‘The Government Cannot Control the Military – So Far the Human Rights Situation Is Getting Worse’: Ko Han Gyi, Coordinator of ND-Burma

[we have been] at the Burma border for a long time. At that time, in Burma there was the military regime, so most of the democracy groups, human rights groups, were based on the Thai-Burma border where they established women, youth and issue-based organisations. [ND-Burma was founded] in order to establish a human rights network. ND-Burma has two main goals in the short term; we advocate for [improving] the human rights situation in Burma and document information we receive [from the members]. In the future, when we pass the transition period, we can use our information to seek justice, truth, with transitional justice mechanisms.

For focus, our goals, we have three main programs. One is capacity building, which means we conduct human rights documentation training for the field researchers who are practically collecting information on the ground. When we receive the information from them we put it into the Martus database system. Based on our information and our analysis, we decide to release the output like the periodic report [about the human rights situation]. Sometimes we release thematic reports based on an issue like torture, extortion, and human rights violations related to the election. We then advocate to the international community as well as the politicians, MPs, policy makers and people inside Burma. Before the country started opening up, we mainly focused advocacy to the international community. After the country opened in 2011, we started to think about advocacy inside.

Q: How have you seen the human rights situation change over the years that you have been working with ND-Burma?

Not really changed. Last year some ethnic armed groups signed the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) and after that the armed conflict escalated more in the northern part of Shan State. Before this [happened], we could see conflict only between the Burma Army and the ethnic armed groups, but after they signed the ceasefire agreement (NCA), the armed conflict started to change; even the ethnic armed groups [are now] fighting each other, like the TNLA (Ta’ang National Liberation Army) and the RCSS/SSA (Restoration Council of Shan State/Shan State Army). So, the pattern of the armed conflict has escalated and changed there, and in this conflict situation there are more human rights violations; they are mostly committed by the Burmese army, but at the same time the ethnic armed groups have committed some crimes. We can see clearly when the TNLA and RCSS fight each other who are responsible for those violations.

Q: Can you describe some of the challenges that the field researchers face when collecting this human rights data?

Most of the human rights violations are committed by the Burma Army so when the [Burma Army] soldiers see our people, the field researcher with the recent information related to the human rights violations, he or she will get tortured and arbitrary arrest [happens]. Then they can get a sentence, a long prison sentence. In the fighting area, it’s really dangerous, and personal security is very high risk; they can be tortured and nearly killed, and also [there are] some oppressive laws like Unlawful Associations Act for instance. So, according to this act the military or authority who suspects that the people are connected to the ethnic armed groups, they can do anything they want. These kinds of laws are also dangerous for our people. And also [regarding] the human rights violations committed by the ethnic armed groups, if we document a case in their area it’s also dangerous for our people. So, we always consider… whoever committed the crimes, they [the field researchers] always consider for security first.

Q: How do these challenges affect the data?

Most of our people, they have a lot of experience, so sometimes if they feel that it is dangerous to document a case, they keep quiet until they are outside of that area. However, they have some contact with the victims, the witnesses, the survivors, so when the situation allows, they try to conduct the interview or document [the case] with them. So that’s why we have safety first with the information from the field researchers.

Q: How would you describe the current human rights situation in Burma?

In our latest report, because armed conflict escalated in the ethnic areas and especially in the northern part of Shan State and Kachin State, that’s why the human rights violations increased when we compare with last year. There is even one case from the Mon State where the military, Tatmadaw, killed two innocence people, so even in the ceasefire area, when the military is stationed in the ethnic areas, they commit crimes. And in the ethnic conflict area, they can do even more.

We can see that most of the cases are torture and killings related to torture. Mostly they [perpetrators] are the military persons, soldiers; they see the people near the military post, or near the fighting area, so they suspect [links to armed organisations] and ask [questions]; firstly they arrest the villagers and then ask for information. Sometimes they suspect they are related to the ethnic armed groups and they start to torture to get some information. Sometimes the villagers give false information, they are forced to confess by the torture and sometimes [they are] killed. For example, in this case where five villagers were killed near Lashio, they [perpetrators] were [Burma Army] soldiers and they suspected that these villagers were in ethnic armed groups and then they killed them. Also in Myitkina, the [Burma Army] soldiers killed a university student, a Kachin university student, so they kill [civilians] even in the urban area, not only in the rural area in the Kachin State.

Q: In any of those cases are the perpetrators being brought to justice?

 We do not hear any cases of perpetrators being brought to justice because in most of the cases, even [when] the villagers complain to the military or the cases are raised by the CSOs, civil society or community leaders, the military says they bring the perpetrators to the military court and they investigate every case. But most of the civil society groups and the community leaders want all the perpetrators put in civil courts; now they do not know about the military court’s decision or the military court’s investigation. But on rare occasion we can see a case like with the five villagers who were killed near Lashio; for the first time the military confessed that the soldiers killed them and the military court is investigating this case.

