Partnership Against Transnational Crime Through Regional Organized Law Enforcement” (“PATROL”) Project, Led by UNODC

Home , Border checkpoint

through RegionalOrganizedLawEnforcement Partnership againstTransnational Crime © Baseline surveyandtrainingneeds United Nations Environment Programme assessment inMyanmar Project Number:XAP/U59 (PATROL)

17-21 October 2011

DISCLAIMER: The results from the survey reflect the perception of participants, and they are not the results of specific investigations by UNODC or PATROL partners - Freeland Foundation, TRAFFIC and UNEP. Any error in the interpretation of these results cannot be directly attributed to an official position of any of the organizations involved.

2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 4

1.1. Background and Context – The PATROL Project...... 4 1.2. Objective of the Baseline Survey and TNA...... 4 2. Methodology ...... 5

2.1. Basic Statistics of the Sample ...... 5 2.2. Limitations of the Methodology...... 6 3. Major Findings ...... 7

3.1. Survey Findings...... 7 3.2. Q&A Session Findings...... 10 4. Lessons Learned and Recommendations ...... 15

Annex I – Results of the Survey...... 16 Annex II – Select Geographical Analysis ...... 33

Summary:

This report presents the main findings of the baseline survey and training needs assessment (“TNA”) conducted in northeast Myanmar between 17-21 October 2011. Forty-six law enforcement and border officials associated with the Border Liaison Office (“BLO”) mechanism participated. The findings from this report will help support the implementation and evaluation of the inter-organizational “Partnership against Transnational Crime through Regional Organized Law Enforcement” (“PATROL”) project, led by UNODC. A summary of the findings is as follows: - Myanmar is overwhelmingly an origin country for migrant smuggling and human trafficking. It is also considered a country of transit. - Almost all migrant smuggling is done with the aid of smugglers and through unofficial crossings. - The most common form of human trafficking is seen as men for labour at the border with Thailand and women for sexual exploitation at the border with China. - The most commonly smuggled drugs are synthetic drugs, followed by heroin and opium. Smuggling is done using human mules or couriers and vehicles. - Orchids, snakes and pangolins are viewed as the most commonly smuggled wildlife. Timber, which is ban from export by land, is still smuggled on a periodic basis. - Movements of hazardous waste and Ozone Depleting Substances (“ODS”) are not commonly encountered. Participants have very limited knowledge about these goods. - Almost all participants have been in their current position for less than three years, most of them less than a year. - The most urgent training needs are identified as ‘Transnational Crime Awareness’ and ‘Checkpoint Anti-Smuggling’.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Context - The PATROL Project The Partnership against Transnational Crime through Regional Organized Law Enforcement (“PATROL”) project aims to assist countries in the Greater Mekong Sub-region fight against transnational organised crime (“TOC”) by helping them strengthen borders and expand cross- border cooperation.1 To achieve this aim, the project relies on the Border Liaison Office (“BLO”) mechanism, which was established by the Memorandum of Understanding on Drug Control in 1993.2 Although originally focused on illicit drugs and drug precursors, the mandate of BLOs has been broadened under the PATROL project to include migrant smuggling, human trafficking and the illicit cross-border movements of wildlife, timber, hazardous waste and Ozone Depleting Substances (“ODS”). The PATROL project has made significant progress in the training of law enforcement and border officials associated with BLOs. Myanmar marks the fourth Picture 1. View of Lashio, Shan State baseline survey and training needs assessment (“TNA”) that has been conducted since the project began in January 2010, with the others being done in Cambodia, Viet Nam and, most recently, Thailand. Customized training programmes have already been devised by the PATROL team and delivered to law enforcement and border officials in these latter countries. Pending official endorsement of the PATROL project by national authorities, a customized training programme can be delivered in Myanmar. Implementation of the PATROL project is led by UNODC and carried out in cooperation with Freeland Foundation, TRAFFIC and UNEP.

