BurmaNet News, August 19, 2010

[Editor]

August 19, 2010 Issue #4023

INSIDE BURMA
AP: Myanmar pro-democracy leaders praise US decision
AP: Myanmar lays down stringent campaign rules for November election
NLM: Rights to assemble and canvass for Hluttaw candidates
Irrawaddy: NLD election boycott official
Irrawaddy: The end of the DKBA?
AFP: NDF drums up support across Burma
Mizzima: USDP anticipates majority victory in elections

BUSINESS / TRADE
Economist: A new day beckons, sort of

INTERNATIONAL
WSJ: U.S. to Back Human-Rights Inquiry in Myanmar
Independent: Obama wants Burmese rulers to face UN war crimes investigation
BBC: US backs inquiry into alleged Burma war crimes

OPINION / OTHER
GCR2P: Upholding the Responsibility to Protect in Burma/Myanmar
UN Dispatch: Commissions of Inquiry, HRC and the ICC - Mark Leon Goldberg
Independent: Human rights law the only thing to frighten the generals-
Emmanouil Athanasiou
AAPP: AAPP welcomes the U.S.A’s endorsement of a Commission of Inquiry
EPCB: European MPs call on EU to support a UN Commission of Inquiry on Burma
U.S. Representative Joseph Crowley (NY-7): Crowley applauds
Administration’s support of the Establishment of a Commission of Inquiry
into Crimes
TUC: TUC calls for Barclays to come clean on Burma

____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

August 19, Associated Press
Myanmar pro-democracy leaders praise US decision

YANGON, Myanmar – Myanmar pro-democracy parties on Friday praised the U.S.
decision to support a U.N. war crimes commission as a milestone but
cautioned it was too soon to be optimistic.

"We support and welcome the decision by the United States. However, this
is just the first step and several more steps have to be taken before it
is actually implemented," said Tin Oo, vice chairman of Aung San Suu Kyi's
recently disbanded opposition party, the National League for Democracy.

The United States said Wednesday it has decided to support the creation of
a U.N. commission to look into alleged crimes against humanity and war
crimes in Myanmar. The White House said in a statement that it believes
the commission could advance the cause of human rights in Myanmar, also
known as Burma, by "addressing issues of accountability for responsible
senior members of the Burmese regime."

Tin Oo said he hoped such a commission would bring the junta to a dialogue
table with the opposition, a long-standing demand of the international
community. "If the military government changed its mindset and talked to
the country's democratic forces, all the country's woes will be resolved,"
said Tin Oo.

By supporting the U.N. inquiry, the Obama administration is committing
itself to backing an investigation of the military junta led since 1992 by
Senior Gen. Than Shwe. Than Shwe's loyalists overturned election results
in 1990 that favored Suu Kyi's political party. Suu Kyi, who was awarded
the Nobel Peace Prize the following year, remains under house arrest.

Myanmar is holding elections Nov. 7 — the first in two decades — but
critics say they are a sham designed to perpetuate the military's command.
Suu Kyi's party is boycotting the elections and was disbanded after
refusing to register for the polls.

The United States is almost certain to face opposition from China, a close
ally of Myanmar, if it seeks to have the U.N. Security Council establish a
commission. It could also ask Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon or go to the
General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council or the Geneva-based
Human Rights Council where no country has a veto.

"We welcome the decision by the Obama administration and we regard the
decision as a milestone," said Khin Maung Swe, leader of the National
Democratic Force party, formed by renegade members of Suu Kyi's former
party. "But we have to wait and see how effective the decision will be as
some countries with veto-wielding power can oppose at the Security
Council," he said.

"All big nations have to help solve the problems of immense socio-economic
disparity and abject poverty the country is facing in order to prevent
human rights abuses in the country," Swe added.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100819/ap_on_re_as/as_myanmar_us_1

____________________________________

August 19, Associated Press
Myanmar lays down stringent campaign rules for November election

Yangon, Myanmar — Myanmar has published stringent rules for November's
general election that demand candidates seek permission a week in advance
to campaign, do not make speeches that "tarnish" the ruling military or
shout slogans at processions.

The 13-point list of campaigning regulations decreed by the state Election
Commission would guarantee a "free and fair" vote, according to the
state-run New Light of Myanmar newspaper which published the rules
Thursday, a week after the Nov. 7 election date was set.

The vote will be the first in impoverished Myanmar in two decades. The
party of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, which won the last
election in 1990 but was barred from taking power, decided to boycott this
year's vote. They say the junta unfairly imposed rules that restrict
campaigning and bar the Nobel Peace Prize laureate and other political
prisoners from participating.

Many Western governments and human right groups agree that the process is
unfair and seek changes to ensure free and fair polls, including the
release of Suu Kyi — who has been detained for 15 of the past 21 years —
and other prisoners.

Although the election is meant to be the key step from five decades of
military rule to civilian government, critics say a military-initiated
constitution, along with repression of the opposition, ensures the army
will continue to hold commanding influence even after the polls.

According to the regulations, candidates must seek permission to campaign
a week in advance from the local Election Commission, providing details
such as place of assembly, date, time and duration. Holding flags and
shouting slogans in processions is forbidden, as is making speeches or
distributing publications that "tarnish the image" of the military and any
"activities that can harm security."

Candidates found in violation of the regulations face a fine and a jail
term of one year.

It was still unclear when the official campaign period begins. The
Election Commission will finish its scrutiny of candidates by Sept. 10.

Separately, the New Light of Myanmar reported an ethnic Karen group allied
to the government — the Democratic Karen Buddhist Association — agreed to
transform its guerrilla fighters into the Border Guard Forces.

Integrating ethnic rebel groups into government-supervised border forces
is a key part of the government's plans to pacify border areas, which are
dominated by minority groups that have long striven for autonomy,
sometimes though armed struggle.

The junta in the 1990s reached cease-fire agreements with many, but
compromised by allowing them to keep their arms. Five of the groups have
now agreed to integrate themselves into the national border force, but
others, such as the Kachin Independence Army and the 20,000-strong United
Wa State Army, are still resisting the transformation of their militias.

____________________________________

August 19, The New Light of Myanmar
Rights to assemble and canvass for Hluttaw candidates

Nay Pyi Taw — The Union Election Commission issued Notification No.
91/2010 today. The following is the unofficial translation of the
notification.

The Union of Myanmar
Union Election Commission
Nay Pyi Taw
Notification No. 91/2010
8th Waxing of Wagaung 1372 ME
(18th August 2010)

1. The Union Election Commission already issued the Notification No.
89/2010 dated 13-8-2010 saying that multiparty democracy general elections
for the respective Hluttaws will be held on 7 November 2010. With
Notification No.90/2010 dated 13-8-2010, the Commission also announced the
starting and last dates for submission of Hluttaw candidate list, the date
to scrutinize applications of candidates and the last date to withdraw
applications of candidates if needed.

2. Hluttaw candidates representing political parties and independent
Hluttaw candidates who submit lists of Hluttaw candidates to stand for
elections of respective Hluttaws and their representatives, shall follow
the methods described in this Notification if they wish to present their
policies, stances and work programmes and causes through talks or in
writings for their candidates to win.

Procedures to be taken
3. Hluttaw candidates and election representatives may take following
procedure in order that their Hluttaw candidates can win.