Q: Have you seen any of the violations or anything change since the NLD-led Government came to power?

Not really changed, because the military, the position of the military is still strong because according to the 2008 Constitution, they can have 25% of the seating in the Parliament plus they can appoint the vice-President and important positions in the government. And also in the military operated area, there is the military trial impunity, so whenever they have committed crimes civilians do not know about the justice or what will happen with the perpetrator. So they are enjoying impunity, and also according to the constitution, they can have the impunity. So even though the [NLD-led] government took office in April this year, the government cannot control the military; so far the human rights situation is getting worse. And also the position of the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission, they are not a liable organisation to investigate the cases. And also they are not a fully independent organisation, so the human rights violations are increasing in the country. So, I think the National Human Rights Commission also needs to be amended.

Q: What other measures do you think need to be taken to end the impunity?

I think whoever commit crimes they have to be responsible for the case. So for example if the military, their soldiers commit crimes, they have to be responsible for those cases and also they need to be put in civilian courts to be investigated and for trial and then other civilians know the case and their judgement for the perpetrator.

Q: What is your view about the peace process currently? 

 Currently, recently the 21st Century Peace Conference was finished so I think it’s the beginning of the restart of the peace process again from the previous regime. However, in this conference three armed groups could not join the conference and also most of the participants could only submit a paper for what they want in the future, so it is the beginning of this stage and also they couldn’t decide anything. But we can see more about the process in the future because the conference, it’s not a one-time conference, they announced [they will hold it] once every six months. So, I think for the groups who couldn’t join the conference this time, they will have the opportunity to join next time. But also civil society groups couldn’t join as much as they wanted and also women’s groups. So, I think that to solve all the problems in the country, all the actors should participate in the peace process.

Q: Are there any other aspects, except inclusiveness, that they should follow to find a solution and achieve genuine peace?

All the parties from the civil society groups [should be included]. For instance, in the previous conference, we could not hear about the women’s issue, human rights issue or how to deal with the past, and some participants just proposed what they want. So far it’s like the ethnic armed groups want a kind of federalism, they want a security sector reform (SSR) and there is not much [talk] about human rights violations, land problems, or women’s issues, including also refugees’ and IDPs’ return. So that’s why in such an important event, all of the civil society groups who push the human rights issue, land issue, women’s issue and also transitional justice issue; they should be included in this process. When they can participate 100% with their findings, it’s easier to find a solution. Not only there are two sides, the government and the ethnic armed groups, but also more civil society groups should participate in this process.

Q: Can you say more about how do you see the role of transitional justice in the peace process?

We cannot say too much, but under the previous regime led by President Thein Sein, before they left from the government they also held the national peace conference [Union Peace Conference]. At the time the one topic they discussed was development, including developments for the refugee if they go back to their area. Starting with the Thein Sein regime, and, so far during the peace process, neither side has talked about how to deal with the past. Both sides have a misunderstanding about transitional justice (TJ) and they think about it as an accountability issue. But it is not only for criminal justice, alternatively we can work for TJ as reparations, memorialisation, truth telling, institutional reform and so on. We need to relieve their worries about the TJ issue.

Now clearly the military is in a very strong position and so far, we cannot talk too much about justice or accountability because most of the perpetrators are still in the military, and former military officers are in the Parliament, cabinet and government bodies. So at this time we can do like a preparations program for the victims who suffered a lot during the civil war and also for former political prisoners. Nowadays, we can see some former political prisoner groups are implementing limited support activities such as health and education for former political prisoners and their families.

And also we can have some kind of memorialisation and education activities to the young generation. For instance, last year the 88 Generation committee they started to open the 88 museum in Rangoon, so more or less they can collect and exhibit some of the materials related to the 1988 uprising, and during the NLD government, the Minister of Religious Affairs promised them to help in the construction of the museum. So some things are in progress, related to the TJ issues. At the same time, truth seeking process is raised in the ethnic areas, led by local influential religious leaders, community leader and CSOs.

 

Q: You already mentioned about the repatriation that they are planning with the refugees from the border, how do you think about the timing, is it time for refugees to go back?

I think that we need more time to assess, so firstly for the refugee people if they do not want to go back, we shouldn’t push them, so refugee repatriation/return should be a voluntary return. And before they return to their area we should guarantee for their security, like demining, security for their livelihood, and their land. Now the situation is more complicated, and after they [refugees] moved away from their area new people have settled in their area and are using their land, so if they come back there will be more conflict again between these two communities as well. We need to come to assess the situation first and then systematically wait for their return. So, when we talk about the repatriation/return, also the land restitution for the refugees and IDPs is very important. If they do not have land, they cannot survive, they cannot sustain their livelihood.

Q: Recently on the border international donors have moved their funds increasingly inside and towards the central government. How do you see this and do you think the donors should still be supporting border based groups?

