One year after the government officially struck down laws obstructing free press in Myanmar, a parliamentary bill could allow previous censorship practices to re-surge.

When Thein Sein’s Union Solidarity and Development party government ended the last of the censorship laws in August last year, many hailed a new era of free expression and an end to the pressures placed on journalists over the previous half century.

Still, many journalists are concerned by the state of media reform in the country. Currently, a publishing bill that critics say gives the Ministry of Information (MOI) overly broad powers to issue and revoke publication licenses has been passed by the lower house of parliament and is set for consideration by the upper house.

Myint Kyaw is secretary for the Myanmar Journalist Network (MJN), which has been protesting the proposed bill, known as the Printing and Publishing Enterprise Bill. He told IPS that the MJN’s main criticism of the bill was in its conception of a printer and publisher registry system, which would essentially allow a ministry-appointed registrar to issue or deny publication licences and thus leave control over these licences in the hands of the government.“[Previously], all publications, private journals and magazines, arts, music, films and TV programmes were heavily censored by the government.”
-- Aye Chan Naing, chief editor of Democratic Voice of Burma

This situation is reminiscent of when the ministry used to control journalists and editors through the threat of license revocation, Myint Kyaw described. Such a possibility, combined with the threat of imprisonment and aggression, would lead to self-censorship, particularly when speaking critically of the military or when investigating corruption, notably that of former dictators and their family businesses.

Myint Kyaw also spoke of the need for a law guaranteeing access to information and ensuring safety for journalists in conflict areas. Earlier in August, MJN also collected thousands of signatures from around Yangon, the country’s former capital city, for a petition that demonstrated the public’s discontent with the state of media reform.

The current parliamentary bill comes at a time when many human rights groups remain critical of Myanmar’s attitude towards the media. In June, the government banned Time magazine after it featured a piece on the radical Buddhist 969 movement.

“It’s a disgraceful decision to ban the issue and indicates recidivism in official censorship in Burma [also known as Myanmar],” David Mathieson, a senior Asia researcher with Human Rights Watch, told IPS.

Benjamin Ismaïl, head of Reporters Without Borders’ Asia-Pacific desk, expressed a similar viewpoint. “The reflex of censoring news has not disappeared, but this is not a surprise since the government is composed in majority by the same persons who were already in power before 2011.”

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), however, did not denounce this case of censorship, telling IPS that the organisation aims to help develop an independent media, but that “[we] usually confine our advocacy to issues around the protection of journalists.”

Myanmar’s Interim Press Council, which is a body appointed by the government, has submitted its own, separate press bill to parliament. However, 17 of the recommendations in the bill have been contested by the Ministry of Information.

Despite possessing the constitutional right to a free press, in practice the media in Myanmar were tightly controlled by the establishment, from Ne Win’s coup of 1962 until August 2012. Censorship reached such levels in those fifty years that many publications were not able to effectively report from inside the country and were forced to relocate outside its borders.

One such organisation is Democratic Voice of Burma, which was set up in Norway in 1992. Its chief editor, Aye Chan Naing, told IPS that DVB was established “to counter one-sided propaganda by the Burmese military government.”

“All publications, private journals and magazines, arts, music, films and TV programmes were heavily censored by the government,” he said. “We were to counter them by airing unbiased and independent news programmes.”

“We could not do our job independently without getting arrested,” Aye Chan added. “There are a lot of difficulties [in reporting on] a country where our journalists can’t be present or work as undercover reporters. As in any closed country, it is hard to verify what is fact and what is rumour while the government refuses to answer any kind of questions or verification.”

Seventeen of DVB’s reporters were put in prison from 2007 to early 2012 for their work for DVB, Aye Chan said, although DVB has made moves to return to Myanmar since the opening up of the media. The organisation has an official office there now and has registered as a media production house.

Many media organisations and their employees are hoping for a positive resolution to the argument over media reform in the country – ideally, a law that would guarantee both protection for journalists and the ability to report without fear of retaliation by the authorities.

“Now that the government has removed the censorship board and allowed our journalists to work freely and independently…we decided to move back to Burma,” Aye Chan said. “As a media organisation, we need to be on the ground where we are reporting and get the firsthand news.”

Obama meets with Myanmar's President Thein Sein during his November 2012 trip to Asia. Credit: White House Photo/Pete Souza

By Carey L. Biron
WASHINGTON, May 20 2013 (IPS)

Myanmar’s President Thein Sein on Monday became the first leader of that country in almost a half-century to pay a call on the White House, a visit that has simultaneously highlighted a series of monumental changes seen in Myanmar in recent years as well as a reforms process that many are warning may have stalled.