(a) assembling and giving talks at a designated place with the permission
of the sub-commission concerned
(b) distributing and presenting publication

Applying for permission for assembling and giving talks
4. Hluttaw candidates and election representatives who wish to assemble
and give talks at the designated places shall have to apply to the
subcommission concerned as mentioned hereunder seven days in advance.

(a) the state or division sub-commission concerned for the townships where
state or division sub-commission office is based
(b) the district sub-commission concerned for the townships where district
sub-commission office is based
(c) the township sub-commission concerned for the remaining townships
except the townships mentioned in sub-Paras (a) and (b)

5. Assembling and giving talks at the party headquarters and branches
shall be reported in advance to the sub-commissions concerned and it is no
need to apply for the permission.

6. Those entitled to apply: In applying for the permission according to
Para-4, a Hluttaw candidate concerned or his election representative will
have to sign the application.

7. Points to be included in the application: In applying for the
permission, Hluttaw candidates and election representatives concerned
shall have to apply mentioning that they shall assemble and give talks in
accord with the prohibitions, provisions included in the permission and
principles. In addition, they shall have to include the following detailed
points in the application.

(a) planned venue
(b) planned date
(c) starting time and finishing time (estimate)
(d) number of attendees (estimate)
(e) the name, NRC No. and address of a speaker or speakers
(f) the name, NRC No. and address of the applicant

8. Sub-commission's scrutiny: With regard to applying for permission
according to Paras 4, 6 and 7, the sub-commission can

(a) issue the permission or reject the application after scrutinizing the
application as necessary.
(b) The following points shall be stated in the permission order when issued:

(1) Permitted date and place
(2) Starting time and finishing time
(3) Name, NRC No. and address of a permitted speaker or speakers

(c) In issuing the permission, the points prohibiting the act of holding
flags and shouting slogans in procession in going to the designated place
for the assembly and talk and the points stating to disperse without
shouting slogans in procession shall be stipulated.

(d) The following points shall be stipulated as necessary in issuing the
permission:

(1) Not to cause any disturbances to public places such as government
offices, organizations, factories, workshops and work places, markets,
sports grounds, religious places, schools and hospitals

(2) Not to exceed the seating capacity if the venue of the assembly and
talk is a building or hall. (To take the responsibility of ensuring that
there is no public assembling outside the building or hall)

(3) If the venue of the assembly and talk is an open ground, its holding
capacity shall not be exceeded.

(4) Not to hold or carry any sticks, swords, weapons and ammunition and
other harmful items

(5) Not to disturb the traffic and block roads

(6) To amplify the sound box to the degree that is just enough for the
permitted hall or ground in order not to cause any disturbances to the
surrounding areas

(7) Sound amplification system shall be according to the existing laws and
principles

(8) Other necessary stipulations

(e) Permit shall be issued 48 hours prior to the time of the commencement
of the assembly and talk. Any rejection to the permit shall be informed 48
hours prior to the time of the commencement of the assembly and talk
together with the reason to do so.

(f) If necessary for ensuring of security, the rule of law and community
peace, the provisions stipulated in this Notification shall be amended or
revoked.

(g) Allowable public places in the regions concerned for assembly and
giving public talks shall be designated in advance in coordination with
the Peace and Development Councils concerned.

(h) Coordination shall be carried out in order that the Peace and
Development Councils concerned and security forces can safeguard
assembling and giving public talks.

(i) Coordination shall be carried out in order that the Peace and
Development Councils concerned and security forces can take necessary
preventive measures against any threats to security, the rule of law and
community peace.

Rights to publish publications

9. If candidates and election representatives want to publish and
distribute papers, books and pamphlets on their policies, stances and
programmes for public knowledge, they shall follow the 1962 Printers and
Publishers Registration Law and the stipulations in Directive No (42)
dated 17 March 2010 issued by the Central Supervisory Committee for
Printers and Publishers Registration and Scrutinization under the Ministry
of Information.

Restrictions

10. Candidates and election representatives shall not breach any of the
following restrictions in assembling, giving public talks and distributing
publications.

(a) activities that can harm Non-disintegration of the Union,
Non-disintegration of national solidarity and Perpetuation of sovereignty,
(b) activities that can harm security, the rule of law, community peace,
(c) disobeying the State Constitution of the Union of Myanmar and existing
laws,
(d) giving public talks and distributing publications with the intention
of inciting sedition or tarnishing the image of the State,
(e) giving public talks and distributing publications with intent to break
up or tarnish the image of the Tatmadaw,
(f) distributing publications, giving public talks or organizing people to
provoke racial, religious, individual or public conflicts, or harm dignity
and morals,
(g) misusing religion for political gains,
(h) instigating riots and distributing publications with intent to harm
peaceful learning,
(i) instigating riots and distributing publications with intent to incite
service personnel not to discharge their duties well or take to the
streets against the government,

11. Candidates and election representatives shall not breach the existing
laws, and restrictions contained in this Notification and stipulations of
the permission in assembling and distributing publications to present
their policies, stances and programmes.

12. Any candidate or election representative is liable for action taken in
accordance with Political Parties Registration Law and the Election Laws
concerned in addition to existing law if they disobey any of the
restrictions contained in this Notification, or stipulations prescribed in
the permission.

11 Therefore, it is hereby announced that candidates and election
representatives are to honour this Notification in assembling, giving
public talks and distributing publications for their candidates to win in
the elections, to ensure that the multiparty democracy general elections
due to be held in 2010 are free and fair.

By order
Sd/Thein Soe
Chairman
Union Election Commission

____________________________________

August 19, Irrawaddy
NLD election boycott official

Leaders of Burma's main opposition party, the National League for
Democracy (NLD), have decided to officially boycott the Nov 7. election,
according to Ohn Kyaing, a party spokesperson.

The decision was made at a meeting on Thursday attended by central
executive committee and leading party members.

Held at the house of NLD vice chairman Tin Oo in Rangoon, the meeting was
attended by top NLD leaders including vice chairman Tin Oo, Win Tin, Nyunt
Wai, Than Htun and Hla Pe, said Ohn Kyaing, who also attended.

He said the NLD decided to boycott the election because the 2008
Constitution and the election commission's election law do not guarantee
democracy and human rights in Burma.

The NLD also affirmed that voters have the right to decide whether to vote
in the election according to the constitution, he said.

In June, detained Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi said Burmese
citizens have the right not to vote in the upcoming election.

However, earlier in August, an article in one of the state-run newspapers
warned that anyone who “disrupts” the upcoming elections could face up to
20 years imprisonment.

Ohn Kyaing said he cannot provide detailed information about the election
boycott at this moment, but the NLD will hold strategy meetings in the
near future for organizing the election boycott.

The Nov. 7 election takes place one week before Suu Kyi is due for release.

____________________________________

August 19, Irrawaddy
The end of the DKBA? - Saw Yan Naing

The Burmese government welcomed troops of the Democratic Karen Buddhist
Army (DKBA) into the border guard force in a ceremony on Thursday in
Myaing Gyi Nyu, the headquarters of the DKBA in Karen State, according to
sources.

The ceremony was attended by several Burmese officials including Burmese
Military Affairs Security Chief Lt-Gen Ye Myint, who is one of the
regime’s chief negotiators responsible for persuading ethnic ceasefire
militias to accept becoming border guard forces, Brig-Gen Zaw Min, the
chairman of the Karen State Peace and Development Council, and Maj-Gen
Thet Naing Win, the Southeast Regional Commander in Moulmein.

Gen Kyaw Than, the DKBA commander in chief and vice chairman, also
attended the ceremony.

Witnesses said Burmese police cleared the road for a convoy of DKBA
vehicles bringing hundreds of DKBA troops to Myaing Gyi Nyu on Wednesday
for the ceremony.

Separate ceremonies will also take place this month in other
DKBA-controlled areas including Pinekyon Township and Shwe Koko,
headquarters of DKBA Special Battalion 999 led by Col Chit Thu, according
to Karen sources.

Karen sources in Hpa-an, capital of Karen State also said that Brig-Gen
Pah Nwee, the commander of DKBA Brigade 999, and his troops will be
received at a ceremony on Friday.

“They [DKBA Brigade 999 troops] are practicing for Friday's ceremony,”
said a source in Hpa-an.

Sources have not confirmed when there will be a ceremony for Col Chit Thu
and his troops from DKBA Special Battalion 999.

Meanwhile, observers predict DKBA forces will lose control of many of its
strongholds where large business operate when the militia becomes a border
guard force paid for and dominated by Burmese officials.

According to Burma’s 2008 Constitution, the border guard force will be
part of the Burmese armed forces and will receive the same salary as
Burmese army troops.

Saw Htee Moo, a well-informed source close to the DKBA said the Burmese
regime will likely take over DKBA-controlled trade, leaving the DKBA
poorer.

Several large businesses in Karen State along Thai-Burmese border such as
logging, zinc and tin mining  and border trade through Myawaddy Towship
are currently controlled by the DKBA.

This will change, according to Karen sources, who say trade in
DKBA-controlled regions and border areas will come under the direct
control of the Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry
when the DKBA becomes a border guard force.

The DKBA split from its mother organization, the Karen National Union
(KNU) and signed ceasefire agreement with the Burmese military government
in 1995. It has six brigades with an estimated 6,000 armed fighters.

In early August, Burmese junta troops in Myawaddy Township seized the main
border trade gate operated by DKBA Brigade 999 on the Thai-Burmese border.
The Burmese troops put up a Burmese national flag and took down the DKBA
flag, changing the name of the gate from Brigade 999 to Dawna Taung—the
name of a well-known mountain in Karen State, according to sources close
to DKBA.

“DKBA is now at the endgame. They will disappear,” said Maj Saw Hla Ngwe,
joint secretary (1) of the KNU.

____________________________________

August 19, Agence France-Press
NDF drums up support across Burma

The Burmese opposition party formed by ex-members of Aung San Suu Kyi’s
National League for Democracy opened a new office in Mandalay Thursday to
drum up support ahead of November elections.

Watched by plain-clothes police and military intelligence personnel, about
100 people attended the inaugural ceremony in the central city, where
members of the National Democratic Force cut a ribbon and released
balloons.

“We cannot avoid the coming election, whether we assume it is fair or
not,” NDF chairman Than Nyein said in a speech. “People might have
expected in the past they would vote again for the NLD as they had done
before. But, unexpectedly, the NLD does not exist any more as it is not
participating in the election.”

He said NDF members felt they would be failing in their duties if they did
not stand in the country’s first polls in two decades when people are
ready to cast their votes.

“We will not go backwards nor run away
. We are not people who will
retreat because of difficulties,” he said.

The NDF’s decision to contest the election has put it at odds with other
former members of the NLD – including Suu Kyi – who opted to boycott the
poll because of “unjust” election laws.

The vote has been widely condemned by activists and the West as a sham
aimed at shoring up almost half a century of military rule.

The NLD, which was founded in 1988 after a popular uprising against the
junta that left thousands dead, won a landslide victory in 1990 elections
but the military rulers never allowed it to take office.

Critics say the ruling generals are taking no chances this time, reserving
one quarter of the seats in parliament for the military and crafting
election rules to ensure that junta-backed parties have the advantage.

Opposition parties are facing serious financial and time constraints
signing up candidates by an August 30 deadline. Anyone who wants to run in
the election must pay a non-refundable registration fee of about 500 US
dollars.

While the NDF – whose headquarters is in Yangon – is expected to struggle
to fill the NLD’s shoes, it is managing to win over some Suu Kyi fans.

Suu Kyi, who has spent much of the past 20 years in detention and is seen
as the biggest threat to the junta, is barred as a serving prisoner from
standing. The poll date falls about a week before Suu Kyi’s current house
arrest is due to expire on 13 November.

“We want democracy and we must participate in the election. As I liked the
NDF’s statements, I became a member,” said 37-year-old trader Nan Hteik
Zaw.

____________________________________

August 19, Mizzima News
USDP anticipates majority victory in elections

Nahtoegyi – With less than three months before Burma’s first general
election in two decades, an official from the primary military-supported
party is confident of victory.

Minister of Industry No.1, Aung Thaung, predicts the junta-backed Union
Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) will win 16 million votes in the
forthcoming election and take more than 50 percent of parliamentary seats.

Aung Thaung, who is also a secretary in the Central Committee of the
party, aired his premonition at a ceremony for the party’s submission of
its membership application letter held at Nahtoegyi Stadium in Mandalay
Division on August 9.

An estimated 30 million people are to vote in the November 7 polling,
according to the Ministry of Immigration and Population.
Aung-Thaung
Aung Thaung, a native of Mandalay Division, said the USDP was not formed
out of the blue, so they are better in every aspect than other political
parties.

A close confidant of Senior General Than Shwe, Aung Thaung will contest in
a constituency of Mandalay Division in the forthcoming election.

The USDP is led by current Prime Minister Thein Sein and is expected to
conduct office opening and flag hoisting ceremonies

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

August 19, Economist
Myanmar's politics and economy
A new day beckons, sort of
The first election in 20 years coincides with a rushed privatisation
programme. Guess who profits from the fire sale

IN MYANMAR, a column of cars at a petrol station usually means a fuel
shortage or a broken pump. But the queue at “New Day”, one of dozens of
newly privatised stations in Yangon, the former capital, is a sign of
progress. New managers have repainted its tin roof and installed two
Chinese-made pumps with digital displays. Fresh-faced attendants in
branded red-and-white polo shirts leap eagerly to their task. To the side
sit the rusting pumps of MPPE, the state firm that this year lost its
monopoly on fuel sales and distribution.

Motorists now enjoy the luxury of filling their tanks. Before, one
explains, you could buy a maximum of two gallons a day and black-market
merchants supplied the rest. Naturally, rationing did not apply to
military men or civil servants, who got free fuel allocations. MPPE was
notorious for selling substandard diesel. Now drivers can pick among the
private operators of Myanmar’s 248 filling stations, though prices seem to
be pegged at a single rate.

The sell-off is part of a big privatisation plan taking place before a
general election—the first in two decades—that has been called for
November 7th. Ports, airlines, highways, mines, dams, factories,
warehouses, government buildings and cinemas have all gone on the block.
Private firms may now run schools and hospitals. Four banks are due to
open soon, the first new ones since a banking crisis in 2003. One may even
issue credit cards, a rarity in Myanmar.

