8
THE NEW LIGHT OF MYANMAR Wednesday, 29 July, 2009
If the law is breached …
U Myo Myint (Law)
Every independent country has their sovereignty.They can freely exercise legislative power, executivepower and judicial power for their interest.Myanmar is an independent, sovereign countrywith the rights to formulate and prescribe appropriatelaws, and to form a government with suitable admin-istrative machinery. It also has its own judicial sys-tem and judicial organs.About 200 world countries have different geo-graphical features, climates, races, traditions, cul-tures, languages, literatures, religious faiths, cos-tumes and historical backgrounds. However, theyshare same goals in writing and enacting necessarylaws for restoration of State stability and communitypeace, public security and development; forminggovernments capable of leading the countries con-cerned, and operating courts to enforce the laws.All the countries such as the United States of America, United Kingdom, France, China, the Rus-sian Federation, India, Korea, Australia, Germany,Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, etc. have their govern-ments, but each government has different formationfrom that of others. They practise their laws as neces-sary. They have courts to hear cases in accordancewith the laws concerned. Criminals and offenders arenot privileged. Such people are arrested by the police,charged, and put on trial. So, all countries acceptsayings such as “No man is above the law”, and“Ignorance of law is no excuse”.In hearing a case in United Kingdom, five or sixordinary people without much knowledge of the laware invited to form a jury such as shopkeeper, barber,shoemaker and housewife. And they are requested tolisten to the details of the statements and argumentswith a sense of social etiquette. The real judge sitsamong them, but does not get involved in hearing thecase. He explains the nature and development of thecase and facts about the law to them. He does notmake a verdict, either. The jury members have to castvotes to decide if the accused is guilty or not. The judge reads out the verdict based on their decision incourt.The US’s jury system is based on British judicialsystem. Throughout the colonial period, British colo-nies including Myanmar used juries to hear cases inline with the British judicial system. After they re-gained independence, they laid down and practiseown judicial systems, in place of the jury system.World countries have different laws, governmentsand judicial systems on the grounds of differentpeoples, cultures and religious faiths.In Myanmar, according to the Myanmar cus-tomary law, the people have the vested right, underwhich a citizen can be vested with the possessions if other spouse dies, and the children are vested withthe belongings if their parents die. That is in con-formity with the Myanmar lifestyle, the nature andreligious faith of the people. In Christianity, headsof families, fathers and husbands make wills toleave their money and property to be given as theywish. Their wives and children are not vested theirmoney and property automatically. In some wills,certain amount of money and property is given todrivers, housemaids and nurses who they think to beloyal to them, and the remaining money and prop-erty are to be donated to a particular organization,instead of giving parts of their money and propertyto their wives and children.In some Myanmar movies and novels, Buddhistfathers make wills under which certain amounts of money and property are given to their wives andchildren. However, wills are not legal in Buddhism.After the rule of the British colonialists, Myanmarmade amendments to the laws, judicial systems andbureaucracy administrative machinery patterns pre-scribed by the British colonialists. In the colonial days,even Myanmar elders at the age of over 70 had to kow-tow and answer ‘Phayar’ (respectful form of addresstowards monks and loyalty) to British judges who wereat the age of around 30 while the cases were in progress.In the Myanmar judicial system, the accused have therights to defend themselves from the lawsuits, givearguments and appeal. Except some cases to be heardin closed rooms in special tribunals, all cases are heardin public. Unusual punishments designed to tarnish thedignity of the accused (such as a thief with a signboardsaying ‘Thief’ hung on his neck has to shout “I’m athief” every time he is struck with a rod) are not handeddown. Any of the law shall not be applied with retro-spective effect to make a verdict. The case is to beheard in accordance with the law that exists when theaccused commit crimes.In many western countries including the US, alarge number of cases are heard secretly behind closeddoors. In Myanmar, some cases were heard by specialtribunals (the people were not allowed to listen to the judicial proceedings) in the times of the Britishcolonialists, the AFPFL government, and the revolu-tionary