Skip to main content

Democracy: Looking Beyond Elections

CONTINUED FROM YESTERDAY

The NLD government-appointed ethnic members at high-ranking positions in the executive and the legislature and as chief ministers of States. However, the lack of consultation with ethnic parties undercut NLD’s measures for national reconciliation. Arakan National Party’s (ANP) political disagreement with NLD was most obvious with serious ramifications. ANP was the single largest party that won 22 out of 35 seats in Rakhine State Hluttaw. ANP was of the view that if NLD wanted to see ethnic parties cooperate in the peace process, national reconciliation and constitutional amendment, it should first give an ethnic party like ANP the opportunity to nominate the chief minister and form the government of Rakhine State or at least negotiate with ANP. However, NLD failed to do so. Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD) and Mon National Party (MNP) were other ethnic parties that expressed similar disappointment towards the NLD. The Chairman of ANP, Dr Aye Maung, who was selected as the representative of ethnic parties in U Thein Sein’s six-party talk, missed the opportunity to represent ANP as the Chief Minister of Rakhine State. Instead, U Nyi Pu, the NLD member was appointed as the Chief Minister. Since then, NLD’s relations with Rakhine ethnic parties had become troublesome. The political rupture exacerbated existing security concerns in the Rakhine State. NLD’s failure to seize the opportunity of engaging governmental and nongovernmental actors/stakeholders to build confidence and common understandings rendered its reform dialogues half strained from the very beginning.

 

In order to avoid security ramifications of political actions or inactions and to have multidimensional perspectives in decisions and policies, Tatmadaw repeatedly called for holding National Defence and Security Council meetings. The popular opinion about the compositions of NDSC is that the civil-military ratio of NDSC members favours Tatmadaw in decision-making/policy-making. A practical problem seems to be the State Counsellor post which is not among the NDSC member list. Whether it was to limit the Tatmadaw’s role in decision-making or for some other reasons, only the NLD government would know why it very rarely held the NDSC type meetings. Thus, it was not surprising for the distortion of decisions and policies as they mainly represented the NLD’s perspectives.

 

 

On 11 November 2019, Gambia filed a lawsuit against Myanmar at the ICJ accusing the country of committing genocide against a certain group of people in Rakhine State. A largely decision-implementing role of the Tatmadaw could be clearly seen in Brigadier General Zaw Min Tun’s interview with Voice of America (VOA) on 11 December 2019 regarding Tatmadaws’ opinion of the State Counsellor facing genocide accusation at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). According to Brigadier General Zaw Min Tun, Tatmadaw followed the government’s instruction on security and defence matters and had assigned two Tatmadaw officials to join a legal team formed under the President Office for responding to the accusation and explaining the reality. Likewise, Major General Thaung Naing, Deputy Judge Advocate General said on 24 December that they were ready to accompany the team to ICJ and it was up to the government of President U Win Myint to decide. Nevertheless, the NLD government proceeded without military members.

 

The NLD government’s shortfall in institutional management is also evident in its initiatives for the constitutional amendment. Despite apparent inclusiveness of the 45-member Joint Parliamentary Committee for Constitutional Amendment (JPCCA), NLD’s 40 per cent composition and the use of voting as the procedure for approving a set of suggestions to be written into a bill means that the chance of the suggestions of other members to get approved was low without NLD’s support. The prevalence of individualist tendencies and no attitude for negotiation prevented proper assessment of different views. On the other hand, time constraints to deal with a bill during NLD’s remaining tenure and the need to avoid deadlock might have put pressure on the approval procedure. It means that the committee was yet to come up with persuasive techniques and cultivate the political culture of a negotiated settlement to treat everyone in a relatively fair and equal manner.

 

The committee submitted a report which included 3,765 amendment proposals. NLD made 114 amendment proposals while the rest were largely made by Shan, Rakhine, Mon and Kachin ethnic parties. NLD’s proposals mainly sought civilianization—of executive and legislative power branches and decision-making authority—which among others include: bringing a state of emergency under the control of civilian authority and institutions; requiring Tatmadaw appointed ministers to resign from the military post; the phased withdrawal of Tatmadaw from the legislature; raising the role and authority of the president and the Union Parliament and altering the composition of the National Defence and Security Council (NDSC) to become the civilian majority. Here, the NLD had sought to inject its strength of majority mandate into a decision-making mechanism that should largely be based on consensus. Regarding the NLD’s proposal to repeal the constitutional provision articulating the C-in-C of defence services as the supreme commander of all armed forces including the Myanmar Police Force, Tatmadaw representatives strongly believed that the provision should be upheld to keep the institution, its militia strategy and the national defence system cohesive and independent from partisan politics, especially because of uncertainties surrounding the institutional and interest management of civilian governments.