Nearly five decades after seizing power and nationalising all industries,
the army suddenly seems infused with a Thatcherite spirit. Given its
appalling economic record—income per person is a paltry $459 a year—that
could be cause for celebration.

Sadly, the programme seems to be a hurried asset-stripping exercise by the
generals and their cronies, with echoes of Russia’s 1990s fire sale. The
valuations of the assets are not published, nor what they are fetching.
Buildings are listed for auction, but sales are done in private. In a
deeply corrupt country, it is easy to imagine the worst. Opposition
activists, diplomats and businessmen say that a handful of pro-junta
tycoons are benefiting royally, including many who were blacklisted by the
American government.

Yet the pace of sales suggests that the election, however flawed, might
represent some real political change. The vote will not be fair.
Campaigning will be tightly controlled and it is costly to field
candidates. Pro-junta parties enjoy access to official media, unlike the
opposition. The country’s most famous politician, Aung San Suu Kyi, is
barred from running, along with over 2,000 other political prisoners. In
protest, her National League for Democracy (NLD) will not contest the
election, although a breakaway party will.

Despite all this, the poll is a watershed. Businessmen are bracing
themselves for a transition from the certainties of military rule to a
civilian-flavoured administration. For the departing generals,
privatisation looks to be a retirement plan of sorts. The 77-year-old
leader of the junta, General Than Shwe, wants to hand over gradually to
younger men. A constitution drawn up in 2008 enshrines a strong role for
the armed forces, which will control a quarter of the seats in national
and local parliaments and run the security agencies. But new faces and
power bases will emerge. “People are grabbing what they can. Nobody knows
where they’ll be after the election,” notes a diplomat.

The result may be that some power is dispersed, particularly in Myanmar’s
14 states and divisions, half of which are dominated by ethnic minorities.
Army officers may soon do less day-to-day administration, though cronies
of the junta and military-run companies would keep the commanding heights
of the economy.

Uniforms are so yesterday

Optimists in Yangon see benefits from the privatisation programme,
whatever its inequities. One suggests that the new owners might even
invest in their companies. “They have the capacity. We can use these
guys,” he says. Not all the assets are prizes; some ministries simply
wanted to be rid of dud firms, suggests Sean Turnell of Macquarie
University in Australia. Just possibly some generals will try to knock
their companies into good enough shape to compete, eventually, with
foreign rivals.

That would become clear only after the election, if men in suits, not in
uniform, start to set economic policy. If some authority were devolved to
local bodies, that might cause friction with regional military commands.
In any case, no one expects that the army will meekly hide away in its
barracks. It still sees itself as the guardian of national unity and a
bulwark against ethnic separatism and foreign meddlers. The constitution
gives a powerful role to the commander-in-chief, who appoints his own
security council and can declare a state of emergency. The new day may yet
look rather like the old one.

____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

August 19, Wall Street Journal
U.S. to Back Human-Rights Inquiry in Myanmar

The Obama administration decided to back efforts to create an
international commission investigating alleged human-rights violations in
Myanmar in a move that ratchets up pressure on the country as it prepares
for its first election in 20 years.

The move comes just months after Washington said it was embarking on a new
policy of "engagement" with Myanmar aimed at improving relations after
years of economic sanctions failed to weaken its secretive military
regime. Supporters of the engagement effort, including some Myanmar exiles
and analysts, had hoped it would encourage top Myanmar generals to open
more to the outside world and take steps to ensure the coming election is
held to international standards.

More recently, however, U.S. officials began to express frustration that
their overtures—which included visits to Myanmar by high-ranking State
Department officials—had failed to influence the government, which is
accused of human-rights violations including the imprisonment of 2,000 or
more political opponents.

Myanmar's government has declined to release Nobel laureate opposition
leader Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest, which U.S. officials have said
is a precondition to holding fair elections. In June, Myanmar officials
issued tough new campaign rules that prohibit political parties from
marching or chanting slogans or giving talks "tarnishing the image of the
state." Opposition leaders say they have been harassed by police in recent
weeks.

U.S. officials have expressed concern over unconfirmed reports that
Myanmar may be attempting to develop a nuclear-weapons program. Those
concerns grew more serious in recent months after exile news services
released reports about the alleged program based in part on details from a
Myanmar army defector. Myanmar officials have repeatedly denied any
attempts to develop nuclear weapons.

"The United States supports establishing an international commission of
inquiry to investigate alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity" in
Myanmar, an administration official said Wednesday. "We have begun
consulting with others to determine how best to achieve that end," the
official said.

It wasn't possible to reach anyone within the Myanmar government to comment.

Critics of Myanmar have been pushing for a United Nations-led inquiry for
years. The effort gained momentum this year after a U.N. special
rapporteur for Myanmar, Tomas Ojea Quintana, said he found a pattern of
systematic human-rights violations in trips to the country, including
cases of forced labor.

A Myanmar diplomat disputed the assessment at the time and said
international authorities should be more focused on rebuilding relations
with the country.

U.S. support doesn't mean an inquiry will occur. But it indicates that
Western governments are hoping to tighten pressure on Myanmar's military,
which has ruled the country since 1962, and especially its top leader,
Senior Gen. Than Shwe. Many exiles and academics believe Myanmar's
generals opted to schedule an election this year in part to boost their
legitimacy in the international community, potentially forestalling any
bid to open a crimes-against-humanity probe.

Myanmar's officials promise that the vote, scheduled for Nov. 7, will be
free and fair. But many opposition leaders, including Ms. Suu Kyi, have
vowed to boycott, and international rights groups have said they don't
believe a fair vote can be held given Myanmar's tight restrictions on the
media and public assembly. Opposition leaders easily won the last vote, in
1990, but the junta ignored the results.

The decision to back a commission of inquiry "is the right and timely
action by the Obama administration" to express displeasure over what is
likely to be a "sham election," said Aung Din, executive director of the
U.S. Campaign for Burma, a Washington group that uses a former name for
the country, in a statement.

____________________________________

August 19, Independent
Obama wants Burmese rulers to face UN war crimes investigation - Andrew
Buncombe

US move reflects the failure of engagement with Rangoon

The administration of US President Barack Obama has decided to throw its
crucial support behind moves to establish a special UN commission to
investigate alleged war crimes perpetrated by the military rulers of
Burma.

In what represents a marked rollback of one of President Obama's most
controversial foreign policy initiatives, US officials said Washington
would now back the war crimes investigation, as urged earlier this year by
the UN special rapporteur for human rights in Burma. Washington is also
said to be considering tightening sanctions against the junta.

The decision represents a reversal of an initiative announced last year to
try to develop closer diplomatic ties with Burma by establishing regular
meetings involving a senior US official.
Related articles

There was talk that a closer relationship could possibly be rewarded with
a dilution or dropping of some sanctions. But reports suggest Washington
believes its overtures to the military have largely been rebuffed, even
though several meetings have been held.

There is also likely concern over continued reports – though none of them
confirmed – that Burma is interested in developing a nuclear weapon.

"There have been no positive results on democracy and human rights in our
diplomatic engagement," one anonymous official told The Washington Post.

The decision by the US to back the tribunal, already supported by Britain
and Australia, comes before elections in Burma on 7 November.

While the junta claims they will be a stepping-stone towards full
democracy, most observers in the West have dismissed them, saying they
will do little more than cement the position of the military.

