Dr Zarni (Speaker) Dr Munir Majid (Chair)

To mark International Human Rights Day, people from the Burmese community, North Korean community and many supporters are standing together to call for justice and freedom in both countries. Burma Campaign UK and Christian Solidarity Worldwide have organised a demonstration today in front of the Chinese embassy in order to ask the Chinese government to use their influence on both countries responsibly.

Since last year’s so-called election in Burma, many people consider that the country’s situation has improved and changed. In reality, little has changed, considering that there are more rapes, murders and conflicts in ethnic areas. Most political prisoners remain in prison.

In North Korea, there are more than 200,000 political prisoners locked away in several prison camps all over the country with terrible conditions and slave labour. Many children have been born in those prison camps and branded as criminals. North Korea is known as the country with the world’s worst human rights record.

“It is very important to remember that there are many human rights abuses happening in Burma and North Korea. People in both countries have known little freedom and basic human rights. The Chinese government should recognise those facts and use their influence responsibly to stop those terrible human rights abuses,” said Wai Hnin, Campaigns Officer from Burma Campaign UK.

Benedict Rogers, East Asia Team Leader at Christian Solidarity Worldwide, said, "The human rights violations perpetrated by the regimes in North Korea and Burma rank among the worst in the world. Both regimes stand accused of crimes against humanity. For that reason, as we remember the 63rd anniversary of the establishment of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the international community should take action to end the reign of terror in North Korea and Burma, seek the release of all prisoners of conscience, an end to slave labour, torture, rape and killings in both countries. China’s influence on both North Korea and Burma is significant, and therefore we are appealing to China to use its influence responsibly, and urge both regimes to stop their crimes against humanity."

HRDP 

သမၼတဦးသိန္းစိန္ အစိုးရသစ္ လက္ထက္တြင္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈမ်ား ယခင္အစိုးရေဟာင္းနည္းတူ ဆက္လက္က်ဴးလြန္ေနလွ်က္ရွိေၾကာင္း လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးကာကြယ္ျမႇင့္တင္သူမ်ားကြန္ယက္ (HRDP) က ေျပာသည္။ 

ဧရာဝတီတို္င္းေဒသႀကီး၊ ဘိုကေလးၿမိဳ႕ေပၚတြင္ HRDP အဖြဲ႕မွ ယေန႔က်င္းပျပဳလုပ္သည့္ (၆၃) ႀကိမ္ေျမာက္ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးေန႔ အထိမ္းအမွတ္အခမ္းအနား သဘာပတိမိန္႔ခြန္းတြင္ ယခုကဲ့သုိ႔ ေျပာၾကားလိုက္ျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။ 

“ယခုက ဒီမိုကေရစီစနစ္လို႔ ေျပာေနတဲ့အတြက္ ဘယ္လိုပဲျဖစ္ျဖစ္ ဒီမိုကေရစီစနစ္ဟာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးကို လက္ခံရပါမယ္၊ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးရွိသင့္တယ္၊ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးနဲ႔ပတ္သက္တာေတြ မရွိဘူးဆိုရင္ ဒီမိုကေရစီအစိုးရ မျဖစ္ႏိုင္ဘူးလို႔ ေျပာခ်င္ပါတယ္” ဟု အခမ္းအနားသဘာပတိအျဖစ္ ေဆာင္ရြက္သူ ဦးေမာင္ေမာင္ေလးက ေျပာသည္။ 

အစိုးရသစ္တရပ္အေနျဖင့္ ယခင္အစိုးလက္ထပ္ကတည္းက လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈမ်ားကို ခ်က္ခ်င္း ရပ္တန္႔ကာ ေနာက္ထပ္ ခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈမ်ားမျဖစ္ေပၚေစရန္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးမ်ားကို အသိမွတ္ျပဳရန္လိုအပ္ၿပီး လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္သည့္ ကိစၥရပ္မ်ားကိုလည္း ကာကြယ္ေပးရမည္ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ဦးေမာင္ေမာင္ေလးက သဘာပတိမိန္႔ခြန္းတြင္ ထည့္သြင္းေျပာၾကားခဲ့သည္။ 

