From 1948 to 1988 our Burmese army had been the extremely-rare
Socialist Army supporting the stupid leftwing Socialist dictatorship of late General Ne
Win – May his soul burn in hell to eternity.
But the devastating result of that Socialist dictatorship –
itself the legacy of late General Aung San and his Socialist comrades - has
basically reshaped the army into a patriotic-rightwing conservative and
nationalist army since that failed 1988 Uprising.
Withstanding massive international pressure including the
devastating international sanctions last 20 odd years Burmese Army has
gradually been changing its direction from old-Left to new-Right and now Burma
is a so-called semi-democratic state ruled by so-called quasi-civilian government.
But Burma is still controlled by the military class since
the ruling class and the business elites are ex-military or somehow connected
to the military through blood and economic ties. And the leftist elements of
the society and the outside world really hate to see that.
The so-called democracy activists inside and outside Burma
are now waging a war to reshape Burma into a left-leaning social democratic
state and their attacks on Burmese army, the only truly-Burmese institution strong and brave enough to stand against them on their way to evil-Socialism, have intensified recently.
I’ve already written many posts on the massive financial support
from that leftwing billionaire George Soros the founder of Open Society to the Burma’s Open
Society led by that army-hating Socialist Min Ko Naing and his so-called
88-Generationers.
Taking advantage of newly-found openness and media-freedom
in Burma many of these leftist attacks are often cloaked in the form of academic
seminars and conferences and workshops held right on Burmese soil.
And this post is to let the Burmese people know that actually these academic-sounding lefties are the wolves in sheep skins trying to drag Burma into their brutal Socialist clutch again.
And this post is to let the Burmese people know that actually these academic-sounding lefties are the wolves in sheep skins trying to drag Burma into their brutal Socialist clutch again.
(Following article written by Dr. Melissa Crouch a
socialist-academic from National University of Singapore appearing recently in Socialist
media Asia Sentinel is one of those intensifying attacks.)
Will
Myanmar's Soldiers Return to Barracks?
The rule of law
and the constitution matter. This is evident in Myanmar, where current steps
towards constitutional amendment have the potential to determine the future
direction of the country's transition process. A key issue is whether the role
of the military, as defined by the Constitution of Myanmar, will be changed.
A constitution in
any democracy must clearly define the position of the military and provide for
appropriate national defense, while providing mechanisms to prevent the misuse
of power. There should be civilian control over the military, and the military
should be subordinate to the executive arm of government in particular. To
achieve this, the military cannot also be part of the legislature, nor have the
power to appoint ministers.
A range of
constitutional approaches can limit military power. Some constitutions adopt a
minimal approach and briefly refer to the military as subordinate to the
executive, leaving other details for further regulation by the legislature.
Others take a more expansive approach and set out in detail the role of the
military and the limits of its powers.
In Myanmar the
military is under the control of the Defense Services Commander-in-Chief, who
is appointed by the President. But the President's appointment is subject to
the approval of the National Defense and Security Council, a majority of whose
members are from the military. In practice, this means the military has
significant influence in appointing its own commander. The Constitution does
not specify the term of the Commander-in-Chief, the qualifications the position
requires or the circumstances in which he could be removed from his position.
In contrast, the office of the President has a clear term, the candidate must
meet set requirements, and there is a clear process for removal from office.
There are further
differences in relation to the composition of Parliament and the election of
members. The Commander-in-Chief has the power to nominate the Defense Service
personnel in both houses of Parliament, which makes up 25 per cent of the
seats. He also has the power to recommend the appointment of the Minister of
Home Affairs, Border Affairs and Defense.
The 2008
Constitution creates a complex relationship between the President, the
Commander-in-Chief and the military-dominated National Defense and Security
Council. Contrary to some recent reports, it is unclear which position has the
most power, but the office of the President appears to be subject to greater
regulation, at least in comparison to the Commander-in-Chief.
In addition to
being subordinate to the executive, the military must not be immune from the
law and should also be required to comply with human rights obligations. There
are several different approaches to military justice in democratic countries.
In some systems, a crime committed by a military officer may be heard by the
general courts, and in other contexts such cases are heard by a system of
special military courts.