Campaigners have argued the elections could not be considered fair while
more than 2,100 political prisoners – among them an opposition leader,
Aung San Suu Kyi – were still detained.

A total of about 40 parties have registered to participate in November's
elections, though many of them are groups led by former senior military
officers who have taken off their uniforms for the process. The National
League for Democracy, the party of Ms Suu Kyi, a Nobel laureate, voted not
to participate, though a breakaway group has registered.

Activists yesterday welcomed the US decision. Aung Din, executive director
of the Washington-based Campaign for Burma, said: "This is the right and
timely action in response to the power thirsty and brutal generals, who
are expecting to delete their dirty crimes by putting a sham constitution
into effect through a sham election.

"This is a clear message that the United States will not recognise their
showcase election and will make them accountable for their horrible abuses
against their own citizens."

Mark Farmaner, of the Burma Campaign UK, also supported the move but said
it was essential the EU made a similar declaration. "The EU must end its
silence on crimes against humanity in Burma, and publicly support a UN
inquiry," he said.

Pro-democracy and human rights groups have urged the United Nations
Security Council to impose an arms embargo on the regime and establish a
commission of inquiry into crimes against humanity.

They fear a humanitarian crisis may develop along the border with
Thailand, where the Burmese military has been fighting ethnic Karens,
pushing thousands of refugees across the border. Karen National Union
fighters have been battling for half a century for greater autonomy from
Burma's central government.

The establishment of an independent tribunal to investigate war crimes is
no small undertaking and has as much to do with geopolitics as with any
offences that may have been committed. Many activists opposed to the 2003
invasion of Iraq have campaigned for Tony Blair and former US president
George Bush to be charged with war crimes. In the case of Burma, five
nations have so far supported an investigation. France is said to be one
of several countries in the EU, along with Germany, Austria and Italy,
that support a softer stance.

In March, the UN special rapporteur for Burma, Tomás Ojea Quintana, issued
a report that was highly critical of the country's human rights situation.
Urging an investigation, he said there was evidence of mass killing,
torture, forced displacement and rape.

The decision by the Obama administration followed a review of longstanding
US policy towards Burma. Officials said they believed a policy of
sanctions had, by itself, failed to bring about improvements in democracy
and human rights.

Yet the move also underscored concern that Asian giants such as India and
China, which have warm relations with Burma, were securing valuable oil
and gas deals. Such relationships were also undermining the effectiveness
of Western sanctions.

Reports suggest there are various options for setting up a commission of
inquiry. According to Foreign Policy magazine, the US could introduce a
resolution establishing such a commission before the UN Human Rights
Council, which will convene next month.

Washington could also press the UN General Assembly to pass a resolution
establishing it, or it could appeal to Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary
general, to do it under his own authority. Such inquiries can often lead
to war crimes prosecutions.

Burma: War crimes?

The Burmese junta and its 77-year-old leader, General Than Shwe, could be
investigated over a number of alleged crimes during its rule including:

* The crushing of the August 1988 democracy uprising that led to the
deaths of 3,000 to 6,000 people.

* Widespread ethnic cleansing of groups such as the Karen, which have been
fighting for greater autonomy for half a century.

* The alleged use of forced labour to build pipelines and other
infrastructure, torture and beatings, and the use of rape by Burma's armed
forces. Human Rights Watch says that such violations are widespread in
Burma.

*The violent crackdown on the September 2007 "Saffron Uprising", headed by
Buddhist monks, which left scores of people dead.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/obama-wants-burmese-rulers-to-face-un-war-crimes-investigation-2056314.html

____________________________________

August 18, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)
US backs inquiry into alleged Burma war crimes - Kim Ghattas, Washington

The US government says it will back the creation of an international
commission to investigate alleged war crimes by Burma's military junta.

The body could advance the cause of human rights in Burma by "addressing
issues of accountability" for members of the regime, the White House said.

A senior US official told the BBC the move was still consistent with the
US policy of engagement with Burma.

The US announced in 2009 that it would engage diplomatically with Burma.

In March, UN special rapporteur Tomas Ojea Quintana released a critical
report referring to "systematic violation of human rights" for years in
the country.

The Obama administration's aim was to help put Burma on a path to reform,
achieve credible elections as well as promote national reconciliation,
including with the National League for Democracy, led by Aung San Suu
Kyii.

But US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says efforts have yielded no
improvement in the situation inside the country, ahead of general
elections scheduled for 7 November.

"Diplomatic engagement is not a reward - it is a tool designed to
facilitate and encourage positive change," a state department official
told the BBC.

"We have been clear all along this did not preclude us from taking steps
to increase pressure when warranted."

The commission of inquiry could be formed either through the UN Human
Rights Council, through a UN General Assembly resolution or by UN
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and could eventually lead to a war crimes
prosecution.

The US official hinted that further sanctions on Burma were also possible.

"Our sanctions regime is dynamic, is constantly being assessed for
efficacy, and is capable of being adjusted as warranted by conditions
within Burma and the actions of the Burmese government," he added.

The US move has been welcomed by human rights organisations like the US
Campaign for Burma.

"This is the right and timely action by the Obama administration in
response to the power-thirsty and brutal generals in [the Burmese capital]
Nay Pyi Taw, who are expecting to delete their dirty crimes by putting a
sham constitution into effect through a sham election," said the group's
executive director, Aung Din.

"This is a clear message that the United States will not recognize their
show-case election and will make them accountable for their horrible
abuses against their own citizens."

It is unclear what impact, if any, the commission will have on the
leadership, particularly the ruling General Than Shwe.

But much of what drives policy towards Burma, including the decision to
engage, is about influencing younger members of the junta, who may not be
as deeply involved in any alleged war crimes.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

August 16, Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Upholding the Responsibility to Protect in Burma/Myanmar*

Introduction The situation in Burma/Myanmar remains grave. With elections
scheduled for 7 November 2010 international attention on the country has
increased. Such attention, and any policy action taken, must focus not
only on the goal of democratic transition, and concerns about the regimes
nuclear collaboration with North Korea, but also on the plight of Burma’s
ethnic minorities who continue to suffer atrocities at the hands of the
government. These atrocities may rise to the level of crimes against
humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing – crimes states committed
themselves to protect populations from at the 2005 World Summit, as
described in the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect policy
brief dated 4 March 2010, “Applying the Responsibility to Protect to
Burma/Myanmar.”
International actors have a responsibility to protect Burma’s ethnic
minorities from atrocities – atrocities that are often overshadowed by the
attention focused on the pro-democracy movement. This brief assesses the
current risk of atrocities and identifies measures that can be used to aid
in preventing and halting these atrocities. The brief argues that pressure
must be placed on the Burmese government to cease the commission of crimes
and avoid the resort to violence against groups with which it currently
has ceasefires.

Current Risks
Acts that appear to rise to the level of war crimes, crimes against
humanity and ethnic cleansing continue to be perpetrated against ethnic
minorities – including Karen, Shan and Karenni civilians – in the name of
rooting out ethnic armed groups. The upcoming elections and the junta’s
desire to gain both international and domestic legitimacy have not led to
a reduction in the targeting of civilians. Most recently, on 23 July, the
Burmese Army, known as the Tatmadaw, reportedly shelled villages in Karen
state displacing 900 people.