“လယ္ယာေျမကိစၥဆိုရင္ ႏိုင္ငံနဲ႔ အဝွမ္းမွာ နည္းမ်ဳိးစံုနဲ႔ လယ္ယာေျမေတြ သိမ္းပိုက္ခံေနရပါတယ္။ အလုပ္သမားေတြ နားရက္မရွိေအာင္ အလုပ္လုပ္ေနရတာေတြ၊ ဆင္းရဲဒုကၡေတြဟာလည္း အစိုးရေဟာင္းလက္ထက္နဲ႔ သိပ္မကြာေသးပါဘူး။ နယ္စပ္ေဒသေတြက တိုက္ပြဲေတြကေန ဒုကၡသည္ ေသာင္းနဲ႔ခ်ီေမြးထုတ္ေပးေနတာလည္း ျငင္းမရပါဘူး” ဟု ေျပာသည္။ 

ထို႔အျပင္ အေျခခံလူတန္းစားမ်ားအတြက္ ဥပေဒအကာအကြယ္သည္ အေရးတႀကီး လိုအပ္သည့္အျပင္ တရားစီရင္ေရးကိစၥမွာလည္း ဥပေဒရဲ႕ ကာကြယ္ဖိႏွိပ္မႈသည္ စိုးရိမ္စရာေကာင္းလွသည့္ အေျခအေနတြင္ ရွိေနေသးေၾကာင္း သူက ဆက္ေျပာသည္။ 

HRDP အေနျဖင့္ ထုိအခမ္းအနားမ်ဳိးကုိ ၂၀၀၆ ခုႏွစ္တြင္က်ေရာက္သည့္ (၅၈) ႀကိမ္ေျမာက္ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးေန႔မွ စတင္က်င္းပလာခဲ့ရာ ယခုအခါ ဆဌမအႀကိမ္ေျမာက္ က်င္းပျခင္းလည္း ျဖစ္သည္။ ေခါင္းေဆာင္ ဦးျမင့္ေအးမွာ စစ္အစုိးရလက္ထက္ ၂၀၀၈ ခုႏွစ္မွ စ၍ ယေန႔အခ်ိန္ထိ အက်ဥ္းေထာင္ထဲတြင္ မတရားဖမ္းဆီးထားျခင္း ခံေနရသည္။ 

ယခုလက္ရွိ အစိုးရသစ္လက္ထက္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မ်ားႏွင့္ပတ္သက္၍ ယံုၾကည္ခ်က္ရွိသူ၊ လြတ္လပ္စြာ ေဆြးေႏြးစည္း႐ံုးလႈပ္ရွားသူေတြကို ရာဇဝတ္ပုဒ္မမ်ားတပ္ကာ ေထာင္ခ်ထားမႈ၊ ကေလးစစ္သားအသံုးျပဳေနမႈမ်ား၊ တုိင္းရင္းသားေဒသမ်ားတြင္ ထိုးစစ္ဆင္ေနျခင္းမ်ားသည္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးကို မေလးစားရာေရာက္ေၾကာင္း HRDP ေျပာေရးဆုိခြင့္ရွိသူ ကိုေစာဗန္ကူးက ေျပာသည္။ 

“၂၀၁၁ ခုႏွစ္ထဲမွာ ကေလးစစ္သားအမႈ ၄၂ မႈရွိခဲ့တယ္၊ အဲဒီထဲက ကေလးတခ်ဳိ႕ပဲ ျပန္လြတ္လာေသးတ၊ လူထုေတြၾကား လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးဆိုင္ရာ အသိပညာေတြ ဆက္လက္ျပန္႔ပြားဖို႔၊ တည္ၿငိမ္းေအးခ်မ္းတဲ့ ဒီမိုကေရစီႏိုင္ငံ တည္ေဆာက္ေနတယ္ဆိုရင္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးဟာ ဒဂၤါတျပားရဲ႕ ေခါင္း ဒါမွမဟုတ္ ပန္းျဖစ္ေနတဲ့အတြက္ ခြဲလို႔မရဘူး” ဟု သူက ဆက္ေျပာသည္။ 

အဆုိပါ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးေန႔အခမ္းအနားကုိ ဘိုကေလးၿမိဳ႕၊ အမွတ္ (၄) ရပ္ကြက္၊ (၄) လမ္းတြင္ က်င္းပျပဳလုပ္ခဲ့ျခင္းျဖစ္ၿပီး အခမ္းအနားသို႔ ပရိသတ္အျဖစ္ မႏၱေလးတိုင္း၊ ရွမ္းျပည္နယ္၊ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္၊ မေကြတိုင္းႏွင့္ ပဲခူးတိုင္းတုိ႔မွ HRDP အဖြဲ႔၀င္ ၂၀၀ ေက်ာ္ႏွင့္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးစိတ္၀င္စားသူ ေဒသခံျပည္သူ ၂၀၀ ေက်ာ္ တက္ေရာက္ခဲ့ၾကသည္။ 

