BurmaNet News, October 14, 2009

[Editor]

October 14, 2009 Issue #3818

INSIDE BURMA
Irrawaddy: 11 political activists sentenced at Insein Prison
AP: American to stand trial in Myanmar for fraud
Mizzima: EU diplomats meet NLD leaders

ON THE BORDER
Irrawaddy: Burmese migrants beaten, arrested in China
Kaladan Press: Local authorities restrict refugee movement again
DVB: DKBA moves towards border guard change

ASEAN
DVB: US senator urges ASEAN free trade

OPINION / OTHER
Irrawaddy: The message from Oslo – Aung Zaw

STATEMENT
Asian Human Rights Commission: Misuse of law to imprison man who
complained about electricity supply (AHRC-STM-214-2009)


____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

October 14, Irrawaddy
11 political activists sentenced at Insein Prison – Ko Htwe

Eleven political activists, including one Buddhist monk, were sentenced to
between five and 10 years on Tuesday at Rangoon Northern District Court in
Insein Prison.

The court also passed down a sentence in absentia on two monks, Ashin
Pyinnya Jota and Ashin Sandardika, from the All Burma Monks’ Alliance, who
have fled abroad.

Sources close to prison authorities in Insein told The Irrawaddy on
Wednesday that Ashin Sandimar (aka Tun Naung), Kyaw Zin Min (aka Zaw Moe),
Wunna Nwe and Zin Min Shein were sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for
violating the Explosives Law (Section 3) and the Unlawful Association Law
(Section 6).

Meanwhile, Saw Maung, Aung Moe Lwin, Moe Htet Nay, Tun Lin Aung, Zaw Latt,
Naing Win and Tun Lin Oo were sentenced to five years for violating
Section 6.

In 2008, Ashin Sandimar, Wunna Nwe and Saw Maung were sentenced to eight
years imprisonment for violating the Immigration Act (13/1) and the
Illegal Organization Act (17/1), while Zin Min Shein and Tun Lwin Aung are
already serving 13-year sentences for other offences related to political
activities.

Therefore, Ashin Sandimar, Wunna Nwe and Tun Lwin Aung have now been
convicted and sentenced to 18 years each, while Saw Maung has received 13
years, and Zin Min Shein a total of 23 years.

Bo Kyi, the joint-secretary of the Thailand-based rights group Assistance
Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), said, “We can say with
certainty there was no free and fair verdict. They [the activists] were
tortured during interrogation and were forced to admit violating these
acts.”

Sources have said that some of the activists—perhaps even some of those
already behind bars—tried to organize demonstrations on the second
anniversary of the Saffron Revolution in September, but the authorities
caught them and accused them of belonging to illegal organizations, of
being terrorists, and of planning to create unrest.

Meanwhile, Burmese-American activist Nyi Nyi Aung (aka Kyaw Zaw Lwin), who
was arrested in early September at Rangoon Airport, appeared in court for
the first time on Wednesday.

“He has been accused of violating the Cheating Offence - Section 420, and
forgery,” said his lawyer, Nyan Win.

Shortly after the arrest of Nyi Nyi Aung, 16 ethnic Arakan youths were
arrested—seven in Rangoon and the others in Sittwe, the capital of Arakan
State. They were accused of maintaining links with the Thailand-based All
Arakan Students’ and Youths’ Congress.

According to Assistance Association for Political Prisoner (Burma), 2,119
political prisoners are being held in prisons across the country.

____________________________________

October 14, Associated Press
American to stand trial in Myanmar for fraud

Yangon, Myanmar — A Myanmar-born American jailed for allegedly plotting to
incite unrest in the military-ruled country was brought before a court
Wednesday on charges that carry a sentence of up to 14 years, his lawyer
said.

Kyaw Zaw Lwin was charged with fraud and forgery but not with inciting
unrest, of which he was earlier accused, said his lawyer, Nyan Win. The
fraud and forgery charges each carry a prison term of seven years.

A hearing has been scheduled for Oct. 23 with testimony by prosecution
witnesses, including immigration officials, the lawyer said.

Authorities arrested the U.S. citizen, also referred to as Nyi Nyi Aung,
on arrival at Yangon airport on Sept. 3. According to dissident groups he
is a resident of Maryland.