An additional source of concern over the past year has been related to the
risk that armed conflict would break out over the government’s demand that
current “ceasefire groups” (ethnic armed groups that signed ceasefire
agreements with the government in exchange for some level of autonomy to
govern their communities) transition into border guard  forces under the
control of the Tatmadaw. The majority of these ceasefire groups including
those representing the Wa, Mon, Kachin and Shan ethnic groups have
resisted such
demands. Negotiations between the government and the ceasefire groups have
largely been unsuccessful at reaching

a compromise. Thus far the government has exercised restraint and appears
to have placed such demands on hold until after the elections rather than
resorting to an armed attack on the ceasefire groups.

However, there is no guarantee that such restraint will continue.
Similarly, there is no indication that the government will halt its
attacks on civilians in currently contested areas. There is also a risk
that there may be an escalation of systematic attacks on the pro-democracy
movement in the period surrounding the election. These attacks may include
arbitrary detention, torture and extra judicial killings.

In light of the ongoing risk and the government’s manifest failure to
protect, the international community must take protective and preventive
action. Possible measures that can be enacted in keeping with the
responsibility to protect include diplomatic engagement, a commission of
inquiry, an arms embargo and economic sanctions.  While there is no
guarantee, there are grounds to believe that these measures may influence
the junta’s calculations about the benefits of targeting civilians as well
as their ability to perpetrate atrocities.

Diplomatic Engagement
Regional actors, including ASEAN and its members along with China and
India, must engage with, and urge the government to exercise its
responsibility to protect. China, as one of Burma’s staunchest public
supporters and biggest investors, has significant leverage. The Chinese
government has, as of late, been playing a constructive role behind the
scenes. This includes through its efforts to mediate conversations between
the Burmese government and major ceasefire groups operating along the
Chinese border. China’s influence was likely a key factor in the Burmese
government’s apparent decision to place the issue of the border guard
forces on hold until after the election.

Thailand and India should seek to play a similar role and ASEAN itself
must move beyond publicly urging “credible and transparent” elections to
engaging with the government on issues relating to the prevention of mass
atrocities. Such engagement may include placing pressure on the government
to permit visits to the country by the Special Rapporteur. Additionally,
Thailand and other regional states must not use the election as
justification for the forced repatriation of refugees likely to suffer
atrocities if returned to Burma.

Governments outside of the region should increase their diplomatic
engagement as efforts to isolate the regime have increased the
government’s insularity and paranoia. Efforts to open the channels of
communication are crucial in the wake of elections which, while likely to
be neither free nor fair, may provide a small opening for progress. Recent
diplomatic visits by the Unites States are a positive step. Additional
efforts, including possibly recognizing the junta’s change of the
country’s name, may help to demonstrate that states are sincere in their
efforts to improve relations. Better relations may enhance states’
influence over the junta and create an opening to press the government on
atrocity prevention. Finally, the UN needs to engage more intensely using
mechanisms that potentially could include the appointment of a new Special
Advisor on Myanmar and seeking to brief the Security Council.

Commission of Inquiry
In recent years, there have been numerous calls for International Criminal
Court (ICC) consideration of the situation. Given that Burma has not
ratified the Rome Statute, ICC engagement would likely require
authorization by the Security Council, which may not be forthcoming. There
have also been suggestions that an international commission of inquiry
should be created. In his recent report, the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar
stated that human rights violations that “may entail categories of crimes
against humanity or war crimes under the terms of the Rome Statute” were
taking place and that, as these crimes were committed with impunity,
“United Nations institutions may consider the possibility to establish a
commission of inquiry with a specific fact-finding mandate to address the
question of international crimes.” Such a commission could be initiated by
the UN Secretary General or the General Assembly and would bring intense
scrutiny to the actions of the government, and possibly those of ethnic
armed groups, against ethnic minorities and political opponents. The
government has shown some level of concern about its international
reputation. Increased attention and pressure may cause the government and
its armed forces to moderate their behavior to some extent, reducing or
preventing the commission of atrocities.

Economic Sanctions
At present economic sanctions, restrictions on aid dispersed through the
government, and targeted banking and travel sanctions against individual
generals apply to Burma. The broad economic sanctions target the formal
economy, which benefits most directly from foreign investment and is
dominated by those with ties to the regime. As a result, these sanctions
impact more negatively the capacities of the military, individual generals
and allies of the regime, than they do civilians who primarily operate in
the informal economy. Some arguments favoring the lifting of sanctions are
premised on the idea that doing so would strengthen the middle class who
could then challenge the junta’s power. Yet the absence of an independent
business sector in Burma suggests this is unlikely to happen. Despite the
fact that sanctions have not been able to halt atrocities outright, they
may have some impact on the military’s ability to wage a larger scale war
on ethnic minorities.

The current sanctions regime could be strengthened and made more effective
by addressing two related issues. The first is that sanctions are not
universally applied. Many influential regional actors, in particular,
India, China and Thailand, continue to invest in and trade freely with
Burma. Additionally, those countries that have enacted sanctions have not
done so in a uniform manner. They have allowed numerous exemptions,
notably in the energy sector, that in many cases directly benefit military
leaders. Better coordination and the universalization of the sanctions
regime could help improve their effectiveness. Tying conditions for the
lifting of sanctions to a cessation of atrocities against ethnic
minorities in Burma, instead of solely to a democratic transition, may
also help advance the protection of populations from atrocities.

Arms Embargo
Many UN member states have embargoes restricting the sale of weapons to
the junta and to non-state armed groups. However, as in the case of
economic sanctions, the ban is not universally enforced. Implementing a
global ban on the transfer of arms would contribute significantly to
halting the four crimes by making it more difficult for the Tatmadaw to
obtain weapons. Yet there are currently obstacles to such a comprehensive
approach, in particular China and Russia export arms to Burma and may,
based on past precedent, block efforts to have the UN Security Council put
Burma on its agenda, and issue a resolution establishing an arms embargo.

Conclusion
The UN, ASEAN and key actors such as China and the US must, in keeping
with their own responsibility to protect, place pressure on the Burmese
government to take action to prevent and halt mass atrocities. Coordinated
regional and international diplomatic engagement, focused on urging the
government to cease the commission of atrocities against civilians and
avoid a resort to violence with ceasefire groups, should be undertaken.
This engagement should be in conjunction with other measures such as the
creation of a comission of inquiry.

*The country was officially renamed the Union of Myanmar by the military
government in 1989. The use of term Burma in this report is not intended
as a political statement.

____________________________________

August 18, UN Dispatch
Commissions of Inquiry, the Human Rights Council and the ICC - Mark Leon
Goldberg

Colum Lynch reports that the United States is ready to support a
"commission of inquiry" into alleged crimes against humanity in Burma. 
The move, he says, comes as the Obama administration recognizes that a
policy of engagement is not working.

Make no mistake: this decision could be the first step in a long process
that might eventually lead to the indictment of Than Shwe and the Burmese
leadership for crimes against humanity. But beyond Burma, it could also
set a new standard for how the United States can constructively help
direct the work product of the International Criminal Court, even though
the United States remains outside its formal structures.