ယေန႔ျပဳလုပ္သည့္ အခမ္းအနားကို အာဏာပိုင္မ်ားအေနျဖင့္ တစံုတရာ ေႏွာင့္ယွက္ဟန္႔တားမႈမ်ား မရွိခဲ့ေၾကာင္း သိရသည္။

credit here

Teknaf, Bangladesh: The female Rohingya communities from northern Arakan who travel for medical treatment, are facing more difficult in Bangladesh than Burma, said a female patient from Maungdaw.

“We are checking whole body including female private area by Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) female staff while entering to Bangladesh entry point (Teknaf Land port) and Dum Dum Meah check post, for searching drug (Yaba) which come from Burma to Bangladesh).” 

“The Burmese authority didn’t search like this, but the authority searches the female passengers, not private area. If the authority got information, they search everywhere they suspect.”

“Are all the Rohingya communities are drug smugglers, so the authority is going to check all the people who enter the entry point?”

The custom and Immigration officers are also collecting money from Rohingya community who enter into Bangladesh, it is fee or extortion, said a trader who always visit Bangladesh for his business.

“The officers are collecting 200 taka from a passenger while reporting and to get entry permit on their passport.”

While we are going back to our home land, the BGB female personnel again check as same as entry time. Why it is also for drug checking?, said the female patient from Maungdaw.

“BGB female personnel took secretly Taka 10,000 from a female Rohingya from Maungdaw while they were checking when the female didn’t find her money; the passengers asked the BGB personnel to return the money. Then the BGB personnel return the money. It is happen on December 2 at the evening,” said a female passenger from Maungdaw.

“The checking was only for harassment of the Rohingya community who had come to Bangladesh for medical treatment where they are not getting any medical facility in their home land and are not able to travel to Akyab for restriction of movement where they can get the medical facility. It is the life of Rohingya in northern Arakan – no education, no medical, no job, can’t able to marriage freely, no religious freedom, no permit to travel one place to another, force looting their foods grain and etc.”

Credit : Kaladan Press

credit here

By Doug Bandow

 

Assessing the situation in Burma after the Clinton mission.

Dwight Eisenhower went to Korea and Hillary Clinton went to Burma. True, it's not quite the same. Nevertheless, Clinton recent trip was almost as dramatic, coming after Washington's lengthy campaign to isolate the brutal military regime that has been running the impoverished nation since 1962.

Despite well-founded skepticism of the commitment to reform in Naypyidaw -- a city created at great cost apparently in the belief that locating the capital far away from the people would help protect the regime -- President Barack Obama was right to suggest that "After years of darkness, we've seen flickers of progress." The Clinton visit may help spur a reform process capable of ultimately transforming Burma, also known as Myanmar.

There long has been no hope. Although the junta's membership changed over time, its deadly policies did not vary. With equal ruthlessness the regime suppressed the urban democracy movement, symbolized by Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, and battled ethnic guerrillas, such as the Chin, Karen, Shan, and Wa, seeking autonomy in the east. The result has been thousands of political prisoners, hundreds of thousands of refugees in bordering countries, and millions of displaced people within Burma. Tens of millions of Burmese languish in poverty.

The U.S. and Europe tried economic sanctions, but China, India, and most other Asian states felt no compunction about dealing with Naypyidaw. Human rights be damned when there are profits to be made. While the Burmese people suffered, well-connected Burmese elites prospered. And the regime went on doing what it did best: killing, imprisoning, punishing, and oppressing.

Now come "flickers of progress." The election last fall was a fraud, and the new "civilian" government initially seemed little better. However, in recent months some political prisoners have been freed, controls over the media and labor unions have been relaxed, Suu Kyi has met with government officials, and restrictions on her party have been lifted. Equally significant, Burmese leaders seem increasingly nervous about Beijing's tight embrace.

Nevertheless, the reforms might be a façade. And the latest engagement boomlet might fade as have others in the past. Still, so long as the two countries are talking, Washington should promote democracy and individual liberty. And the administration should emphasize Naypyidaw's obligation to end the army's vicious military campaigns against ethnic groups seeking autonomy and related attacks on religious freedom.