"Nyi Nyi Aung is well and in good spirits," said Nyan Win. A U.S. Embassy
consular official was also present in the courtroom, which is inside
Yangon's notorious Insein prison, said Drake Weisert, an embassy
spokesman.

Nyan Win said his client told him on Monday that he was physically
tortured while being interrogated during the early part of his detention.
He denied allegations that he was plotting to incite unrest.

The U.S. Embassy said it has made a formal complaint to Myanmar's military
government over Kyaw Zaw Lwin's claims that he was mistreated in prison.

Myanmar authorities accused Kyaw Zaw Lwin of entering Myanmar to stir up
protests by Buddhist monks, who led pro-democracy demonstrations in 2007
that were brutally suppressed by the junta. Authorities said he confessed
to plotting with dissident groups outside the country, and accused him of
links to several activists inside Myanmar who planned to set off bombs.

Nyan Win said his client was charged with forgery for allegedly making a
national identity card.

Lawyers Nyan Win and Kyi Win led the legal team that defended
pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi in a recent high-profile trial that
resulted in an extension of her house arrest. She is currently serving an
18-month sentence after spending 14 of the past 20 years in detention.

Kyaw Zaw Lwin's mother is serving a five-year jail term for political
activities and his sister was sentenced to 65 years in prison for her role
in the 2007 pro-democracy protests, activist groups and family members
said.

____________________________________

October 14, Mizzima
EU diplomats meet NLD leaders – Mungpi

New Delhi - A delegation of European Union diplomats on Wednesday met
leaders of Burma’s opposition party – the National League for Democracy –
wanting to know its stand on the ruling junta’s planned 2010 elections.

Khin Maung Swe, a central executive committee member of the NLD said, the
delegation, comprising 20 diplomats, visited the NLD office in West
Shwegondine Street and asked how the NLD views Aung San Suu Kyi’s
cooperation to help ease sanctions, and whether the NLD is seeking
power-sharing with the junta in making a demand to revise the 2008
constitution.

“Our reply is that we are not seeking for power-sharing, but are demanding
a revision of the 2008 constitution, so the political process can be broad
based and inclusive,” Khin Maung Swe told Mizzima

“We are not demanding power, we are asking the government to ensure that
the constitution guarantees the people their rights,” Khin Maung Swe told
Mizzima.

The diplomats, from Bangkok’s Swedish Embassy, Rangoon’s British, Italy,
German and French embassies, according to Khin Maung Swe, were mainly
visiting the office to seek information that may help shape the European
Union’s common position on Burma.

EU, like the United States, has maintained sanctions against Burma’s
ruling junta and in April extended its sanctions for another year.

“We believe that the visit was part of the EU’s effort to find useful
information in helping Burma to achieve democracy,” the NLD leader said.

The EU delegation’s visit came days after the visit by diplomats of US, UK
and Australia to the NLD office.  On Friday, US, UK and Australian
diplomats met detained party leader Aung San SUu Kyi and also met the NLD
CEC.

Welcoming the EU delegation’s visit Khin Maung Swe said, “We are glad that
the EU and the international community are taking interest in the Burma
issue. We would like to urge all to take further action for Burma to
achieve democracy.”

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

October 14, Irrawaddy
Burmese migrants beaten, arrested in China – Saw Yan Naing

Chinese police have been cracking down recently on illegal Burmese migrant
workers with beatings commonplace and about 50 migrants arrested every
day, according to sources on the Sino-Burmese border.

The crackdown started around Sept. 25. Several detained migrants have
alleged they were badly beaten and were charged 300 yuan (US $44) for
their release. Immediately after their release, the Burmese migrants were
forcibly repatriated, said the sources.

Ma Grang, a merchant in the Chinese border town of Ruili, said he met with
a factory worker named Myo Win and his friend who claimed they were badly
beaten by the Chinese police, and have since returned to Burma.

“They were beaten with batons on their back, legs and chest. I saw the
bruises,” said Ma Grang.  “Myo Win was not able to work for a few days.”

He said that Chinese police did not systematically beat up illegal Burmese
migrant workers in the past.

“However, this time, they are treating the migrants brutally,” he said.

