New Delhi (Mizzima) – Ethnic leaders from the group made up of ethnic political parties that contested in the 1990 general election, have joined the National League for Democracy’s “no vote” campaign ahead of elections on November 7.
The main opposition NLD party left Rangoon yesterday for Kachin State on week-long roadshow trip organisational trip accompanied by Arakan League for Democracy (ALD) party leader and Committee Representing the People’s Parliament (CRPP) secretary Aye Thar Aung. They briefed NLD township, ward and village level organising committee members from 11 townships in Mandalay Division.
“I am glad and encouraged at meeting organising committee members from townships, wards and villages for the first time after the authority dissolved NLD,” Aye Thar Aung said.
NLD central executive committee member Ohn Kyaing, NLD women’s wing members Phyu Phyu Thin, Hla Hla Moe, Aye Aye Mar, NLD youth wing member Myo Nyunt and Aye Thar Aung met organisers from Mogok, Singu, Madaya, Thapeikkyin, Patheingyi, Tadaoo, Amrapura, Singai and Pyinoolwin townships and exchanged their views on boycotting this year’s national elections.
Fellow ethnic minority and CRPP leader, Zomi National Congress (ZNC) chairman Pu Cing Tsian Thang, joined NLD leaders in a similar trip to southern Shan State and Soe Win from the National Democracy Party joined NLD leaders in their trip to western Pegu Division.
Upon reaching Kachin State, Aye Thar Aung said he would pass on some of the motions passed at the CRPP meeting held on September 3 month including a resolution not to vote in upcoming polls.
The group resolved to boycott 2010 general election, to discuss issues and difficulties being faced by ethnic people including concerns over the building possibility that a new wave of civil war would break out amid growing tension between junta forces and armed ethnic groups under ceasefire that have rejected the junta’s Border Guard Force (BGF) demand.
They also decided to discuss the 2008 constitution and to tell people in ethnic areas that building a genuine federal union and national unity could only be achieved through enacting a constitution based on the Panlong spirit that would entrench democratic and ethnic rights.
“The Kachin [Independence Organisation’s armed wing] said that they would not need to bear arms if the Union [of Burma] was based on the Panlong agreement. And the CRPP has reached a resolution on how to build a Union in future based on that agreement. We will discuss these matters with the people during this trip. Another topic will be on the current situation of distrust of the SPDC [junta] by armed ethnic groups and their delay in disarming themselves,” Aye Thar Aung said.
The junta’s electoral watchdog, the Union Election Commission (UEC), issued a notice mid-last month that claimed five old political parties including the NLD were automatically dissolved as they had failed to re-register with the UEC during the stipulated time. The NLD has since conducted roadshows to explain to the public their no-vote policy. They have completed trips to almost 10 of the states and divisions.
“Party members are more consolidated and the party is stronger after these meetings. We can say this is a significant and progressive result of survival and revival. Party members abide by our policy of non-voting in the election. If some of them go and cast their vote this time, they will never be free from fear. But we can say how many people didn’t vote only after the election,” Ohn Kyaing told Mizzima.
The CRPP was established on September 16, 1998 by the NLD, which won more than 80 per cent of seats in the 1990 general election and ethnic parties that also won seats, to call on the junta to convene the Hluttaw (parliament)
Member parties are the ALD, the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy, the Shan State Kokang Democratic Party, the Mon Nationality Democratic Front, the ZNC and Union Nationalities League for Democracy.
source: http://www.mizzima.com/news/election-2010-/4442-ethnic-leaders-join-nld-vote-boycott-roadshow.html
Thursday, 14 October 2010
Wednesday, 13 October 2010
Burma's Aung Sann Su Kyi "will not vote"
Burma's detained pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi will refuse to vote in the general election on 7 November.
Her lawyer, Nyan Win, said that although her name was on a voters' list, she would not take part in a poll organised by the military.
Ms Suu Kyi's party won a landslide victory in the last election in 1990 but the junta annulled the result, and kept her in near continuous detention.
The poll is seen by many as a sham that will just cement the military's power.
Some 25% of seats are guaranteed under the new constitution for the military, which means unelected military officers will sit in parliament.
The government has also founded its own political party - the Union Solidarity and Development Party - headed by the incumbent prime minister.
Legal moves
Ms Sui Kyi is currently under house arrest and was at first excluded from the electoral roll; about 2,000 other activists are also still detained.
Her National League for Democracy (NLD) had already decided to disband to avoid having to expel Ms Suu Kyi and other detainees under strict electoral laws.
