Asian Human Rights Commission -- Police torture endemic in Burma

Quotes and Excerpts of the Day:


"Officers including Sub-inspectors Aung Thwin, Hsan Lin and Win Myint
Htun allegedly forced Than Htaik Aung to stand with toothpicks
inserted into his heels, to drink putrid drain water, and allegedly
also came into his cell and urinated. Officers including Police
Captain Zaw Lwin and Sub-inspectors Thet Wei, Kyaw Myo Hlaing and Kyaw
Htoo Naing allegedly forced U Nandawuntha, a monk, to stand throughout
two days of interrogation and then forced him to kneel on sharp gravel
while an officer jumped up and down on his calves. If he didn’t give
him the answers that they wanted then they hit him on the head with a
wooden rod."

"The systemic consequences of these and other similar rulings are
twofold: first, courts at all levels in Myanmar routinely accept as
evidence confessions that have been obtained through the use of
torture; and second, anecdotally the use of torture is now more
widespread than at any time in recent decades. The AHRC has over the
last couple of years received many reports of the use of torture,
including extreme forms of torture normally associated with
politically driven inquiries, in ordinary criminal cases. The making
of payments to police officers to have them not torture detainees is
also reportedly commonplace,"

"Once deeply embedded in a system of policing torture is, as you know,
extremely difficult to remove. Whatever happens in Myanmar in coming
years the use of torture will remain endemic."


http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO1001/S00342.htm?


Myanmar: Open Letter to the UN on Torture
Tuesday, 19 January 2010, 10:03 am
Press Release: Asian Human Rights Commission

An Open Letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture by the Asian
Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Professor Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment
OHCHR, UNOG
CH-1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND

Dear Prof. Nowak

MYANMAR: Extensive use of torture by police in recent cases

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has followed with concern
reports of the most recent criminal cases targeting persons deemed
threats to the state in Myanmar, and in particular the alleged use of
grave forms of torture to extract confessions from them.

Among these is the case of Dr. Wint Thu and eight others accused over
their involvement in a prayer campaign for the release of political
prisoners, and of having had contact with groups abroad that the state
has designated unlawful, whom it is alleged that from September to
their trials in December the Special Branch held incommunicado and
tortured.

Officers including Sub-inspectors Aung Thwin, Hsan Lin and Win Myint
Htun allegedly forced Than Htaik Aung to stand with toothpicks
inserted into his heels, to drink putrid drain water, and allegedly
also came into his cell and urinated. Officers including Police
Captain Zaw Lwin and Sub-inspectors Thet Wei, Kyaw Myo Hlaing and Kyaw
Htoo Naing allegedly forced U Nandawuntha, a monk, to stand throughout
two days of interrogation and then forced him to kneel on sharp gravel
while an officer jumped up and down on his calves. If he didn’t give
him the answers that they wanted then they hit him on the head with a
wooden rod. Dr. Wint Thu and Ko Myo Han were also both allegedly
forced to stand throughout interrogations of two and four nights
respectively.

Four officers at the Aungthapyay interrogation facility in Yangon
Division, including Sub-inspectors Win Myint and Soe Aung allegedly
dripped candle wax onto the genitalia of co-accused Wei Hypoe,
splashed him with boiling water and tied him to metal bars then
assaulted him with bamboo rods. They also applied a stinging substance
to his open wounds.

In a related case Special Branch officers Sub-inspector Thet Wei and
Kyaw Htoo Naing alleged injected a detainee from Nyaung-U by the name
of Ko Zaw Zaw with an unknown substance during interrogation.

All of the victims of alleged torture were sentenced to long jail
terms in December, at a closed court inside a prison. Their
convictions were reportedly based upon the confessions that the police
obtained through the use of torture.

Although the Evidence Act and other parts of law prohibit the use of
confessions obtained during police interrogation, the current Supreme
Court of Myanmar has enabled their use and has thereby encouraged the
practice of torture by virtue of a number of orders, including two
rulings from 1991. In the first of these, the U Ye Naung case, the
court overturned all previous precedent and effectively also the
Evidence Act itself by allowing for evidence obtained during a
Military Intelligence interrogation to be admitted to trial where the
accused could not prove that it had been obtained through duress.
Similarly, in the second, the Maung Maung Kyi case, the court placed
the burden of proof onto the accused to show that he had not been
tortured and threatened into making a confession.

The systemic consequences of these and other similar rulings are
twofold: first, courts at all levels in Myanmar routinely accept as
evidence confessions that have been obtained through the use of
torture; and second, anecdotally the use of torture is now more
widespread than at any time in recent decades. The AHRC has over the
last couple of years received many reports of the use of torture,
including extreme forms of torture normally associated with
politically driven inquiries, in ordinary criminal cases. The making
of payments to police officers to have them not torture detainees is
also reportedly commonplace, although the making of such payments does
not apply in cases like that of Dr. Wint Thu where the families of
victims are not even able to locate the whereabouts of their loved
ones, much less do anything to stop their suffering through the
payment of money or by other means.

Once deeply embedded in a system of policing torture is, as you know,
extremely difficult to remove. Whatever happens in Myanmar in coming
years the use of torture will remain endemic. Clearly, it is not
something that will be addressed through some modest international
interventions or expressions of concern. Notwithstanding, the Asian
Human Rights Commission takes this opportunity to urge you to take up
the incidence of torture in Myanmar with the Special Rapporteur
assigned to monitor the situation of human rights in that country and
together with him to communicate your concerns with a view to
impressing upon the members of the senior judiciary at the very least
that until they reverse the earlier rulings that have enabled the
sorts of practices described in this letter and instead issue orders
to prohibit unequivocally the use of torture by police then they
should be considered complicit in this abuse and should be subject to
international scrutiny and censure in same measure a s the torturers
themselve
Yours sincerely

Basil Fernando
Executive Director
Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong