------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: April 13, 1997 Issue #693 SPECIAL EDITION- UN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Part II HEADLINES: ========== SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TO COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS SLORC RESPONSE TO SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR SLORC ATTACKS KNU AT COMMISSION UN HUMAN RIGHTS BRIEFING - DAVID TAW'S PAPER ***************************************************** SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TO COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS April 9, 1997 From: darnott@gn.apc.org STATEMENT MADE BY JUDGE RAJSOOMER LALLAH SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON THE SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN MYANMAR TO THE FIFTY-THIRD SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 9 APRIL 1997 Mr. Chairman, In June 1996, I was appointed by your predecessor, Ambassador Saboia, as the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar. This position was created in 1992 by this Commission in accordance with resolution 1992/58. The mandate required me to establish direct contact with the Government and people of Myanmar, with a view to submitting reports to the General Assembly and the Commission. That mandate has since been periodically renewed. Mr. Yozo Yokota preceded me in this task. I wish to pay tribute to the competence with which he discharged his mandate. I derived much assistance from his work. Mr. Chairman, On assuming my mandate, I tried to identify the priority concerns of the international community with regard to the situation of human rights in Myanmar. These concerns are referred to in the resolutions which the various competent organs of the United Nations have adopted over the past six years but more particularly in the General Assembly resolution 51/117 and Commission resolution 1996/80, which were the most recently adopted. These concerns may be summarized as follows: a. the electoral process initiated in Myanmar by the general elections of 27 May 1990 has yet to reach its conclusion and the Government still has not implemented its commitments to take All necessary steps towards the establishment of a democratic order in the light of those elections; b. many political leaders, in particular elected representatives, remain deprived of their liberty; c. violations of human rights remain extremely serious, including, in particular, the practice of torture, summary and arbitrary executions, forced labor, including forced portering for the military, abuse of women, politically motivated arrests and detention, forced displacement, serious restrictions on the freedoms of expression and association, and the imposition of oppressive measures directed, in particular, at ethnic and religious minority groups; d. the continuing fighting with ethnic and other political groups, despite the conclusion of cease-fire agreements, together with the continuing violations of human rights has resulted in flows of refugees to neighboring countries. Mr. Chairman, In October 1996, I submitted an interim report to the General-Assembly commenting upon the institutional framework of Myanmar and its adverse impact on rights to personal security and due process of law, the freedoms of opinion, expression and movement and the requirement that the will of the people be the basis of authority in the State. Two months ago, I submitted my report to your Commission. I have included more specific information relating mainly to the situation in the border areas between Myanmar and Thailand. This most recent information has come to me directly through my visit to Thailand. There I received testimonies from among the thousands of newly displaced persons who fled Myanmar in the summer of 1996. The testimony corroborated earlier reports I had received. While both reports are at the disposal of All delegations, I wish to draw attention to certain specific issues. Mr. Chairman, Since my appointment in June 1996 and, despite the requests expressed in the resolutions of the General Assembly and this Commission that I have direct access to the Government and people of Myanmar, I have yet to be allowed by the Government of Myanmar to see the situation on the ground. Following my appointment, I have written on 3 separate occasions to the Government of Myanmar seeking their cooperation and requesting their authorization to visit the country in the discharge of my mandate so as to reflect the situation in Myanmar as comprehensively as possible. My efforts have so far failed. There has been no response to my letters. However, in his statement to the Third Committee of the GA in November 1996, the Permanent Representative of Myanmar did indicate that a visit would be possible at an appropriate and mutually convenient time. Although I have remained ready to undertake such a visit, I have so far had no favorable communication from the Government. Mr. Chairman, I feel bound to record my regret that the Government of Myanmar would appear to adopt an attitude of non-cooperation. Clearly, the refusal of the Government of Myanmar to allow me as Special Rapporteur to visit the country considerably complicates the task I have set myself as Rapporteur to ascertain and report on the human rights situation in Myanmar. The