Suu Kyi's Trial May be Little More than a Sham
Myanmar Military Shows No Signs of Loosening its Grip
May 26, 2009
On May 18th, 2009 Aung San Suu Kyi, the light of democracy in military-ruled Burma, went on trial for violating the terms of her house arrest. She had nine more days to serve of her existing six-year prison term, and, if convicted now, could serve another five years. Human rights activists, and other observers in the international community, agree that the charge was trumped up in order to prevent Suu Kyi from participating in the run-up to Myanmar’s 2010 elections.
Excuse for Suu Kyi's Trial Results from John Yettaw's Visit
The pretext for the trial is questionable. John Yettaw, an American with an infatuation for Suu Kyi, swam across the lake surrounding her home and entered without the knowledge of the guards. When Suu Kyi asked him to leave, he insisted that he was too tired and ill to swim back. She let him stay two nights and told her lawyers that she did not report the occurrence because she did not want to cause trouble for the security personnel who act as her guards. She argues that the house is closely watched and the event happened because of a security breach. Her lawyers quote her as saying, in a CBC News article of May 25th, “I am not guilty because I have not broken any law.” (1)
Nyan Win Feels the Myanmar Junta is Rushing to Trial
The military has made one concession. On May 20th the regime stated that it would allow some local and foreign media to cover the trial, the first time the junta has agreed to media coverage. However, Nyan Win, Suu Kyi’s lawyer stated that he felt the military are rushing to trial. Nine of the remaining prosecution witnesses were dismissed by the government, and the presiding judge ruled that Suu Kyi must testify on Tuesday, May 26th, hardly time to prepare an adequate defense.
Suu Kyi, leader of Myanmar’s opposition, Nobel laureate, and Buddhist has followed, as much as possible, Ghandi’s teaching of non-violence. As Marcus Gee, reporter for the Globe and Mail, said in his May 22nd article entitled ‘Why Aung San Suu Kyi Won Long Ago,’ the military junta is afraid of Suu Kyi, because, even in a police state, legitimacy matters. (2) There is no doubt that Suu Kyi has the moral and ethical high ground, but the question is: is that enough? Even Ghandi, who developed and utilized the methodology of non-violence, was opposed by a state that believed in the rule of law. Suu Kyi has no such protection. The junta will not hesitate to keep her imprisoned, even if they do not execute her, and no matter how calm she remains, or how deftly she handles herself at trial, she has to be able to travel freely throughout the country to be an effective opposition leader.
(1)Aung San Suu Kyi Set to Testify in Latest Trial Court eager to move toward sentencing, defence alleges, CBC News, May 25, 2009
(2)Why Aung San Suu Kyi Won Long Ago, Marcus Gee, Globe and Mail, May 22, 2009
 |