government. For instance, murder case inHsinswe Village by Thakin Soe and the treason breachedby Ohn Kyaw Myint and party were heard under theguard of heavy security force at the hall (training hall)of Insein Jail.Both in other countries and in Myanmar, importantcases are heard in specific halls because unscrupulouspersons in disguise of ordinary people listening to thelegal proceedings can disrupt the hearing of the case,try to grab or kill the accused to prevent from providingevidences.The core of the Myanmar judicial system is the lawand whether the accused is found guilty or not, withoutdiscrimination on the grounds of colour, race or status.In many cases in the US, prison term is sentenced to theBlacks (Negroes) not to the Whites although they arethe same, offenders; woman culprits are asked to walk with bare foots and with iron fetters in public. In AbuGhraib Prison in Iraq and Guantanamo Prison of theUS Navy in Cuba Island, and CIA’s secret prisons inEurope, prisoners are interrogated inhumanly.Myanmar does not practise such inhuman methods.Certain radio stations in the West and other mediawhere expatriates are given places are constantly criti-cizing Myanmar’s judicial system and law with biastowards the accused.It is the case that US citizen Mr John WilliamYettaw secretly entered the compound of Daw AungSan Suu Kyi’s house through the door on the side of Inya Lake on the night of 3 May 2009, and left thehouse on 5 May night, swimming across the lake.Then, he was arrested by security members in the lake.In the arrest, responsible persons inspected hisbelongings. He also entered the house of Daw Suu Kyiin November 2008. In fact, Daw Suu Kyi was alreadyrestricted under Article (7) of the Law to Safeguard theState Against the Dangers of Those Desiring to CauseSubversive Acts. Then, Detention Order was issuedunder Article 10 (A), Restriction Order under Article10 (B) / 11, and Continued Restriction Order underArticle 13 / 14 of the Law, and she was kept to stayinside the house. She was allowed to do the cooking,and to receive medical treatment.Yettaw entered Daw Suu Kyi’s house through theback door of the fence by swimming across the InyaLake in the dark. If the motive of leaving two chadorsand some stuff by Yettaw was to be exposed, it wouldbecome an exciting Hollywood movie. We would belikely to see a thriller in which the actress escapes indisguise.
His first intrusion can even be said to violatethe law. He intruded the second time. Daw Suu Kyireceived the intruder for two nights and providedhim with meals, a room and longyis. He was evennursed as he got cramp in his legs. She received theintruder although she could shout to securityguards for help. Although the house and com-pound are regarded as restricted areas by law, oneintruded and the other accepted. Doesn’t it violatethe law? It can be questionable whether these aredemocratization activities.
Fearing that the public would be realizing the truesituation, internal and external anti-government groupsshouted that Yettaw’s being able to enter the com-pound was due to poor security and that they wereworried about her security. They shouted almost everyday. They hid what they wanted to conceal from thepublic on security grounds. On the night of 3 MayYettaw swam with the help of drinking water plasticcontainers through the culvert box near the KoreanEmbassy not far from Daw Suu Kyi’s house. The routewas not far. But he got cramp in his legs and Daw SuuKyi had to nurse him for two days. It was strange thathe did not get any cramp in his legs on his way back even though he had to swim diagonally across the InyaLake to nearly reach IBC and the residence of the USdiplomat. Anyhow, if there is a criminal case, just facecharges in accord with the law.
Now, the NLD inside the country started tomake political profit taking advantage of the case.Again, there have been external interferences.Every country prescribes the Act of Contempt of Court. The aim is to protect the courts in orderthat they can address legal issues in a fair and justway. There is contempt of court act in Myanmar.
There are three types of contempt of court.(a)Inclusive are defamation of the court, criti-cism of the court to harm its dignity, present-ing wrong facts about the trial in progressbefore the judge, satirical writings about the judge and accusations against the court that itwill not be able to pass sound judgment.(b)Inclusive are disturbing of the court activity,taking photos of the trial in progress withoutany permission of the court and presenting thephoto of the defendant before the court in thecase in which there is a problem of whetherthe face of the defendant is recognized or not.
(See page 9)
Threatening and unnecessarily attempting to influ-ence the trial should be avoided. Anyone should not beinvolved in such acts as favouring the defendant, favour-ing the plaintiff and using influence.
29-7-09 NL8/9/18, 9:23 AM8
Leave a Comment