After UN Silence on Myanmar Jailing 5 Reporters, 50 More Probed

]]>


]]>

]]>

After
UN Silence on
Myanmar
Jailing 5
Reporters, 50
More Probed

By
Matthew
Russell Lee

UNITED
NATIONS, July
15 -- After
Myanmar
condemned five
journalists to
10 years in
prison each
for reporting
on a weapons
factory, Inner
City Press on
behalf of the
new Free

UN Coalition
for Access
asked the UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
about it on
July 11.

 
Haq had no
specific
comment but
said he would
check. Video

here.

 
In the four
days since,
Ban's UN has
had nothing to
say. On June
14, Inner City
Press asked
again, also
about Thailand's
proposed refoulement
of 100,000 Muslim
Rohinga back
to Myanmar. No
comment.

 
Now Myanmar
has opened
criminal cases
against 50
more
journalists,
for protesting
the sentencing
of their five
colleagues. 
Deputy
Inspector Han
Tun Aung from
Kamayut police
station said
he had opened
cases against
50 reporters,
including
Thamagga News
Journal chief
reporter Ma
Shwe Hmon.

 
Does the UN's
silence
encourage such
a crackdown?

 
Back on July
3, amid more
attacks on
Muslims in
Myanmar, Inner
City Press
asked lead UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:

]]>

Inner
City


Press: In
Myanmar, there
has been a
curfew
declared in
Mandalay after
violence
between
Buddhists and
Muslims, and I
wondered, one,
whether Mr.
[Vijay]
Nambiar and
his good
offices have
any comment on
this, and two,
whether the UN
country team
there is in
any way
affected by
the curfew?
What is its
knowledge? Do
they think the
Government's
reaction is
appropriate?

Spokesman
Dujarric:


I have not
seen anything
from Mr.
Nambiar's
office. I
haven't seen
those reports,
so I will look
into those.

 
While often
Ban Ki-moon's
spokesperson's
office does
not return
with an
answer, even
to correct a
misleading
statment, or
even inserts
the transcript
an answer
different than
the erroneous
one given, in
this case on
July 4 the UN
provided, and
Inner City
Press tweeted
and publishes
in full:

From:
UN
Spokesperson -
Do Not
Reply[at]
un.org

Date: Fri, Jul
4, 2014 at
4:50 PM

Subject: On
Myanmar.

To: Matthew
Russell Lee
[at]
innercitypress.com

Cc: Stephane
Dujarric 
Farhan Haq

From Special
Adviser Vijay
Nambiar:

"Special
Adviser Vijay
Nambiar is
deeply
concerned by
the reported
loss of life
and public
disorder
resulting from
the latest
flare-up of
communal
tension in
Mandalay
caused by the
deliberate
rumour-mongering
and incitement
of tension
among
communities
that have
lived together
peacefully so
far. 
While
expressing
sorrow at the
deaths in the
latest wave of
violence, he
noted the
prompt and
effective
initial
response of
the
authorities to
prevent a
deterioration
of the
situation and
protect
civilians.

The


Special
Adviser called
on religious
and community
leaders to
help the
authorities
restore calm
in Mandalay
and avert any
spread of
tension to
other parts of
the country.
Those
responsible
for the
violence
should be
brought to
justice. He
urged the
inhabitants of
Mandalay as
well as the
people of
Myanmar
generally not
be provoked or
manipulated by
vested
interests but
to promote
harmony,
mutual respect
and peaceful
coexistence
between all
communities in
the country."

"On the curfew
in Mandalay:

There are two
UN offices in
Mandalay, and
UN staff
members are
observing the
curfew, which
has had a
negligible
impact on
their work."

  


When Inner
City Press
first
published
these answers,
there was
reader
feedback
recalling
Nambiar's role
in Sri Lanka.
On those two
countries,
Inner City
Press on June
20 asked the
US State
Department's
Ambassador
Luis CdeBaca
of the US
Office to
Monitor and
Combat
Trafficking in
Persons, click



here for State
Department
transcript:

OPERATOR:



All right. We
did have one
final question
from Matthew
Russell Lee at
Inner City
Press. Please
go ahead.