absence of a response to my letters is, in the circumstances, regrettable because it has not rendered possible the engagement of a constructive dialogue in the light of the analysis which I have made of the present situation, the current laws and practices, and the developments described in my reports and which manifestly have an unfavorable impact on human rights in Myanmar. I greatly hope, however, that the Government of Myanmar will cooperate and engage in such a dialogue in response to the concerns of the international community, as expressed in the resolutions so far adopted by the General-Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights. Mr. Chairman, Although I have not been able to visit Myanmar itself, I have gathered much information which I considered reliable from a number of sources: these sources have included governmental, inter-governmental and non-governmental sources, including individuals who either have recently left Myanmar or else had relevant information about the situation in Myanmar. Further, in my continuing effort to obtain the most accurate and up-to-date information on the situation in Myanmar, I visited Thailand in December 1996 to assess the situation of the recently displaced who had fled from Myanmar to the refugee camps along the Thai-Myanmar border. I wish in this regard to thank warmly the Government of Thailand for authorizing me to visit the border areas. Mr. Chairman, I wish to draw special attention to the fate of persons belonging to the ethnic minorities living in the border areas. Displacement has become a way of life for many of them. For the past 30 years, Karen, Mon, Karenni and Shan have had to flee their homes and lands in order to avoid conscription into compulsory labor for the military, in particular portering or for development projects. I must also mention frequent violent attacks against persons and property, which have often resulted to forced displacement. As a result, family units and communities are invariably destroyed and the displaced lose their natural and cultural environment if not their lives. In addition to All these developments, which cause serious consequences and social problems for the population living in that area, military operations have recently been undertaken by the military in the Karen State and artillery bombardments are reported to have caused damage not only to property but also to human suffering and loss of life. Reports from refugees who have been coming out of the border area describe in horrifying detail the situation in the Karen State and it is feared that there is little hope for improvement of the situation in the near future. Mr. Chairman, I now come to the politico-legal system in Myanmar. The present legal and institutional framework through which legislative, executive and judicial powers continue to be exercised in Myanmar is not in conformity with established international norms governing human rights. These norms require that the authority of government should be based on the will of the people and that this will shall be expressed in genuine elections in which everyone is entitled to participate either directly or through freely chosen representatives. More than 6 years have now passed since the will of the people in Myanmar was freely expressed in general elections in 1990. That will continues to be frustrated. The National Convention established by the Authorities since 1993 to devise principles to govern a new constitution has been afflicted by criticisms of unrepresentativeness and of procedures obstructing meaningful debate. There is no indication as to when its proceedings will end. Mr. Chairman, In the meantime the suppression of the exercise of civil and political rights is reported to attain new heights. A panoply of laws continues to be used to criminalise and punish the very exercise of civil and political rights. There are still frequent allegations of the arbitrary killings of civilians and insurgents by members of the armed forces. Acts of torture or other cruel or inhuman treatment are frequently reported to continue to occur, especially in the case of the large-scale displacement of persons belonging to ethnic minorities. Due process of law continues to be flouted. In particular, the National Democratic League (NLD) and its leadership are reported to be the constant subject of harassment and oppression to the extent that the NLD found it necessary to write to the authorities to highlight specific instances of arrests, harassment and other unjustified action by officials. On the other hand, peaceful protests by students are reported to have been met by the closure of the universities, thus putting in jeopardy the education of a generation of the youth of the community. Mr. Chairman, In conclusion, I have to say with profound regret, at this time, that there has been no change in the situation of human rights in Myanmar in the past year and that there is still no concrete sign of improvement. It is clearly not sufficient to point out and dwell upon systematic violations of human rights. Constructive measures are called for. It seems to me that the absence of respect for the rights pertaining to democratic governance as expressed in the elections of 1990 by the people is at the root of All the major violations of human rights in Myanmar. Clearly the establishment of a democratic order in itself would create the most secure basis to remedy the situation and further to create the proper infrastructure for the protection and enjoyment of human rights. To this end a new process would be required to be engaged by the authorities of Myanmar. Recommendations in this regard are contained in paragraph 64, in Chapter III F and Chapter IV B of the Report. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ************************************* SLORC RESPONSE TO SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR April 9, 1997 From: darnott@gn.apc.org The following statement was made on 9 April 1997, following the oral statement of the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar to the Commission on Human Rights. The Special Rapporteur's report, E/CN.4/1997/64, was posted on this conference on 22 March 1997. INTERVENTION BY AMBASSADOR U AYE, LEADER OF THE MYANMAR DELEGATION UNDER ITEM 10 Mr Chairman, I would like to respond to the report contained in document No E/CN.4/1997/64 just tabled, claiming to show the situation of human rights in the Union of Myanmar. Limitation of time constrains me from elaborating on each allegation in detail. For this reason, my delegation has undertaken to circulate, for the official records of this Commission documents Nos. E/CN.4/1997/123 and E/CN.4/1997/124 in response to Mr. Lallah's report and an earlier one mentioned therein; to highlight the inaccuracies contained in them, and also to present the situation of human rights in Myanmar in its true perspective. But even a superficial glance at Mr Lallah's reports reveal that they are essentially political statements, in the guise of legal arguments, intended to exert unwarranted pressure to influence the outcome of events that must necessarily be decided by the inhabitants of my country and not by outsiders. Mr Chairman, The report just tabled contains numerous cases of wide ranging allegations. But on closer scrutiny, it can be seen that such allegations are carefully qualified with phrases such as "it was reported", "according to reports", "reportedly arrested" "allegedly arrested, etc. It would naturally follow that flawed conclusions would result from such conclusions. The reports go on to less than credible lengths to stress any perceived negative elements, while turning a blind eye to all constructive and positive achievements. This is what numerous delegations have attested to in the proceedings of this very Commission when they reject the practice of unbalanced reporting. When this practise of one sided presentations about my country was pointed out, the response was that the inclusion of more positive developments would render such reports too lengthy and unwieldy. The consequence, Mr Chairman, is that accuracy, objectivity and balance falls victim to expediency, lack of resources and time constraints. Mr Chairman, To be more precise, I shall touch on but a few of the allegations and accusations made in the reports and their presentation. The charge of non-cooperation has been made against my country. But the record has clearly shown that while we have not accepted the appointment of any special rapporteur for reasons repeatedly made known by my delegation in this Commission, we have consistently cooperated and will continue to cooperate with the UN and its representatives in dealing with issues of human rights and other matters of common interest. In the recent past, high officials of my Government have had numerous rounds of fruitful dialogue with the Secretary General and his representatives, and the most recent round with Mr Francesc Vendrell, Director of the East Asia and Pacific Division of the UN, who visited my country just a few weeks ago -- all of which are elaborated in our memoranda presented to this Commission. In fact, we have when requested, provided the Centre for Human Rights and the thematic rapporteurs, including Mr. Lallah with information relevant to my country and the thematic rapporteurs have undertaken to incorporate our responses in their reports. Such exercises will continue to be pursued in the future and Mr. Lallah will have the opportunity to visit Myanmar at a mutually convenient time. Mr Chairman, In his reports, and especially in an earlier one, Mr. Lallah had emphasised primarily on the operation of the legal system in my country and has attempted to reveal aspects, which in his view, amount to shortcomings. We find it to be further perplexing that the report should attempt to cast doubt on the validity and effectiveness of our judicial system. Courts of law, civil, criminal and military are functioning normally throughout the country. From the time of its inception, the State Law and Order Restoration Council has undertaken to ensure that the laws of the land be upheld to preserve and strengthen the rule of law, and to maintain public order. The current administration has inherited over 900 laws, including those enacted during the time of the former colonial rulers, and by successive Governments after the achievement of independence. Accordingly, Myanmar continues to have a sound, efficient and fair judicial system, with the rule of law prevailing in the land, and peace and stability being maintained in accordance with the provisions of existing laws. At present, the Supreme Court and lower courts of law at State, Division