BurmaNet News: May 28 2003

[editor at burmanet.org]

May 28 2003 Issue #2246

INSIDE BURMA

AFP: Torture, killings continue in Myanmar despite Suu Kyi release: Amnesty
DVB: Burma War office places all armed organizations on state of emergency
AP: Junta accuses Suu Kyi supporters of attacking ‘peaceful’ opponents

REGIONAL

Bangkok Post: Inquest delay threat to ties with Burma
Bankgok Post: Killing seen as warning to others
Irrawaddy: Human rights defender hits at Thailand
Outlook India.com: Surrogate wars, surrogate governments

INTERNATIONAL

CNN.com: Ashcroft's justice, Burma's crimes and Bork's revenge

MISCELLANEOUS

IFJ: Final call for entries for the Lorenzo Natali Prize for Journalism

INSIDE BURMA

Agence France Presse May 28 2003

Torture, killings continue in Myanmar despite Suu Kyi release: Amnesty

Myanmar has continued to arrest and torture political dissidents despite
the release of pro-democracy campaigner Aung San Suu Kyi in May of last
year, Amnesty International said Wednesday.

Forced labour and extra-judicial killings of ethnic minority civilians
also continued in Myanmar, formerly Burma, in 2002, the London-based
rights watchdog said in its report on 2002.

"Reports of torture of political prisoners during initial interrogation by
the Military Intelligence continued to be received," Amnesty said, adding
that three political prisoners had died in custody during the year.

"Extrajudicial executions continued to be reported in most of the seven
ethnic minority states," it added.

The report said about 50 political prisoners were detained during the year
and about 300 released, bringing to 500 the total number of prisoners set
free since January 2001. However, about 1,300 political prisoners remained
in jails.

The group noted no progress had been made in talks between the military
government and Nobel peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for
Democracy, despite three visits to the country by the UN secretary
general's special envoy Razali Ismail.

Amnesty highlighted the case of former ruler General Ne Win, who was
placed under de facto house arrest with his daughter and later died.

His daughter remained under house arrest and his son-in-law and three
grandsons were arrested and sentenced to death. The family was believed to
have come into conflict with the junta over its business interests.

Eighteen members of parliament-elect, who won seats in the unrecognised
1990 democratic election, also remained in jail.
____________

Democratic Voice of Burma May 26 2003

Burma War office places all armed organizations on state of emergency

According to a news report received by DVB Democratic Voice of Burma , the
War Office in Rangoon has issued a directive on 24 May putting all armed
organizations in the country on a state of emergency. All military and
civil head of departments have been advised to work full time and are also
notified to avoid unessential travel.

Unconfirmed reports also state that bomb explosions are not only
restricted to the border regions, and it has been learnt that unexploded
bombs have been discovered frequently in the inner cities.

Military sources say, during State Peace and Development Council Chairman
Sr Gen Than Shwe's trip to Upper Burma last month, at least a bomb
explosion occurred once among the pagodas in Pagan and many unexploded
bombs were also seized.
______________

Associated Press May 28 2003

Junta accuses Suu Kyi supporters of attacking 'peaceful' opponents
By AYE AYE WIN

Myanmar's military government Tuesday accused Aung San Suu Kyi's
supporters of physically assaulting "peaceful" opponents during her
ongoing trip to the north. It said 10 people were injured in the attacks.

The government claims contradict complaints by Suu Kyi's National League
for Democracy that a pro-junta group obstructed the Nobel Peace laureate's
tour and bullied her supporters.

The NLD said Monday that pro-junta elements driving by in a dozen cars had
threatened to run over people waiting along the road to greet Suu Kyi near
Mandalay in northern Myanmar on Sunday. It said a brick was hurled at Suu
Kyi's car, hitting its hood.

But a government statement gave a different version of the events.

It said a group of people who do not support Suu Kyi were staging
"peaceful protests" against her when youths from the NLD started fights
with them.

It said 10 people including three women were injured in three separate
incidents when NLD members threw stones and attacked those staging
peaceful "anti-Suu Kyi protests."

"Local authorities have urged the NLD to be broadminded and understand
that there are those who support the NLD and those who do not support
them," the statement said.

Suu Kyi is currently on a one-month political tour of the north, her
seventh such trip since being freed by the military government from house
arrest last May.

The NLD has said her previous trips were also obstructed by members of the
Union Solidarity Development Association, a pro-junta group of 19 million
members.

The allegations and counter allegations could further stall the
reconciliation process that Suu Kyi and the junta embarked on in October
2000. The process has not moved beyond confidence building talks, and has
yielded no tangible result in resolving the country's political deadlock.

The military regime came to power in 1988 after crushing a pro-democracy
movement. It held elections on May 27, 1990 but refused to hand over power
to the NLD despite its overwhelming victory.

