Genocide in Burma

“Last year I was in Rwanda, where western governments failed to name genocide for what it was. After Rwanda,the international community once again declared "Never again", but in Burma it is never again, all over again.”
(Lord Alton, House of Lords, parliament debate)

Genocide is the world most horrible human rights problem. It killed millions of people during the past decades, especially 1.5 million Armenians, 3 million Ukrainians, 6 million Jews, 250,000 Gypsies, 6 million Slavs, 25 million Russians, 25 million Chinese, 1 million Ibos, 1.5 million Bengalis, 200,000 Guatemalans, 1.7 million Cambodians, 500,000 Indonesians, 200,000 East Timorese, 250,000 Burundians, 500,000 Ugandans, 2 million Sudanese, 800,000 Rwandans, 2 million North Koreans, 10,000 Kosovars. Most of the cases were committed by the government. When those in power are wrong, it has become a threat to its own people.

The origin of the concept called ‘Genocide’ is the 1944 work by Raphael Lemkin on Axis Rule in Occupied Europe:
“[ ] This new word….is made from the ancient Greek word genos (race, tribe) and the Latin cide (killing)……aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves [ ]" (Lemkin, 1944:79)


According to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted by Resolution 260 III A of the UN Assembly on 9th December 1948, Genocide can be defined as
“[ ] any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group” (Article II)

The Convention also categorized the punishable acts as
· Genocide;
· Conspiracy to commit genocide;
· Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
· Attempt to commit genocide;
· Complicity in genocide. (Article III)

As Genocide was mostly committed by the rulers, the Convention clearly identified the enforcement in Article IV as “Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals”. In fact, Genocide affects not only the victims of the national groups but also the international community in a contemporary world.

As Pellet argued,
“[ ] Genocide threatens the international society as a whole, the very basis of the Still fragile international community” (Pellet, 1999:427)


In the case of Burma, although it ratified the Convention in 1956, the current military regime has adopted Genocide as a terror against the ethnic national groups of Karen, Karenni and Shan people, etc. and the evidences were well-documented in the resources of

• Rogers, Benedict (2004) “ A Land Without Evil: Stopping the Genocide of Burma’s Karen People”;
  

• Horton, Guy (2005) “ Dying Alive: A legal Assessment of the Human Rights Violations in Burma”;
  

• Rummel, R. (2001) “Saving Lives, Enriching Life” Pg.18-22; and so on.
  

As the ‘Genocide Acts” of Burmese military regime were obvious, Baroness Cox, Chief Executive of Humanitarian Aids Relief Thrust (HART) and a deputy speaker of the British House of Lords, who has visited the regions of Karenni, Shan and Karen people many times, called on the international community to investigate claims of genocide and crimes against humanity.

In his work of “A Desperate situation: Genocide in Burma”, Browning also mentioned that the torching of villages, destruction of food stores and crops, theft of livestock and property, extra-judicial killings and rape were every day occurrences affecting hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. (Browning, 2002)

Moreover, Guy Horton's claimed for the usage of the concept 'genocide' in relation to Burma rests on the 1948 Genocide Convention, ratified by Burma in 1956 as
“According to the convention, the genocide is described as 'deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part'. There are over a million people internally displaced in Burma and more than 2,500 villages in eastern Burma have been destroyed since 1996”
(Horton, 2005)

Furthermore, according to the Muslim aid report of “Rohingya faces genocide in Burma”, it was mentioned as
“Extermination and genocide increased, and within nearly 4 decades about half (1.5 million) of total Rohingya population had been forced to flee their homeland and those remaining in the country are counting their days in utter misery, fear and frustration”(Muslim Aid, Al-Jamiat Journal, 2002)

In conclusion, I would like to appeal the international community not to ignore the “Genocide practices” committed by the Military Regime in Burma and take actions against the international criminals in accordance with the international law.

