticking exercise, but more and more companies have accepted
it is legitimate, and we are now going well beyond box-ticking to serious
debates."

Insight has engaged with almost a quarter of the companies in the
all-share index, equating to 87% by value, over a range of corporate
responsibility issues already this year.

Its concerns with BAT highlight the difference between socially
responsible investment as a growing dimension in mainstream fund
management, and niche ethical funds, which for instance tend not to invest
in tobacco companies so cannot attempt to influence them.

Meanwhile, Anglo American, the mining group, is facing legal action in a
US court from the Colombian mineworkers' union, accusing Anglo of tuning a
blind eye to human rights abuses.

On the executive pay front, Kingfisher is reported to have revised
contract and share option packages for directors in response to
shareholder pressure, while a survey has found 17 chief executives have
"golden parachute" deals that would pay out more than a year's salary if
they lost their jobs.


EDITORIALS

The Washington Post   May 27, 2003
Act on Burma

ON THIS DAY 13 years ago, the people of Burma voted in a landslide to
replace their military rulers with a pro-democracy party headed by Aung
San Suu Kyi, the indomitable daughter of the hero of the nation's
independence movement. The generals refused to cede power, and the
struggle to implement the election results continues to this day. Just
recently, as Aung San Suu Kyi tried to bring her message of nonviolence
and self-determination to a Burmese province, thugs from the ruling party
attacked her motorcade and menaced her with machetes. The message in those
machetes to the United States and other friends of democracy should be
clear: It's time for stronger measures of support for Burma's beleaguered
citizens.

Those 50 million or so people and their plight don't generally draw much
attention from world power brokers. Burma, also known as Myanmar, is
strategically tucked at the crossroads of India, China and Southeast Asia,
and it's rich in natural resources. But its regime has no weapons of mass
destruction (at least thus far), and its population is mostly Buddhist,
not Muslim; in the war on terrorism, it's peripheral. But for the Bush
administration's efforts to promote democracy, Burma offers a unique
opportunity. Most dictators claim to represent the will of their people,
and most claim that no alternative to their rule exists; both claims
usually are lies, but not easy to disprove. In Burma the truth is
provable: The National League for Democracy won 392 seats out of 485; in
the 13 years since the party should have taken over, the nation has grown
steadily poorer; and both the party and its leader remain popular and
ready to lead.

That enduring popularity comes in the face of grinding repression. Some
1,400 political prisoners are subject to torture and appalling conditions.
Burma leads the world in slave labor, forced child conscription into the
military, rape as an instrument of terror. Aung San Suu Kyi spent the
better part of the past 13 years under house arrest, routinely vilified in
the official (and only) press, in part for marrying a British man and
producing "mongrel" children. Now widowed, Aung San Suu Kyi was freed from
house arrest one year ago when international pressure forced the regime to
promise a political dialogue. But no dialogue has ensued; a United
Nations-brokered process has gone nowhere.

The U.N. facilitator is scheduled to return to Burma next month, and
reports indicate the regime will once again promise dialogue. Some
observers, particularly Japanese officials eager to ramp up investment in
Burma, will pretend this is progress. But this time around no one should
be satisfied with anything but deeds: true freedom for the National League
for Democracy to operate, including to publish a newspaper; and true
dialogue leading to power-sharing and transition. Short of such progress,
the U.S. government should conclude that its current investment ban is
insufficient.

"There are moments in history when great people emerge to shine a bright
light on a dark path. Aung San Suu Kyi is such a person," President Bush
said last month. Also last month, the American Apparel & Footwear
Association called for an immediate ban on textile, clothing and footwear
imports from Burma, citing the government's continued "abuse of its
citizens through force and intimidation." Stiffer sanctions might harm
some ordinary Burmese, but far less than almost all Burmese are being
harmed by military rule.
____________

Mizzima News (www.mizzima.com)   May 26, 2003
Who's the real culprit behind bomb explosion in Pyu cinema?

Reportedly, local residents believe the real culprits behind a 15 May bomb
blast in a Burmese cinema are some members of the junta's pet
organization, which is controlled by the respective local authorities.

The SPDC's newspaper, the New Light of Myanmar, reported on 17 May 2003
that a time bomb exploded in a movie house in Pyu on the night of 16 May,
220 kilometers north of Rangoon.

While the people were watching the film in a private-owned cinema in Ward
4, Pyu, at about 9.15 pm, a bomb planted by the KNU insurgent group
exploded causing 48 people severely wounded.

The authorities concerned rushed the wounded to Pyu People's Hospital.
Among them was the Primary Assistant Teacher Daw Ei Ei Phyo, 22, of Pyu No
1 Basic Education High School. The daughter of U Myint died from her
injuries. Six women and six men with severe wounds had to be transferred
to Toungoo People's Hospital. In Pyu People's Hospital, one novice, seven
men and 14 women are still undergoing medical treatments; five women and
eight men were discharged. The military junta blamed the explosion on the
Karen National Union (KNU), a group seeking to establish an independent
state for the ethnic Karen population, according to the papers.