 

Meanwhile, uneven ethnic proposals expressing federal aspirations find it hard to make their way through the majority mandate in the Union Parliament and the final amendment bill of the JPCCA reportedly sidelined federal considerations. Thus, ethnic representatives were unsatisfied with the conduct of the joint committee and didn’t expect any substantive outcome. Being unhappy with the JPCCA, Tatmadaw and USDP representatives made no amendment proposal through it. Instead, they submitted separate bills for parliamentary review. In contrast to the NLD-led JPCCA, Tatmadaw and USDP representatives made suggestions on federalization—starting with the procedure of appointment of chief ministers and members of the state/regional cabinet. The trend in the constitutional amendment process was that Tatmadaw and USDP prioritized federalization over civilianization whereas the NLD leadership prioritized civilianization as part of consolidating democracy before it could address ethnic aspirations for federalization. NLD using the majority mandate in attempting to push the military out of the constitutional equation before a commonly accepted set of federal foundations can be established will impair the institutional stability which can seriously jeopardize the security of the country. Only two minor amendments irrelevant to civilianization or federalization passed through the parliament.

 

NLD’s move in the parliament pushed the Tatmadaw to the edge of public opinion that Tatmadaw members in the Union Parliament were obstructing endeavours for the constitutional amendment. Politically, it ill-informed the public and could raise displeasure against the country’s security institution. In contrast to the purpose of consolidating democracy, missteps or out-of-sequence measures led the NLD’s national reconciliation efforts away from both ethnic groups and the Tatmadaw. By pushing the majority mandate against ethnic groups and the Tatmadaw or against collectivity and collaboration in constitutional reform initiatives, the NLD was creating the risk of security impairment and a setback rather than democratic consolidation. Moreover, the majority mandate was turned into a structural barrier rather than employed as political capital.

 

The NLD government divided the peace process into three: 1) establishing a framework for political dialogue as the basis of the Union Peace Conference (21st Century Panglong Conference); 2) promoting inclusiveness, and 3) delivering the benefits of peace to the public. The 21st Century Panglong Conference brought 51 basic principles in Union Accord (1) and (2) as a confidence-building among the government, the Tatmadaw and the NCA signatory EAOs (NCA-S EAOs). Yet, a more challenging part relating to federal principles is to find their way into the Union Accord (3) along with agreements on post-2020 phase-byphase implementation. Meanwhile, only two more EAOs signed the NCA during the tenure of the NLD government, making NCA-S EAOs altogether ten. The peace process is a complex process comprising many actors, stakeholders and mechanisms. With the NLD government’s fledging management of interests and institutions demonstrated by mishandling of majority mandate, lack of adequate political capital and out-of-sequence measures, bringing about political cohesion among diverse interests and groups in drafting commonly acceptable and viable democracy and federal principles to be applied throughout the Union was a mission impossible.

 

In preparation for the 2020 general election, the ruling NLD party overlooked confidence-building, political cohesion and confirmation of national causes for pursuing the majority mandate. In terms of engagement, the NLD party launched a grassroots campaign while remaining largely inattentive to consulting, at least virtually, security and post-election stability at the actor/stakeholder level. Neither the executive nor the legislature of the NLD government showed responsiveness when complaints about voters list errors and election irregularities loomed large after the election. Tatmadaw’s request to discuss the matter in the NDSC was turned down by the NLD government. Here, the failure of the 2020 general election was not indicative of one-off wrongful actions or inactions but the accumulation of deviations from democratic practices. NLD’s 2016-2021 tenure clearly demonstrated that elections and majority mandate alone could not ensure democracy.

 

Section (3)

 

NUG, CRPH, Populism and False Hope

 

To correct democracy that had been unacceptably deviated from its typical criteria, the State Administration Council (SAC) has to temporarily hold the state responsibilities and the three branches of power under the 2008 Constitution on 1 February 2021. It is not a coup. It has followed legitimate constitutional procedures, including the peaceful transfer of power, to deal with the election crisis and the deviations from the practices of democracy. The time period of SAC assuming state responsibilities is a politically defining moment to correct democracy and prevent disruptive tendencies. By looking at the civil-military composition of the SAC and subsidiary councils, the involvement of various infrastructural institutions of civil and military nature and the procedures and mechanisms of decision-making and enforcement, it is quite clear that the SAC is neither military junta nor military regime. Despite the temporary suspension of the division of powers and except for enacting certain new laws necessary for the public interest, the Council continues to practice the existing laws, rules and regulations of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar.

 

The UEC’s refusal to address objections and complaints about voters list errors and the failure of the NLD-led executive and legislature to take responsible measures activated the constitutional procedures to correct deviations from democratic practices. Since the time the constitutional procedures set in for the political defining moment, the legitimacy of NLD as a government and its executive, legislative and judicial powers have ended. Just as the legitimacy of the NLD government had officially ended, the results of a deeply flawed election could not extend legitimacy to the NLD to proclaim itself as a government or to form a coalition government. Seemingly out of contact with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the NLD party and its associates are taking arbitrary measures. Some NLD senior members and senior appointees are acting as if their majority mandate and legitimacy extends indefinitely. In this respect, the so-called National Unity Government (NUG) and Committee Representing Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (CRPH) proclaiming legitimacy and acting against the prevailing constitution were unlawful regardless of popular support. There is no justification under any manifestation for the terrorist activities of those groups. They are merely unlawful terrorist groups as declared by the present government.

 

A state has to create, maintain and enforce social order as necessary through the fulfilment of public goods with the minimum use of coercion. Public goods are the common or collective benefits expressible in political, security, economic and social terms provided by the governments. A state acquires its strength through the fulfilment of public goods. Here, a state is an institutional and territorial complex comprising four main elements: territory, population, sovereignty and government. Creating disruption to a government ability to provide public goods to its people means creating disorder and weakening of the state.

 

The opposition politics of NLD, NUG and CRPH today go everything against the SAC’s ability to provide public goods and establish social order. Under the incitement of the NLD, its supporters and extremists and due to media framing, peaceful demonstrations turned into confrontation, riots and violence. The public, particularly youths labelled as generation Z, was mobilized into violent and disorderly conduct. Former Myanmar Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York U Kyaw Moe Tun supported disorderly conduct on the street at a time when people should practice social distancing and avoid crowd activities according to the COVID-19 health guidelines. The security forces took law enforcement measures following the riot control procedures practising utmost restraint with minimum use of force. However, only selective scenes of riots were distributed across social media and news media to create narratives against SAC’s handling of violent and disorderly conduct while remaining silent as to the reality unfolding behind the riots and violence.

 

The NLD camouflaged itself as an executive and legislative authority in NUG and CRPH respectively, continues to victimize the population for the consequences of its wrongful actions and inactions. The Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) is both conceptually wrong and against ethics, human rights and law. Conceptually, it is meant to fail the society and the state rather than the government. The civil services provide many essential public services. Urging civil service personnel to join CDM is irresponsible and shows total disregard for respective ethics. Due to CDM, a large number of doctors, nurses and other health workers stop coming to the hospitals, clinics and dispensaries failing to attend to elderly people, maternity care, accidents and other inpatient and outpatient care. Low-income people who need emergency care or continuous treatment for cases such as heart attack, kidney dialysis and patients receiving chemotherapy lost their lives due to the dysfunction of the health care sector. At this moment of COVID-19 third wave, much medical staff letting the health care system down is against ethics. The CDM in the health sector violates the people’s right to health and is also wrong from a humanitarian perspective. Urging or intimidating university and school teachers not to go to work and students not to go to class is an attempt tantamount to violating the right to education and destroying the future of the country. Civil service personnel must abide by the prevailing laws and by-laws promulgated with regard to their duties and obligations regardless of who the government is. It is also the purpose of bureaucracy in democracies. Provoking and intimidating civil service personnel not to perform their duties and obligations and bullying, harassing and launching the so-called “social punishments” campaign against responsible civil service personnel violate nonviolence and rule of law norms of democracy. Since the assumption of the state responsibilities of SAC, the same existing laws, rules and regulations have been practised in a way that they are supposed to be. Law-abiding citizens of Myanmar were persuaded into disorder as if the NLD, CRPH and NUG are above the law to command people to obey or disobey the law.