On Tuesday, the 13th anniversary of the elections, Suu Kyi urged the junta
to honor the result and give up its stranglehold on power.

"Ignoring the results of the 1990 election amounts to insulting the people
and disrespecting the people," Suu Kyi said in a statement released at a
function at the party headquarters in Yangon.

It was read out by Hla Hla Moe, one of the victorious candidates for the
National League for Democracy party in the May 27, 1990 elections.

The NLD won 392 of 485 seats in the election for parliament but the
military regime, which itself had called the elections, refused to hand
over power.

REGIONAL

Bangkok Post May 28 2003

Inquest delay threat to ties with Burma

Situation could incite workers to violence
Leader of a human rights group worries that any delay or foul play in an
inquiry into the murders of six Burmese workers in Tak's Mae Sot district
will badly affect Thai-Burmese ties.

Six Burmese construction workers identified as Aye Min, 22, Min Hein, 28,
Thein Naing, 33, Ah Nge Lay, 19, Maung Maung, 24 and Ah Nyar, 22, who went
missing on May 14 were found dead last week in a forest close to the Huay
Kalok village, Mae Sot. Their bodies had reportedly been incinerated.

The six were last seen in the custody of uniformed Thai officials believed
to be local police after being involved in a fight with some Thai workers.

They had been handcuffed and taken away in a pick-up truck, witnesses said.

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia)
secretary-general Somchai Homlaor yesterday warned that ``any delay and
cover-up in investigating these heinous crimes would only hurt
Thai-Burmese relations''.

He also warned that a failure to deliver justice could create more
frustration, fear and anger among Burmese living in Thailand.

``This situation might force Burmese workers to resort to violence to
defend themselves from exploitation and abuses,'' Mr Somchai said.

Forum-Asia urged the government to look into the brutal killings
immediately for the sake of justice to the victims and their families.

``Thailand is a country governed by the rule of law,'' Forum-Asia said.
``Regardless of the victims' nationality, race and social status, their
cases must be treated fairly and without discrimination. Those responsible
for their death must be brought to justice.''

The group called for the establishment of a mechanism to interview and
protect key witnesses in the cases who might be worried about their
safety.

Local officials were allegedly involved in the six deaths.

Forum-Asia said there had been many murders of migrant workers in border
areas of Tak.

The group said ``rampant corruption'' among law enforcement officers
allowed criminal gangs to torture and murder with impunity, and local
authorities paid no attention to cases in which the victims were not Thai
nationals.
 _____________

Bangkok Post May 28 2003

Killing seen as warning to others

Gun, pickup seized from kamnan
By Supamart Kasem

The massacre of six Burmese may be intended as a lesson for other illegal
workers from the people who control the racket, a border district chief
said yesterday.

Samart Loyfa, chief of Mae Sot district, said a human trafficking ring was
behind the brutal killings.

Mae Sot police found charred bones, clothing and burnt tyres in a bamboo
forest at Ban Huay Kalok, tambon Mae Pa last week.

Mr Samart said traffickers collect fees for workers smuggled to the inner
provinces and extort money from employers and workers alike.

He said he had warned local officials against getting involved and
promised he would take drastic action against any found to have ignored
his warning.

An initial investigation by police has linked the murders to local
influential figures.

Pol Lt Gen Nawin Singhaphalin, commissioner of Police Region 6, said the
inquiry was moving slowly but surely. Investigators would be ready to seek
court arrest warrants in about two weeks.

The bodies were found one week after the men were killed.

Pol Lt Gen Nawin said police were not involved, but declined to say if any
other state officials were.

A police source said investigators had seized a pick-up truck and a gun
from a kamnan of tambon Mae Pa.

Border sources said the fee for supplying migrant workers from border
provinces to inner provinces had doubled to 10,000 baht per head, as
immigration authorities and police boosted security.

Almost 20,000 illegal migrant workers had been arrested since April and
deported to Burma via Myawaddy opposite Mae Sot district.

Since the start of this month, more than 50,000 Burmese people had entered
Thailand on border passes, but only 35,000 returned.

More than 70% of those who did not return were believed to have been
smuggled to inner provinces for illegal employment in factories.
__________