He added that Burmese migrant workers in Ruili—a border town in
southwestern Yunnan Province which lies opposite the Burmese town of
Muse—are currently living in fear and dare not go outside their living
quarters.

Awng Wa, a source on the Sino-Burmese border, confirmed that the Chinese
authorities had increased restrictions on migrating or visiting Burmese
people.

In the past, Burmese people could cross the border and stay in Ruili for
more than a week at a time. With the current crackdown, Burmese are only
allowed to stay on Chinese soil for seven days. Anyone violating the rule
is fined 600 yuan ($88), he said.

Sources in Ruili speculated that the police crackdown had been initiated
to prevent the flow of illegal Burmese migrant workers into China. Others,
however, claimed the Chinese were responding to attacks by Burmese
government troops against ethnic Kokang and Han Chinese migrants in Burma
in August.

During the Burmese government attacks, about 37,000 ethnic Kokang—who are
widely considered to be ethnic Han Chinese—and first-generation Chinese
migrants had to flee from Laogai in Burma across the Chinese border. Many
Chinese reported that they had lost their businesses as a consequence.
An estimated 90 percent of businesses in Laogai are—or were—owned by
Chinese businesspeople.

Ma Grang said many businessmen in Ruili have suggested that the crackdown
against Burmese migrants is a reciprocal gesture because of what happened
to Chinese people in Burma recently.

Awng Wa told The Irrawaddy he believed both motives were in play—the
Chinese police were cracking down on Burmese in revenge for the Laogai
seizure, and to curtail the number of migrants crossing into Yunnan
Province, he said.

____________________________________

October 14, Kaladan Press
Local authorities restrict refugee movement again

Kutupalong, Bangladesh – Local authorities from Morischa border check post
under the Ukeya police station have restricted Arakanese Rohingya refugees
from Kutupalong to cross the check post for their daily work in other
areas, said Abu Alam, the camp refugee committee secretary.

Today early, morning, Arakanese Rohingya refugees from the unregistered
refugee camp, were going for their daily work in Cox’s Bazaar and other
parts of Ukeya area by local bus. But, when the refugees reached the
border check post of Morischa, the security personnel did not allow them
to pass and told them to go back to the camp, he added.

When the refugees asked the security personnel at the check post about the
reason for the restriction as going to work is their only way of survival
the security personnel avoided answering, the secretary said.

“We are not recognized by the UNHCR as refugees and we do not get any
support from any quarter. We worked for our families’ survival, for which
we need to move for jobs. If the Bangladesh government restricts our
movement, how is it different from the Burmese military junta,” asked
Rafique, a committee member from the camp.

“We came here to save our lives from the Burmese military junta. We don’t
want to settle here. When our country becomes peaceful and democracy is
restored, we will go back to our country,” he added.

The unregistered Kutupalong refugee camp has more than 30,000 people who
are working for their survival in areas near the camp and Cox’s Bazaar as
daily labourers and rickshaw pullers.

The camp is getting little support from ACF and MSF for a hygienic system
in the camp, supply of biscuits to the young, supply of household items
and medical treatment.

Today, because of the border check post block more than 50 refugees
returned to the camp.

____________________________________

October 14, Democratic Voice of Burma
DKBA moves towards border guard change

The pro-junta Democratic Karen Buddhist Army is to present the Burmese
government with a list of battalions that will be transformed into border
guard forces, officials from the group said.

The list is due to be sent tomorrow to the government’s military affairs
security chief, Lieutenant General Ye Myint.

The ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) has been urging
ceasefire groups in Burma to transform into border guard forces prior to
the 2010 elections, although many have so far refused.

A Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) official said that those appointed
to the border guard group would be given military and administration
training in December in Moulmein, the capital of Burma’s eastern Mon
state.

“There would be 360 personnel, including 30 Burmese army members, in each
new battalion,” said the DKBA official. “We don’t know how many battalions
would be formed.”

He said that DKBA leaders are now holding a five-day conference, due to
end tomorrow, in Karen state.

The government has reportedly told the DKBA that new border guard forces
would be under the direct control of the commander-in-chief of the
country’s Defence Services.

The highest position in the group would be major’s rank, while the age
range for personnel in each battalion will be 18 to 50 years old.

Another DKBA official said Ye Myint came to the DKBA headquarters at the
end of September and told the group to dismantle its Tactical Operation
Command unit.

An official at the DKBA’s 999th Battalion said some members within the
group were disappointed with the age and rank limits for the border
militia group.

A number of battalions accommodate people who are over 50 years old, many
of whom rank above major, who would face demotion once the transformation
has taken place.

Resistance to the government’s border guard plan has come from the
majority of Burma’s ceasefire groups, who claim that the move would erode
their autonomy and significantly weaken their clout.

The government is attempting to bring more armed groups back into the
“legal fold”, and thus permit them to create political parties, prior
elections next. Ostensibly the move would bring more support for the
government.

____________________________________
ASEAN

October 14, Democratic Voice of Burma
US senator urges ASEAN free trade – Francis Wade

Restrictions on US trade with Burma should not hinder the establishment of
a Free Trade Agreement between Washington and Southeast Asian nations, a
top US senator has said.

Legislation is set to be introduced this week by Dick Lugar, US senator
for Indiana, that will encourage Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations
between the US and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a
statement on the senator’s website said.

“The United States should proceed to develop a comprehensive strategy
toward engaging ASEAN in serious FTA discussions,” Lugar said.

The US is already party to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
and Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR). An
FTA is an agreement between countries to eliminate tariffs and preferences
on goods and service traded.

According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), six ASEAN countries,
Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and Singapore, are
expected to grow at around four percent next year, more than many of the
world’s advanced economies.

Lugar said however that access to ASEAN markets by China, India,
Australia, New Zealand and South Korea are giving these countries “a
competitive edge over the US in Southeast Asia”.

An FTA agreement between ASEAN nations, New Zealand and Australia is due
to come into force on 1 January next year. Australia’s trade minister,
Simon Crean, said today that the agreement will cover 600 million people
and a combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of around $AUS3 trillion.

Lugar’s comment comes a month before US president Barrack Obama is due to
make his first address at an ASEAN summit, scheduled for mid-November.

It also comes shortly after the US announced it would begin dialogue with
the ruling junta in Burma, whilst maintaining sanctions, after years of
isolation.

Lugar said that ongoing restrictions on trade with Burma “should not deter
US efforts to reach an FTA with the rest of ASEAN”.

“President Obama’s possible meeting with ASEAN leaders while in Singapore
will reflect the significance of the US-ASEAN relationship,” he said.

Observers say the US policy shift is being done in part to counter China’s
growing influence over Burma, and the ASEAN region. ASEAN nations are also
said to be concerned about China’s political, economic and military
dominance in the region.

It was Lugar who in 2006 introduced legislation to establish the first US
ambassador to ASEAN.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

October 14, Irrawaddy
The message from Oslo – Aung Zaw

The decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to US President Barack Obama
has caused controversy and surprise around the world.

At home, some Republicans and conservative hardliners portrayed Obama as
the darling of “European leftist elites.” Some political pundits even said
that he should turn down the prize from what they described as an
“anti-American committee.”

“This is not Obama's fault,” said Ari Fleischer, a former Bush spokesman,
noting that the president did not seek out the Nobel Prize.

Fleischer then argued that it is fair game for Republicans to question an
award for a president who so far appears to be “all show and no
substance.”

Obama admitted that he was also taken by surprise after learning he won
the Nobel Peace Prize but said he was “deeply humbled.”

The US president said he did not see the Nobel Prize “as recognition of my
own accomplishments,” but rather as an acknowledgment of the objectives he
and his administration have set for the US and the world.

“I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many
transformative figures that have been honored by this prize,” Obama said.

Thorbjorn Jagland, chairman of the Nobel committee that chose Obama for
the Peace Prize, defended the decision and praised the president’s efforts
to heal the divide between the West and the Muslim world and scale down
the anti-missile shield in Europe. “All these things contributed to—I
wouldn’t say a safer world—but a world with less tension,” he said.

Obama plans to go to Oslo to accept the award. Well, it’s a relief that at
least this Nobel laureate is not under house arrest.

In 1991, when the Nobel Peace Prize committee announced the award of that
year’s Peace Prize to detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi people in
Rangoon listened to the news on the BBC’s Burmese service with jubilation.
They saw the award as a resounding reproof to the Burmese regime.

Suu Kyi also learned the news from her radio at home and told visiting US
congressman Bill Richardson and New York Times reporter Philip Shenon in
February 1994 that she had felt humbled.

Suu Kyi’s son Alexander Aris accepted the award in Oslo on her behalf in
December 1991, and said in an acceptance speech: “Firstly, I know that she
would begin by saying that she accepts the Nobel Prize for Peace not in
her own name but in the name of all the people of Burma.

“She would say that this prize belongs not to her but to all those men,
women and children who, even as I speak, continue to sacrifice their
wellbeing, their freedom and their lives in pursuit of a democratic Burma.
Theirs is the prize and theirs will be the eventual victory in Burma's
long struggle for peace, freedom and democracy.”

The prize came at a high price for the Burmese people, as a frustrated
regime that same year brutally crushed a peaceful demonstration by Rangoon
students who were celebrating the award to Suu Kyi. Many of the arrested
students were thrown into prison to serve sentences of up to 12 years.

The regime denounced the decision of the Nobel Committee to honor Suu Kyi.
The state-run media even went so far as to suggest that the Central
Intelligence Agency had played a role in the decision. The regime’s
twisted logic saw the award as Western interference in Burmese affairs and
Suu Kyi was described as “the darling of the West.”

Francis Sejersted, who headed the Nobel Award Committee, said Suu Kyi had
been chosen for the award because she was “one of the most extraordinary
examples of civil courage in Asia in recent decades.” Nevertheless, the
award had its critics, within and outside Burma.

Suu Kyi entered politics after returning to Burma from London in 1988 to
nurse her ailing mother Khin Kyi. She was drawn into the tumultuous events
of that year, and in 1989 the regime placed her under house arrest.

In just a few months she had become a figurehead. Her first public speech
at Rangoon’s Shwedagon Pagoda drew hundreds of thousands of people who
know her only as the daughter of Burma’s independence hero Aung San.

Three years after that first venture into Burmese politics, Suu Kyi was
awarded the Nobel Prize. It is fair to ask what she had done to deserve
it.

One prominent European statesman played a key role in the Nobel Peace
Prize Committee’s decision. Former Czech President Vaclav Havel, a staunch
supporter of the Burmese democracy movement, nominated Suu Kyi for the
award.

In an interview in 2001 with The Irrawaddy’s correspondent Min Zin, Havel
described Suu Kyi as a friend and said she deserved the prize because of
her non-violent struggle for democracy.

Havel said dialogue and national reconciliation were the best options in
breaking Burma’s political impasse. Today, his country, the Czech
Republic, continues to play a leading role in Europe in promoting Burma’s
cause. (It’s ironic that Havel recently expressed his disappointment at
Obama’s decision to put off a meeting with Dalai Lama until after a
US-China summit.)

The critics who once questioned the Nobel Peace Committee’s decision in
1991 to award the Peace Prize to Suu Kyi now quietly admit that she did
indeed deserve it. They recognize her principled commitment to fight for
democratic change in Burma and see how she has inspired many at home and
abroad as a symbol of democratic struggle in the international arena.

Still, some argue that because of the Nobel Peace Prize, Suu Kyi’s
non-violent struggle places her in a straightjacket because she has to
refrain from calling for the downfall of the current regime.

Yet it must be said that the award of the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize to Suu
Kyi gave the Burmese people hope, boosted their morale and the struggle
for democratic change.

Whatever the doubts that Suu Kyi will live to see the changes she dreams
of, she definitely plays a key role in pushing for a peaceful transition
of power in Burma and injecting a theme of dialogue in the often violent
and vicious Burmese political culture.

In the years since 1991, Suu Kyi has shown the world that she did indeed
deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. Now, President Obama faces a huge test of
his own. He has to convince critics that the medal is not for show but for
achievement.

The US president is in illustrious company—the Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu
and other great names—who all share more than a place on the Nobel roll of
honor. They are all additionally bound by their regard and support for a
woman who has met the highest Nobel standards—Aung San Suu Kyi.

