‘We can’t leave out Depayin:’ Suu Kyi's Lawyer

By THE IRRAWADDY

Aung San Suu Kyi’s lead lawyer, Kyi Wynn, remains optimistic that Burma’s High Court will next week grant his appeal to reinstate two key defense witnesses in the bizarre trial being held in the notorious Insein Prison special court in Rangoon.

The District Court trying Suu Kyi had allowed only one of four defense witnesses to take the stand.

Speaking to The Irrawaddy, Kyi Wynn said that he had wanted Win Tin and Tin Oo to be called as defense witnesses, but they were rejected by the lower court.

The high court is expected to rule on the appeal on Wednesday, allowing for the trial to resume.

Win Tin is a senior party member of Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party. Tin Oo is a former commander-in-chief of the armed forces and is currently under house arrest.

Suu Kyi has called the charges against her “politically motivated.”

Kyi Wynn said that defense lawyers could not leave out the notorious Depayin Massacre in which Suu Kyi’s motorcade and supporters were ambushed in May 2003. Since that date, Suu Kyi has been detained.

She was charged under Section 7 of the State Protection Law which says, “The [military] Cabinet is authorized to pass an order, as may be necessary, restricting any fundamental rights of any person suspected of having committed or believed to be about to commit, any act which endangers the sovereignty and security of the state or public peace and tranquility.” Her attorneys plan to challenge the legality of that charge against her.

After Depayin, Suu Kyi asked for lawyers to represent her, but the request was denied.

Shortly after the attack, Suu Kyi opened the case at the local police station in central Burma where the attack took place. But no action was taken against thugs backed by the regime. Instead Suu Kyi was placed under house arrest.

Lawyers now indicate that Suu Kyi’s detention in May 2003 could be considered illegal, and they sought to call Tin Oo, who accompanied Suu Kyi during her trip in May 2003, as a defense witness.

Suu Kyi had visited several towns where she encountered large crowds, but they were peaceful and welcomed her entourage in orderly fashion, said her lawyer.

Tin Oo, who witnessed the attack, wanted to testify in court, said a dissident political source in Rangoon.

The former defense minister in the 1970s is a staunch supporter of political change in Burma and currently vice chairman of the election-winning NLD party. A political source said that he has closely followed the trial on the radio.

Lawyers said that his testimony would last one day. “He would talk turkey [at the court],” said Kyi Wynn.

“I don’t think she [Suu Kyi] was trying to endanger the sovereignty and security of the state or public peace and tranquility,” Kyi Wynn said, referring to the motorcade.

It is widely believed that the regime’s leader, Snr-Gen Than Shwe, and hard-line ministers were behind the deadly ambush attack on the motorcade.

There was no independent investigation set up after the ambush, which led to the death of numbers of Suu Kyi’s supporters.

Kyi Wynn said that Suu Kyi and her lawyers had no intention to prolong the trial. He said that the court proceedings should end in July.

While Suu Kyi has said that the case against her is politically motivated, she has also repeatedly said that there is no rule of law in Burma. Analysts contend that her lawyers want to demonstrate the country’s lack of rule of law.

Suu Kyi was charged with violating the terms of her house arrest after an uninvited American man swam secretly to her closely guarded lakeside home last month and stayed two days.

If convicted, she faces up to five years in prison.

It is widely expected that Suu Kyi will be found guilty because courts in Burma are known for handing out harsh sentences to political dissidents.

Suu Kyi, 63, has been detained under house arrest for more than 13 of the last 19 years. She was transferred to Insein Prison on May 14. Her lawyers also argue that since the regime lifted the restriction of her house arrest in May, she is now a free person and there is no reason to detain her. Her current detention in Insein Prison should be considered illegal, said her lawyers.

READ MORE---> ‘We can’t leave out Depayin:’ Suu Kyi's Lawyer...

Former Burmese intelligence official ‘would testify’ at ICC

(DVB)–A former Burmese senior intelligence official and ambassador to Washington has said he would testify against Burma’s ruling generals if they are eventually brought in front of the International Criminal Court.

On Saturday Burma marked the six-year anniversary of the Depayin massacre, in which 70 supporters of opposition National League for Democracy party were killed by a government-backed militia.

The massacre happened whilst Aung San Suu Kyi had been campaigning for supporters, and following the incident she was placed under house arrest.

Speaking to DVB on the anniversary, Aung Lin Htut, who served as the junta’s deputy ambassador in Washington before he sought asylum in the US in 2005, supported the idea of bringing the junta to the ICC.

“I myself would testify if [junta leader Than Shwe] is taken to the international court,” he said.

“Even if I am imprisoned, I could appear as witness.”

The comments were backed by the general secretary of the exiled Burma Lawyers’ Council, Aung Htoo, who is campaigning to take those responsible for the Depayin massacre to the ICC.

“The most obvious point about Depayin is that no one was arrested and no action was taken against a serious crime known to the country and the world,” he said.

“[The authorities] not only failed to take responsibility for the security, it was also arranged that people who take the security responsibility commit the crime.”

Burma’s military government, and Than Shwe in particular, are said to be shaken by the idea of being taken to the ICC.

A number of people have suggested recently that the spiraling human rights situation in Burma, particularly regarding the use of child soldiers and increasing numbers of political prisoners, warranted attention from the ICC.

Last week, Thai MP Kraisak Choonhavan, who also heads the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus, said the junta should be brought to court.

“If they [ICC] are in their right mind and they go through the facts, there is no denying that [junta leader] Than Shwe and his cronies should be persecuted at the ICC,” he said.

Similarly, a group of over 60 British MPs last month called for a United Nations commission of inquiry into crimes against humanity in Burma.

And in April, former senior legal adviser to the ICC, Morten Bergsmo, said that the Burmese army’s use of child soldiers could constitute a war crime.

Reporting by Htet Aung Kyaw

READ MORE---> Former Burmese intelligence official ‘would testify’ at ICC...

It's incumbent upon Thailand to lead Asean on Burma

By Kavi Chongkittavorn
The Nation

AFTER THE ASEAN CHARTER came into force on December 15 2008, members were obliged to follow objectives, principles and norms set forth in the document. These include the promotion and protection of human and other fundamental rights. What the Burmese regime has done against the opposition of Aung San Suu Kyi and its other citizens is not part of Asean's standards or practices.

Before the charter's drafting, it was customary for Asean members to defend their colleagues to ensure continued unity. As a regional organisation, Asean also protected members from outsider pressures and scrutiny. Under such conditions, the principle of non-interference was the mantra to glue Asean together and silence criticisms from within. Even before Burma joined Asean in 1997, the grouping was providing the most effective shield to the regime - first as an Asean observer (1995) and a signatory to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (1996) - over Burma's preponderance for using force against its own people. The East-West divide also augmented Asean's determination to admit Burma, despite repeated warnings of the consequences.

During the deadly Depayin incident in May 2003, when Suu Kyi was almost killed by junta-sponsored thugs, Asean leaders were uncharacteristically silent. At the summit in Phnom Penh six months later, the Asean leaders gave a vote of confidence to the newly appointed Burmese prime minister Lt General Khin Nyunt, hoping he could lead changes from the inside. Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra also backed the new leader saying Burma deserved a second chance. In October 2004, Khin Nyunt was purged from power and placed under house-arrest.

Now Asean has shown some backbone in handling Burma's situation and the plight of Aung San Suu Kyi, as well as with its Western dialogue partners, after Asean gained the charter. The Asean chair's statement calling for her release was the strongest ever from a country with which it shares one of the longest common borders in Southeast Asia.

At the Asean-EU Ministerial meeting in Phnom Penh last week, the Asean foreign ministers, except Burma, expressed strong support for the chair's statement. The Asean leaders are anxious to meet Burmese Prime Minister General Thein Sein on the side-lines of the Asean-South Korea Commemorative Summit scheduled today and tomorrow in Cheju Island, South Korea to gauge the regime's latest attitude.

In engaging the dialogue partners over Burma, Asean used to be insecure and easily angered whenever criticism or disagreements came to the fore.

Throughout the past two decades, Asean was often up in arms against the West's criticism defending Burma's record and the decision to admit the pariah state into the family. Now, it is a different story.

For instance, joint statements from the Asean-Asem and Asean-EU ministerial meetings issued last week in Hanoi and Phnom Penh respectively would not have been possible without the new Asean attitude. It was a far-cry from the atmosphere of earlier Asean-EU ministerial meetings, especially after the May 1990 polls; the two sides often traded insults and blamed each other for lack of understanding of their distinctive political environment and cultures. Burma is no longer a wedge, albeit remaining a problem, dividing Asean and EU as they see eye to eye that Burma needs to open up political space, support the UN role, free all political prisoners and hold inclusive elections.

The EU has in recent months become one of the most enthusiastic Asean dialogue partners, collectively and individually. Last week, the EU became the first regional organisation to sign a protocol to accede to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation which now boasts 17 signatories, apart from the 10-member Asean. TAC was amended to allow EU ascension as an entity. Nearly half the 27 members have already appointed their ambassadors attached to Asean.

Asean can now ponder how best to tackle the current Burmese situation. First of all, the Asean leaders have to determine if the current trial of Suu Kyi and political oppression inside Burma are considered a serious breach of the Asean charter. This is a tough but unavoidable question as it will set a precedence for the grouping's own future.