 

Many civil service personnel followed the campaign “Do not go to the office, quit the job” under the false promise of giving salaries to those government employees who lose their job. They voluntarily ran into various hardships. In fact, the NLD, CRPH and NUG are together systematically destroying the bureaucracy and public services which take time to build capacity, skills and expertise. All the burdens of their intention for the state and society to spiral down into deep weakness fall upon the population.

 

Nevertheless, certain persons like Kyaw Moe Tun who claimed to be representing NLD, NUG and CRPH and NUG’s so-called “Minister for Health and Sports’’ and “Minister for Education” Dr Zaw Wai Soe continue to misleadingly advocate CDM as if it is for a noble cause. Against his ethics as a medical practitioner, Dr Zaw Wai Soe even talked about malicious conduct such as the use of explosives and poisoned foods for rebellion while committing more actions on the path of violent revolution. In fact, these measures fulfilling their own political purposes are inhuman and irrational. The CDM of bank staff interrupted banking services not limited to domestic and foreign transactions and transfers affecting trade and commerce. The purpose of pulling down the country’s economy already racked by the COVID-19 pandemic is cruel. What seems crueller is letting the elderly people, pensioners and disabled persons wait in a long queue under the hot sun to make their cash out merely for a monthly food expense. Just consider our elderly parents or grandparents in such a place. Although CDM seems to be a non-violent method, its consequences upon the population are inhumane and far worse than violent acts.

 

Members of NLD, CRPH, NUG, their supporters and extremists resorting to acts of terror for their political goal are also diverse and numerous. Terror attacks among others include the killing of village, ward and township administrators; attacks against security forces with pistols, assault rifles, hand grenades, catapults, slingshots, iron hooks, fire bottles, sticks, rocks, knives, spears and harpoons; the brutal killing of members of Myanmar Police Force; brutal attacks and killings of USDP members and their family members; and accusing innocent civilians and veterans as informers and killing lawlessly. The so-called “Defence Minister” and “Deputy Defence Minister” of NUG U Yi Mon and Daw Khin Ma Ma Myo openly incited rebellion against the Tatmadaw. They are also deeply involved in providing courses of training to the so-called People’s Defence Forces (PDF) for the rebellion.

 

Various destructive activities range from attending basic military training and mine explosion courses at the camps of EAOs; blocking of roads; destroying public properties and bridges; burning of factories related to foreign direct investments; attacking administrator offices and USDP offices with homemade bombs and time bombs; throwing Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) to banks; arson attacks or improvised mine and grenade attacks against hospitals, schools, township education offices, universities, township municipal offices, township immigration and labour offices, town hall, township courts, police offices, other villages, ward and township level government offices, telecommunication offices, housings of government employees, traffic-light control buildings and township power sub-station. Even COVID-19 vaccination checkpoints and vaccination centres are targeted under attack. The type, nature and pattern of violence and targets and victims involved point to the fact that members of NLD, CRPH, NUG, their supporters and extremists are systematically disrupting public services essential for the proper functioning of the administration, security, economy and social wellbeing in order for the state and the society to plunge into disorder. By mobilizing individual or group attacks against the state and the society through populism to realize their political purpose, NLD and its associates are blatantly violating the democratic norms related to life, liberty and property and tolerance for differences. These violent and disorderly conduct demonstrate all but against what a government is supposed to do.

 

The NLD’s deviation from democratic practices in decision-making/policy-making has also turned into arbitrary. On 3 June 2021, the subordinate group of the NLD party, NUG, issued a policy paper regarding a certain group of people in Rakhine State. In doing so, the NUG pretends to have a participatory policy-making by mentioning a clause like “After consultations with the many different stakeholders in the Rakhine States”. Firstly, both NUG and CRPH are unlawful organizations. Secondly, the NLD appointed UEC had postponed the elections in a large part of Rakhine State and no sufficient ethnic Rakhine representatives had been elected for lawmaking and certain policy approvals. Thus, the NUG’s policy paper did not represent ethnic Rakhine people just as the CRPH did not represent ethnic Rakhine people. Even if they could say they’ve collected informal opinion, it is not yet a policy level consent of ethnic Rakhine people. The policy paper illustrates that the NLD, CRPH and NUG either don’t even know what representation is or they are playing dishonest against the international community for their own political purposes. And it is not surprising.