1.2. Objective of the Baseline Survey and TNA The objective of the baseline survey and TNA is twofold: - Gather Baseline Information: Assessing the understanding of law enforcement and border officials and their capacities forms a baseline against which it will be possible to measure improvement. - Assess Training Needs: Identifying the awareness, knowledge gaps and training needs of law enforcement and border officials in four thematic areas helps to craft a customized training programme and package of technical assistance. This report presents results from the baseline survey and TNA that was conducted in northeast Myanmar from the 17-21 October 2011. Members of the PATROL team administered it with assistance from the Central Committee for Drug Abuse Control (“CCDAC”).

1 The countries of the Greater Mekong Sub-region are Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, Viet Nam and the Yunnan Province of China. 2 UNODC and all countries in the Greater Mekong Sub-region endorsed the 1993 Memorandum of Understanding on Drug Control.

2. Methodology The baseline survey and TNA in Myanmar consisted of two phases. In the first phase, a survey was administered in the form of a structured questionnaire to forty-six law enforcement and border officials, representing seven Myanmar BLOs. This was followed by a Q&A session with select survey participants. a) The Survey The survey addressed five main components: 1) Migrant Smuggling and Human Trafficking 2) Illicit Drugs and Drug Precursors 3) Wildlife and Timber Trafficking 4) Trafficking of Hazardous Waste and ODS 5) Operations, Training and Integrity The survey, translated into Burmese, was designed in a self-completion format, using questions that were both closed-ended, such as multiple-choice and rank ordering, and open- ended. Each participant was asked to complete all components of the survey, regardless of their specific background and expertise. This was done in order to assess their basic understanding or perception of all components being surveyed. The complete list of questions from the survey is available in Annex I. b) The Q&A Session The Q&A session attempted to learn more about the general perceptions towards BLOs and their importance for border security. Participants were asked questions about the different agencies operating at the border, the expansion of the BLO mandate under the PATROL project and the main constraints in their functioning. This was done to provide additional insight into the situation at borders in Myanmar and bring to the fore some of the outstanding challenges and substantive issues.

2.1. Basic Statistics of the Sample All forty-six participants completed and returned questionnaires (Figure 1). There was an even split between those representing BLOs bordering Lao PDR and China (22) and those representing BLOs bordering Thailand (24). Participants were selected by the CCDAC, based on a list of relevant agencies provided by UNODC. In total, seven different agencies were represented.

The baseline survey and TNA was conducted through two separate workshops, both in Burmese: - Lashio (18 October 2011): This workshop was attended by 22 participants from four BLOs bordering China and Lao PDR.3 - Tachileik (21 October 2011): This workshop was attended by 24 participants from three BLOs bordering Thailand.4

2.2. Limitations of the Methodology Though the sample size was deemed to be adequate, the uneven representation from each BLO was not ideal. One glaring shortcoming was the fact that only one participant from the BLOs bordering Lao PDR participated. This means that a majority of the findings can only be generalized to the BLO stations along the border with Thailand and China. Representation across relevant agencies and departments was fairly equal (Figure 2). That said, it was noted that Customs was under-represented considering its role in the detection and interdiction of cross-border crimes. Participants working in the area of hazardous waste and ODS was limited, and might be explained by the fact that no one from the Ministry of Environment was present.

Picture 2. Participants and facilitators in Lashio

3 The four BLOs are Muse, Chin Shwe Haw and Lweje, which are along the border with China, and Wanpon, which is along the border with Lao PDR. No representative from the Wankyin BLO was present. 4 The three BLOs are Tachileik, Kaw Thaung and Myawaddy.

3. Major Findings The section starts by providing a short overview of the major findings from the survey. This is followed by a summary of discussions that occurred during the Q&A session. The complete results from the survey are available in Annex I and select geographical analysis is available in Annex II.

