On May 10th Burma will decide whether to accept the continuation of the brutal military regime or take a risk and vote no during the referendum on the constitution. The proposed constitution is finally available for the public for 1 USD, for many unaffordable. The government also issued guidelines for the officers of the polling booths but up till today most of the people do not know how the voting will be organised.
Since the referendum was announced on February 9th, those no longer able to suppress their anger and disapproval of the regime started to deal with the difficult question of how to campaign in a country where this is absolutely prohibited. Since a few weeks people for example wear T-shirts with a big NO and a small smoking.
Most of the content of the draft constitution was known among the people but few had really read or analysed a previously available older version.
Some argue that having a constitution is better than having nothing. So this raises the question if once this proposal is accepted what can be changed? The final version states that any amendments would need the approval of all eligible voters. This effectively rules out any future changes to the constitution. The exclusion of all people who have ever been imprisoned from participation in political parties sheds a light on the promised democratic elections in 2010.
They continue to arrest whoever might be(come) a threat to the regime. For example Ko Aung Htun youth coordinator of the National League for Democracy (NLD) in Thingangyun township, Rangoon, is held in an unknown place since April 1st. With more and more campaigns being launched together with the start of the Water Festival on April 13th, the celebration of the Buddhist New Year, the amount of arrests rises.
The military government and the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA), a kind of government-ngo with mostly involuntary members simultaneously reinforce their YES campaign. The referendum law does not allow prisoners to vote however information leaked from the Insein prison that prisoners will be released when they vote yes. In remote areas villagers are warned by armed soldiers for punishments like burning their houses and prosecution of their families when they don’t vote pro-junta. Students with bad results for their matriculation examinations can still pass through accepting a USDA membership and a promise to vote yes. A membership that anyway gives 16 extra points to students.
Next to the YES campaign and the crackdown of the NO campaigns the government uses more indirect measures and has carefully compiled the referendum law to enable them to manipulate the results.
The inhabitants of Rangoon and Magwe divisions for example complain about more power restrictions and have no electricity except for a few unexpected short moments. Access to Internet is easily reduced in this way. The printed media received strict instructions from the state censor board on how the referendum should be reported.
The organisation of the referendum has created a momentum for the people to raise their voices but it brings a lot of dangers! Some critics referred to the 1990 elections as a smart move of the government to identify and dismantle the opposition.
Campaigning goes together with obligatory registrations and restrictions. I also guess that it is probably not cheap. Trying to stay invisible under the eyes of Big Brother is anyway very difficult with the omnipresence of informers.
Also on the day of the referendum the people will have to take a risk. Most of the polling booths will only serve 1000 people and lists with the names of those who did not come, and as such did not vote in favour of the military junta, will be collected by the election commission. U Aung Htoo of the Burma Lawyer Council said the guidelines on the organization of the referendum were inadequate and would not ensure a fair vote. “The weak point of the handbook is that it doesn’t say how many people are allowed to vote in the referendum,” Polling booths having 10% extra ballot papers than the expected electorate is as such a potential dangerous rule.
As far as I know it is also still unknown what is the required minimum turn-out of the electorate in order for the result of the referendum to be considered valid.
The voting rolls will be made public at least seven days in advance. A very short time for people to find out if and where they have the right to vote. It might bring a lot of confusion as the referendum law is very vague about the registration of people on those voting rolls. Difficulties can be expected for those who don’t reside at their permanent address like students or migrant workers. Transportation to polling booths on the other hand, especially with recent rise in the fuel prices, is for many unaffordable. Government officials already told the media that they will have to vote at the office. Many people as such will be deprived of their right to vote.
Already since the beginning of the preparations of this referendum, actually starting in 1990, the process has been confusing and unfair. In the run-up to the referendum many people were able to obtain an identity card. In different regions in Burma I heard different prices ranging from 0,25 to 10 USD and people reported changes in their names and ethnicity. I visited a remote area were the people estimated that only 10% of the people managed to make an identity card and as such have a right to vote. Without any warning General Than E arrived in the beginning of March to the village and ordered the village heads of nine surrounding villages to mobilise their inhabitants to come the next day. For some village leaders this meant walking three hours in the night and many villagers could not leave their work on the farms the following day. Information about the referendum given was minimal. I guess in the areas out of government control, the liberated areas, even fewer people have a new identity card. Those issued before 1989 are not valid.
This referendum and the signs of manipulation make me look back what happened with the multi-party democracy general elections on May 27th 1990.
Several times I read that one of the reasons why the representatives elected in 1990 never convened the parliament was that a constitution needed to be approved first. I remain confused as the opposition claims that their right to convene the parliament in 1990 was violated and the military government announced new elections after the constitution is approved. In 1990 this next step of new elections was seemingly not announced.
In The New light of Myanmar, the English government newspaper of February 29th, the author refers to the government announcement 1/90 on July 27th 1990 stating clearly that the representatives elected by the people would be responsible for drawing a constitution and gaining the power according to this constitution. This announcement however came two months after the elections, won by the opposition (NLD). The author of the article does not remind its readers to this detail.
In the endnotes of the Legal Issues on Burma Journal, April 2004, I find information about the Peoples Assembly Election Law (No 14/89) published by the regime in May 1989, one year before the elections, stating that the parliament shall be formed with the representatives elected according to this law (art. 3).And during its 43rd news conference in June 1989 the military stated, “The elected representatives can form a government, and we will transfer power to the government formed by them”.
The above mentioned article in the New Light of Myanmar however states that everybody knew before the elections that the task of the elected representatives would only be to write a constitution. Furthermore the author says the NLD refused this task and refers as well to terrorist organisations, saboteurs and riots upon which the government took initiative in 1992 to draw the constitution. They finished this task after 16 years.
I haven’t found yet the Election Law of 1989!
A dutch version is available on the MO* website.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment