The Burmese military junta has and is playing its election cards the way it wants to, albeit throwing to the winds all electoral norms.
It has taken legislative measures and unfolded step by step the details of its road map to its so called “disciplined democracy.” But the central act, namely the announcement of the date of the election has been conveniently bypassed to suit the regime.
Fixing the deadline for registration of political parties, without having fixed the election date is illegal and therefore untenable. The two dates are collateral. The date of registration, last date for filing of nomination papers, the scrutiny, and the campaign period, are all correlated and time bound. But the pivot is the date of the election. Without having fulfilled that condition, acts prior to it are void. In the eye of the law, the Registration of Political Parties law is not enforceable.
In a recent visit to Burma, Dr. Kurt Campbell, the US Assistant Secretary of State said “the election will lack international legitimacy. We urge the regime to take immediate steps; open the process in the time remaining before election.” The immediate steps would be to restore normalcy in the existing political climate. The release of all political prisoners and amnesty to all, who have been convicted under its law, the exiles, except those who are perpetrators of human rights violations. These are some of the urgent measures to revive confidence that the election may be free and fair. This is a human rights issue, which needs resolution at the outset. Campbell has called for greater respect for human rights and release of political prisoners.
He said, “the regime has detained many of Burma’s brightest and most patriotic citizens, sending them to remote locations throughout the country, where generals hope they will be forgotten. They are not. Burma has historical precedents of amnesty and junta is well aware of them. In Brazil amnesty law was put as the foundation of the new democracy. Amnesty law in Afghanistan is also illuminating. Article 1 states an end to rivalries. Article 2, to all groups and individuals. Article 3, who are still in opposition, if they join the process of reconciliation.
Allowing Campbell to meet Su Kyi and his meeting the junta leaders separately is a positive step. The U.S outlined a proposal for credible dialogue among all stake-holders towards elections planned for this year. The junta must give proper heed to this proposal because it is not merely a US proposal coming from the strongest democracy, but it reflects the unanimity of the international community. Since the date of election has not been fixed Than Swe has time to review the situation and for the larger interest of the country can reset the planned election.
The NLD has been dissolved and it has become easier to enter into talks with Su Kyi as a senior citizen and statesman. The junta has also to enter into talks with ethnic leaders and cease-fire groups so that a political environment is put in place, conducive to free and fair polls.
Lessons can be drawn from recent elections in the U.K and Philippines. Thailand has set an example about what happens when an election is manipulated.