Khin Ma Ma Myo (19/03/2006)

Burma: An Illicit Drug Producer

“Burma is the world’s second largest producer of illicit opium and the second largest cultivation of opium poppy. Burma remains the primary source of amphetamine-type of stimulants in Asia”
(US office of National Drug Control Policy)

Illicit drug is a global problem that involved production, trading and consumption that lead to various social and economic consequences from international trade to individual level. As Burma is a well-known drug producer in the world, I would like to emphasize its production and consequences on a global scale.


In 1998, the UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on drugs set a global target to eliminate or significantly reduce the cultivation of opium poppy by year 2008 (Political Declaration, General Assembly 20th special session, 10th June 1998)


Generally, the illicit drug can be categorized as

• Drugs that are produced or processed from natural plant products such as opium poppy, opium, morphine and heroin.

• Synthetically produced illicit drugs such as amphetamine and

• Psychoactive pharmaceutical drugs that become illicit as a result of being diverted from licit uses or purposes

According to the US Office of National Drug Control policy as I stated above, it is obvious that Burma produced a large scale of the first two categories of illicit drugs, i.e. opium poppy cultivation, opium production, heroin and amphetamine.


In 2004, the cultivation of opium poppy in the world was 195,940 hectares in total and the top cultivation countries include Afghanistan (131000 hectares), Burma (44200 hectares) and Lao PDR (6600 hectares). It means that 23% of the world opium poppy was cultivated in Burma under the military regime.


Similarly, the production of opium in metric tones was 4850 metric tons in total and the top production countries include Afghanistan (4200), Burma (370), Lao PDR (43). In short, 8% of the world opium was produced in Burma under the current SPDC regime.


With the 2004 price level, the 370 metric tones produced in Burma worth 87 US$ millions As estimated by the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), the turnover of the illicit drug trade was approximately the same size as the international trade in textiles, oil and gas and world tourism on a global scale, and these criminal financial flows and money laundering threatens the integrity of banks and other financial institutions. In Burma, the military regime not only allows the production of opium, but also approves the drug lords to open banks and financial institutions.


For the Amphetamine-type stimulants such as Amphetamine, methamphetamine and ecstasy, Burma was reported as an origin of methamphetamine in 2003 (UNODC, Annual reports). The World Drug report (2005) clearly stated that the overall market of Thailand methamphetamine market declined after a major crackdown on imports from neighboring Burma.


As a result, it can be claimed that Burma is a serious drug problem area among all the source countries and Drug Transit zones.



As production is the first stage in a series of drug problems, effectiveness of anti-drug policies will depend on the elimination of the cultivation. Illicit drug trade is a chain between the cultivation, production and consumption so that the drug policies in South East Asia should focus on Burma as the starting point of the global drug problem.


While the SPDC regime were doing a lot of drug burning ceremonies for Public Relations stunt in front of the diplomats and drug control officials, some ceasefire groups with the SPDC regime were cultivating opium in their areas. In 1997-1998, the UWSA (United Wa State Army) was granted permission by the government to grow opium for another five years (Irrawaddy, Vol. 9, No.5, 2001). While the SPDC ministers were attending the International Drug Control meetings, the former drug lords were doing a lot of companies and financial institutions in Burma. It clearly proves that SPDC is behind the production of opium in Shan State and the money laundering activities of these businesses on a national scale.


Indeed, SPDC is also responsible for the illicit drug trade across the border as well. Yawd Sark, SSA South leader mentioned as
“The Wa People are just scapegoats. The benefits go to the Chinese businessmen and the SPDC. How can the Wa send drugs to Bangkok?” (TNI, 2003)


It is clear that without the involvement and assistance of SPDC regime, it will be very difficult to smuggle the drugs across the border to Thailand.


In conclusion, I would like to appeal to the international community to investigate the transnational crimes committed by the Burmese Regime to eliminate the cultivation, production and trafficking of drugs and money laundering activities.

Khin Ma Ma Myo (2/04/2006)

International Criminal Court and Burma

“Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which rights and freedoms set forth in the Declaration can be fully realized” .....

(Article 28, Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

According to the universal Declaration of Human Rights, 52 millions of people are entitled to an international order for their freedom and civil and political rights. They have been living under the military regime in a situation where injustice becomes law. Otherwise, they have been under the international criminals for more than four decades. Now it should be a time to call the international community to be brought Burma’s case to the attention of International Criminals Court (ICC).

On 17 July 1998, 120 nations voted to adopt the Rome Statue of International Criminal Court (ICC). Four years later, this statue entered into force. The ICC is established as a permanent court with complementary back up jurisdiction, located in The Hague, the Netherlands. The international Criminal Court composed of four organs, i.e.
(a) The Presidency
(b) The Chambers
(c) The office of the Prosecutor and
(d) The Registry.

In general, the court has jurisdiction with respect to the four types of crimes.

• The crime of genocide

• Crimes against humanity

• War Crimes

• The Crime of aggression.

Among them, the crime of genocide and crimes against humanity were committed by the current military regime of Burma on a national scale.For Genocide, Article 6 of Rome Statue repeated the Article 2 of the Genocie Convention, i.e.

'any of the following acts committed with intent to destoy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, such as:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group”

For Crimes against humanity, Article 7 of Rome Statue defined as _
“Any of the acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of attack:
(a) Murder;
(b) Extermination
(c) Enslavement
(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population
(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
(f) Torture
(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collective on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender
(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;
(j) The crime of apartheid
(k) Other inhuman acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious

injury to body or to mental or physical health.

Undoubtedly, it is clear that the current officials from military regime have committed these crimes with mens rea (i.e. intentionally, and with knowledge of the likely consequences) because genocide and crimes against humanity were used as the weapons of war against the ethnic minorities and members of the opposition groups. These were well documented in the reports of

• “School for Rape: The Burmese Military and Sexual Violence” by Earth Rights international (1998)

• “License to Rape” by Shan Women Actions Network (2002)

• “System of Impunity: Nationwide patterns of Sexual Violence by the Military Regime’s Army and Authorities in Burma” by Women’s League of Burma (2004)

• “ A Land Without Evil: Stopping the Genocide of Burma’s Karen People”; by Rogers, Ben (2004)

• “ Dying Alive: A legal Assessment of the Human Rights Violations in Burma”, by Horton, Guy (2005)

• “Saving Lives, Enriching Life” Pg.18-22 by Rummel, R. (2001); and so on.

The most direct mechanism for triggering the power to investigate these international crimes is under Article 13(b), where by a ‘situation’ is referred to the prosecutor by the Security Council acting pursuant to Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The Court cannot acquire jurisdiction without the Security Council resolution unless the conduct in question occurred on the territory of a state which is party to the Statue or else suspect is a national of a state which is party to the Statue.

Alternatively, the prosecutor may initiate investigations ‘proprio motu’ (on his own or her initiative) and seek evidences from states, UN agencies and other reliable resources. In this case, a pre-trial division of the Court must examine the evidence, hear jurisdiction objection, and decide whether to authorize ‘the commencement of the investigation’. The prosecutor’s special investigative powers cannot be engaged unless or until the pre-trial division rules that there is a prima facie case, ‘a reasonable bias to proceed’

The ICC can issue a warrant for arrest if the prosecutor demonstrates ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ complicity in crime. Suspects must be transported to The Hague and surrendered into the custody of the court.

In conclusion, I would like to appeal to UN Security Council to put Burma issues in an agenda and refer to the prosecutor of International Criminal Court to precede the legal actions against the criminal officials of SPDC regime.

Khin Ma Ma Myo (9/04/2006)

Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association

“Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. No one may be compelled to belong to an association”…
(Article20, Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations Assembly in 1988 is the most symbolic central one although the European Convention of 1950 has the most effective machinery. Nevertheless, ‘Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association’ was also defined in Article 11 of the European Convention.

In fact, Freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association are at the heart of fundamental freedoms. These can be called political rights because they form the basis for people's societal influencing and organization. These are also mentioned in the constitutions of democratic countries.

The freedom of assembly is the right to hold meetings indoors or outdoors and to organize demonstrations without interference from the authorities. In section (2) of the Burmese military regime SLORC (later changed to SPDC) order 2/88, it was stated as
“Gathering, walking, marching in processions, chanting slogans, delivering speeches, agitation and creating disturbances on the streets by a group of 5 or more people is banned regardless of whether the act is with the intention of creating disturbance or of committing a crime or not”.

The freedom of association is the connecting bridge between the fundamental freedoms and the economic, social and cultural rights. As a freedom, it ensures the right to establish associations and to join them and resign from them freely. In Burma, under the 1907 (1957) Unlawful Association Act, a lot of democracy activists were detained because it allows for the detention of up to 3 years of anyone who is a member of or assists in any way an unlawful association. In addition, SLORC Order 1/91 stated as
“The conduct of public services personnel remain clear of party politics.”

All these clearly prove the international human rights violations committed by the Burmese military regime.

Not only prohibited by their order, the military regime opened fired on the unarmed demonstrators in uprisings.

Around midnight on 8.8.88, Burmese military arrived at the central protests and opened fire on the people who were peacefully doing the protests. But it did not end the uprisings in Burma.

Again on 18.9.88, the military gunned down thousands of students and demonstrators and proclaimed the dawn of a new government: SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council).

These were the August and September massacres. The soldiers of one country became the murderers to its own civilians instead of protecting the lives and properties of the citizens. How awful!

In conclusion, since 1988, People of Burma have been deprived of the Freedom of Assembly and Association. They have got these rights only for 40 days out of 7470 days. I would like to ask international community to use your freedom for the sake of the human rights of 53 million Burmese people.

Khin Ma Ma Myo (13/8/2006)

In Full Equality to a Fair and Public hearing

“Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him”..........
(Article 10, Universal Declaration of Human Rights)



Human Rights violations in Burma are mostly in the category of violations resulting from actions, policies and legislation on the part of government. As Burmese people are not living in a law-governed society, they do not have the rights of equality to a fair and public hearing. The worst victims of these violations are students, members of the political parties, monks and journalists.

The use of public trials is essential for any governments for integrity of the judicial process. The basic aim of public trial is to help ensure a fair trial and protect the accused from abuse of criminal process. A public trial may also facilitate accurate fact-finding and encouraging witnesses to tell the truth. In addition, the public has a right to know how justice is administered, and what decisions are reached by the judicial system. So governments all over the world have the judicial process with public trials and there are only some regimes that have violated the Article (10) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Burmese SPDC regime is one of them!


Hundreds of individual cases of these Article (10) violations by SPDC Regime were well documented in the reports of _
· Oo, Win Naing (1996) Cries from Insein, All Burma Students’ Democratic Front
· ABSDF (1996) Pleading Not Guilty in Insein
· AAPP (2001) Spirit for Survival and so on.


Imagine if one were arrested in midnight, tortured for months, taken to the prison’s military court and sentenced to 7 years or more prison sentence, could we call it as justice? The Human Rights claimed ‘everyone is entitled’; however, for the Burmese people, ‘no Burmese is entitled’.


Under the SPDC regime, ‘Being Burmese’ has become ‘automatically being lost of human rights’. ‘Being Burmese’ has become ‘subjected to arrests without warrant, cruel tortures, unfair trials and living behind bars’. In fact, ‘Being Burmese’ means ‘living with fear’. Injustice acts have been taking place in the whole judicial process.


To overcome these, there may be one solution. There is a well-known saying that ‘When Injustice becomes law, Resistance becomes duty’. I believe that we shall stop these injustice acts by means of the People Resistance to the dictatorship government that made us to be deprived of human rights.

Khin Ma Ma Myo (20/8/2006)