3.1. Survey Findings

Smuggling of Migrants and Trafficking in Human Beings

Understanding the difference between migrant smuggling and human trafficking is crucial in order to detect these crimes and offer adequate assistance to victims. Most participants (85%) said they are aware of this difference and demonstrated so by recognizing these crimes in various hypothetical scenarios. What is not clear to about half of the participants though is that a victim of trafficking can cross borders legally. Overall, this result is somewhat surprising given that only some have ever encountered a case of either migrant smuggling (37%) or human trafficking (28%). There is a consensus among participants on the flows and nature of migrant smuggling in Myanmar, though it is not well understood from a legal standpoint. The country is overwhelmingly considered a country of origin and transit. Most of the irregular migration that occurs is believed to take place with the help of smugglers (85%) and executed through unofficial crossings (65%). One common misconception appeared out of the findings. Despite the establishment of a Law Review Committee to fill the gap, Myanmar currently does not have legislation that specifically addresses migrant smuggling. Nonetheless, nine out ten participants believe that Myanmar has a legal framework in place that criminalizes it. Participants have a shared view of human trafficking flows, but the perceived forms of human trafficking vary between participants depending on the region of Myanmar. Similar to migrant smuggling, cases of human trafficking are believed to originate in (66%) and transit through (26%) Myanmar. The most common form of human trafficking is perceived to be the trafficking Picture 3. Checkpoint in Tachileik, at the border with Thailand of men for labour (3.9/5), followed closely by the trafficking of women for sexual exploitation (3.7/5). This is in contrast to the trafficking of children for begging, which is not as common (2.0/5). There are some regional differences. Participants working at the border with Thailand believe that that the most common form of trafficking is men for labour. This was not the case for those at border with either China, where the sexual exploitation of women is the most common form. Previous training on migrant smuggling and human trafficking is quite common compared to the other four thematic areas. That said, there are still twenty-nine participants (63%) that have never received training in the area. The training priorities that participants identified are

i) how to detect, handle and interview a trafficked person, ii) the differences between migrant smuggling and human trafficking and iii) national legislation concerning human trafficking.

Illicit Drugs and Drug Precursors

The picture that emerges from participants concerning the flow and nature of drug smuggling in Myanmar is complex. One-third of participants (33%) have dealt with at least one case of drug trafficking ever, though it appears most deal with one case a month. Drugs are generally seen as originating and transiting through Myanmar. However, deeper analysis shows that participants at the border with either China or Lao PDR believe it to be a country of origin, while those at the border with Thailand see it predominantly as a country of transit. Synthetic drugs (4.3/5) are perceived to be by far the most commonly smuggled drugs, followed by heroin (2.6/5) and opium (1.8/5). Drugs appear to be mostly smuggled by either human mules or couriers and in vehicles, often crossing through unofficial crossings. Again, regional differences are apparent. Smuggling by boat was one of the most common forms of transportation according to those participants representing the BLOs bordering Thailand. This is primarily because the Kaw Thaung BLO is stationed along an inlet of the Andaman Sea. Drug precursor chemicals and the national drug legislation are only partially understood. Participants struggled to identify drug precursors from drugs, since over half (52%) believed methamphetamine to be a drug precursor, while actual drug precursors, like toluene and morphine, were rarely identified. A similar situation arises concerning national legislation. Despite nearly all participants recognizing such legislation exists, only those who had received previous training on it (53%) knew the article that identifies how much of a certain drug is needed in order to commit a drug trafficking offense. Yet, in the follow-up questions virtually all participants considered the possession of certain quantities of opium and marijuana resin as a drug trafficking case, even if those quantities were in reality below the legal threshold set by domestic law. Picture 4. Scenes of poppy eradication in Shan State (Courtesy of CCDAC) Over half of the participants have received drug and precursor chemical training previously, making it the most common type of training when compared to the other thematic areas. According to participants, training is needed in the areas of i) identifying drug precursors, ii) drug identification and iii) national legislation relating to drugs.

Wildlife and Timber Trafficking

The wildlife and timber trafficking situation in Myanmar is particularly important to understand given the high levels of biodiversity and conservation efforts in the Greater Mekong Sub-region. Over half of the respondents have come across cases of wildlife or timber smuggling, although such activities are believed to be rare by most participants. Wildlife trafficking is viewed largely as the trafficking of animals and their parts (66%). Only one-third (33%) of all participants understand that, in addition to this, wildlife trafficking can

include plants. The most commonly smuggled wildlife species are orchids (2.3/5), snakes (1.8/5) and pangolins (1.8/5). Although this does not change much when examining BLOs bordering Thailand, those along the border with China and Lao PDR reported the smuggling of snakes (2.6/5) to be just as common as orchids (2.6/5). Like all other illegal goods, wildlife and timber are primarily smuggled by being hidden in vehicles and through unofficial crossings. There is some familiarity with the legal framework regulating the trade of wildlife and timber, but access to these documents in the workplace is limited, in particular Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (“CITES”) appendices. Around 40% of participants have heard of the CITES, most of who were able to correctly identify its purpose. Around the same proportion of participants selected the relevant national legislation that regulates the wildlife and timber trade. The low awareness of CITES and relevant national legislation likely explains why almost half of all participants (48%) do not know if permits or certificates are needed for species listed on CITES or to trade timber. Interestingly, while over half of all participants (56%) have access to relevant national legislation at work, only 37% have access to CITES appendices. Participants clearly realize that identifying and handling potentially dangerous animals and poisonous plants requires the assistance of experts. This is why an overwhelmingly majority said they would contact the relevant authorities when in doubt about the legality of a wildlife shipment or when faced with a dangerous animal in an illegal shipment that has been detained. All participants identified more than one relevant authority in which they would contact. For both wildlife and timber, one-third would contact the Ministry of Environmental Conservation Authority and around one-quarter would contact the Forest Department, which is part of the Ministry of Forestry. Wildlife and timber trafficking is the third most common training previously received of the four thematic areas, though only thirteen of the forty-six participants (29%) have ever received it. The three most urgent training needs in the area are identified as i) CITES implementation, ii) the detection of smuggling and smuggling techniques and iii) applying CITES in practice.

Trafficking of Hazardous Waste and ODS

Participants have only a basic understanding of hazardous waste and ODS. Almost all participants (91%) claim they know about or are at least generally familiar with hazardous waste and the ozone layer. Yet, few correctly identified all possible hazardous wastes and 58% said they could not positively identify ODS. Those that said they could identify ODS were often wrong – all believed carbon dioxide is an ODS and almost none correctly selected from the remaining ODS options. Moreover, only some know the international instruments that regulate these goods – the Montreal Protocol (36%) and Basel Convention (28%). These results suggest that most participants are unfamiliar with or misinformed about hazardous waste and ODS, and how they are regulated. The role of Myanmar in the smuggling of hazardous waste and ODS is perceived differently among participants. Around one-third (34%) do not know if it is an origin, transit or destination country, while others (18%) do not think Myanmar is involved in smuggling at all. This result is likely explained by the fact that only one participant of the forty-six (2.2%) has ever encountered a case of hazardous waste and ODS smuggling. On the other hand, participants that believe Myanmar does play a role in the smuggling of hazardous waste and ODS see it mostly as a transit and destination country.

Knowledge about how to handle hazardous waste and ODS exists, but the resources that would help to identify, handle and store them do not. All participants correctly said they would detain and contact the relevant authorities if they encountered a potential shipment of hazardous waste or ODS. Still many participants also said that in some circumstances they would do nothing. Over half (58%) did not have access to proper legislation or operational guides that would help them positively identify these goods and, in the event they would have to handle and store hazardous waste or ODS, 55% either did not have access to or did not know if they had access to the proper facilities. Hazardous waste and ODS training is the least common of the four thematic areas. Only eight of the forty-six (17%) participants have ever received training. The training needs identified by participants are consistent with most of the survey findings in the area. The training priorities identified are i) relevant national legislation, ii) relevant international treaties and laws and iii) identifying hazardous waste and ODS.

Table 1: Perceived Role of Myanmar in TOC

Origin Transit Destination Nothing Don’t Know

Human Trafficking 65.6% 26.2% 3.3% 1.6% 3.3%

Smuggling of Migrants 63.5% 27.0% 4.8% 1.6% 3.2%

Illicit Drugs 41.3% 47.6% 4.8% 0.0% 6.3%

Hazardous Waste 5.7% 28.3% 12.5% 18.8% 35.4%

ODS 2.1% 31.3% 17.0% 17.0% 32.1%

Operations, Training and Integrity

This section of the survey is meant to highlight the work of law enforcement and border officers that is not specifically related to any of the four thematic areas. Most participants have been in their current position for only a short period of time, raising concerns about the development and sustainability of expertise. Just under half of all participants (48%) have been at their current position less than a year and, in total, 80% have been in their position for less than three years. This was even greater along the China and Lao PDR border, where nearly all participants (91%) have been in their position for less than three years. Such frequent rotation of staff may have an impact on the capacity of the border units to retain the benefits of specific training programmes or, more generally, to take advantage of the cumulated knowledge of the environment in terms of social networks, information- gathering techniques and criminal patterns. In order to provide a more effective response to criminal activities at borders, especially with only limited resources available, it is important to identify common trafficking routes and what is being transited along these routes. With the exception of hazardous waste and ODS, whose smuggling activities participants do not seem to be particularly aware, most smuggling is believed to be conducted in areas between checkpoints. International and local checkpoints may also be used along with this route, according to some participants, but not in isolation. In terms of what is smuggled along these routes, participants perceive the trafficking of drugs

(4.1/5) and humans (3.9/5) as the most significant TOC threats in Myanmar. This is followed by the smuggling of timber (3.2/5), according to participants from the border with China and Lao PDR and smuggling of migrants (3.0/5) according to participants from BLOs that border Thailand.

Table 2: Additional Training Needs

Q. 5.8 - What further training Not Relevant Already Have Require More Require do you require? to Position the Training Advanced Training Training

Transnational Crime 9.5% 0.0% 23.8% 64.3% Investigation

Checkpoint Anti‐Smuggling 5.3% 3.6% 18.4% 73.7% Transnational Crime Intelligence Collection and 2.3% 0.0% 27.0% 67.6% Analysis Field Border Patrolling 5.4% 0.0% 27.0% 67.6% Transnational Crime 0.0% 0.0% 21.1% 78.9% Awareness Computer Training 0.0% 11.9% 40.5% 45.2%

Outside of training related to the different thematic areas, ‘Transnational Crime Awareness’ (79%) and ‘Checkpoint Anti-Smuggling’ (74%) are the two most pressing training needs according to participants (Table 2). There is also a clear need for basic and more advanced computer training. About half of the participants indicated they require computer training (45%), while the other half said they required further training (40%). Since intelligence databases and mobile phones, among many other pieces of equipment, were identified as the most important in helping participants complete their duties, it is becoming clear that technology is increasingly relevant. Integrity not only shapes the credibility and reliability of law enforcement towards their society, but it also goes a long way in ensuring that cooperation with neighbouring countries can be meaningful. Most of the participants (80%) report having rules at the border station on receiving presents, though just over one in four (28%) have ever received training in this regard. To gain further clarity as to the role of integrity in Myanmar, participants were given a hypothetical scenario and asked to react it.

Hypothetical Scenario on Integrity (Q. 5.9.)  Imagine that Mr. Y is an old friend of your colleague Officer JK, working at the border. Mr. Y is a respectable family man who runs a small business that entails frequent border crossings. One day he arrives at the border to cross it with his minivan, and for the first time he does not have all of the necessary travel documentation. He apologizes and invites Officer JK for lunch. What do you think Officer JK will do?

In ambiguous situations, the discretion of officials may often prevail over the rules and regulations derived from the law. Just under half of all participants (48%) think that Officer

JK would stop Mr. Y by applying the law strictly. On the other hand, most of the remaining participants think that Officer JK would apply some degree of diligence, in this case by inspecting the vehicle, and decide unilaterally whether or not let him pass (46%). If Mr. Y was allowed to pass, many of the participants (44%) said they would not support the decision of Officer JK, while others (21%) claimed that they would report Officer JK to the supervisor. The remaining participants (35%) said that Officer JK did the right thing.

3.2. Q&A Session Findings

Following the survey, the PATROL team interviewed a subset of participants. These participants were mostly heads of BLOs and senior officials. At least one representative from each of the agencies and departments participating in the survey was included.

Internal and Cross-Border Cooperation Cooperation between agencies and departments responsible for the Myanmar border exists at least with regard to the trade of goods. Participants discussed the One-Stop Service (“OSS”) mechanism at length. This mechanism ensures the fast and comprehensive control of goods traded across borders through coordinating the activities of six agencies and departments. Since it began in 1996, several OSS checkpoints have been established and, among others, the Police Force, Customs and Immigration Departments are involved. It is unknown what type of inter-agency or inter-departmental cooperation exists for regulating migration at borders. The BLO mechanism, which is designed to facilitate cross-border cooperation, has been largely underutilized. While it has produced positive results in terms of strengthening cooperation among local police forces at the borders, the involvement of other agencies and departments has been negligible. This fact made it difficult to explore the weaknesses and strengths of the BLO mechanism with participants, something that had been done previously in Cambodia, Viet Nam and Thailand. Instead, this provided an opportunity to learn more about the role of different agencies and departments at the border and the extent of their experience with BLOs. Border Trade Department: Located within the Ministry of Commerce, the Border Trade Department is responsible for the promotion of trade between Myanmar and neighbouring countries. Its primary objective is to ensure the legality of the trade in licit goods. It is not responsible for interdicting or preventing the trade in illicit goods. As the leading agency for the OSS mechanism, it meets on monthly basis with counterparts from neighbouring countries, such as the Ministry of Commerce in Thailand. According to representatives, the only country it does not meet with is Lao PDR, where cooperation is nearly non-existent. Customs: Customs is involved in the regulation of trade at the border. This is carried out through their regional branches and the OSS mechanism. Due to their use of the OSS mechanism, ties between the Border Trade Department and Customs are very strong. Interaction is very limited between Customs and BLOs, according to representatives. Forest Department: The Forest Department is one of the operational arms of the Ministry of Forestry. It is not involved in the OSS or BLO mechanisms, nor does it have direct interaction with corresponding national authorities in neighbouring countries.

Immigration Department: As part of the Ministry of Immigration and Population, the Immigration Department is responsible for the issuance of identity documents as well as one-day and seven-day border passes for Myanmar migrants. Police Force: The Police Force is comprised of three departments: local police, the Department on Transnational Organized Crime and the Anti-Narcotics Trafficking Task Force. The latter, developed by the CCDAC, has played a significant role in the development of the BLO mechanism in Myanmar. According to representatives, cooperation with BLO counterparts in Thailand, Lao PDR and China is described as satisfactory, although many challenges still exist.

Picture 5. The Mae Sai river - a tiny demarcation between Thailand (left side) and Myanmar (right side)

Challenges and Substantive Issues Most of the current challenges that participants identified, related to border management and cross-border cooperation, were operational. Poor infrastructure and language barriers continue to prevent pro-active information sharing and communication with neighbouring countries. Diminished capacity to respond effectively to the incessant growth of trade is becoming an increasing challenge. As a result of inter alia the establishment of contentious Free Trade Zones with China, increases in trade have made it difficult to control the movement goods, especially natural resources like wildlife and timber.

