Society Groups

Quote:

If the law is breached

U Myo Myint (Law)

Every independent country has their sovereignty. They can freely
exercise legislative power, executive power and judicial power for
their interest. Myanmar is an independent, sovereign country with the
rights to formulate and prescribe appropriate laws, and to form a
government with suitable administrative machinery. It also has its own
judicial system and judicial organs.

About 200 world countries have different geographical features,
climates, races, traditions, cultures, languages, literatures,
religious faiths, costumes and historical backgrounds. However, they
share same goals in writing and enacting necessary laws for
restoration of State stability and community peace, public security
and development; forming governments capable of leading the countries
concerned, and operating courts to enforce the laws.

All the countries such as the United States of America, United
Kingdom, France, China, the Russian Federation, India, Korea,
Australia, Germany, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, etc. have their
governments, but each government has different formation from that of
others. They practise their laws as necessary. They have courts to
hear cases in accordance with the laws concerned. Criminals and
offenders are not privileged. Such people are arrested by the police,
charged, and put on trial. So, all countries accept sayings such as
“No man is above the law”, and
“Ignorance of law is no excuse”.

In hearing a case in United Kingdom, five or six ordinary people
without much knowledge of the law are invited to form a jury such as
shopkeeper, barber, shoemaker and housewife. And they are requested to
listen to the details of the statements and arguments with a sense of
social etiquette. The real judge sits among them, but does not get
involved in hearing the case. He explains the nature and development
of the case and facts about the law to them. He does not make a
verdict, either. The jury members have to cast votes to decide if the
accused is guilty or not. The judge reads out the verdict based on
their decision in court.

The US’s jury system is based on British judicial system. Throughout
the colonial period, British colonies including Myanmar used juries to
hear cases in line with the British judicial system. After they
regained independence, they laid down and practise own judicial
systems, in place of the jury system. World countries have different
laws, governments and judicial systems on the grounds of different
peoples, cultures and religious faiths. In Myanmar, according to the
Myanmar customary law, the people have the vested right, under which a
citizen can be vested with the possessions if other spouse dies, and
the children are vested with the belongings if their parents die. That
is in conformity with the Myanmar lifestyle, the nature and religious
faith of the people. In Christianity, heads of families, fathers and
husbands make wills to leave their money and property to be given as
they wish. Their wives and children are not vested their money and
property automatically. In some wills, certain amount of money and
property is given to drivers, housemaids and nurses who they think to
be loyal to them, and the remaining money and property are to be
donated to a particular organization, instead of giving parts of their
money and property to their wives and children.

In some Myanmar movies and novels, Buddhist fathers make wills under
which certain amounts of money and property are given to their wives
and children. However, wills are not legal in Buddhism. After the rule
of the British colonialists, Myanmar made amendments to the laws,
judicial systems and bureaucracy administrative machinery patterns
prescribed by the British colonialists. In the colonial days, even
Myanmar elders at the age of over 70 had to kowtow and answer
‘Phayar’ (respectful form of address towards monks and loyalty) to
British judges who were
at the age of around 30 while the cases were in progress. In the
Myanmar judicial system, the accused have the
rights to defend themselves from the lawsuits, give arguments and
appeal. Except some cases to be heard in closed rooms in special
tribunals, all cases are heard in public. Unusual punishments designed
to tarnish the dignity of the accused (such as a thief with a
signboard saying ‘Thief’ hung on his neck has to shout “I’m a thief”
every time he is struck with a rod) are not handed down. Any of the
law shall not be applied with retrospective
effect to make a verdict. The case is to be heard in accordance with
the law that exists when the accused commit crimes.

In many western countries including the US, a large number of cases
are heard secretly behind closed doors. In Myanmar, some cases were
heard by special tribunals (the people were not allowed to listen to
the judicial proceedings) in the times of the British colonialists,
the AFPFL government, and the revolutionary government. For instance,
murder case in Hsinswe Village by Thakin Soe and the treason breached
by Ohn Kyaw Myint and party were heard under the guard of heavy
security force at the hall (training hall) of Insein Jail. Both in
other countries and in Myanmar, important cases are heard in specific
halls because unscrupulous persons in disguise of ordinary people
listening to the legal proceedings can disrupt the hearing of the
case, try to grab or kill the accused to prevent from providing
evidences.

The core of the Myanmar judicial system is the law and whether the
accused is found guilty or not, without discrimination on the grounds
of colour, race or status. In many cases in the US, prison term is
sentenced to the
Blacks (Negroes) not to the Whites although they are the same,
offenders; woman culprits are asked to walk
with bare foots and with iron fetters in public. In Abu Ghraib Prison
in Iraq and Guantanamo Prison of the US Navy in Cuba Island, and CIA’s
secret prisons in Europe, prisoners are interrogated inhumanly.

Myanmar does not practise such inhuman methods. Certain radio stations
in the West and other media where expatriates are given places are
constantly criticizing Myanmar’s judicial system and law with bias
towards the accused. It is the case that US citizen Mr John William
Yettaw secretly entered the compound of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s house
through the door on the side of Inya Lake on the night of 3 May 2009,
and left the house on 5 May night, swimming across the lake. Then, he
was arrested by security members in the lake. In the arrest,
responsible persons inspected his belongings. He also entered the
house of Daw Suu Kyi in November 2008. In fact, Daw Suu Kyi was
already restricted under Article (7) of the Law to Safeguard the State
Against the Dangers of Those Desiring to Cause Subversive Acts. Then,
Detention Order was issued under Article 10 (A), Restriction Order
under Article 10 (B) / 11, and Continued Restriction Order under
Article 13 / 14 of the Law, and she was kept to stay inside the house.
She was allowed to do the cooking, and to receive medical treatment.

Yettaw entered Daw Suu Kyi’s house through the back door of the fence
by swimming across the Inya Lake in the dark. If the motive of leaving
two chadors and some stuff by Yettaw was to be exposed, it would
become an exciting Hollywood movie. We would be likely to see a
thriller in which the actress escapes in disguise. His first intrusion
can even be said to violate the law. He intruded the second time. Daw
Suu Kyi received the intruder for two nights and provided him with
meals, a room and longyis. He was even nursed as he got cramp in his
legs. She received the intruder although she could shout to security
guards for help. Although the house and compound
are regarded as restricted areas by law, one intruded and the other
accepted. Doesn’t it violate the law? It can be questionable whether
these are democratization activities.

Fearing that the public would be realizing the true situation,
internal and external anti-government groups shouted that Yettaw’s
being able to enter the compound was due to poor security and that
they were worried about her security. They shouted almost every day.
They hid what they wanted to conceal from the public on security
grounds. On the night of 3 May Yettaw swam with the help of drinking
water plastic containers through the culvert box near the Korean
Embassy not far from Daw Suu Kyi’s house. The route was not far. But
he got cramp in his legs and Daw Suu Kyi had to nurse him for two
days. It was strange that he did not get any cramp in his legs on his
way back even though he had to swim diagonally across the Inya Lake to
nearly reach IBC and the residence of the US diplomat. Anyhow, if
there is a criminal case, just face charges in accord with the law.

Now, the NLD inside the country started to make 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 order that they can address legal
issues in a fair and just way. There is contempt of court act in
Myanmar. There are three types of contempt of court.

(a) Inclusive are defamation of the court, criticism of the court to
harm its dignity, presenting wrong facts about the trial in progress
before the judge, satirical writings about the judge and accusations
against the court that it will not be able to pass sound judgment.
(b) Inclusive are disturbing of the court activity, taking photos of
the trial in progress without any permission of the court and
presenting the photo of the defendant before the court in the case in
which there is a problem of whether
the face of the defendant is recognized or not.
(c) Inclusive are biased writings about the trial in progress,
writings about which side will win or lose in that trial, predicted
writings about the possibility of the defendant’s conviction and
writings about tendency to give instructions to the judgment of the
judge.

There have been some people against whom action was taken for their
writings about court trials in newspapers that led to contempt of
court. We have often seen sketches in newspapers as the judge did not
approve of taking photos of some trials in the US courts. We have also
seen that those who disturbed the trials were thrown out of the courts
by the police. At the time when the trial against Daw Suu Kyi, Yettaw,
Daw Khin Khin Win and Ma Win Ma Ma is taking place in accord with the
law, anyone should not say unnecessarily that Daw Suu Kyi is guilty.

Anyone should not say that all political prisoners including Daw Suu
Kyi are to be released. Please read the above three points on contempt
of court carefully. There should be no prediction that who is guilty
or who is not guilty until the court passes the judgment. It is not
possible to say that one is not to be arrested or convicted as he is
from a political party or a politician regardless of the crime he has
committed. No man is above the law. Crime does not pay. Everyone who
breaches the law shall face a lawsuit and obey the court decision.
Only then, will there be the rule of law and community peace and
tranquility. If politicians and a certain party members who are in
prison for their offences are to be released as political prisoners,
criminals who are in prison for their offences such
as theft, robbery and murder will apply for party membership, wear
party brooches and demand their release.

The AFPFL government held a trial against an American spy, Gordon
Seagraves who was serving as a doctor at Namkham Hospital and doing
missionary works, for his persuasion of Kachin army officer Naw Sai to
go underground. At that time, the Time magazine criticized the Myanmar
judiciary system saying whether the judges of the Supreme Court
understood the law. Now there are also criticisms. Seagraves got only
a light sentence and in prison for six months. He was ordered not to
go back to Namkham. If right judiciary system is desired, don’t
commit contempt of court. Follow the court decision as a member of the
civilized society. Threatening and unnecessarily attempting to
influence the trial should be avoided. Anyone should not be involved
in such acts as favouring the defendant, favouring the plaintiff and
using influence. We have already taken lessons from the
four 8’s unrest with anarchy reigning such as lootings, beheadings and
lawlessness. Respect the law and feel safe.

Translation: MS+ST

Source: THE NEW LIGHT OF MYANMAR Wednesday, 29 July, 2009