It was only late last year that the United States lifted longstanding travel restrictions on Thein Sein, amidst a broader easing of economic sanctions by Washington and others aimed at nurturing a nascent opening-up in Myanmar, also known as Burma. Yet that process has been marred over the past year by ongoing armed insurgencies, continued rights violations and inept government response to anti-Muslim violence."It just seems like the whole [reforms] process is on autopilot.” -- HRW's John Sifton

At the White House Monday, President Barack Obama urged his counterpart to end attacks against Muslim minorities known as the Rohingya. Although President Sein did not directly mention the Rohingya, he did say that the recent communal violence was “extremely tragic”.

“Peace must be rooted in the broadest possible participation of public support, and we must forge a new and all-inclusive national identity,” President Sein said in public remarks at a university here following his visit to the White House, after which he took no questions.

“Myanmar people of all ethnic backgrounds and all faiths – Buddhist, Christian, Muslim, Hindu and others – must feel part of this new national identity. We must end all forms of discrimination and must ensure not only that intercommunal violence is brought to a halt, but that all perpetrators are brought to justice.”

President Sein also noted that a balance must be found between security imperatives and “basic rights and openness”, and he requested “help and advice” from the United States in finding that balance.

Yet critics are increasingly sceptical about Washington’s role in this relationship, warning that U.S. policy towards Myanmar has not been responsive enough to failed pledges of reform by Thein Sein’s quasi-civilian government. The former general’s travels around Washington Monday were dogged by criticism from public protesters and U.S. lawmakers.

“We should establish firm benchmarks to give pro-reform forces within Myanmar … the appropriate leverage to foster democracy and lasting civilian rule,” Trent Franks and Rush Holt, both members of Congress, wrote Monday. They urged that such benchmarks focus on progress of rule of law and “constitutional reform to create a federal system with respect for minority rights and civilian control of the military”.

Carrots and benchmarks

“The problem is that both the president and government of Burma have already been rewarded for the reforms process that’s underway, even while the last six months have been among the least impressive in terms of reform since that process began,” John Sifton, Asia advocacy director with Human Rights Watch, told IPS.

“The [Obama] administration is showing very little inclination to calibrate its approach and use punitive measures when there are negative developments. Instead, they continue to hand out rewards.”

One case in point is last Friday’s release of around 15 political prisoners. With the release – ordered by President Sein’s office, rather than a high-profile committee set up for the purpose – clearly aimed at coinciding with the Washington visit, rights observers are warning that political prisoners are being used as mere pawns.

In addition, President Sein’s government has failed to follow through on a pledge to facilitate the opening of an office by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Further, little headway is being seen in multiple simultaneous negotiations among long-simmering ethnic conflicts.

And a recent government commission tasked with looking into the anti-Rohingya violence was nearly universally disappointing, recommending a security response over social reconciliation for actions that rights groups say constitute ethnic cleansing.

Indeed, that violence is continuing. Also on Monday, Physicians for Human Rights, an advocacy group, released a report detailing the recent deaths of over 100 Muslims in central Burma, in a communal “massacre” in late March.

While the Obama administration has repeatedly voiced its “concern” over these and related issues, public policy announcements over the past year have been in the Myanmarese government’s favour: continued rollbacks on sanctions (though some do remain), boosting of trade links, a historic visit to Yangon by President Obama, followed by Monday’s visit to the White House by Thein Sein.

“This encouragement policy is not working – over the past year, and particularly in the past couple of months, the Burmese government has escalated its human rights violations and military attacks against ethnic minorities,” Jennifer Quigley, executive director of the U.S. Campaign for Burma, an advocacy group, said in a statement.

“Instead of retracting previous concessions or freezing new concessions … the U.S. administration has responded disproportionately by granting more concessions. President Obama is sending the message that crimes against humanity by state forces against ethnic and religious minorities in Burma will be ignored by his administration.”

Calibrated approach

U.S. officials, meanwhile, have repeatedly inferred that their actions are meant to strengthen the moderately reformist wing under Thein Sein, guarding against hardliners and entrenched interests.

“We can’t underestimate the fact that Burma has made great progress in the last couple of years,” State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki said Friday. “Yes, there’s still more work to do, but the progress they’ve made has been significant and they’ve put in place an ambitious reform agenda.”

The Obama administration’s own acknowledgement of the ongoing “work to do” was given a strong fillip elsewhere in Washington on Monday. Just as Thein Sein and Barack Obama were planning to meet at the White House, the U.S. State Department was releasing an annual global report on religious freedoms.

The Myanmar section is clear-eyed in its reporting of the past year, noting that despite constitutional guarantees of religious freedoms, the government “in practice” enforces restrictions on those rights. “The trend in the government’s respect for religious freedom did not change significantly during the year,” the report states, noting also government complicity in the anti-Rohingya attacks last June.