The monitoring of migration is an important issue given the amount of out-migration that occurs to Thailand and China for work. When asked whether there is a mechanism to keep track of the actual duration of the stay for each migrant, it was suggested that such a mechanism exists, but that it is not shared with neighbouring counterparts. Migrants who overstay their border pass in neighbouring countries is very limited, according to representatives from the Immigration Department, and is in any case not punished by domestic law.

Operations countering the trade of drugs continue to have an impact, especially along the Thai border, but the trade of precursor chemicals remains largely unimpeded. The Royal Thai Police are certainly responsible for most of the successful operations to block the flow of drugs coming from Myanmar. At the same time the Myanmar Police Force has intensified the in-land operations to reduce the number of drugs reaching the border areas. Several joint operations, including controlled deliveries, have been conducted between Myanmar and

Thailand, largely as a result of a well-functioning BLO mechanism. This said, the growing trade in illegal drug precursors coming from China and India remains difficult to interdict and, as a result, ATS production keeps expanding.

The illegal trade of timber is difficult to assess and is confounded by the fact that it cannot be exported through land crossings under Myanmar law. According to the respondents, the trade of timber is allowed, but it must be adequately certified and leave through established exit points, such as ports. Some exceptions exist, for instance when rubber wood is exported to Thailand it is done so through land border checkpoints. How such exceptions are determined was not clarified. Despite trade limitations and regulations on timber exports, representatives from the Forest Department recognize that smuggling cases are still frequent.

4. Lessons Learned and Recommendations Following the analysis of the survey and Q&A session, and along with visits to border checkpoints and BLOs in the field, six recommendations are made: Lessons Learned  The CCDAC is well equipped to lead the transition of BLOs in Myanmar to a more comprehensive mandate that includes migrant smuggling, human trafficking and the trade in illicit goods, such as timber, wildlife, hazardous waste and ODS.  Cooperation between agencies and departments associated with the BLO mechanism in Myanmar needs to improve significantly if it is to become more effective. This means that at least the Border Trade Department, Customs, Immigration Department and Forest Department need to become active players.  The BLO and OSS mechanisms share similar mandates and objectives. One way to integrate them may be for OSS checkpoints share information with BLOs, especially in relation to the trade in timber, wildlife, hazardous waste and ODS. In return, BLOs can work to promote the cross-border cooperation capacities of OSS checkpoints and help prevent the smuggling of illegal goods through them. Recommendations  The PATROL project should undertake training activities that help to increase the basic understanding of Myanmar law enforcement and border officials with respect to BLOs and all forms of TOC.  The PATROL project should organize a session on cross-border cooperation that includes participants from Myanmar BLOs and BLOs from neighbouring countries.  The PATROL project should explore ways to strengthen the exchange of information between the competent national authorities in Myanmar and other countries, with special reference to irregular migration and overstay.

Annex I – Results of the Survey

Muse 8 Chin Shwe Haw 7 Myawaddy 7 Please tick your duty station: Lweje 6 Tachileik 10 Wanpon 1 Kaw Thaung 7 Total 46 Provincial Police Force 15.2% Police Department on TOC 8.7% Border Trade Department 13.0%

Please tick your agency/unit/department: Customs 13.0% Immigration Department 10.9% CCDAC/Anti-Narcotics Task Force 26.1% Forest Department 13.0%

1. Smuggling of Migrants and Trafficking in Human Beings Component Are you aware of the difference Yes 84.8% 1.1 between migrant smuggling and human trafficking? No 15.2%

Have you dealt with migrant Yes 28.3% 1.2 smuggling cases? No 71.7%

Have you dealt with human Yes 37.0% 1.3 trafficking cases? No 63.0%

Based on the information provided in the following case studies, which of the 1.4 scenario describes a migrant smuggling case, which describes a human trafficking case and which of these cases cannot be clearly identified? In Cambodia, a young man worked in the fields growing rice. Mrs. Migrant smuggling case 10.9% Kunthey promised him higher wages for factory work in Thailand Human trafficking case 73.9% and helped him to cross the border 1.4.1 Based on the given information it is not illegally. Once in Thailand, a factory possible to decide whether it is a smuggling 10.9% owner took his passport and forced or a trafficking case him to work day and night slicing fish and repairing torn nets. He was Don't know 4.3% paid no salary.