To understand what "commissions of inquiry" might have to do with the ICC,
consider the case of Sudan.  In 2004, as news reports emerged of mass
atrocity in Darfur, Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed a commission of
inquiry led by the Italian jurist Antonio Cassese to investigate alleged
war crimes in Darfur. When the Cassese report was presented to the
Security Council in early 2005, it contained a number of damning
allegations of war crimes, including a classified annex with the names of
individuals suspected of having committed war crimes. Crucially, the
report recommended that the Security Council authorize the International
Criminal Court to investigate the alleged crimes.

The Bush administration did not much like the ICC, but it became
politically difficult to ignore the report's central conclusions about
accountability. The non ICC members of the P-5 (China, Russia and the USA)
abstained and let the measure pass. Like Sudan, Burma is not a member of
the International Criminal Court.  The only way that the ICC's
jurisdiction could extend to Burma is if the Security Council similarly
authorizes the ICC to open an investigation there.

The first step of this process, though, is getting the investigation off
the ground.  The most obvious way to secure international support for a
commission of inquiry is through the Human Rights Council, which the Obama
administration joined last year.  The Human Rights Council routinely
appoints human rights investigators to look into alleged rights
violations. Sometimes these investigations recommend the ICC intervene to
provide accountability for war crimes. The most high profile of these
investigations, the Goldstone inquiry into alleged war crimes in Israel
and Gaza, recommended that the Security Council consider giving the ICC
jurisdiction in Israel and Gaza should local judicial mechanisms prove
unsatisfactory. That was obviously a non-starter for the United
States--but it does go to show how the Human Rights Council can instigate
an investigation, the conclusion of which includes a recommendation for
ICC referral by the Security Council.

Should the United States successfully press the Human Rights Council to
appoint a commission of inquiry for Burma, it is not  unreasonable to
expect 1) that after the inquiry, the commission recommends the Security
Council refer the situation to the ICC; 2) that the Security Council
obliges. (Remember: China is also an ally and trading partner of Sudan and
Beijing did not offer a veto then.)

This kind of ICC bank shot is a good example of how the United States can
constructively interact with institutions or treaty regimes that it may
support, but in all likelihood will never formally join.  These kinds of
strategies are going to become increasingly relevant; treaties that were
once considered uncontroversial, like the CEDAW and Law of the Seas, have
in today's political climate become suddenly contentious. Unless something
radically changes in the Senate, the United States will have to navigate a
future in which it is in permanent observer status to these conventions,
treaties and institutions.   Administrations that are supportive of these
institutions in principal (as the Obama administration is with the ICC)
will have to find a way to influence these structures from the sidelines.

It seems the Obama administration may have stumbled onto one way to
potentially engage the ICC. Let us see where this leads.


____________________________________

August 19, Independent
The long arm of human rights law is the only thing that will frighten the
generals into change- Emmanouil Athanasiou

For the first time in 45 years, the international community is coming
around to the view that justice must be available to the victims of
Burma's military regime. UN bodies, NGOs and independent experts have
documented a pattern of appalling and systematic human rights violations
including summary executions, torture, forced labour, mass rape and the
recruitment of child soldiers. These acts clearly constitute crimes
against humanity under the statute that established the International
Criminal Court (ICC).

Yet, not only have Burma's armed forces overseen a reign of terror, they
have done so with impunity. The victims are crying out in despair at the
knowledge that their rulers may never have to pay for their actions.

Washington's support for a UN commission of inquiry will play an extremely
important role in influencing those countries which have been reluctant to
hold Burma to account. These governments have for too long bought the
deluded notion that by engaging with the junta's plans for elections,
Burma can be coaxed to democracy. This is a nonsense, because the
elections are based on a constitution in which not a single democratic
principle has been respected. Article 445 of Burma's 2008 constitution for
example, enshrines immunity for any act committed by the regime in the
execution of its duties. Whether Burma's leaders will end up, like
President Bashir of Sudan, being indicted by the ICC remains to be seen.
But the Obama administration's policy shift will at least ratchet up
pressure on the most hypocritical EU nations. For financial and business
reasons they have hidden behind ineffective sanctions and the claim that
Washington's engagement policy left them no other option.

It should also inhibit the excesses of Than Shwe and his fellow rulers who
act as if they are untouchable. The fear of being held to account in an
international court may even drive them to accept dialogue with their
country's democratic forces. If there is any hope for Burma's future it
lies in the application of international justice and not in sham
elections.

The writer is head of the Asia desk at the International Federation for
Human Rights

____________________________________

August 19, Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma)
AAPP welcomes the U.S.A’s endorsement of a Commission of Inquiry on Burma
and urges other nations to take action.

[Maesot, Thailand] the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners-
Burma warmly applauds the United States of America for their decision to
support the establishment of a United Nations Commission of Inquiry to
investigate crimes against humanity in Burma. AAPP is appealing to ASEAN,
members of the European Union, and other like-minded nations to stand in
solidarity with the Burmese people and pledge their support for a
Commission of Inquiry.

The United States is the fifth country to support the proposal for an
investigation into crimes against humanity in Burma and follows the United
Kingdom, Australia, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. In March 2010, the UN
Special Rapporteur on Burma, Tomas Quintana endorsed the call of Burma
activists around the world and urged the UN  “to establish a commission of
inquiry with a specific fact finding mandate to address the question of
international crimes” in Burma.

“AAPP and the people of Burma welcome the decision by the United States to
support a Commission of Inquiry and we urge other nations to do the same.

 “The international community has long been aware of the systematic nature
of human rights violations committed in Burma, and it is time they
started to investigate them; mere rhetoric is no longer enough” Bo Kyi,
joint secretary of AAPP, said.

“This move by the US will hopefully give other UN member states the
encouragement they need to back a Commission of Inquiry.

There is no doubt that the military junta of Burma is one of the worst
human rights violators in the world. Torture, sexual violence, forced
labour, recruitment of child soldiers, and the killing of civilians in
ethnic areas are widespread and systematic.

AAPP and other human rights organizations have spent years documenting
human rights violations in Burma and are ready to help an Inquiry when
needed.

“As long as the military regime continues to respond with denial in the
face of such horrific and harrowing human rights abuses, then we need to
ensure that these violations are adequately addressed through independent
channels.

Establishing a Commission of Inquiry is a necessary first step to ending
impunity and bringing the abusers to justice," Bo Kyi said.

For more information –
Tate Naing (Secretary):    +66 (0) 812 878 751
Bo Kyi (Joint Secretary);   +66 (0) 819 628 713

____________________________________

August 19, European Parliamentary Caucus on Burma
European MPs call on EU to support a UN Commission of Inquiry on Burma

The European Parliamentary Caucus on Burma (EPCB), representing MPs from
15 European countries, is calling on EU member states to officially
support the establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry on Burma.

The call from European MPs comes just days after the USA became the fifth
country to publicly support a UN Inquiry. The EU is currently drafting the
next UN General Assembly resolution on Burma, which should include the
establishment of a Commission of Inquiry.

The military regime in Burma is responsible for planned, widespread and
systematic violations of human rights and freedoms in the county. The
abuses include rape and sexual violence, the deportation and forcible
transfer of civilians, the recruitment of child soldiers, the persecution
of ethnic minorities, the use of torture and other war crimes and crimes
against humanity.

The EPCB believes that a UN Commission of Inquiry that would allow a
thorough investigation and documentation of these crimes, along with the
formation of recommendations on future actions and policies, is a crucial
step that the international community should support.