Yes [they should support], because border based groups are also working on many issues like with migrants and refugees, for instance the Mae Tao Clinic (MTC); not only migrants and people who are on the border rely on the MTC, but also people from inside arrive in this clinic. And also migrant education, and some groups working on refugee [issues], if they do not have secure funding then they cannot support [these populations]. Now I heard that some areas in northern Shan State and Kachin State also suffer from lack of funding to support the refugees [IDPs] as well, [because] the international community and donors shifted their funds. They should not only focus on the inside. And during the President Thein Sein regime, most of the international community, western countries, supported the peace process, but it is only for the government side, not for the ethnic groups or the CSOs working on these issues.

Q: How do you think the international community could support the peace process to achieve peace?

International community has supported the peace process since previous President Thein Sein government such as with funding, technical assistance. However, international community can’t monitor, especially the previous government, how they used the support.

During the peace process, role of CSOs is also important for monitoring the ceasefire and following the code of conduct, documenting the human rights violations conducted by military and armed groups, and bringing humanitarian assistance for IDPs, so international community should give support to CSOs, which are working in conflict affected areas and the peace process. Lack of justice, impunity and ignorance of victims’ and survivors’ experiences can’t achieve national reconciliation and sustainable peace, therefore, international community should make sure the voices of the victims are reflected in the peace process.

Q: Is there any message that you would like to give to the international community?

As the NLD won the election by landslide and took the office in April 2016, international community think that there has been a restoration of democracy and human rights. In fact, the military is still in a strong position; according to the constitution they can have 25% of the seats in the parliament, appoint vice-president and important posts in the cabinet. During Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s visit to the USA recently she also pointed out that 80% of the retired military officers are in the Government so there is a long way to democracy.

In the country there are many important things to do like amend the constitution, repeal the repressive laws, [achieve] internal peace and national reconciliation. Therefore, the international community still needs to give support for the reform process.

Q: What would be your message to the NLD-led Government?

As soon as the NLD government took office, we could see some positive signs like they released political prisoners and they repealed some oppressive laws, so that is good. But they need to work more to decrease the human rights violations and also abolish the oppressive laws more, like the Unlawful Association Act. Recently they abolished some oppressive laws in the Parliament. And also according to our information, most of the [human rights abuse] cases are torture and killings that are related to the torture, so the government should ratify the convention against torture and follow up with action. The NLD-led Government [should] more engage with CSOs and let them have more space to re-build the country in all arenas.

Now is the right time to build the trust and national reconciliation process. The NLD-led Government [should] announce that [they] acknowledge the suffering of victims of human rights violations in the past and present committed by previous regimes and the military, and start to initiate the reparation program for the victims and survivor who have been violated.

Q: How do you think they can give more space to the civil society to participate?

Sometimes the civil society groups can meet with the government officials, MPs in Naypyidaw, because most of the government officers and the MPs who are former political prisoners, they can listen to what we request. Similarly, in other areas the government should cooperate with the civil society to have meetings and consultations on some issues and also when the government has important events like the peace conference, they [should] allow most of the civil society groups to participate in the peace process.

Q: Is there anything that you would like to say more about your experiences or the issues we have discussed?

Even when I was in the ABSDF, sometimes I worked for the documentation and researched the government [actions], and at the time we collected information about forced labour, killings, committed by the government. At the time it was the military regime, so since then I have understood ‘the human rights situation is bad in Burma so we need to work on this issue.’ When I quit from the ABSDF I had a chance to work with human rights organisation like HREIB (Human Rights Education Institute of Burma) and continue to learn about transitional justice issue through trainings, workshops and exchange programs.

[…]

Before the country started to open, most of the border based groups conducted a number of trainings about human rights and transitional justice, so most of the people who are based on the border know about it. But when the country opened up after 2011, some of the organisations started to educate such kind of knowledge to the people inside but it’s still not enough, especially in the ethnic area. We can see that when human rights violations are committed by the military, local influential religious leaders or community leaders raise the issue for seeking the truth, seeking justice. But if the victims and the community had more knowledge about transitional justice then they could work more effectively; they [would] know who they should complain to, they would know how to gather the evidence of the case and which institute to present it to. If they had more knowledge about this, they could seek the truth and justice for the victims. So, we need this kind of capacity building in the ethnic communities as well as in the communities in the central areas, because in some central areas, we can see a lot of land grabbing and a lot of land confiscation. So, we need more capacity building, not only for the community leaders and the community, but also we should have human rights and TJ awareness for Burma Army and [ethnic] armed groups. When they understand well about human rights and TJ issue, we can include how to deal with the past in the peace process; TJ is not only for criminal justice, but alternatively we can work for reparations, truth and institutional reform.

[/fusion_separator]

Burma Link interviewed Ko Han Gyi in September 2016.