Response to the coalition of 31 international NGOs calling for the immigration
law reform in Burma
the Burmese political activists residing in overseas for more than two decades,
we take the minority issue seriously. First of all, we would like to clarify
that the recent crisis in Arakan state was not based on the race or religion
but the crimes committed by both parties. The lack of rule of law and
corruptions employed by the military rule for decades were to be blamed for it.
question here for the coalition of 31 international NGOs that suggests what the
lawmakers in Burma should do with regard to the immigration law reform is that does it really think that more than 80% MPs
made up of the cronies and goons of the military will listen to what they ask
for? Of course not, it already knows it. If the coalition of 31 international
NGOs thinks it might work to push the opposition MPs, including Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi, made up of less than 20% in the whole parliament, in this case, there
is something wrong with these NGOs.
say if Burma is a well
established democracy, should the lawmakers in Burma listen to their constituents
or a bunch of NGOs from overseas? Representative, in its own definition, is to
represent the will of the constituents. Don’t the NGOs think? Also, is it so
premature to suggest the lawmakers what should/ should not be inserted in the
reform law that has not yet been set in the agenda to discuss in the
parliament? Remember, no minority’s rights is still guaranteed under 2008
constitution in Burma.
the coalition of 31 international NGOs thinks it has moral responsibility to craft
the other nation’s laws, our question here is that how many of these NGOs
members have involved in the law making process in their own country?
fallacy of these NGOs begins with quoting the UN institutions that always have
left the loopholes for the superpower nations and their cohorts to do whatever
they want in the end. Let’s have a look at the most dangerous institution
called R2P. Why did the superpowers use R2P against Libya? And, why don’t they use it
and why not? Does the coalition of 31 international NGOs think it should write
a draft resolution or suggestion - “one size fit it all”, a universal approach
- in this regard and send it to the UNSC? Anyway, the point we would like make
here is that no law is perfect in this world. And, all of the laws must at
least reflect the will of the majority people in the nations of their own.
is another example. The most powerful nation on earth called the US has signed the NDAA law during the Christmas
Eve of last year, and maintained the Guantanamo
prison for years. One violates the 4th amendment of the US constitution
and the other violates the international law. Does the coalition of 31
international NGOs think it should write a draft and send it to the US lawmakers
and others? And, may we ask them why/why not? Still, we are in serious doubt
that the lawmakers in the US
will pay attention to it.
the coalition of 31 international NGOs thinks it can issue whatever statement
it wants to Burma, one of worst trouble-spot nations on earth, without learning
the opinion of the majority of the people in Burma in this regard, there will
be a tremendous backlash and setback on these NGOs’ effort for democratization
of Burma sooner rather than later.
1. U Aung Than Oo (Germany) 1. Dr. Moe Moe Hnin (Belgium)