In mid-July, the National Convention resumed to write a new constitution in Burma (Myanmar), where military has ruled the county since 1962. Optimism has grown in the international community, as the long drawn out process, started in 1993, finally concluded on September 3 and has finished adopting a set of principles for a constitution.
In July, United Nations Secretary-General’s special envoy on Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, visited Washington, Beijing, Tokyo and New Delhi to consult with key countries. Gambari drummed up support for engaging the military government, saying it was important to “recognize positive steps made by (Burma).”
But such optimism is masking the harsh reality. The new constitution, if it is completed and promulgated in its present form, will not necessarily make the widespread violation of human rights and denial of democracy any better. It plans to codify the role of the military in the future affairs of state, reserves one quarter of the parliamentary seats for serving officers, makes sure the president must possess ‘military vision’, and includes a raft of provisions designed to bar opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from participating in elections.
Many ethnic groups that have signed ceasefires with the military government are becoming increasingly vocal and dissatisfied with the National Convention. But they are not allowed to publicly question this process: it a criminal offense to criticize or obstruct the constitutional process in any way. The government has handpicked most of the delegates.
In late June, the International Committee of the Red Cross took the remarkably rare step of making a public statement on Burma, stating the military government’s abuses committed against people along the border “violate many provisions of international humanitarian law.” In spite of this, the military government remains firmly entrenched in power, with strong diplomatic support from its big neighbors, China and India.
However, any optimism over Burma’s constitutional process should not mask a worsening human rights situation. The international community should face the reality and have to speak clearly and publicly about the human rights situation in Burma.
Japan is the biggest aid donor to Burma and retains a great deal of prestige and influence. Japan has an important role to play -- perhaps more than any other country, Japan may be able to find a way through the diplomatic impasse to positively influence the military government.
To do this, Japan will have to say that a twisted constitutional process, military assaults on civilians, and the denial of basic freedoms has no place in the political system of Burma – and that Japan’s continuing relationship with the government depends on genuine reform. Finishing the long delayed Convention is no cause for celebration.
David Scott Mathieson is Burma consultant for New York-based Human Rights Watch.