Our South East Asia correspondent Rachel Harvey says her decision not to vote may further encourage other NLD supporters to follow her lead, come election day.
That in turn will infuriate the current military leadership, she says.
"The NLD will not compete so she (Suu Kyi) said she has no party to vote for even if she is allowed to vote. As the NLD is not participating in the election, she will not vote," said Nyan Win.
He said Ms Suu Kyi had also pointed out that any grant to her of the right to vote would contravene the junta's own laws which prohibit detainees from taking part in the polls.
Her advice to followers also not to vote has been criticised by the state-controlled press.
Ms Suu Kyi's house arrest is due to expire on 13 November and she expects to be released "according to the law", Nyan Win said.
"If she is not released it is like a violation," he said.
Many Western nations and the UN are critical of Burma's poor human rights record and refusal to hand over power to Ms Suu Kyi's party in 1990.
source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11529919
Her lawyer, Nyan Win, said that although her name was on a voters' list, she would not take part in a poll organised by the military.
Ms Suu Kyi's party won a landslide victory in the last election in 1990 but the junta annulled the result, and kept her in near continuous detention.
The poll is seen by many as a sham that will just cement the military's power.
Some 25% of seats are guaranteed under the new constitution for the military, which means unelected military officers will sit in parliament.
The government has also founded its own political party - the Union Solidarity and Development Party - headed by the incumbent prime minister.
Legal moves
Ms Sui Kyi is currently under house arrest and was at first excluded from the electoral roll; about 2,000 other activists are also still detained.
Her National League for Democracy (NLD) had already decided to disband to avoid having to expel Ms Suu Kyi and other detainees under strict electoral laws.
Our South East Asia correspondent Rachel Harvey says her decision not to vote may further encourage other NLD supporters to follow her lead, come election day.
That in turn will infuriate the current military leadership, she says.
"The NLD will not compete so she (Suu Kyi) said she has no party to vote for even if she is allowed to vote. As the NLD is not participating in the election, she will not vote," said Nyan Win.
He said Ms Suu Kyi had also pointed out that any grant to her of the right to vote would contravene the junta's own laws which prohibit detainees from taking part in the polls.
Her advice to followers also not to vote has been criticised by the state-controlled press.
Ms Suu Kyi's house arrest is due to expire on 13 November and she expects to be released "according to the law", Nyan Win said.
"If she is not released it is like a violation," he said.
Many Western nations and the UN are critical of Burma's poor human rights record and refusal to hand over power to Ms Suu Kyi's party in 1990.
source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11529919
Sunday, 10 October 2010
Saturday, 9 October 2010
Global Action Against Junta's Planned Sham Election
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/epHUQdoXLjZ-IRlHI7rEtA?feat=directlink
Global Action Against Junta's Planned Sham Election
Burma Democratic Concern (BDC) joined hands together with democratic forces around the world showing our opposition on the junta's planned sham election and its results.
Sunday, 3 October 2010
Myanmar's Sham Election
We are now a month away from the first elections in Burma in 23 years. That should give us cause to celebrate. Sadly, that is wishful thinking. Burma’s 55 million people continue to suffer brutal oppression. Abject, needless poverty is, for most, a daily reality. These elections will be little more than a sham to perpetuate military rule.
So when Asian and European leaders meet on Monday in Brussels, the U.K. will be calling for us to speak with one voice against the gross mistreatment of the Burmese people.
That means being unequivocal: These elections will be neither free nor fair. Opponents of the ruling party lack resources and are systematically targeted by the current regime. Thousands of political prisoners remain incarcerated. Various ethnic parties have been refused the right to participate. Last month the military dissolved the National League for Democracy — its biggest perceived threat.
The situation is little better for those parties which are being allowed to participate. The regime they oppose has passed deeply unfair election laws and runs the election commission. In Burma all media is heavily censored by the state.
So the election result is a foregone conclusion. Under the constitution a quarter of seats are already reserved for the military. In half of the remaining seats parties loyal to the regime will run uncontested, their opponents unable to field a candidate. The regime is therefore guaranteed a substantial majority — before a single vote is even cast.
The consequence for Burma is the return to power of a ruling elite that has presided over widespread human rights abuses, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, rape and torture. That same regime has been guilty of profound economic mismanagement and corruption. While they routinely blame sanctions for weak development, the truth is that they have squandered Burma’s natural resources and export opportunities. The country’s infant mortality rate is now amongst the highest in Asia.