For example,
Indonesia has a system of Military Courts with a right to appeal to the Supreme
Court, a general body. There has been recent public debate in Indonesia about
whether the matters that go to military courts would be dealt with more fairly
by the general courts. The Constitution of Myanmar also provides for a system of
courts martial, with an ultimate appeal to the Commander-in-Chief. In contrast
to Indonesia, there is no right to appeal to the Supreme Court in Myanmar,
which means that the decision of the Commander-in-Chief is not subject to
review.
Special military
courts allow for a degree of specialization because they are constituted by
judges who have a background in the military. But one concern is that these
judges may be less independent in their decision-making. Instead, using the
general court system to determine cases concerning the military suggests that
military officers are subject to the same law and institutions as everyone
else.
This is why it is
important that the current constitutional amendment process clarify the role of
the military. Formal changes to ensure that the military is subject to the
control of the executive, and that there are clear limits to its power, would
be an important step.
But while the
formal safeguards of an amended Constitution will help Myanmar transition to
democracy, substantive changes matter too. It is equally important that there
exists a culture and mentality within broader society that the military should
in fact play a subordinate role to the executive, have no influence over the
legislature, and remain subject to the rule of law. Recent reports highlighting
the excessive role and dominance of the military are one indication that such a
cultural shift may now be occurring.
(Melissa Crouch is
a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Law Faculty, the National University of Singapore.
From 8–10 May 2013, Dr Crouch participated in the Myanmar Constitutional Democracy Workshop hosted by the Sydney Law
School in Yangon.)
The
Socialist behind the Constitution Workshop?
The Workshop held from 8-10 May this year clearly was a
part of the International Socialists’ grand plan to amend Burma’s 2008 Constitution
and pave the way clear for Aung San Suu Kyi, clearly the Socialists’ favourite
to rule Burma, to become the president in coming 2015 General Elections.
Right now these
bloody Socialists want to remove that 25% Military Representation from all the parliaments
in Burma.
Their well-hidden
agenda also is to reshape Burma into a so-called true-Federal Union where small
percentage minorities like Muslims and other ethnics will have more say on the
affairs of Burma than us Buddhist Burmese, clearly the large majority population
wise.
If Socialists get
their way all seven present divisions representing us Buddhist Burmese will be grouped
as one only Burman (Bama Pyee-ne) State with the equal right as newly-formed
North-Arakan Islamic State or Wa Independent State. It sucks and it definitely is
scary!
Just look at the key person behind that so-called Myanmar
Constitutional Democracy Workshop participated by Melissa Crouch. The Workshop’s
only Patron is none other than Janelle
Saffin the well-known long-term anti-Burmese-military activist and a hardcore
leftwing Socialist politician from Australia.
The previously Australian-Labour-Government-Whip Janelle
Saffin currently represents the rural NSW electorate of Page. A marginal labour
seat Page (covering the towns of Lismore, Balina, Kyogle, Casino, Yamba and Grafton)
had traditionally been held by the conservative National Party.
Good news for our Burma is that the latest polls in
Australia are indicating she and the Julia Gillard-led Australian Labour Party
will lose most of their seats to the conservatives in coming September General
Elections.
(26 June 2013 Update: Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard just lost her job last night as she was defeated by former PM Kevin Rudd in the Australian Labor Party Leadership Spill. Janelle Saffin's time meddling in Burmese politics is now almost over too.)
(26 June 2013 Update: Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard just lost her job last night as she was defeated by former PM Kevin Rudd in the Australian Labor Party Leadership Spill. Janelle Saffin's time meddling in Burmese politics is now almost over too.)
 |
| Australian Socialist MP Janelle Saffin Calling for Gay Marriage Rights. |
 |
| Australian MP Janelle Saffin Condemning Burmese Military Government (2009)? |
 |
| Janelle Saffin, Julia Gillard, and 3 NLD MPs in Canberra during NLD's Socialist MPs' May-2012 visit to Australia. |
George Soros's "New World Order" Through UN!
What Exactly was Shans' 1962 Federal Mu (Federal Policy)