For the first time since 1990, the Burmese military regime has
declared ‘free and fair’ multi-party elections will be held before the end of
this year. However, the military’s announcement has been met mostly with
skepticism by those familiar with the regime’s appalling human rights records
and history of brutally stifling all dissent. The elections are in accordance
with the new Burmese constitution, which was approved in a May 2008 referendum
widely regarded as rigged.
The international community has expressed concern that the first
general election in Burma in 20 years may not run fairly or freely following
the issuance of a new law that effectively bans democracy leader Aung San Suu
Kyi from participating in the contest. The Nobel Peace Prize laureate described
the new election laws as “repressive” and “unjust.”
UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon in March said the new law ran
counter to the hopes of the international community for a political process
that involves all groups. He repeated his appeal for a wide-ranging political
process that would produce a fair and transparent election, trusted by all
Burmese people, and including the participation of Aung San Suu Kyi.
It is disheartening to see that the elections have been “rigged”
from the start. Burma’s election laws are very strict, which has already forced
the military regime’s main opponent, the National League for Democracy, to
decide not to register for the elections.
Moreover, the United Nations, members of ASEAN, and numerous
Western nations have insisted that the elections will not be credible without
the participation of Suu Kyi.
In the last free election in 1990, the Burmese people
overwhelmingly rejected military rule, awarding the National League for
Democracy party more than 80 percent of the seats in parliament. Yet the
military has refused to allow the NLD to form a government. In the 20 years
since that election, Burmese democracy activists have faced imprisonment,
intimidation, torture and death as they have peacefully voiced demands for
justice, individual and ethnic rights, and a democratic form of government that
is representative of all Burma’s people.
Ever since their embarrassing loss in 1990, the military regime
has been afraid to hold elections in fear of again losing.
U Win Tin, a member of the Central Executive Committee and a
co-founder of the National League for Democracy, wrote in an article that the
showcase election planned by the military regime makes a mockery of the freedom
sought by Burmese people and is simply intended to make military dictatorship
permanent. Key ministries including justice, defense and the interior will
remain under the control of the military, and under the 2008 constitution, a
quarter of the 440 parliament seats will be reserved for military officials.
People holding military permissions are not permitted to contest the election.
As such, twenty members of the junta, including Prime Minister Thein Sein, have
retired from their posts to participate in the election. With the primary
opponents out of the way, military leaders are resigning left and right from
their posts to run in the 2010 elections as civilians. Furthermore, already
one-fourth of the new Myanmar Parliament has been reserved for military
officials, which means the officials who have resigned and are campaigning as
civilians are most likely being positioned to take the remaining 75% of the
seats in support of the military. The military plans to gain virtually all the
seats of power.
A 224-member House of Nationalities will have 168 elected
candidates and 56 nominated by the military chief, while the 440-member House
of Representatives will have 330 elected civilians and 110 military
representatives. At the same time, the results of the 1990 elections were
annulled as they did not comply with the new election laws.
All of this has led the new laws to being described as a “farce” by
the Philippines and a “mockery” by the United States.
Observers, especially pro-democracy supporters, have indignantly
expressed outrage at the military regime’s so-called “fair elections”. Japan
and other Asian countries have tried to convince the military dictators to hold
elections that are actually democratic. The European Union, after considering
Burma in the European Union Foreign Affairs Council meeting, has added another
year to their political sanctions on Burma after the Asian country’s failure to
respond to concerns about its elections being unfair.
Regardless of the mockery that the 2010 Myanmar elections may make
of the democratic process, it would be an even bigger blow for the country if
no genuine opposition participates. Under the new laws, the NLD will face
dissolution as a legal entity if it continues with its current plan to boycott
the election. The Central executive council of NLD party has decided that it
will not take part in the elections unless the following three demands are met:
the release of political prisoners (approximately 2,100, of which around 400
are members of the NLD), observers be allowed to monitor the elections, and the
Constitution of 2008 is revisited and examined. However, military junta has
failed to respond to any of the demands of the NLD. Despite the undemocratic
clauses of the 2008 Constitution on which the 2010 election is based, it will
essentially allow a pseudo-civilian government to be formed after the election.
This will include the re-introduction of a parliamentary system in Burma,
albeit with 25 per cent of the seats guaranteed for the military.
Despite the unfair practices and challenges any opposition party
may face, the election also provides an opportunity for opposition groups to
challenge the SPDC, by competing for seats against junta-backed proxy parties.
Parties have until 6 June to apply to run in the new elections. As
of 12 May, 36 parties had applied and 31 had been approved, of which 19 are
linked to ethnic minorities. The National League for Democracy, which
overwhelmingly won the previous elections but were never allowed to take power,
have decided not to participate. Nonetheless, some senior members have formed
the National Democracy Force to contest the elections, claiming that a complete
boycott would play into the hands of the government.
The new Democratic Party, established by the daughters of two
former Prime Ministers of Burma, U Nu and BaSwe, is also aiming to take part in
the election.
The Shan Nationalities League for Democracy, a Shan political
party that came second in the 1990 election, has also expressed an interest in
participating.
Another new party is being formed comprising members of a
ceasefire group and a party that won seats in the 1990 elections. Five former
members of the New Mon State Party (NMSP) and five members of the Mon National
Democratic Front (MNDF), together with five other Mon elites who make up the
new party, founded a 15-member committee and later announced that they are
going to participate in the upcoming election. The SPDC has not answered
opposition calls to amend the 2008 constitution, nor have they stated clearly
how the electoral process will be managed or under what terms new political
parties will be allowed to organize.
The government established the Union Solidarity and Development
Association, which is largely seen as their ‘grassroots’ political arm, in
1993. The organization claims to have around half the population as members.
The National Unity Party, which contested the 1990 election as the main
pro-government party and won 10 seats, has also registered to run.
Reuters estimates that six parties in total are allied to the
government. The junta itself, according to the Japanese newspaper Asahi
Shimbun, will also be setting up two or three proxy parties to contest the
election. The Burmese military junta is notorious for its cunning and trickery.
Therefore it is seen as difficult to believe they are capable of running an
election with credibility, exclusivity, and fairness in 2010. Top NLD leader
Win Tin’s suggestion to Senior U.S. diplomat Mr. Kurt Campbell on 10 May 2010
was for the U.S. “not to recognize the results of the upcoming election, which
will be held without the two important elements — credibility and exclusivity —
that the international community has demanded.”
by Arkar Moe, Burma Refugee Organization (Malaysia) We will publish Part II tomorrow