These failings are undeniable. Yet some are tempted to overlook the deep flaws in the approaching election. Clearly, it would be more convenient for the international community to quietly agree that any election is better than no election. Burma would recede in the mind, allowing us to “move on.” That is attractive for nations that insist we should not interfere in one anothers’ affairs. And the West could not be accused, as it sometimes is, of attempting to recreate the world in its own image.
These are not reasons to ignore the truth. The European Union has already made it clear that sanctions — targeted at the regime and its sources of revenue — will not be lifted until genuine progress is made on the ground. We must now work with our Asian partners, using our collective clout, to push for that progress. Members of the Asia-Europe Meeting group, or ASEM, account for nearly 60 percent of the global population — and the same proportion of global trade. Burma’s military regime should know that, until it satisfies international demands, it will meet the same disapproval whether it looks East or West.
Not only is that our shared moral duty, but it is in our strategic self-interest too. Without a process of national reconciliation in Burma, the risk of instability is real. Ethnic cease-fires look increasingly fragile. A return to conflict would have devastating humanitarian consequences, undermining regional security and leading to further refugee flows into neighboring countries and beyond.
So we must continue to exert pressure on the regime to engage all opposition and ethnic groups in a meaningful dialogue. The objective must be a fair settlement that gives ethnic groups a political voice and protects their minority rights. All prisoners of conscience — including the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi — must be released without delay. Reconciliation must be geared toward the social and economic development that has long evaded the Burmese state.
This week is an opportunity for Asian and European nations to reaffirm that message. Military men must know that swapping their uniforms for suits will not change the demands of the international community. We will not be pacified by a democratic facade. Our expectations will not drop.
Nick Clegg is deputy prime minister of Britain.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/opinion/04iht-edclegg.html
So when Asian and European leaders meet on Monday in Brussels, the U.K. will be calling for us to speak with one voice against the gross mistreatment of the Burmese people.
That means being unequivocal: These elections will be neither free nor fair. Opponents of the ruling party lack resources and are systematically targeted by the current regime. Thousands of political prisoners remain incarcerated. Various ethnic parties have been refused the right to participate. Last month the military dissolved the National League for Democracy — its biggest perceived threat.
The situation is little better for those parties which are being allowed to participate. The regime they oppose has passed deeply unfair election laws and runs the election commission. In Burma all media is heavily censored by the state.
So the election result is a foregone conclusion. Under the constitution a quarter of seats are already reserved for the military. In half of the remaining seats parties loyal to the regime will run uncontested, their opponents unable to field a candidate. The regime is therefore guaranteed a substantial majority — before a single vote is even cast.
The consequence for Burma is the return to power of a ruling elite that has presided over widespread human rights abuses, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, rape and torture. That same regime has been guilty of profound economic mismanagement and corruption. While they routinely blame sanctions for weak development, the truth is that they have squandered Burma’s natural resources and export opportunities. The country’s infant mortality rate is now amongst the highest in Asia.
These failings are undeniable. Yet some are tempted to overlook the deep flaws in the approaching election. Clearly, it would be more convenient for the international community to quietly agree that any election is better than no election. Burma would recede in the mind, allowing us to “move on.” That is attractive for nations that insist we should not interfere in one anothers’ affairs. And the West could not be accused, as it sometimes is, of attempting to recreate the world in its own image.
These are not reasons to ignore the truth. The European Union has already made it clear that sanctions — targeted at the regime and its sources of revenue — will not be lifted until genuine progress is made on the ground. We must now work with our Asian partners, using our collective clout, to push for that progress. Members of the Asia-Europe Meeting group, or ASEM, account for nearly 60 percent of the global population — and the same proportion of global trade. Burma’s military regime should know that, until it satisfies international demands, it will meet the same disapproval whether it looks East or West.
Not only is that our shared moral duty, but it is in our strategic self-interest too. Without a process of national reconciliation in Burma, the risk of instability is real. Ethnic cease-fires look increasingly fragile. A return to conflict would have devastating humanitarian consequences, undermining regional security and leading to further refugee flows into neighboring countries and beyond.
So we must continue to exert pressure on the regime to engage all opposition and ethnic groups in a meaningful dialogue. The objective must be a fair settlement that gives ethnic groups a political voice and protects their minority rights. All prisoners of conscience — including the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi — must be released without delay. Reconciliation must be geared toward the social and economic development that has long evaded the Burmese state.
This week is an opportunity for Asian and European nations to reaffirm that message. Military men must know that swapping their uniforms for suits will not change the demands of the international community. We will not be pacified by a democratic facade. Our expectations will not drop.
Nick Clegg is deputy prime minister of Britain.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/opinion/04iht-edclegg.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