 

Not only the representativeness of policies and decisions of NLD, CRPH and NUG are questionable, the cohesion and coherence of their policies and decisions are also cynical. At the very day of his defection on 26 February 2021, U Kyaw Moe Tun said he represented “the legitimate and duly elected” NLD government. His statement about representation seems right but fundamentally wrong. The principle duty of permanent representatives and any other diplomatic representations are to represent the state not the government. A government is just one out of four main elements of a state. Because of the unrepresentativeness of NLD and its instrumental organizations, CRPH and NUG, they do not even represent a government, let alone representing the state. Besides, CRPH and NUG are unlawful, unconstitutional and terrorist organizations. Thus, the NLD, NUG and CRPH do not have decision-making/ policy-making authority. Just as they don’t have the mandate, they lack decision/policy implementing institutions and mechanisms apart from online façades.

 

Kyaw Moe Tun has been dismissed from the civil services for his abuses of assigned duty and mandate since the morning of 27 February 2021 in accord with the existing civil services personal law, rules and regulations of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. Myanmar has repeatedly expressed its non-recognition of the participation of Kyaw Moe Tun at the United Nations. However, there have been misleading news on media that covers misinformation and one-sided opinions from different perspectives regarding the representation of Myanmar at the United Nations. Some news agencies mistakenly mentioned that the participation of Kyaw Moe Tun at the United Nations would be the victory for the so-called National Unity Government. Such descriptions totally differ from the situation on the ground. By saying that he represents the NUG, Kyaw Moe Tun admits himself as a terrorist member.

 

According to Rule 28 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, a Credentials Committee, consisting of nine members, shall be appointed at the beginning of each session by the General Assembly. The Committee shall elect its own officers and it shall examine the credentials of representatives and report to the General Assembly.

 

Rule 29 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly stipulates that any representative to whose admission a Member has made objection shall be seated provisionally with the same rights as other representatives until Credentials Committee has reported and the General Assembly has given the decision. It is considered that the participation of Kyaw Moe Tun in the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly and the committees’ meetings are because of Rule 29 of the General Assembly. It is further insisted here that his participation would not represent the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar.

 

Kyaw Moe Tun no longer holds Myanmar diplomatic passport nor has the diplomatic status or any identity to represent. When his U.S. visa expires, he will not have a valid passport. Without a valid Myanmar identity document and without a valid visa on it, his legal status is merely an asylum seeker in the United States. Accordingly, his eligibility for representation is out of the question. From the policy perspective, the volte-face in his policy positions means that what he and his NLD government said right to the international community during the 2016-2021 tenure were now all terminated. It can be interpreted as the policy incoherence or NLD’s politicization of state policies. The trustworthiness and functionality of such arbitrary and unilateral policy-making and decision-making are out of the question. Besides, Kyaw Moe Tun is a wanted fugitive who is being prosecuted under Myanmar’s existing laws. 

 

The people of Myanmar had invested in the NLD to realize their expectations. During its 2016-2021 tenure, the NLD has failed its supporters with its deviations from the practices of democracy. Instead of making the best use of the majority mandate, it has spoiled it into a structural barrier against nation-building processes or national community formation processes. After the irregularities of the 2020 general election have emerged, the NLD has failed the state and the society including its extreme supporters by disrupting law and order while victimizing people for the consequences of its wrongful actions and inactions. The NLD has repeatedly turned popular support into a false hope. What the NLD has been taking Myanmar into is not democracy but a state of failure. It can be concluded that the youths of the new generation are being put to death for the sake of a political party or a group of people, brutally murdering innocent people and civil servants, and attacking, burning and destroying public service sites such as schools and hospitals are all conduct of creating anarchy under the guise of democracy and systematic destruction of the country.

 

By an observer

 

#TheGlobalNewLightOfMyanmar