Town-residents who wanted to stay anonymous told a different story. The
Ye-Thiri cinema where the explosion occurred on 15 May is owned by two
Muslim brothers, U Ye Myint and U Myint Aung, both former members of the
National League for Democracy. The military authorities suspected them of
continuing to secretly support the NLD. Their suspicion increased when the
junta's pet group and name-sake non-governmental organization, the Union
Solidarity & Development Association (USDA), occasionally asked for
financial supports from the two brothers and was refused every time. In
mid-April or around the time of the Burmese New Year and the water
splashing festival, the local military authorities and the USDA executives
asked the two brothers to contribute donation funds for the township
development program. Although the authorities told them to offer a
six-figure donation, they excused themselves on grounds of their financial
situation. Finally, the USDA's cash-collectors picked a quarrel with the
two brothers. They were told that their business would bear the cost of
their refusal to donate.

So the residents of the Pyu town believe that the culprits of the bomb
blast in the Ye-Thiri cinema are none other than USDA members, backed up
by the authorities. They are very angry about the USDA'S terrorism in the
Pyu township. But nobody dares to speak out for everyone knows that the
military intelligence service is investigating the case and finding a
scape-goat.  At present, the cinema's business license is suspended and
the two brothers are under investigation for the incident.

Ordinary Burmese people commonly believe that the USDA is the military
regime's gang of undercover informants. People still remembered the 1996
November incident as if it happened yesterday. Nobel Peace Prize laureate
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi said her car was surrounded by some 200 people who
used iron bars and motorcycle chains to smash the windows on 9 November
1996.  The USDA is perhaps the most dangerous new element on Burma's
present political stage. In the incident, media-men found a gathering of
USDA demonstrators in a street behind the police lines, taking directions
from a man with a cell phone and a walkie talkie - gadgets issued only by
the regime's security officers. The Lady was not injured but she and
witnesses said security forces stood by and did nothing. She accused a
military-backed civilian political group called the Union Solidarity
Development Association, or USDA, of being behind the incident. After the
incident, Daw Suu remarked that the USDA behaves like a fascist
organization and compared it to the Hitler Youth.

With such a bad background history, the USDA could be suspected of any
crime in the country. There is strong concern about the recent harassment
during the Lady's Kachin state trip.
____________

FindLaw's Legal Commentary   May 26, 2003
Ashcroft's Justice, Burma's Crimes, and Bork's Revenge
By JOANNE MARINER

Given the chance to protect corporate interests, the Bush administration
is predictably happy to take it. Ditto for the prospect of undermining
international justice.

But it's not every day that the opportunity arises to accomplish both
objectives at once. It takes a case like John Doe I v. Unocal Corp., a
civil damages action currently pending in U.S. federal court.

In a brief recently filed in the Unocal case, the administration - in the
person of Attorney General John Ashcroft - sets out to defend an oil
company, reaffirm the president's untrammeled power over foreign policy,
and eviscerate a law that has provided a modicum of justice to victims of
rights abuses from around the world.

All that, and more. In an added plus, the brief also gives the
administration a vehicle for highlighting the wit and wisdom of Robert
Bork. Bork, the right wing's original judicial martyr, is very much in the
thoughts of an administration that is currently fighting bruising
confirmation battles in Congress.

Forced Labor, Murder, Rape and Torture

The plaintiffs in the Unocal case are Burmese villagers who claim that
they were subjected to forced labor, murder, rape, and torture during the
construction of a gas pipeline through their country. Soldiers allegedly
committed these abuses while providing security and other services for the
pipeline project.

Jane Doe I, one of the plaintiffs in the case, testified that when her
husband tried to escape the forced labor program, he was shot at by
soldiers, and that, in retaliation for his attempted escape, she and her
baby were thrown into a fire. Her child died and she was badly injured.

Other villagers described the summary execution of people who refused to
work, or who became too weak to work effectively.

There is little doubt that such crimes occurred. They have been
exhaustively documented by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and
a host of other groups. In 1995, when pipeline construction was beginning,
the U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution urging Burma (also known as
Myanmar) to put a stop to its practices of torture, forced labor and
summary executions. Even the Justice Department, whose "friend of the
court" brief was filed this past May 8, was willing to acknowledge the
"blatant human rights abuses" committed by Burma's military government.

The only serious factual issue in the case is the extent of Unocal's
responsibility for the crimes. The plaintiffs claim that Unocal aided and
abetted the Burmese military in its campaign of abuse, an assertion that
Unocal vigorously denies.

"Practical Assistance"

The Unocal case is now pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit. The lower court that first heard the case dismissed it,
finding insufficient proof of Unocal's involvement in the abuses.

The appeal was heard by a panel of Ninth Circuit judges that ruled
unanimously to reverse the dismissal. The court found that the evidence
presented by the villagers supported the conclusion "that Unocal gave
practical assistance to the Myanmar Military in subjecting Plaintiffs to
forced labor."

As the court described it, this practical assistance "took the form of
hiring the Myanmar Military to provide security and build infrastructure
along the pipeline route in exchange for money or food." The assistance
"also took the form of using photos, surveys, and maps in daily meetings
to show the Myanmar Military where to provide security and build
infrastructure."