INNER CITY
PRESS: Sure.
Thanks a lot,
and thanks for
taking the
question. I
was looking at
Myanmar –
Burma – and
also at Sri
Lanka. And in
both cases, it
seems to say –
the report
seems to say
that that
government is
either, in the
case of Burma,
directly
involved in
trafficking in
coercion; or
in the case of
Sri Lanka,
suspected of
complicity in
it. So in
those two
cases, I
wondered as
the U.S. sort
of re-engages
with Myanmar
or Burma, how
does this
issue get
raised and how
is it going to
be resolved?
And the same
in the case of
Sri Lanka
where there's
this human
rights
inquiry. Is
this – what
can be done in
terms of
actual
government
complicity in
trafficking?

AMBASSADOR
CDEBACA: Well,
it's
interesting.
Let me start
with Burma. We
– this is one
of the first
things that we
re-engaged on.
I was in Burma
within I think
about three
weeks or a
month after
Secretary
Clinton took
her first
historic trip
there, and
when I met
with Aung San
Suu Kyi, one
of the things
that was very
interesting to
me was that
she
recommended to
me that I
needed to talk
to her jailor.
And I asked
her, "What do
you mean?" And
she said, "The
guy from the
secret police
who was
assigned to me
to be my
warden all of
these years
would bring me
articles on
human
trafficking
off of the
Internet, and
we would talk
into the night
about how we
would work
together to
help end human
trafficking
and slavery
for our people
if things ever
changed." A
lot of people
forget that
she spent her
Nobel Prize
money while
she was in
prison. She
sent it World
Vision, an
NGO, to
provide food
and shelter
for about 200
Burmese
trafficking
victims in
Thailand. The
first place
that she went
after she was
able to travel
was to the
shrimp-packing
sheds in
Thailand where
so many
Burmese are
affected by
this crime.

So it was
interesting to
see not only
her, but then
eventually
what came true
is the new
head of the
anti-trafficking
unit – the
central body
against
trafficking in
persons for
the Burmese
Government in
the new era –
is the very
person who she
recommended to
me that we
should work
with. He's
written a book
on
trafficking;
he's gone to
other parts of
the region. I
think there's
a real desire
on the part of
the Burmese
Government to
engage and to
bring on some
of these
modern
approaches.

And to that
end, they even
passed a law
abolishing the
1907 Villages
and Towns Act,
which is what
gave them the
legal ability
to enslave
their own
people. So the
notion of
giving that up
as part of the
process of
opening up to
the outside
world. I think
that, as with
every country,
there's a long
way to go, and
we'll continue
to work with
them. We have
an established
and formal
dialogue with
them that was
agreed to by
both
presidents
during
President
Obama's visit
a year and a
half ago, and
it's something
that I've been
to Burma for
that dialogue
and will be, I
think, going
again in the
fall for the
second round
of that. So
we're – in
that
situation, I
think that
we've got a
formal way to
work with
them.

Sri Lanka on
the other
hand, I think
that that's a
bit of a work
in progress.
We don't see –
first of all,
we're not
digging out of
the years of
exclusion from
the
international
community that
we had seen
with the
Burmese
Government,
but we've got
this notion of
three years in
a row the
trafficking
statute that
they have,
which is a
pretty good
one – it
prohibits all
forms of
trafficking,
which not
every SAARC
country, not
every country
in the region
has laws that
prevent forced
labor as well
as sex
trafficking –
and yet three
years in a row
without any
convictions,
no services
really for
male
trafficking
victims, sex
trafficking
victims
punished, and
the folks who
come home from
overseas, no
real way to
screen for or
help them the
way that other
source
countries like
the
Indonesians
and the
Filipinos
have.