Asean Secretary-General Dr. Surin Pitsuwan's role will also be crucial in interpreting the charter. Indonesia's draft of the joint Asean statement on Burma, which was diluted by the new Asean members in Phuket last month, specifically linked the charter with Burma's intransigence. Jakarta's position was clear that it was a breach of the charter and Rangoon failed to take up collective responsibility as part of the Asean family. The other five core Asean members including Brunei were on the same page.

As the grouping's leading democracy, Indonesia can urge the Thai chair to put the Burmese issue on the agenda of the upcoming summit to work out appropriate responses.

Indonesia, as the country that initiated drafting of the Asean Charter, feels that the charter must be taken seriously both in words and spirit, otherwise Asean's future and creditability are at stake. Protecting the charter and giving it teeth is a priority shared by Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, Brunei, Malaysia and the Philippines.

The second approach would be the initiative of the Thai chair. To take Burma to task, the government must be firmer on overall Thai-Burma relations. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya must not abandon the much respected Burmese policies of their predecessors from 1997-2001. To do so, Thailand urgently needs to review ties with Burma and design a new and more comprehensive policy that lessens dependence on Burma's energy and resources-based imports.

Thai-Burmese border security, which has been neglected for the past several years, must be beefed up. Quite often, when the junta leaders faced a continuous international community bombardment, they would pick on Thailand to rally domestic support.

At the Asean summit in Laos in 2004, Burma skipped the Asean chairmanship due to sustained outside pressure both from Asean and the EU. But this time, the outcries over Suu Kyi's trial were louder and broader in every way. Parliamentarians from Asean countries recommended suspension of its membership.

It is incumbent on the chair to call for a meeting among the leaders on the issue.

Suspension of Burma's rights and privileges within Asean is possible if Rangoon remains defiant and Suu Kyi continues to be held. For the membership's suspension, it would require extraordinary courage for the chair as well as the leaders of core Asean members to kick off the debate.

Either approach gives life and blood to the charter, which will set the future yardstick for compliance.

The Asean leaders must be ready to protect the charter,
not a pariah member in their midst.

READ MORE---> It's incumbent upon Thailand to lead Asean on Burma...

Six Years after Depayin, Survivors Recall the Horror

By SAW YAN NAING
The Irrawaddy News

Six years after the Depayin massacre, 31-year-old Kyaw Soe Lin, one of its victims, says he will never forget the horror.

Kyaw Soe Lin was driving the car carrying Aung San Suu Kyi in a convoy that came under attack by pro-regime thugs on May 30, 2003. His quick action in driving away from the mob saved her life.

Fifty of Suu Kyi’s supporters are estimated to have died in the unprovoked attack, carried out by armed members of the pro-regime Union Solidarity and Development Association and the paramilitary Swan Ah Ashin militia.

The mob ambushed Suu Kyi’s convoy in Kyee village, on the outskirts of Depayin Township in Sagaing Division, central Burma. Barbed wire was strung across the road, which was bathed in flood lights hung in trees.

When the mob attacked his car, Kyaw Soe Lin’s first reaction was to hit back. “They started to hit people who were guarding our car. Then, they hit our car. I was very angry and I thought at first to hit them back. But then I drove the car away and escaped.”

His action undoubtedly saved Suu Kyi from serious injury or even death.

On Friday to mark the sixth anniversary of Depayin, several members of Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), gathered at its headquarters in Rangoon.

Toe Lwin, who was guarding Suu Kyi’s vehicle and now lives in exile, told The Irrawaddy in an interview. “The attackers moved toward Daw Suu’s car, and soon about 30 of them surrounded us. I told them it was Daw Suu’s car and asked them not to attack. I told them to stop beating people and asked them to go back.

“But they blocked our vehicles. They tore clothing off women and then beat them. They hit elderly people. I saw them collapse in front of me. I will never forget it.”

“Suddenly, they started to hit Daw Suu’s car. First I tried to protect it. Then they started to beat me. They hit my head three times and I collapsed. Daw Suu’s driver finally sped away and escaped.”

Police arrived on the scene when the attack was over. They detained the survivors and witnesses claimed some of the women were raped.

Suu Kyi was also detained and placed under house arrest, under Article 10 (b) of the 1975 State Protection Act Law. The law allows a person to be detained without charge for a maximum of five years. Suu Kyi has now been under house arrest for six years.

The Thailand-based Burma Lawyers’ Council released a statement on Friday saying the Depayin massacre constituted a crime against humanity and the perpetrators—who had not yet been apprehended—should be brought before the International Criminal Court.

The statement said that only then could the rule of law “be restored; a genuine national reconciliation will be achieved; and people will enjoy peace, stability and development.”

READ MORE---> Six Years after Depayin, Survivors Recall the Horror...