Moreover, the court found, the evidence supported the conclusion "that
Unocal gave 'encouragement' to the Myanmar Military in subjecting
Plaintiffs to forced labor."

Besides ruling for the plaintiffs on the forced labor issue, the court
also reversed the district court's dismissal of the murder and rape
claims, finding sufficient evidence of Unocal's complicity in those
abuses. But the panel decision, issued in September 2002, was vacated in
February, when the Ninth Circuit decided to rehear the case en banc (in
other words, sitting as a panel of eleven, rather than three, judges).

The Alien Tort Claims Act

Except for a token acknowledgment of the Burmese government's human rights
abuses, the Justice Department's brief ignores the facts of the case.
Rather than attempting to defend Burma and Unocal on the factual record,
it instead aims to destroy the legal basis of the villagers' suit.

In its brief, the Justice Department embarks on a wholesale attack on the
Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), the law underlying the villagers' claims.
For over twenty years, since the landmark 1980 case of Filartiga v.
Pena-Irala, courts have ruled that the ATCA permits victims of serious
violations of international law abroad to seek civil damages in U.S.
courts against perpetrators found in the United States.

The Justice Department's proposed interpretation of the law would
radically narrow its scope. The law would be changed so dramatically, in
fact, that as the Department itself acknowledges, it would be rendered
"superfluous."

If the Ninth Circuit adopts this approach, victims of human rights abuses
abroad will no longer be able to rely on the U.S. courts for any hope of
justice. And no more will multinational corporations, enticed by other
countries' lower wages, laxer worker protections - and, possibly,
ineffective and corrupt judicial systems - have to worry that abuses they
commit in foreign countries may come back to U.S. courts to haunt them.

The Justice Department's current view of the ATCA represents a radical
break from past practice. No previous administration has ever challenged
the legitimacy of ATCA suits against gross human rights abusers.

There is, however, some precedent for the Department's restrictive view of
the law. And its source - then-judge Robert Bork - is telling. In 1984,
back when he was a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit, Bork wrote a concurring opinion in the case of Tel-Oren v. Libyan
Arab Republic that vigorously challenged the use of the ATCA in human
rights suits.

The Justice Department's brief is littered with approving references and
quotes from Bork's Tel-Oren concurrence. The Department clearly hopes,
with this case, to establish Bork's views as the authoritative position of
the Ninth Circuit.

To do so would, of course, be an important step toward convincing the
Supreme Court, which has yet to rule on the ATCA's use in human rights
cases, to follow suit.

From the ATCA to the ICC

The Justice Department's offensive against the ATCA may be a testament to
the law's growing relevance. It was only in 1993 that plaintiffs began
suing multinational companies under the ATCA for alleged complicity in
human rights violations abroad.

Since that time, there have been at least twenty-five such cases. Although
the courts have dismissed most of them, and have not rendered any
judgments against companies, the ATCA has clear potential as a tool for
policing corporate perpetrators of human rights abuse. Indeed, the ongoing
cases have already set alarm bells ringing in the corporate world.

Yet there is another obvious basis for the Justice Department's effort to
sabotage the law. Equal to this administration's solicitude for corporate
welfare is its loathing of international justice.

It may seem like quite a leap from the ATCA to the International Criminal
Court (ICC). Yet the underlying concepts - that one country's gross human
rights abuses might be of legitimate concern to an outside forum, and that
international human rights standards might be legally enforceable, rather
than merely hortatory - are the same.

With the ATCA and the ICC, the Bush administration is attempting to
protect human rights abusers at the expense of their victims. Only if
justice and accountability are ignored does this effort make sense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joanne Mariner is deputy director of the Americas division of Human Rights
Watch. The views expressed in her columns are her own, and do not
necessarily reflect those of Human Rights Watch.


STATEMENTS

Network Media Group   May 27, 2003
Exiled MPs call for release of MPs in prisons

The Members of Parliamentary Union comprised of exiled MPs of 1990
election called the military government of Burma today on 13th Anniversary
of the election to honor the election results and to release political
prisoners including 19 MPs unconditionally, mentioned in the statement
released today.

"We strongly condemn the recent arrests of dozens of dissidents including
U Win Myint Aung,  NLD MP for Dee-Pe-Yin constituency-2. We demand the
unconditional release of all political prisoners", said in the statement
quoting Teddy Buri, Chairman of the Members of Parliament Union.

"We also reiterate our call on the military regime to enter into
meaningful talks with the NLD led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and ethnic
nationalities for a negotiated political settlement. We call upon the
international community to take concerted and coordinated actions against
the regime to honor the election results and bring about a democratic
change in Burma", Teddy Buri said as quoted.

The statement also pointed out that there are still more than 1300
political prisoners including 19 MPs in prisons of Burma, continuation of
unlawful arrests, forced labor and human rights abuses and intimidations
on Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy.

The military regime of Burma promised the multi-party election after the
nationwide uprising in 1988. The multi-party general election was held on
May 27, 1990 while the leader of opposition Party, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
was put under house arrest. But, opposition party won landslide victory in
this 1990 election which results were never recognized.