Suu Kyi's activities long have captured the West's attention. And she is a worthy symbol of the Burmese people's desperate struggle for liberty. But a variety of ethnic groups have been battling even longer for the autonomy promised them when Britain released its colony to independence. Some, such as the Chin, Karen, Karenni, and Naga, are heavily or largely Christian. While the junta's repression of urban democracy protestors has been brutal, its campaign against ethnic freedom forces has been murderous. The army has routinely conscripted civilians as porters, killed and raped ethnic peoples, destroyed villages and displaced residents, and sown land-mines to create territorial dead zones. Documenting Naypyidaw's depredations against just the Karen and Karenni is the group Christian Freedom International, which has been active in Burma for years.

Beyond these wars, Naypyidaw long has been one of the world's most notorious religious persecutors. According to the latest State Department report on religious liberty, "The government imposed restrictions on certain religious activities and limited freedom of religion." Although members of officially recognized faiths are allowed to worship, "Religious activities and organizations were subject to restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and assembly." The government monitored religious activities and limited public events. Buddhists involved in the 2007 democracy demonstrations continued to suffer severe punishment.

Moreover, added State, "The government also actively promoted Theravada Buddhism over other religions, particularly among ethnic minorities. Christian groups continued to struggle to obtain permission to repair places of worship or build new ones." The regime favored Buddhist institutions in the placement of orphans, and based government and military promotion on adherence to Buddhism.

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom long has rated Burma as a County of Particular Concern. The Commission's latest report warned that the regime "severely restricts religious practice, monitors the activity of all religious organizations, and perpetrates violence against religious leaders and communities, particularly in ethnic minority areas." The USCIRF also pointed to "the severe repression and forced relocation of the Rohingya Muslim minority; the banning of independent Protestant 'house church' activities; and the abuses, including forced labor, relocations, and destruction of religious sites, against ethnic minority Protestants."

Compass Direct News, which covers religious persecution, reports continuing assaults on Christians despite the (admittedly modest) positive steps in the capital. In mid-October in the Kachin State, for instance, the army burned down two churches, detained several leaders and congregants, and insisted that all religious gatherings required government permission. Kawdin Lahpai, editor-in-chief of the Kachin News Group, explained that this "reflects the long-time policy" of the regime.

While any genuine reform will take time since repression is so deeply embedded in the system, it appears that that whatever the currents of change in Naypyidaw, no waves have reached Christians and other disfavored faiths elsewhere. As the Commission explained when writing to Secretary Clinton last month, "serious human rights violations continue to occur daily in Burma and any recent positive steps can easily be reversed."

The panel urged the secretary to maintain pressure on Naypyidaw to release political prisoners and stop ethnic conflicts, as well as to "end attacks and discrimination against minority religious groups, and improve religious freedom and related human rights." The Obama administration should include religious liberty in any dialogue with Burma over human rights.

No one knows if this time the thugs who rule this tragically poor and oppressed nation are really prepared to yield power. History suggests much reason for pessimism, but many dissidents, including Suu Kyi, are allowing themselves to hope for a different, more positive future. Hopefully they are right.

Washington should encourage positive developments and expand engagement if the regime broadens its reforms. In doing so the administration should remember the first liberty. Only if the Burmese authorities come to respect freedom conscience in religion are they likely to respect freedom of conscience in politics and elsewhere.
About the Author

Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute and the Senior Fellow in International Religious Persecution at the Institute on Religion and Public Policy. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Beyond Good Intentions: A Biblical View of Politics (Crossway).

Credit Here:http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/12/religious-libertys-flicker

Credit here

Start on 12.00 Min

Credit : BBC Burmese

Aung San Suu Kyi, whose story is told in a new film, went from devoted Oxford housewife to champion of Burmese democracy - but not without great personal sacrifice.

By Rebecca Frayn

When I began to research a screenplay about Aung San Suu Kyi four years ago, I wasn’t expecting to uncover one of the great love stories of our time. Yet what emerged was a tale so romantic – and yet so heartbreaking – it sounded more like a pitch for a Hollywood weepie: an exquisitely beautiful but reserved girl from the East meets a handsome and passionate young man from the West.