and Township levels exist to administer justice independently according to law; to protect and safeguard the interests of the people and to assist in the maintenance of law and order; to educate the people to understand and abide by the law; to work within the framework of the law for the settlement of cases; to dispense justice in open courts unless otherwise prohibited by law; to guarantee in all cases the right of defense and the right to appeal under law; and to aim at reforming moral character in meting out punishment to offenders. The Code of Criminal Procedure and other relevant laws provide a comprehensive legal framework and guarantees to ensure that a fair trial is given to every defendant in a court of law. There are also safeguards against the abuses of legal proceedings during trial. The conduct of trials and administration of justice are carried out in public courts in strict observance of the basic principles just mentioned. The independence of the Judiciary is strictly maintained, and there exist no control or influence exercised by the Government over the administration of justice by the Judiciary. Mr Chairman, Another aspect that the reports elaborate upon is the constitutional process transpiring in my country during the current stage of transition. Questions have been raised as to whether this constitutional process will indeed lead to the establishment of multi-part democracy. In response to such doubts, I would like to reiterate that the National Convention is being convened to take concrete and systematic steps to build a genuine multi-party democratic steps to build a genuine multi-party democratic state in accordance with the aspirations of the people of Myanmar. This Convention is a truly representative body encompassing representatives from various political parties legally existing in the country, representatives of national racial groups, the peasants, the workers, the intelligentsia, the technocrats, and legal experts among others who enjoy the right to freely exchange their views. As such there should exist no doubt as to meaningful representation and democratic procedures in the Convention. Consensus has already been achieved in the National Convention on issues of primary importance such as over a hundred fundamental principles which will form the basis of the new State Constitution, in addition to agreements reached on the State, its basic structure, the Head of State, and the delineation of the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary organs. In essence, the National Convention has reached its halfway point and future sessions will be devoted to achieve consensus on issues such as the fundamental rights and responsibilities of citizens, the holding of regular elections, and the role of political parties, among others. Hence, when calls for dialogue are made, our response is that dialogue is already in progress in the form of the National Convention, which for reasons just mentioned is the most appropriate forum for dialogue and consensus building. On the other hand, there can be no necessity for any dialogue between the Government and one single political party, at the expense of all other legally existing political parties and the over 100 national races who constitute the Union of Myanmar. Mr Chairman, To sum up, we hold the view that the reports in question constitute an attempt to dispense with reality and to exert political pressure on the Government. This exercise is bound to be counter-productive for the promotion and protection of human rights in my country. I shall accordingly reject these reports and their contents as being irrelevant and merely reflecting the views of those who are opposing the Government for reasons unconnected with the issue of human rights. To us, the issue of human rights encompasses much more than legal arguments, political manipulations and results of interviews with groups openly hostile to the good intentions of the Government. For us human rights encompasses issues neglected in the reports, issues such as the right to develop, relying essentially on our own strength and resources, and to live a life of dignity with adequate food, clothing and shelter for all. None of these aspects of the right to development, absolutely none, have received even superficial mention in the reports. Nevertheless, we shall continue to endeavour toward the attainment of such objectives while at the same time persevere to protect our independence and sovereignty. Mr Chairman, Commenting on his recent trip to the region, Mr. Lallah mentioned in his report that the situation in Myanmar is so complex and susceptible to so many different interpretations. After reporting thus, I find it most regrettable that the document should draw simple and misguided conclusions out of a complex situation. ***************************************** SLORC ATTACKS KNU AT COMMISSION April 9, 1997 From: David Arnott Statement by U Denzil Abel, member of the Myanmar Observer Delegation to the 53rd Session of the Commission on Human Rights under Agenda Item 10 Geneva 9 April 1997 [delivered 10 April] Mr Chairman, I thank you for giving me the floor and affording me the opportunity to inform the Human Rights Commission on the situation in my country, the Union of Myanmar. Mr Chairman, In the course of discussion under Item 10 my delegation has