So I think
that there's a
long way to
go, but they
have this
inter-ministerial
structure that
they have now
adopted, and I
think that for
us both here
in Washington
and at the
Embassy in
Colombo it
provides us
some
interlocutors
who we hope
that we'll be
able to work
with going
forward.

QUESTION: Just
one follow-up
on Burma. Do
you see this
issue of the
Rohingyas, is
it – does it
make them
susceptible to
trafficking,
this kind of
stateless
status? And
how – do you
have more – do
you see this –
do you see it
through the
light of
trafficking,
or is it a
separate
issue?

AMBASSADOR
CDEBACA: Well,
I think that
we see with
any displaced
and vulnerable
communities
that are
suffering from
social
exclusion, and
I think that
the plight of
the Rohingyas
has pretty
been – has
been pretty
well
documented.
That is the
type of
population in
which we often
see in this
type of
situation.

Now, I mean,
obviously, we
remain
concerned
about all of
the
humanitarian
issues that
are around the
Rohingya and
other
vulnerable
ethnic and
religious
communities.
We actually
shed some – a
little bit of
light on this
both in the
Burma
narrative but
also, frankly,
in the Thai
narrative as
we're looking
at the
exploitation
and even
alleged sale
of Rohingya
refugees once
they get to
their
destinations
as they're
moving for all
these
different
reasons.

INNER CITY
PRESS: Thanks.

Here
is the report
on Thailand:

"There
continued to
be reports
that corrupt
Thai civilian
and military
officials
profited from
the smuggling
of Rohingya
asylum seekers
from Burma and
Bangladesh
(who transit
through
Thailand in
order to reach
Malaysia or
Indonesia) and
were complicit
in their sale
into forced
labor on
fishing
vessels. Thai
navy and
marine
officials
allegedly
diverted to
Thailand boats
carrying
Rohingya
asylum seekers
en route to
Malaysia and
facilitated
the transfer
of some
migrants to
smugglers and
brokers who
sold some
Rohingya into
forced labor
on fishing
vessels."

  



Will
Thailand try
to sue the US
State
Department?
Here's from
the
Department's
report on Sri
Lanka:

"The
Sri Lankan
government
made very
limited law
enforcement
efforts to
address human
trafficking.
Sri Lanka
prohibits all
forms of both
sex and labor
trafficking
through
Article 360(c)
of its penal
code, although
the law also
covers
non-trafficking
offenses, such
as selling
children. The
law prescribes
punishments of
up to 20
years'
imprisonment.
These
penalties are
sufficiently
stringent and
commensurate
with those
prescribed for
other serious
offenses, such
as rape. The
government
investigated
20 new cases
of trafficking
in 2013,
compared to 44
in 2012.
Authorities
prosecuted one
case under
Article
360(c), an
increase from
zero cases in
2012 and 2011,
though it was
a case of
baby-selling.
Authorities
also
prosecuted ten
potential sex
trafficking
cases under
Sri Lanka's
procurement
statute, which
prescribes
lesser
penalties than
Article
360(c). As in
2012 and 2011,
Sri Lankan
courts did not
convict any
traffickers
under Article
360(c) in
2013, though
one court
convicted
three
defendants
under Article
360(c) for
baby-selling.
Authorities
also convicted
12 traffickers
under the
procurement
statute; all
but one of
them received
a suspended
sentence. The
government's
reliance on
procurement
charges, and
the absence of
prosecutions
under the
trafficking
statute,
resulted from
an inability
or
unwillingness
on the part of
police to
thoroughly
investigate
potential
human
trafficking
cases for
elements of
force, fraud,
or coercion."

That's
by no means
the only
crimes, and
war crime, the
Sri Lankan
government is
unwilling to
investigate.
Watch this
site.

 Follow @innercitypress
Follow @FUNCA_info



http://www.information.myanmaronlinecentre.com/after-un-silence-on-myanmar-jailing-5-reporters-50-more-probed/