For Michael Aris the story is a coup de foudre, and he eventually proposes to Suu amid the snow-capped mountains of Bhutan, where he has been employed as tutor to its royal family. For the next 16 years, she becomes his devoted wife and a mother-of-two, until quite by chance she gets caught up in politics on a short trip to Burma, and never comes home. Tragically, after 10 years of campaigning to try to keep his wife safe, Michael dies of cancer without ever being allowed to say goodbye.

I also discovered that the reason no one was aware of this story was because Dr Michael Aris had gone to great lengths to keep Suu’s family out of the public eye. It is only because their sons are now adults – and Michael is dead – that their friends and family feel the time has come to speak openly, and with great pride, about the unsung role he played.

The daughter of a great Burmese hero, General Aung San, who was assassinated when she was only two, Suu was raised with a strong sense of her father’s unfinished legacy. In 1964 she was sent by her diplomat mother to study Politics, Philosophy and Economics at Oxford, where her guardian, Lord Gore-Booth, introduced her to Michael. He was studying history at Durham but had always had a passion for Bhutan – and in Suu he found the romantic embodiment of his great love for the East. But when she accepted his proposal, she struck a deal: if her country should ever need her, she would have to go. And Michael readily agreed.

For the next 16 years, Suu Kyi was to sublimate her extraordinary strength of character and become the perfect housewife. When their two sons, Alexander and Kim, were born she became a doting mother too, noted for her punctiliously well-organised children’s parties and exquisite cooking. Much to the despair of her more feminist friends, she even insisted on ironing her husband’s socks and cleaning the house herself.

Then one quiet evening in 1988, when her sons were 12 and 14, as she and Michael sat reading in Oxford, they were interrupted by a phone call to say Suu’s mother had had a stroke.

She at once flew to Rangoon for what she thought would be a matter of weeks, only to find a city in turmoil. A series of violent confrontations with the military had brought the country to a standstill, and when she moved into Rangoon Hospital to care for her mother, she found the wards crowded with injured and dying students. Since public meetings were forbidden, the hospital had become the centre-point of a leaderless revolution, and word that the great General’s daughter had arrived spread like wildfire.

When a delegation of academics asked Suu to head a movement for democracy, she tentatively agreed, thinking that once an election had been held she would be free to return to Oxford again. Only two months earlier she had been a devoted housewife; now she found herself spearheading a mass uprising against a barbaric regime.

In England, Michael could only anxiously monitor the news as Suu toured Burma, her popularity soaring, while the military harassed her every step and arrested and tortured many of her party members. He was haunted by the fear that she might be assassinated like her father. And when in 1989 she was placed under house arrest, his only comfort was that it at least might help keep her safe.

Michael now reciprocated all those years Suu had devoted to him with a remarkable selflessness of his own, embarking on a high-level campaign to establish her as an international icon that the military would never dare harm. But he was careful to keep his work inconspicuous, because once she emerged as the leader of a new democracy movement, the military seized upon the fact that she was married to a foreigner as a basis for a series of savage – and often sexually crude – slanders in the Burmese press.

For the next five years, as her boys were growing into young men, Suu was to remain under house arrest and kept in isolation. She sustained herself by learning how to meditate, reading widely on Buddhism and studying the writings of Mandela and Gandhi. Michael was allowed only two visits during that period. Yet this was a very particular kind of imprisonment, since at any time Suu could have asked to be driven to the airport and flown back to her family.

But neither of them ever contemplated her doing such a thing. In fact, as a historian, even as Michael agonised and continued to pressurise politicians behind the scenes, he was aware she was part of history in the making. He kept on display the book she had been reading when she received the phone call summoning her to Burma. He decorated the walls with the certificates of the many prizes she had by now won, including the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize. And above his bed he hung a huge photograph of her.

Inevitably, during the long periods when no communication was possible, he would fear Suu might be dead, and it was only the odd report from passers-by who heard the sound of her piano-playing drifting from the house that brought him peace of mind. But when the south-east Asian humidity eventually destroyed the piano, even this fragile reassurance was lost to him.

Then, in 1995, Michael quite unexpectedly received a phone call from Suu. She was ringing from the British embassy, she said. She was free again! Michael and the boys were granted visas and flew to Burma. When Suu saw Kim, her younger son, she was astonished to see he had grown into a young man. She admitted she might have passed him in the street. But Suu had become a fully politicised woman whose years of isolation had given her a hardened resolve, and she was determined to remain in her country, even if the cost was further separation from her family.

The journalist Fergal Keane, who has met Suu several times, describes her as having a core of steel. It was the sheer resilience of her moral courage that filled me with awe as I wrote my screenplay for The Lady. The first question many women ask when they hear Suu’s story is how she could have left her children. Kim has said simply: “She did what she had to do.” Suu Kyi herself refuses to be drawn on the subject, though she has conceded that her darkest hours were when “I feared the boys might be needing me”.

That 1995 visit was the last time Michael and Suu were ever allowed to see one another. Three years later, he learnt he had terminal cancer. He called Suu to break the bad news and immediately applied for a visa so that he could say goodbye in person. When his application was rejected, he made over 30 more as his strength rapidly dwindled. A number of eminent figures – among them the Pope and President Clinton – wrote letters of appeal, but all in vain. Finally, a military official came to see Suu. Of course she could say goodbye, he said, but to do so she would have to return to Oxford.

The implicit choice that had haunted her throughout those 10 years of marital separation had now become an explicit ultimatum: your country or your family. She was distraught. If she left Burma, they both knew it would mean permanent exile – that everything they had jointly fought for would have been for nothing. Suu would call Michael from the British embassy when she could, and he was adamant that she was not even to consider it.

When I met Michael’s twin brother, Anthony, he told me something he said he had never told anyone before. He said that once Suu realised she would never see Michael again, she put on a dress of his favourite colour, tied a rose in her hair, and went to the British embassy, where she recorded a farewell film for him in which she told him that his love for her had been her mainstay. The film was smuggled out, only to arrive two days after Michael died.

For many years, as Burma’s human rights record deteriorated, it seemed the Aris family’s great self-sacrifice might have been in vain. Yet in recent weeks the military have finally announced their desire for political change. And Suu’s 22-year vigil means she is uniquely positioned to facilitate such a transition – if and when it comes – exactly as Mandela did so successfully for South Africa.

As they always believed it would, Suu and Michael’s dream of democracy may yet become a reality.

Rebecca Frayn is a writer and film-maker. 'The Lady’ opens nationwide on December 30

credit here 

Teknaf, Bangladesh: A two-member Australian delegation led by Australian High Commissioner of Bangladesh Dr Justin Lee visited the Nayapara official refugee camp on December 8, at about 11:00 am, said a refugee leader on condition of anonymity. 

“The delegation observed the whole camp including schools and cottage industry of soap center and also met with refugees and refugee teachers in the camp after arrival at camp. The delegation more wanted to know about the opinion of refugees whether the refugee want to go home or not after Bangladesh PM’s visit to Burma.” 

“We are not willing to go back until we are not accorded citizenship rights with ethnicity,” a refugee teacher said. “We more wanted to return our confiscated lands, to stop human rights violations and racial discrimination, to get compensation of our properties, to withdraw army and Nasaka from northern Arakan , to withdraw Natala (model) villages from northern Arakan and to ensure rights as par other nationalities.” 

One of the refugee teachers named Habib asked to the High Commissioner to consider for providing opportunity for refugee children’s higher education along with the cooperation of Bangladesh government. In fact, in the camp, there is no higher education and the informal education is existed up to class V.

The delegation also participated in “a 16-day long activism”, in the camp, which include, sport, drama, cleaning environment and in making local Phita (local sweets), which was held since November 25 to December 8. The extraordinary performers were award by the camp authority. 

This programs were supervised by RTM, PAI, ACF and RIB and United Nations Higher Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), said another refugee teacher from the camp. 

At about 12:00 noon, the delegation left from the camp. The Camp-in-Charge (CIC) Kamaruzzaman warmly welcomed the delegation.

Credit :Kaladan Press

In light of the decision to award chairmanship of ASEAN to Burma in 2014, ASEAN countries have to monitor closely regime’s self-declared reform process and have to seriously consider for a regional solution of the Rohingya problem, including their boat people issue. It may be mentioned that the deprivation and rejection of Rohingya’s citizenship rights and ethnic rights coupled with policies of exclusion and discrimination are the root causes of the Rohingya problem.

We call upon the international community with the UN, OIC, EU, ASEAN, USA, UK, for the following:

1. To put pressure on the Burmese regime to stop forthwith all human rights violations and abuses against ethnic Rohingyas.

 2. To restore citizenship rights and recognize the ethnic rights of the Rohingyas by the Burmese government. 

3. To address the root causes of the Rohingya boat people issue and find out a permanent solution to the “Rohingya problem”.

