CSIS has an insightful new summary of the problems with land reform and protests now arising throughout Myanmar. Definitely worth reading in its entirety.
Category Archives: Burma
Law as a last resort (Myanmar/Burma)
During President Thein Sein’s first press conference ever, he addressed the problem of land disputes. Most reports, including one in The Myanmar Times, have focused on the conference as a sign of the president’s warming relationship with the media. However, his answers hint to his administrations larger views towards judicial reform.
In my article for the Australian Journal of Asian Law, I quotes several of Thein Sein’s speeches in which he seemed to urge the courts to work in harmony with the other branches of government. In the context of the Saffron Revolution and Cyclone Nargis, these warnings sounded like an ominous sign of judicial independence under a civilian government.
Of course, events haven’t panned out quite the way I’d expected. The Constitutional Tribunal was very bold in striking down government acts. Until, of course, it was impeached. As I’ve noted many times, it seems many in the legislature were unwilling or unable to conceive of courts acting as a constraint on government.
In the press conference, Thein Sein states that he prefers for land disputes to be settled by negotiation, with adjudication as a last resort. Of course, many people prefer non-litigious dispute resolution. Litigation is costly and frustrating. However, the president’s comments did recall those earlier speeches he had made and suggest he hadn’t simply made those comments under duress.
I have no reason to suspect the government has any intention to try to limit judicial independence in land disputes. However, between the impeachment of the Constitutional Tribunal members and Thein Sein’s own views, I wouldn’t be surprised if judicial reform in Myanmar focused on alternative dispute resolution (ADR), such as mediation and arbitration. Indeed, as Erik Jensen has often argued, for developing countries less formal dispute resolution might serve societies better.
So far, I haven’t heard much about a big push for ADR in Myanmar, but if that’s what was on the president’s mind during his press conference it might prove a useful direction for Myanmar’s legal reforms.
We don’t have no corruption here… (Myanmar/Burma)
One thing I’ve said repeatedly is that I’m worried Myanmar’s judiciary is going the way of Indonesia’s, at least to the extent that Reformasi did not tackle judicial corruption when they had the chance. This is why I worry when I saw Justice U Soe Nyunt’s testimony in the Pyithu Hluttaw last week. According to The New Light of Myanmar, the justice claimed that allegations of corruption were merely hearsay. Perhaps, but only because researchers and journalists haven’t ben able to do the type of rigorous research needed to expose corruption.
Fortunately, the Hluttaw Rule of Law Committee is allegedly working on a judicial reform bill, so the issue isn’t being completely ignored. However, much of what we’re heard publicly from the NLD focuses on “judicial independence”. I hope the government recognizes that courts need both independence and accountability.
The New Light of Myanmar reprinted below:
Alleged cases of corruption at different levels of courts not hold water: Supreme Court Judge
Nay Pyi Taw, 25 Oct- As the Pyithu Hluttaw session continued for the sixth day, U Than Tun of Debayin Constituency raised a question about measures for fighting against corruption at court at different levels and U Myint Tun of Kawthoung Constituency about measures of the Supreme Court of the Union for strengthening of judicial pillar, a proposal approved by Pyithu Hluttaw.
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Union U Soe Nyunt described the alleged corruption at different levels of courts from the ground as misleading hearsay without creditability. The Supreme Court of the Union he said has issued instructions to prevent against bribery, corruption, fraud and negligence of judges and personnel at different levels of courts. Such measures as multi-level enforcement, punitive actions against failure to observe instructions and investigation and punishment on receiving complaints are in practice to enforce the instructions. As regards the question of U Myint Tun, he replied that the Supreme Court of the Union has prepared itself to take advices as necessary if the other three pillars are to support the judicial branch. He reckoned that the Supreme Court of the Union would not need to issue law, by-law, order and instruction with regard to proposal passed by the Pyithu Hluttaw. -NLM
Comments Off on We don’t have no corruption here… (Myanmar/Burma)
Filed under Burma, corruption, Myanmar, Supreme Court
Blog post summarizing Constitutional Tribunal dispute (Myanmar/Burma)
I have a post for Tom Ginsburg’s new I-Connect Constitutional Law blog about the Myanmar Constitutional Tribunal impeachment saga. It’s basically just a summary of recent events for American constitutional law scholars who might not have followed news in Myanmar closely. Here is the link:
http://www.iconnectblog.com/2012/10/will-democracy-and-constitutionalism-mix-in-myanmar/
Comments Off on Blog post summarizing Constitutional Tribunal dispute (Myanmar/Burma)
Filed under Burma, constitution, constitutional tribunal, Myanmar
Rule of Law Committee (Myanmar/Burma)
Aung San Suu Kyi’s Rule of Law Committee has already received 1,700 complaints about land rights and judicial cases. Mizzima has a brief article summarizing recent developments.
Comments Off on Rule of Law Committee (Myanmar/Burma)
Filed under Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma, Myanmar
Dominic J. Nardi, Jr. 
You must be logged in to post a comment.