Irrawaddy May 28 2003

Human Rights Defender Hits at Thailand

The United Nations special representative for human rights defenders
expressed concern about Thailand’s worsening human rights situation,
saying government-sponsored harassment and intimidation was impeding
progress.
"These concerns could seriously jeopardize Thailand’s progress in
democracy and the strengthening of human rights protection," the UN envoy
Hina Jilani said yesterday, after concluding a ten-day visit of the
Kingdom.
In addition to activists working on human rights protection, she said
people dealing with anti-trafficking, social and environmental projects
also face intimidation. Jilani told reporters yesterday that
non-governmental organizations operating in Thailand have to work in a
very difficult environment, particularly when they challenge Prime
Minister Thaksin Shinawatra or business interests.
Jilani expressed alarm at the treatment of Burmese opposition members in
Thailand, who have faced crackdowns recently because Bangkok sees them as
a security risk, and a roadblock to improving relations with Rangoon. This
is a change from previous Thai governments, which have normally turned a
blind eye to Burmese pro-democracy campaigns.
"Many of the Burmese human rights defenders feel very insecure with regard
to their freedom of movement inside Thailand," she said.
During her visit, she met with dozens of Burmese dissidents and visited
the city of Chiang Mai, in Thailand’s north.
The UN envoy also visited the southern province of Songkhla and met with
Thai political leaders, including the Prime Minister and senior cabinet
ministers in Bangkok.
Thailand has obtained a reputation as a nation that respects civil
liberties and democratic freedom in a region dominated by suppressive
regimes. Jilani says, however, that this standing is threatened by action
ordered from the "highest levels".
Thailand is the first nation in Southeast Asia to have invited the UN
envoy on an official visit.
____________

Outlook India.com May 28 2003

Surrogate Wars, Surrogate Governments
By PRADIP PHANJOUBAM

 For almost a week last fortnight, after clashes between two underground
militant organizations, the United Kuki Liberation Front (UKLF) and the
United National Liberation Front (UNLF) in the Chakpikarong sub-division
of the Chandel district, in Manipur, residents of a number of villages
were subject to widespread fear, forcing many to flee their homes.
Although the exact numbers are not known or disclosed, both the
underground organizations acknowledged having suffered casualties. Clashes
between underground organizations are not altogether new in this area, but
the tragedy has been not so much theirs, as it has been for the unarmed
and hapless public, most often impoverished villagers in sparsely
populated peripheries of the State.

But the Chakpikarong clashes have other very strong undercurrents of old
tensions running below the obvious surface. Although the physical clashes
were between the UKLF and the UNLF, in spirit it was between two old time
antagonists, the National Socialist Council of Nagalim -- Isak-Muivah
(NSCN-IM) and the UNLF. The latter, drawing its strongest support from
amongst the Meitei community in the Imphal Valley, is the only Meitei
militant organization that has come out openly to challenge the NSCN-IM's
demand for a 'Greater Nagaland', which the Naga militants aspire to create
by splintering Manipur and other neighbouring states. Others too are
opposed to the move, but none of them have demonstrated their opposition
publicly, unwilling to risk their relationship with the NSCN-IM -- by far
the most well-armed and powerful insurgent organization in the region.
Most Kuki underground organizations, particularly the Kuki National Front
(KNF), and the Kuki National Army (KNA), are also opposed to the NSCN-IM's
vision of an integrated Naga homeland carved out of land that is also home
to the Kukis. It is to the credit of the military strategists of the
NSCN-IM that, amidst this open and emotive opposition to their homeland
move, they have been able to set up their own satellites deep within
communities that are hostile to its political ambitions.
The UKLF, a relatively new Kuki militant group in the Chandel district
bordering Myanmar, is one such, and came into being not long after the
bloody Kuki-Naga feud in the mid 1990s. The NSCN-IM has also set up
another Kuki extremist group, the Kuki Revolutionary Army (KRA) in another
Kuki stronghold -- the Sadar Hills Autonomous District Council (ADC), in
the Senapati district in the north of the State -- and likewise has also
been patronizing similar organizations among other communities, both in
the Manipur Hills and the Meitei dominated Valley.

The recent Chakpikarong clashes must be seen against this background. The
Chandel district is within the areas that the NSCN-IM considers as Naga
contiguous territories, and hence part of its vision of the contentious
Greater Nagaland. In reality, it is a mixed-population district, with many
small communities, most of them now politically aligned to the Naga
identity, although many among them share close ethnic affinity with the
Kukis, their immediate neighbours in the district.
Much to the chagrin of the Nagas, Kuki intellectuals refer to the Naga
tribes in this district as 'Old Kukis' who have switched identity
affiliation. This dichotomy between political and ethnic identities throws
up a number of obvious social tensions and it is no coincidence that some
of the worst clashes between the Kukis and Nagas during the feud in the
1990s occurred in the Chandel district.
Further, valley based underground organizations, particularly the UNLF
have been making deep inroads into the Kuki inhabited areas of the
district, a fact viewed with resentment and suspicion by the NSCN-IM.
Before the Naga ceasefire, clashes in the area used to be directly between
the NSCN-IM and the UNLF - NSCN-K (the rival Khaplang faction of the NSCN)
combine.
Ever since the Naga ceasefire in 1997, however, the NSCN-IN can no longer
risk open encounters, as these would violate the 'Ground Rules' of their
agreement with the Union Government. Its satellite organizations are,
consequently, pressed into action under direct or indirect goading. In the
present instance, the UKLF became the instrument in an attempt to
neutralize the presence of the UNLF in the Chakpikarong area.
What is unfolding is thus a war for the control of territory and, in a
distant way, one prompted by the unresolved and explosive question of the
NSCN-IM's Greater Nagaland dream - a war in which one of the parties is
fighting by proxy.