Maung Tun Khin
President

Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK.
Contact +44 7888714866






Read in PDF File here

The statement came following a two-day visit to Burma by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of Bangladesh, which ended on December 7,2011 -Wednesday.

President Thein Sein was quoted in the Burmese state-run newspaper Myanmar Ahlin as saying: “Burma wants to cooperate with Bangladesh in resolving the issue.”

According to figures compiled by UNHCR, there are about 29,300 Burmese refugees assisted by the UN group and more than 200,000 Burmese of questionable status in Bangladesh.

Read Joint Statement in Burmese here
Read Joint Statement in English here

(Hong Kong) Despite signs of political change and the easing of restrictions on freedom of expression in Burma, rights abuses remain "systemic, deeply entrenched and vast in scale", the Asian Human Rights Commission said today in its annual State of Human Rights in Asia report. 

The 17-page Burma report, entitled "From blinkered to market-oriented despotism" synthesizes and analyses a number of key human rights issues from throughout the year, including civil war, land confiscations, the passing of anti-poor and anti-democratic laws in the new semi-civilian parliament, the absence of a judiciary capable of protecting human rights, and ongoing detention of political prisoners. 

"It is obvious that none of the instruments and institutions available for the making of complaint of rights abuses in Burma come remotely close to what under international standards would satisfy the requirements for remedies for human rights violations," the AHRC said. 

"Despite the political changes of the year and associated fanfare, the judiciary in Burmaremains inert, tied to the executive, and incapable of performing even basic functions for the defence of human rights," it added.

Wong Kai Shing, director of the Hong Kong-based regional rights group, said that it was good that rule-of-law issues in Burma are starting to get attention, but that it would be a long time before judicial institutions could work to protect human rights, even if the political will exists. 

"The beginning of a discussion on rule of law in Burma is enormously important, but the amount of work that will have to be put into giving meaning to rule of law there is enormous," Wong said. 

"In the meantime, economic and social conditions are changing quickly, and will change even more quickly in the next few years, and our concern is that this change will fast outpace any equivalent change for the better in institutions for the rule of law," he added. 

The AHRC in its report highlighted the increasing incidence of land grabbing in Burmaby companies linked to the army. 

"This is an emerging phenomenon in Burma and one that we have to document and research carefully to understand its characteristics and implications," Wong said. 

In the past, land grabbing in Burma was conducted mainly by the armed forces and other state agencies directly, but increasingly in the last few years it has been linked to private economic interests. 

"Our concern is that within a few years Burma could go the way of Cambodia, where land grabbing is massive and practically no legal or institutional arrangements exist to do anything about it," he added. 

The report also includes details of a number of cases of illegally or unjustly imprisoned people on whose cases the AHRC is working, including those of Htun Oo and 13 other persons charged over a bombing in Pegu during 2010; 22-year-old Kaung Myat Hlaing, sentenced to 10 years in jail for allegedly sending some politically oriented photographs through the Internet; six men in 2010 were accused of having contact with an insurgent group in the east of Burma, one of whom was tortured to death during interrogation; and, the case of U Gambhira, a monk who was at the forefront of the 2007 protest movement.

The report is available online at here

Some extracts from the report follow. 

BURMA: From blinkered to market-oriented despotism?

Since a new quasi-parliamentary government led by former army officers began work inBurma (Myanmar) earlier this year, some observers have argued that the government is showing a commitment to bring about, albeit cautiously, reforms that will result in an overall improvement in human rights conditions. 

The question remains, though, as to whether the new government constitutes the beginning of a real shift from the blinkered despotism of its predecessors to a new form of government, or simply to a type of semi-enlightened and market-oriented despotism, the sort of which has been more common in Asia than the type of outright military domination experienced by Burma for most of the last half-century. 

From farmlands to factories

While much of the current discussion about economic reform has concerned changes to the banking system, foreign exchange, and investment laws, none of these issues go to the problems of massive poverty afflicting millions of people all across the country, or the ever-growing gap between the wealthy few and the many poor. 

One cause for particular concern, and one that the AHRC has followed closely, is the convergence of military, business and administrative interests in new economic projects aimed at displacing ordinary people from land. 