____________________________________
STATEMENT

October 13, Asian Human Rights Commission
Misuse of law to imprison man who complained about electricity supply
(AHRC-STM-214-2009)

Last week the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) issued an urgent appeal
on the case of a man in Burma who has been imprisoned as a consequence of
making repeated complaints about electricity supply and other poor
services in his neighbourhood of Rangoon. The complainant, U Khin Maung
Kyi, 45, in August had called the township electricity supply office over
problems with the service to his house. He had argued with the staff on
the phone. Thereafter, officials brought a security bond order against
him. But because there is already a criminal case pending, he was
imprisoned instead of being released on the bond. (The full details of the
case are in the appeal:
AHRC-UAC-133-2009 <http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2009/3284/>.)

The case deserves our attention not because it is particularly bad--in
comparison to many other cases in Burma it is not--but because it is
indicative of how in a perverted system of law and government
administration any law can be used for any purpose, including to jail a
man whose so-called crime was merely to have been an annoyance to
government personnel.

The law under which Khin Maung Kyi has been jailed is the 1961 Restriction
and Bond Act. Under that act, if the authorities have credible information
that a person or persons are likely to commit a criminal offence, they can
apply for a good behaviour bond to be placed on the person or persons. The
types of offences for which the act is envisaged are listed under its
section 3. They include housebreaking, theft, robbery, procurement,
criminal intimidation, destroying railway lines or bridges, arms offences,
endangering law and order, or abetment of such crimes.

The list is rather long and some of the offences, including the
last--under which Khin Maung Kyi was accused--are ambiguous. In any event,
it is clear that the making of repeated telephone calls to a government
office does not constitute grounds for the issuance of an order. That this
is the case is all the more obvious when considering the contents of the
Courts Manual. The manual makes strenuously clear to judges that rumours
of possible offences are not satisfactory grounds for issuing these
orders. Judges have a special obligation to check that the facts are
credible. It states in section 376(1) of chapter XVI that:

"No person should be called upon to give security except under credible,
clear and substantial information. Although a police report is credible
information, Magistrates must not take action too readily upon such
reports..."

The manual and later the 1961 act were both introduced at a time that the
courts in Burma were still functioning according to legal principles
rather than the policy-directives of a military regime.
Therefore they do not consider explicitly a case like that made against a
man who merely had the affrontery to complain about his electricity
supply. They also both presume that a judge will act more or less
according to the concept of a judge that once existed: that of a judicial
officer rather than an executive officer in judicial garb. The absurdity
of the current case speaks to the vast gap that now exists between the
notion of a judge in Burma of the past and the one of the present.

A further disturbing feature of the case is that the form on which the
order for the bond made against Khin Maung Kyi was prepared had been
filled out beforehand. Only the sections for his name, the date and the
signature of the judge were filled out on the day of the order.
This suggests two things: that this court is giving out these orders
frequently enough that its officials find it expedient to fill out the
necessary documentation in batches; and, that the actual circumstances of
each order do not matter. Anyone looking at the bond orders for this court
would find that the grounds for the orders are the same.

There is no way to identify the specific grounds for the orders and
therefore there is no need for "credible, clear and substantial"
information on which to obtain them. Any official wanting to restrict or
deny someone his or her liberty can front up at the court and have an
order issued as a formality.

In this manner, the court is not only endorsing police and executive
officials' decisions to restrict the already limited freedoms of citizens
in Burma; it is actively encouraging them to continue to make baseless
requests of the same type. This has effects for the system as a whole. It
reassures the police that they need not be serious and diligent in any of
their work. They can front up to trial without evidence and get
convictions. They can cajole and buy their way through anything.

Although the problems in U Khin Maung Kyi's case are indicative of
features of the legal system in Burma that will not be addressed until the
country experiences considerable political change, the Supreme Court could
issue detailed guidelines about the use of the 1961 Restriction and Bond
Act so as to prevent these types of glaring abuses. The guidelines should
stipulate the types of circumstances under which such orders can and
cannot be issued and reinforce the responsibility of the judge to conduct
a genuine enquiry when he or she receives a request for an order of this
sort. These guidelines would not of course solve any of the deeper
systemic problems that underlie the present case, but could at least serve
to prevent the needless imprisonment of a few more people like Khin Maung
Kyi, and in the process may help to ameliorate the worst effects of the
abuse of security bonds on other parts of Burma's already profoundly
damaged legal system.

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional
non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues
in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.