Still, HRW’s Sifton alludes to broad if grudging agreement with the outlines of U.S. attempts to offer rewards for reforms and to bolster Thein Sein’s hand.

“Few in civil society are suggesting that the U.S. government turn its back on Thein Sein,” he notes.

“Rather, the issue is imposing a calibrated approach so that when the reforms process slows or there are other disappointing developments, those are met with corresponding slowdowns or punitive actions on the U.S. side. Right now, it just seems like the whole process is on autopilot.”

As campaigning for the Apr. 1 poll in Burma (also Myanmar) gets into full-swing, there are misgivings on whether the National League for Democracy (NLD) party of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi will get a fair deal.

NLD spokesman Nyan Win at a Feb. 20 press conference in Rangoon. Credit:Mizzima

The election is a test of strength between the liberals who support President Thein Sein’s reform agenda, and hardliners who seem intent on derailing the reform process, despite publicly declaring support for it.

Already NLD spokesman Nyan Win has complained of difficulties in getting permission to use public venues for its meetings. “We want fair play, but restrictions have lately increased. We hope the government keeps its word and allows a free and fair election,” he told IPS.

Suu Kyi, however, needs no venues and thousands of supporters and well-wishers flock her routes to catch a glimpse of the iconic figure who spent most of the last 20 years under house arrest.

Everywhere the reception has been the same, with adoring crowds yelling their support for the Nobel peace laureate who led the NLD to a landslide victory in 1990 – only to be thwarted by the military which refused to hand over power.

“She’s treated like a pop star,” said freelance journalist Min Thu who has been following her entourage. “The excitement is overwhelming as people want to see her, waive to her, and for those close enough, to touch her.”

“Now we can have democracy,” said Aye Win, a retired schoolteacher in Rangoon. “When she is elected she will help end poverty and repression in the country,” she told IPS over email.

The NLD is contesting almost all the seats – 40 in the lower house, six in the upper house and two in the provincial assemblies.

While this represents less than 15 percent of the seats in the national assembly – 440 seats in the lower house and 224 in the upper house – the results are less important than the way in which the polls are conducted.

“Suu Kyi’s decision to run for parliament is an extremely important move for the future of the country,” said Prof. Sean Turnell, a Burma specialist at Macquarie University, Australia, who recently visited the country.

“She is uniquely placed to drive reform forward and bring on board a substantial constituency to help maintain that momentum,” Turnell told IPS.

United States secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, stressed the need for the by-elections to be free and fair when she met government leaders in December in the capital of Naypyidaw.

Since then the mantra has been constantly repeated. United Nations human rights envoy, Tomas Ojea Quintana, on his mission there last month, said that any rolling back sanctions was dependent on the conduct of the by-elections.

“We have taken the necessary measures so that the upcoming by-elections will be free, fair and credible,” speaker of the lower house, Shwe Mann, told European Union development commissioner, Andris Piebalgs, last week.

Piebalgs, who announced a new 150 million euro (198 million dollars) aid package for Burma, said in a statement that the purpose of his visit was “to assess the ongoing reforms and encourage their continuation.”

However, many leaders of the army-backed, ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) are not happy and there is evidence that they are trying to scupper the NLD’s campaign.

This became evident a few weeks ago when Suu Kyi wanted to speak to her supporters in Mandalay. The EC gave her permission to speak, but she was not allowed the use of the main stadium there to address the rally.

On her first trip to the Dawei industrial zone in southern Burma it became clear that former fisheries minister and USDP central executive member, Maung Maung Thein, had warned residents that if they did not vote for the USDP they would lose their jobs, sources told IPS.

Maung Maung Thein has considerable business interests in the area – especially in the fishing industry – and he has also been accused of colossal corruption.

All along the main road in Suu Kyi’s constituency of Kawmhu on the outskirts of Rangoon there are big, colourful billboards giving credit to the USDP for infrastructure projects, medical centres and schools built by the government.

This may not dissuade voters from electing Suu Kyi, but may influence voting in other parts of the country.

The pro-democracy leader is not anxious to cry foul. “We have certainly come across a few hitches in the last couple of weeks with regards the campaign of the NLD,” she told reporters.

“We hope that these will be sorted out because free and fair elections depend on how a campaign goes, not just how people are allowed to cast their vote on the day itself,” she said.

“The problem is access to resources, and when so much is at stake that there will be setbacks,” said Aung Naing Oo, a former activist and now development specialist who returned to Burma from exile in Thailand for the first time in 20 years.

“There will always be obstacles to democratic change in the short-term, especially the danger of vote buying,” he told IPS.

While the NLD may win most of the seats it contests, it will be a minority party in the parliament. More than 70 percent of the parliamentary seats are already held by the pro-military legislators from the USDP, including many who are serving soldiers nominated by the army chief.

“Even if she is the leader of a minority party in parliament, Suu Kyi will be a potent symbol for national reconciliation and democratic change,” said Nyo Myint, a political analyst and pro-democracy activist based in Chiang Mai, Thailand. “The lady is showing her trust in the government,” he said.

(END)

Extraordinary political changes in the year since former army general Thein Sein came to power in Myanmar have prompted European powers to ease restrictions on the isolated nation, raising questions whether such rewards are too little or too much.

Citing “the remarkable programme of political reform,” the European Union announced on Feb. 17 it was lifting its travel ban on President Thein Sein and 86 other senior leaders from Myanmar (also known as Burma). The European Council, representing heads of the EU’s 27 countries, also said it would review other sanctions by the end of April.

While acknowledging the steady progress since Thein Sein became the civilian president in March 2011, some European officials remain cautious about ending some remaining restrictions – including those on commerce and certain types of aid.

“I would question how quickly these things are being done in Burma,” Sir Graham Watson, a member of the European Parliament’s foreign affairs committee, said shortly after the EU announced it would end visa restrictions on top officials.

Watson has been highly critical of past EU handling of authoritarian regimes in Myanmar as well as the ousted leaders of Libya and Tunisia. A report he prepared, adopted by the Parliament earlier this month, cites Europe’s failure to prevent dictators and their families from socking away fortunes in EU countries with impunity.

“There will no doubt be some voices that say, and I think I will be among them, let’s make sure that the Burmese government is truly committed to what it is doing, and that this isn’t kind of a short-term fix,” Watson told IPS in an interview.

In contrast to the street revolts of the Arab Spring, Myanmar’s changes stem from the military elite that ruled from 1962 to 2011. The new government has freed hundreds of political prisoners and moved to end censorship of news media. Authorities have also eased their notorious travel restrictions and are encouraging foreign investment in a country that the UN’s Human Development Index ranks among the poorest in the world.

Freed from house arrest, opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy are campaigning in by-elections scheduled for Apr. 1, nearly 22 years after her victory in national elections was nullified by the military junta. The Nobel Peace Prize winner was released from home detention in November 2010.

The changes have drawn swift recognition, with the United States moving to ease sanctions and restore full diplomatic relations. In December, Hillary Clinton became the first secretary of state to visit Myanmar in 50 years. Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign policy chief, is due to visit in April, and EU aid commissioner Adris Piebalgs was there last week to pledge development assistance.

One organisation that has long monitored Myanmar, the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, has urged Western powers to move more swiftly to reward the reforms.

“We see a very different system of government, and it’s a very different game being played right now,” said Jim Della-Giacoma, ICG’s project director for Southeast Asia.

“When the government is moving in the direction the population wants, when the government is moving in the direction that the international community has long called for, it’s no longer a situation of pushing or pressuring, but there needs to be a new approach of encourage and assisting, and in this context continued sanctions don’t play a very useful role,” he said in a telephone interview from Jakarta.

Della-Giacoma says Myanmar’s reforms partly stem from the need for economic opportunities that have been passing by during decades of isolation and Western embargoes. Western countries could help by removing sanctions apart from those on weapons, he said.

“Now is the time for the EU to craft new policies that reflect the current situation,” he said, “rather than dreaming up new benchmarks that justify the persistence of policies that should have been lifted long ago.”

Still, there are concerns about how far the civilian government will go. Thein Sein, a former prime minister under the former military junta, had a long career as an army commander. He was chosen as president by Parliament, not by popular vote.

Earlier this month, human rights advocates reported that dissident Ashin Gambira was detained by the police just weeks after being freed in the January amnesty. The Buddhist monk had been sentenced to prison for involvement in anti-government demonstrations in 2007.

The International Press Institute has expressed concern that some imprisoned journalists were freed conditionally, which the Vienna-based press freedom group says exposes them to government pressure and self-censorship.

Meanwhile, the Myanmar authorities continue to pursue their 60-year war with the Karen minority and other ethnic groups over their quest for autonomy.

Amnesty International urged Clinton before her December visit to put pressure on the government, noting in a statement that the army “continues to commit human rights violations against civilians on a widespread and systematic basis.”

Watson, the British MEP, says concerns about Myanmar’s commitment to reforms mean that the EU should not be too quick to reward the government.

“I think there is universal support in the legislature for the principle of more for more,” Watson said. “The more the Burmese government does to open up their society, to introduce democratic reforms, then the more we should be prepared to do to take away the sanctions we have applied. But I think it’s too early to end all sanctions.”