Myanmar's recently elected parliament has convened at Naypyidaw, but it would be unwise to expect first-hand accounts of the session in the media. In the “discipline-flourishing democracy” of the junta, journalists were not allowed to cover the opening day's proceedings. There can be no visitors to this parliament, and anyone other than a legislator caught entering the building faces a one-year prison term and fine. The shadow of the junta is everywhere. The new bicameral parliament has 664 members, of which nearly 500 belong to the Union Solidarity and Development Party, a proxy for the military regime that goes by the name of State Peace and Development Council (SPDC). Separately, 25 per cent of the seats in both houses go to serving military officers. Together, the junta controls, more or less, 82 per cent of the parliamentary seats. The opposition, represented by the National Democratic Force, a splinter group of Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy, has a mere 16 seats. (The NLD boycotted the elections.) Parties representing Myanmar's ethnic nationalities form another small clutch of opposition voices. But the military's brute majority ensures that the reins are firmly in its hands. Any opposition proposal seeking reforms in governance, in the Constitution, or in the political system, is certain to meet a swift end. In any case, the rules governing proceedings give opposition members little room to freely ask questions, or introduce legislation. The elections, held in November 2010, were a sham exercise in democracy; the convening of the parliament is an extension of this trickery.
The legislators are to elect a President who will head the new government that will replace the SPDC. It is certain that he will be a trusted representative of the junta. Will Senior General Than Shwe put up his own name or is it going to be another general slightly lower in the hierarchy? The military will also be well represented in the cabinet. There should be no doubt now that Ms Suu Kyi took the right step in boycotting the election. Her participation in the junta's “road map to democracy” could have only given it legitimacy. On her release from long years of house arrest, an event timed by the junta to immediately follow the election, the Nobel Laureate spoke about dialogue with the military towards national reconciliation and putting in place a genuine democracy in Myanmar. The regime has not responded to the offer. Ms Suu Kyi's shining achievement has been to demonstrate through thick and thin that she remains immensely popular with the people of her country — and therefore cannot be written out of Myanmar's political equation.
Keywords: Myanmar elections, rigged elections, human rights violation, SPDC
I am not so sure that the decision of Suu Kyi to 'not participate' in the elections was so wise. People in favour of changes have been looking at the NLD since the last elections (1990) as major player in political reform. I can imagine that voters would find it rather disappointing that the party on which they have laid their hope in 20 years decides not to participate out of principles. The second reason I think it was not a wise decision is because of the election law in which was written that parties which would not participate in the elections cease to exist. I understand it must have been a tough decision, but the result is that Daw Suu Kyi finds herself without party and without any legal status, besides that of citizen, to actually have any dialogue with the new government.
Why the International community is playing a safe rather a cat and mouse game with the Military Junta for over 30 years? Is it impossible to plot and over throw the military rulers, if the western world or its Asian neighbours want to? Rather, it is time to ask the big question, what this tiny country would have achieved by democratic means? If free elections and freedom of speech is ensured, would it have made a big difference to the people?I am not sure, going by the Indian experience. Looting would have been legitimised and corruption, a large scale one, would have have become an accepted way of life. Oil rich countries in the middle east are really flourishing, ensuring better living for its people, whereas the same oil wealth have widened the disparity between the rich and the poor, in African and latin American countries. Kingdoms in the middle east have kept their people under their tyranny for long but at least they have ensured that their subjects do not suffer in utter poverty. Communists giants like China and Russia, have opened their door for the western influence and money, without giving up their ideology. Dictators like Gadaffi have gone by their green book and able to provide basic needs. It is only in democratic countries, that people suffer their most and there is greater inequality in the society. Freedom of speech have given right to vent their feelings on paper without fetching any results. People continue to elect goons, criminals to their assemblies, tainted parties continue to prosper. Saddam Hussien kept Iraq in one piece, whereas the Democratic giant disintegrated it into pieces. What is needed for the common man, is roti, kapada and makhan. Whomsoever ensures it will gain their trust.
This is a beginning of new era in Myanmar,opening of democracy chapter in history of Myanmar.Releasing of Ms Suu Kyi from house arrest will give Myanmar an extra ounce strength as a good leader, who will always be a ray of motivation and inspiration for people and open a new doors for progress and prosperity.Though Democracy is still under the shadow of autocracy,but very soon when people will realize it's actual value(like Egypt) they will undoubtfully welcome it wholeheartdly and then it will gain it full momentum.
The junta is trying to deceive the citizens of Myanmar through the this election which has a preplanned result. Ms Suu Ky has been doing a remarkable unbelievable task for the democracy of Myanmar. Her hard work won't be in vain, let's hope that Myanmar will walk into democracy soon. People of Myanmar and the world are adulating Ms Suu Ky.
Tunisia and Eygpt protests should be lessons for the countries where human rights are violated and parliamintry actives are not transparent.Thanks to Ms Suu Kyi, she is leading the people to true democracy.
Please Email the Editor