The proxy war aside, one other player is conspicuous by its absence -- the
law. The entire Chakpikarong area, as in much of the rest of Chandel
district, as well as the adjoining Sugnu subdivision of the valley
district of Thoubal, have become virtually a 'liberated zone', where the
writs of many different rebel organizations are the only law. At present,
unless overwhelming numbers of Central Forces are brought in, it is
difficult for the government to bring the situation under control.
It is not very far from here, in the Sajik Tampak, that underground forces
of the UNLF repelled advancing Border Security Force (BSF) soldiers after
a pitched three-day battle in January 2003. In these areas, the Government
has, as a policy, even disarmed its police forces, since it had become
routine for police stations, most of them under-manned and ill-equipped,
to be overpowered and robbed of weapons by militants who were vastly
superior in numbers and armament.
Thus, the Chakpikarong police station, for instance, has only about three
unarmed policemen. Three times the number of unarmed policemen is present
at the Sugnu police station, and they -- for obvious reasons -- have not
been able to make a difference in the situation.
Not only are the law enforcement agencies absent, there are also no signs
of direct government presence. The fair-weather roads in the area remain
in a pathetic state of disrepair for years together; the public health
centers are without doctors; the sub-divisional offices are without
officers; general scarcities are endemic, and the only things not in short
supply are diseases and epidemics of malaria, cholera and dysentery.
In such a vacuum, it is only natural for parallel structures of government
to sprout up and assert themselves. It is a situation, as T.S. Chonghring,
an Anal tribal chief in Chakpikarong, told Imphal Free Press, a case of
the government abandoning the people, driving them into the hands of laws
and forces other than the government's own.

INTERNATIONAL

CNN.com May 28 2003

Ashcroft's Justice, Burma's crimes and Bork's revenge
By Joanne Mariner

(FindLaw) --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. Human Rights Watch,
Amnesty International, and a host of other groups have exhaustively
documented them. 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
9th Circuit. The lower court that first heard the case dismissed it,
finding insufficient proof of Unocal's involvement in the abuses.
A panel of 9th Circuit judges that ruled unanimously to reverse the
dismissal heard the appeal. 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 11, 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 9th 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 9th 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
those 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, a FindLaw columnist, 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.

MISCELLANEOUS

Final Call for Entries for the Lorenzo Natali Prize for Journalism
IFJ Seeks Entries from Journalists around Asia and the Pacific
The IFJ is making a final call for entries for the annual Lorenzo Natali
Prize for Journalism- one of the world’s most valuable journalism prizes-
recognising the best of human rights journalism in 2002. The Prize has a
winner specifically drawn from the Asia and Pacific Region. Applications
will be accepted up until Friday 31 May 2003.
The Lorenzo Natali Prize for Journalism: Excellence in Reporting Human
Rights, Democracy and Development was established in 1992 by the European
Commission to promote quality journalism as a bulwark of democracy and
human rights. It is organised by the IFJ, the world’s largest journalists
organisation, representing more than 500,000 journalists world-wide.
The Lorenzo Natali Prize is awarded to print and/or on-line journalists
who have demonstrated a striking insight and particular dedication to the
reporting of human rights issues within the context of the development
process. This year a Prize worth EUR 10,000 will be awarded to a
journalist in Asia and the Pacific.  The winner will also go to Brussels
for the prize-giving ceremony to be held later in 2003.
TO ENTER:
-Entry forms are available from journalists’ organization throughout Asia
or at www.ifj.org or by contacting the IFJ Asia Pacific Project Office
(details below)
-Entry is free and entries close 31 May 2003
-Entry is for print/on-line journalists only
-Articles must have been published between 1st January 2002 and 31st 
December 2002
Send your application (clearly marked Lorenzo Natali Prize for Journalism)
to:
-The Delegation Office of the European Commission in your country OR
-International Federation of Journalists, Asia-Pacific Project Office (see
details below)
More information is available at
<http://www.ifj.org/hrights/lorenzo/inpr.html>
or if you have any further questions, please contact:
Lara Hook
IFJ Asia-Pacific Project Office
C/- Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance,
245 Chalmers St,
Redfern Sydney NSW 2016
AUSTRALIA
Tel: + 612 9333 0999 or 612 9333 0919
Fax:  + 612 9333 0933
Email:  federal at alliance.org.au or lara.hook at alliance.org.au
<mailto:lara.hook at alliance.org.au>