heard some passing remarks with reference to the situation in Myanmar. Judging by their remarks I must say that the speakers are ill-informed and are not wholly aware of developments taking place in Myanmar. They are unduly influenced by unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations inspired by motives other than the cause of human rights. My delegation knows All too well that the sources of these allegations are none other than anti-government forces who are determined to denigrate the outstanding achievements of my Government. They are in fact misusing the noble concepts of human rights as an instrument to pursue their own hidden political agenda. My delegation however has to emphasize that the outcome of events in my country must necessarily be decided by its own citizens and not by outsiders, interlopers and opportunists. My delegation has circulated two documents No. E/CN.4/1997/123 and No. E/CN.4/1997/124. These documents aim to dispel the one-sided blinkered vision actively promoted and propagated by proponents of black propaganda. The documents also serve as a primary source for delegations interested in gaining insight into the complexity of my country and the ongoing progress achieved in creating conditions for a better life for the people of Myanmar. Mr Chairman, The Myanmar Government accords top priority to reconsolidation in my country. The colonial policy of divide and rule, and the misguided armed struggle waged by some groups against successive governments since 1948 have taken an enormous toll on the development of my country. The reconsolidation of our more than (135) National Races is the key to peace, development and progress. The Myanmar Government extended the olive branch to the armed groups and, accepting the sincerity of the Government All but one of the armed groups have since returned to the legal fold [sic]. They are now gainfully occupied with rebuilding and developing their remote border areas in cooperation with the Government. The swords have been turned into ploughshares for the commonweal. The sole remnant is the Karen National Union (KNU). It has engaged in a futile armed struggle against successive governments for almost half a century. It has undergone many changes in both its leadership and political persuasion. The current guise of the KNU is to masquerade as a democratic force. Its guise is meant to gain sympathy and support from the outside world. It does not enjoy the support of the 2.7 million Kayins living peacefully together with other National Races of Myanmar. The KNU is a politically and militarily dissipated force. It has unilaterally broken off peace negotiations with the Government after reneging on the very terms it had proposed. While talking with the Government it engaged with other anti-government forces and foreign sponsors in plots to destabilize the peace and stability achieved so far in the border areas and the nation at large. The KNU resorts to terrorists [sic] attacks against civilians, they use landmine carpeting which maim innocent people. They have of recent even resorted to bomb attacks on places of worship. The KNU cannot but be seen as a terrorist group. Five years have elapsed since the Government unilaterally suspended military operations and offered peace to the KNU. There has been no progress. For the people in the Kayin State to live in peace and enjoy development, the Myanmar Armed Forces are now compelled to conduct mopping-up operations in the Kayin State against KNU bases, from whence atrocities against the people are continually staged. Hundreds of officers and other ranks of the KNU have taken advantage of "trading arms for peace" of their own accord. They have brought in hundreds of arms, magazines, landmines and thousands of ammunition. Returnees are warmly welcomed. The returnees realize that years of fighting have achieved nothing and that fighting does not serve the country in any way. They realize the genuine goodwill of the Government and are now ready to participate in regional development activities. The so-called "Karen refugee camps" on the border are in fact safe havens for the KNU armed group and their sympathizers. Credible foreign analysts publicly confirm that the camps were used as staging points in KNU raids into Myanmar. The Myanmar Government stands ready to receive back All Myanmar nationals who had been residing in the so-called "refugee camps". Peace prospects are now bright for the people in the Kayin State. Development plans can at long last be initiated. The long-suffering people of the Kayin State can look forward to a measure of progress and prosperity evident already elsewhere in the country. Mr Chairman, My delegation takes the opportunity to inform the Commission on some views and policies of the Government of Myanmar on human rights: - Myanmar holds the view that countries differ from each other due to differences in historical background, cultural traditions, religion and level of development. Culturally and in terms of perception, there exists a vast difference between the East and West. By this, we do not mean to infer that there exist no human rights principles applicable to All persons. However, divergences can be seen in approaches and implementation of human rights practices. At the same time, countries or groups of countries should avoid attempting to impose their views and values of human rights on the rest of the international community. - For developing countries like Myanmar, the most essential and fundamental basic right is to meet the food, clothing and shelter needs and to raise the standards of living of he people. Without ensuring this basic right, other aspects of human rights cannot be effectively implemented. Although some countries stress the importance of civil and political rights, developing countries like Myanmar believe that the equal prominence should be accorded to economic, social and cultural rights. The right to development is especially important to developing countries. - It is our belief that community rights should have equal importance, if not more, than individual rights. Moreover, in times of conflict between individual rights and national interest, there are situations that call for priority to be accorded to the interests of the nation. Each individual possesses not only rights but also duties and obligations to his country and to his society. It is a fact that extreme practices of individual rights can lead to disorder and unrest. Economic development and political stability are interdependent since economic development can be obtained only during times of political stability. Similarly, economic development contributes toward political stability. - As the view, approaches, application and implementation of human rights differ from country to county because of the dissimilarities in historical experience, cultural traditions, religion and level of development. Myanmar believes that implementation of human rights in the national context should be the responsibility and competence of each government. Human rights should not be used as a pretext for interfering in matters that are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of states. By this, it does not mean that human rights can be systematically violated behind the barrier of non-interference. What remains paramount is to promote human rights through international cooperation and consensus-building. Together with other developing and non-aligned countries, Myanmar believes that there should be strict observance of the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in the internal affairs of other States. Myanmar is opposed to the misuse of human rights with political motives, to double standards and selectivity, and means of applying pressure. Such tactics are detrimental and counterproductive to the advancement of human rights. Thank you Mr. Chairman ************************************* UN HUMAN RIGHTS BRIEFING - DAVID TAW'S PAPER April 8, 1997 From: darnott@iprolink.ch (David Arnott) The following is the paper presented by David Taw, National Democratic Front, at the Briefing on Human Rights in Burma, at the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva. SLORC Militarism Threatens the Survival of Non-Burman Ethnic Nationalities in Burma By David Taw National Democratic Front April 8, 1997 This is my first time participating in the meeting of the UN Commission on Human Rights. I am very pleased to have this opportunity to discuss the plight of the non-Burman ethnic nationalities whose survival and ethnic and cultural identities are dangerously threatened by the military regime of Burma. Burma is a multiethnic state, and I am a member of the Karen people, one of the ethnic nationalities of Burma. I am a representative of the National Democratic Front (the NDF), a coalition of ethnic nationalities. I would like to make four main points today, all of which indicate how human rights abuses in Burma are inhibiting the long term stability and peace in my country. First, the ethnic nationalities of Burma are seeking a political dialogue to find a lasting political solution in Burma, but our political freedoms and rights are nonexistent under the current regime. Second, the civilian populations in ethnic areas are being persecuted by the SLORC army, which has resulted in thousands of human rights abuses against innocent villagers throughout the country which is destabilizing our traditional societies. Third, the cease-fires between SLORC and the ethnic nationalities have failed to achieve lasting political solutions--again because political freedoms and rights have been eliminated by the SLORC troops in the cease-fire areas. Finally, the recent offensive against the Karen people and the refugee crisis on the Thai/Burmese border once again exemplifies SLORC's oppressive nature and the widespread human rights abuses resulting from its policy of force. All of these abuses stem from the Burmese regime's militarization of the country, and its refusal to seek lasting solutions through dialogue instead of force. MY FIRST POINT IS THAT THE ETHNIC NATIONALITIES DESIRE FEDERALISM & A POLITICAL SOLUTION It is a significant fact that almost all of the major ethnic groups have resistance movements. Some resistance movements started a few years after the country's independence from Britain in 1948, and many others joined the struggle after the 1962 military coup. These resistance movements are a greatly significant phenomenon because they indicate that there is something totally wrong with the state of affairs of Burma. SLORC often claims that their task is to prevent the disintegration of the Union, and they usually try to justify their illegal