In March 2010 the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in
Burma, Tomás Ojea Quintana, included in his report submitted to the UN
Human Rights Council, the recommendation of the appointment of a
Commission of Inquiry, outlining the “gross and systematic” nature of the
abuses taking place in Burma.

In June 2010 a new report – Crimes against Humanity in Western Burma: The
Situation of the Rohingyas – was published by the Irish Centre for Human
Rights, also recommending that the United Nations Security Council
establish a Commission of Inquiry into the crimes exposed in the report.

“The ongoing atrocities in the country demonstrate the need and urgency
for stronger action by the international community. Individual states and
EU must take action and officially support a UN Commission of Inquiry
which would be a crucial and effective preliminary step towards putting an
end to the constant perpetration of grave abuses and crimes in Burma.”
Silver Meikar, executive member of EPCB, says.

For more information contact the Caucus administrators: Zoya Phan on +4420
7324 4712, or Kristina Prunerova on +420 777 787 917.

About EPCB: The European Parliamentary Caucus on Burma was founded in June
2008 to raise awareness on Burma in Europe and promote human rights and
democracy in Burma. It represents 16 European countries with more than 160
MPs.

Administrative support for the European Parliamentary caucus on Burma is
being provided by Burma Campaign UK and People in Need in the Czech
Republic.

____________________________________

August 18, News from U.S. Representative Joseph Crowley (NY-7)
Congressman Crowley Applauds Administration’s Support of the Establishment
of a Commission of Inquiry into Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes in
Burma

(Washington, D.C.) –Today, Congressman Joseph Crowley (D-Queens, the
Bronx) issued the statement below praising the Obama Administration’s
announcement that it would support the establishment of a Commission of
Inquiry into possible crimes against humanity carried out by Burma’s
military junta regime. Congressman Crowley, a long-time advocate for human
rights in Burma, initiated efforts in Congress calling for the
Administration to support an investigation into crimes in Burma in the
summer of 2009.

“It is long overdue that the world acknowledges that the Burmese regime is
guilty of heinous and brutal acts against its own people and I applaud
today’s announcement by the Obama Administration of its support for a
Commission of Inquiry into these crimes.

“Burma’s military regime has destroyed or forced the abandonment of 3,500
villages, raped countless ethnic minority women and recruited thousands of
child soldiers. Millions of innocent civilians have fled their homes as
refugees or internally displaced persons.

“These atrocities are far more than human rights abuses – they are crimes
against humanity, punishable under international law. And, unfortunately,
without strong international action, it is likely that the regime will
continue to commit crimes against humanity, especially against Burma’s
ethnic minorities.

“I spearheaded the call for the Administration to take a definitive stand
in support of the UN investigator’s call for an international
investigation because it is time for the global community to act.

“Today’s move brings us one step closer to delivering the justice the
Burmese people rightfully deserve, but the fight does not end here.
Burma’s regime must stop its brutal campaign against its own people, enact
human rights reforms and free Burma’s legitimate leaders from prison. It
is time for other nations to join the United States’ call for an
international investigation to bring Burma’s brutal regime to justice.”

Congressman Crowley has a long track-record advocating for human rights in
Burma, most recently spearheading the effort to award Aung San Suu Kyi the
Congressional Gold Medal, securing passage of the Tom Lantos Block Burmese
JADE Act, and leading a House resolution continuing a ban on all imports
from Burma as part of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act. Congressman
Crowley is a six-term member of the U.S. House of Representatives who sits
on the Committee on Foreign Affairs’ Subcommittee on the Middle East and
South Asia. He is also a member of the powerful Ways and Means Committee.

BACKGROUND
A Commission of Inquiry is led by a group of legal or international
experts, charged by an international body such as the United Nations
Secretariat or UN Security Council, which investigates certain human
rights abuses. A Commission may determine whether certain human rights
abuses are carried out in way such that they could be considered crimes
against humanity, war crimes or genocide – atrocities which are illegal
and prosecutable under international law. If a Commission of Inquiry
concluded that the Burmese regime committed or may have committed crimes
against humanity, war crimes or genocide, it could result in international
legal action such as the creation of a criminal tribunal or a referral to
an international court. Without the creation of a Commission or similar
investigation, it is much less likely that perpetrators could be
prosecuted under international law and officials could continue to carry
out abuses with impunity.

Contact: Courtney Gidner 202-225-3965
courtney.gidner at mail.house.gov

____________________________________

August 19, TUC
TUC calls for Barclays to come clean on Burma

The TUC is made up of 58 affiliated trade unions in the UK representing
nearly seven million working people

Responding to the news that Barclays Bank has agreed to pay fines for
breaching US sanctions against Burma, TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber
said:

'It's a disgrace that Barclays has been violating US sanctions and doing
business in Burma. Foreign financial services are helping Burmese generals
to loot the country's natural wealth and to fund a military accused of
committing horrendous crimes against humanity.

'Barclays must come completely clean on whether it has been a part of
this, or no amount of London Cycle Hire schemes can save its reputation.

'It is a cause for concern that it took the US sanctions system to
discover the shameful activities of a British bank. The UK and the EU
urgently need to fix our weak rules. We need to put in place US-style
financial sanctions and a rigorous monitoring system to prevent these
sorts of scandals from happening again.'
National Officer for the Financial and Legal Sector of Unite Rob MacGregor
said: 'Ordinary workers have taken a huge hit to keep our banks afloat.
The Government needs to make sure that these banks are helping workers and
small businesses get back on their feet, not propping up dictators.'

General Secretary of the Federation of Trade Unions in Burma (FTUB) Maung
Maung said: 'My country is the worst place in the world to be a worker.
The regime uses slave labour, rape, and torture to stay in power. Unions
are banned and the jails are overflowing with those who have dared to
speak out.

'With sham elections happening in November, the military looks like being
there for decades to come - especially if foreign financial institutions
are keeping them afloat.

'This scandal must be a wake-up call for the UK Government. We already
know that insurance syndicates within Lloyds of London have been doing
business in Burma, and now Barclays. What else has the City of London been
up to?

'The UK Government needs to investigate this fully and cut off all
financial and insurance links to the regime.'

NOTES TO EDITORS:

- Barclays Bank has agreed to pay a $298m (£190m) fine for breaking US
sanctions against several dictatorships. The bank had been charged with
breaking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the Trading
with the Enemy Act between 1995 and 2006.

- The FTUB is one of the newest trade union centres to affiliate to the
International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). The Burmese regime has
banned it and labeled it a terrorist organisation.
- All TUC press releases can be found at www.tuc.org.uk

- Register for the TUC's press extranet: a service exclusive to
journalists wanting to access pre-embargo releases and reports from the
TUC. Visit www.tuc.org.uk/pressextranet

- Congress 2010 will be held at the Manchester Central Convention Complex
from Monday
13 September to Thursday 16 September. Free media passes can be obtained
by visiting www.tuc.org.uk/congress/tuc-18063-f0.cfm and returning a form.
Applications must be in by noon on Monday 6 September. Any received later
than that will be processed in Manchester and will cost £50.

Contacts:
Media enquiries:
Rob Holdsworth T: 020 7467 1372 M: 07717 531150 E: rholdsworth at tuc.org.uk
Elly Gibson T: 020 7467 1337 M: 07900 910624 E: egibson at tuc.org.uk