Concerns over the future of farmers and rural dwellers in Burma were heightened, rather than diminished, when during the second sitting of the new semi-elected parliament in Burma this year, the government submitted a draft land law. Rather than protecting cultivators’ rights, the bill undercuts them at practically every point, through a variety of provisions aimed at enabling rather than inhibiting land grabbing. It invites takeover of land with government authorization for the purpose of practically any activity, not merely for other forms of cultivation. 

No competent judiciary, no remedies for violations

It is obvious that none of the instruments and institutions available for the making of complaint of rights abuses in Burma come remotely close to what under international standards would satisfy the requirements for remedies for human rights violations. In the absence of an independent judiciary or minimally functioning institutions of the sort that are presumed to exist when these types of questions are discussed at the international level, nothing in the existing arrangements can be described as satisfying the requirements of international standards. 

Despite the political changes of the year and associated fanfare, the judiciary in Burmaremains inert, tied to the executive, and incapable of performing even basic functions for the defence of human rights. Since the start of the year, structural changes to the judiciary under the 2008 Constitution have not materialized in any meaningful way. On the contrary, the courts continue to be as closed and obscured from public view as before, perhaps even more so. 

Consequently, police, soldiers and other state officers or paramilitary groups attached to the state continue to be able to use and abuse their powers with impunity. Very often, they do so in the context of personal disputes, with the knowledge that the victims ofabuses have no recourse. Sometimes, they act specifically in response to attempts of people to attract the attention of officials to their problems. 

Legal professionals say that the amount of corruption in the system is growing exponentially, as the costs of living rise and more and more judges and lawyers look to whatever opportunities they can to make as much money as they can. In some courts, lawyers estimate that up to 70 per cent of cases are decided in part or whole through the payment of money. 

Political reconciliation by hostage taking

Over the last few years, prisoner releases in which political detainees have also featured have been a regular event in Burma. Each release is an opportunity for the political leadership to temporarily pay the role of benefactor, and enjoy some praise for whatever largesse it has managed to generate through the freeing from detention of persons who should have never been detained in the first place, persons whose "crimes" constituted acts that in most other countries are taken for granted. It is for this reason that such releases of detainees are indicative not of a system operating according to rational law, but one operating according to feudal principles, in which a regal figure earns the gratitude of his subjects for the merciful exercise of arbitrary power.

Reports of ill treatment of detainees continued throughout the year, and the AHRC made a number of interventions on these, although appeals issued constituted only a fraction of the reported incidents. 

Of special concern was the case of U Gambhira, a monk who was at the forefront of the 2007 protest movement, and who is reportedly suffering from serious illness. In October, the AHRC director, Wong Kai Shing, wrote personally to the president ofBurma, U Thein Sein, a former general and prime minister of the previous government, calling for urgent humanitarian intervention on behalf of the monk.

Widespread accusations also persist of maltreatment during police interrogation. A senior legal expert alleged in a signed open letter that police drugged his client during interrogation. 

Allegations that relate to abuses of human rights committed while under custody again present an opportunity for all concerned agencies and individuals to press for the International Committee of the Red Cross to be allowed to resume its visits to places of detention in Burma. The denial of access to the ICRC is related to the alleged drugging of accused persons, since both relate to an official mentality that nobody has a right to know what really goes on behind the closed doors of police stations and prisons. Where even the principle of an outside agency confidentially monitoring detainees’ conditions in accordance with a globally established mandate is unacceptable, there is no chance of anyone keeping tabs on what officials do to people in their custody. Acceptance of external monitoring of basic conditions is a prerequisite for allegations like these to be addressed in any meaningful way. 

Conclusion

Ultimately, the expression, enjoyment and defence of human rights are about participation: not the type of fraudulent, managed participation imagined by military types and technocratic administrators, but the opportunity for genuine participation of the sort that the people of Burma have attempted repeatedly to obtain for themselves, most recently in the nationwide protests of 2007. No such opportunity exists at the present time, and so nor has there been any sign of public participation in the political rejigging of the army-run system during 2011. 

The reason for this lack of participation is that people are, after all, not stupid, as the military and commercial elite in Burma has repeatedly made the mistake of thinking. A few soldiers pulling off their trousers and putting on sarongs fools nobody. Indeed, it did not fool anybody last time it was done, in 1974, when a new "civilian" government rather than being greeted with applause or praise was greeted with widespread strikes and public protests. This time around, the presence of Aung San Suu Kyi and some other trusted national figures has allowed the new government to negotiate the political waters a little better, but it has not yet brought public participation, and people's tolerance will only last so long.

Credit here