grip on state power by citing the ethnic resistance movements as a threat to national integrity. Asserting that instability will result if they are not in power, SLORC has even tried to legitimize the domination of the military in the future political life of Burma through its national convention. SLORC has often said that Burma will become the next Bosnia unless there is a leading role for the Tatmataw (SLORC's Army). The logic of this is very elusive. Here, I want to make it very clear that no ethnic organization is seeking independence or secession from the Union. We have been striving for our rights which are reflected in Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and elaborated in the UN Declaration on Rights of Persons Belonging to National and Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities. We have been striving together with our ethnic brothers and sisters, including Burmans, to end militarism and build a new society based on democracy, human rights and federalism. In 1990, the ethnic nationalities and the democratic opposition started the process of constitution drafting with the aim of building a consensus about how to construct a new union. International constitutional experts were invited to our seminars, and many consultations were made. Free and open debate characterize these proceedings which is very different from the undemocratic SLORC-orchestrated national convention. The constitution is now in its fifth draft. The extent of consensus we have already built up is promising and strong proof that the threat of a Bosnia-like-situation is minimal. The specter of another Bosnia is SLORC's propaganda and an attempt to frighten the international community. We agree with the policy statement of the National League for Democracy (the NLD) which has said that a Panlong-like Convention has to be convened to lay down the principles for a future constitution. Our drafting efforts are in preparation for this opportunity. It is our strong belief that no constitution can be imposed or dictated by any one organization or institution or any one group of people. Only when the constitution reflects the true aspirations of the people will there be a long-lasting constitution and practical resolution to the current political crises. In order to bring this about, we must guarantee an atmosphere in which all the peoples of Burma, regardless of their ethnicity, sex and religion are allowed to participate in the constitution- making process. MY SECOND POINT IS ABOUT SLORC'S MILITARISM AND THE ATTACKS ON THE CIVILIAN POPULATION During the past eight years, the ethnic resistance movements have suffered a lot from SLORC's terrorizing campaign against the ethnic civilian populations and changes in the geopolitical climate. SLORC has usually practiced a low intensity conflict strategy in the course of its military operations against the ethnic resistance movements. This strategy is known in Burma as the "Four Cuts" program (cutting information, food supplies, financial support and recruitment for the resistance movements). A large part of the Four Cuts program has been to isolate the resistance movements from the surrounding ethnic civilian populations. To isolate the resistance groups, the main target of the SLORC's army has been the civilian population, not the resistance groups themselves. SLORC's army threatens communities in order to make them give up their support for the resistance movement and has committed thousands of human rights abuses, including arbitrary arrests, torture, rape and summary executions of civilians under the Four Cuts program. One of Burmese army's major schemes is the practice of forcibly relocating villages. Orders have been given to hundreds of thousands of villagers to move to new areas under the tight control of the SLORC army. Villagers are often given less than a week's notice to relocate. Later, these abandoned villages are declared free-fire zones which means that SLORC's army will shoot on sight anyone seen in the area of the village. In this way, entire ethnic populations are being uprooted from their native lands and traditional ways of livelihood, and scattered in new satellite villages (actually concentration camps of the military). The new relocation sites also become pools for military porterage or forced labor for SLORC's militarily strategic roads. People often flee the satellite villages by hiding in the jungles of Burma as internally displaced persons or running across the border to Thailand. Today, the horrors for the civilian population continue. Forced relocations have not stopped. And human rights abuses against civilians by SLORC troops continue to be routine throughout Burma. MY THIRD POINT IS ABOUT THE FAILURE OF THE CEASE-FIRES TO ACHIEVE LASTING POLITICAL SOLUTIONS The mounting pressures on their respective communities and other factors resulting from changes in geopolitics forced 15 ethnic resistance groups to sign cease-fire agreements according to SLORC terms. As Daw Aung San Suu Kyi said in her video message, however, SLORC's cease-fire agreements merely stop the shooting. They do not result in further political dialogue which will address the rights of the non-Burman ethnic nationalities and their role in the future political process. Promises of regional development in return for cease-fire agreements have not materialized either, apart from a few show-case openings of schools and hospitals that were heavily publicized in the SLORC-controlled media. Foreign humanitarian NGOs have never been allowed to operate development projects in cease-fire areas. And the worst part of the cease- fires has been the heavy deployment of SLORC troops to consolidate their territorial control; they have acted like an occupation army and continue their human rights violations including forced labor and forced relocation campaigns in cease-fire areas. In the Kachin area, since SLORC troops took control of all check points on the border, replacing the Kachin Independence Organization, heroin has freely flowed into Kachin state and the Kachin people have begun to face a serious problem with increasing numbers of drugs addicts and related HIV/AIDS problems. In the Mon area, after the cease-fire, thousands of people have been conscripted for military porterage and forced labor for roads and the construction of the Ye-Tavoy railway, a strategic transport line for rapid deployment of armed forces to secure a gas pipeline route. When a Mon leader asked the Commander of the South-Eastern military command to stop the forced labor, he replied that the cease-fire agreement was made just between SLORC's army and the Mon National Liberation Army, and it had nothing to do with the administrative orders of various levels of SLORC that were carrying out regional development projects. The reply was nonsense because SLORC is the army and the army is the SLORC. The cease-fire agreement between SLORC and the Karenni National Progressive Party (the KNPP), lasted just three months and broke down after SLORC did not comply with the Karenni's demand to stop forced labor. Fighting has also recently flared up again between SLORC and the United Wa State Army in southern part of the Wa area. These continuing tensions and problems indicate that cease-fires without accompanying dialogue on political and human rights issues will not be able to bring long-lasting peace and stability to Burma. MY FINAL POINT IS ABOUT THE RECENT OFFENSIVE AGAINST THE KAREN PEOPLE AND THE REFUGEE SITUATION ON THE THAI/BURMESE BORDER The National Democratic Front (the NDF) believes that dialogue is the best means to resolve the political problems in Burma, and we fully support the UN General Assembly resolutions that urge SLORC to start a substantive political dialogue, at the earliest possible time, with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other political leaders including leaders of ethnic groups. This desire for political dialogue was reaffirmed by all the ethnic groups--both cease-fire and non-cease-fire groups--which attended the Mae Tha Raw Hta meeting in February of this year. Based on this political will, the Karen National Union (the KNU) took part in four rounds of negotiations with SLORC. Despite ongoing negotiations, however, SLORC launched a massive military campaign in Karen territory and intensified its campaign of terror against the Karen civilian population. Karen villagers were subjected to porterage, torture, rape and summary executions, and the abuses continue. People have had to flee from their villages to escape persecution by the SLORC army. To date, 20,000 Karen people have fled into Thai territory because of the offensive. Thousands of others are internally displaced, still in the jungle on the way to the border, unable to flee because SLORC's military columns block their escape. The refugee population on the Thai-Burmese border has now risen to 120,000. These people have fled persecution by the SLORC army, and the KNU thanks the Royal Thai Government for permitting these people to take refuge in the border areas of Thailand and the international NGOs for assisting them with basic needs. Most of the refugees had been staying in border areas for years without much incident until 1995 when the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (the DKBA) and in some cases combined forces of the DKBA and the SLORC army attacked refugee camps inside Thailand. In January of this year, two large refugee camps close to the border were burnt down by the DKBA and SLORC troops making more than 16,000 refugees homeless. Threats continue to be made against the refugees in Thailand by DKBA and SLORC troops. All the refugee camps along the border are now very vulnerable to the cross border attacks from SLORC and DKBA troops. Because of this insecure situation, it is urgently needed to move the refugee camps to safer places and for UNHCR to extend protection to the refugees. In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that the non-Burma ethnic nationalities are seeking political solutions to the problems in Burma. We are deeply concerned at SLORC's denial of political freedoms and its military campaign against the civilian populations throughout Burma. We call on the UN Commission on Human Rights to make the strongest possible statements to the Burmese regime and work for a UN mediated substantive political dialogue in Burma. Finally, we call on the international community--UNHCR, the diplomatic community and human rights NGOs--to urgently respond to the need for protection of the refugees along the Thai/Burmese border who face a humanitarian crisis and continuing threats from the SLORC army. Thank You. ********************************