1.4.2 Mr. Chok. gives Mr. Kunthey money Migrant smuggling case 56.5% to drive him across the border. Human trafficking case 2.2%

Based on the given information it is not possible to decide whether it is a smuggling 37.0% or a trafficking case Don't know 4.3%

With the help of a relative who Migrant smuggling case 73.9% asked for 200US$ payment, Mr. Human trafficking case 6.5% and Mrs. Kunthey cross a country 1.4.3 border by avoiding the official Based on the given information it is not border checkpoint without having possible to decide whether it is a smuggling 13.0% the required documents to enter the or a trafficking case destination country. Don't know 6.5%

Prasert is an 11 year old boy living Migrant smuggling case 2.2% with his peasant parents on a plantation. One day his father falls Human trafficking case 82.6% sick. One week later a man comes Based on the given information it is not 1.4.4 to the farm and offers his parents possible to decide whether it is a smuggling 8.7% 100$ for their son. They agree and or a trafficking case Prasert has to start working for the Don't know 6.5% man as a beggar in the nearby city.

Yes 50.0% Can a person who legally crosses 1.5 No 39.1% the border be a victim of trafficking? Don't know 10.9%

Yes 89.1% Does your national legislation 1.6 No 6.5% criminalize smuggling of migrants? Don’t know 4.3%

Yes 97.8% Does your national legislation 1.7 criminalize trafficking of human No 2.2% beings? Don’t know 0.0%

Country of origin 63.5% Do you consider your country more as a country of origin, transit or Country of transit 27.0% 1.8 destination for smuggled migrants? Country of destination 4.8% Please tick as many answers as Nothing at all 1.6% you consider appropriate. Don’t know 3.2%

Country of origin 65.6% Do you consider your country more as a country of origin, transit or Country of transit 26.2% 1.9 destination for victims of trafficking? Country of destination 3.3% Please tick as many answers as Nothing at all 1.6% you consider appropriate. Don’t know 3.3%

Illegal migrants mostly cross the border on 10.9% their own According to your own experience, Illegal migrants mostly cross the border with 84.8% 1.10 how do illegal migrants cross the the help of a human smuggler border? A combination of the two 0.0% Don't know 4.3%

They cross the border through unofficial checkpoints / by avoiding official 65.2% checkpoints They cross the border by boat 13.0% What is the most common method They cross the border without documents 10.9% employed by migrant smugglers 1.11 Don’t know 8.7% that you have come across in your They cross the border by hiding smuggled work? 2.2% migrants in the vehicles They cross the border through negotiation 0.0% with border officers They cross the border with fraudulent 0.0% documents

Which form of trafficking in persons Trafficking of man for labour 3.9 do you consider to be more common across your border area? Trafficking of women for sexual exploitation 3.7 1.12 Please rank the options in order of Trafficking of children for begging 2.0 importance by using the numbers 1 to 5 (1 being the least common; 5 Don’t know 0.0% the most common).

Never received any training in this area 42.6% Training on national legislation concerning 17.6% trafficking in human beings Training on how to detect, handle and Did you ever receive any of the 13.2% following trainings? Please tick as interview a trafficked person 1.13 Training on how to detect, handle and many answers as you consider 11.8% appropriate. interview a smuggled migrant Training on how to identify fraudulent 8.8% documents Training on national legislation concerning 5.9% smuggling of migrants

With regard to migrant smuggling Training on how to detect, handle and 1.14 24.0% and human trafficking, what kind of interview a trafficked person training do you think would be most Training on the difference between useful to you? Please select at smuggling of migrants and trafficking in 18.2% most three of the given options persons (max. 3). Training on national legislation concerning 16.5% trafficking in human beings Training on how to detect, handle and 14.9% interview a smuggled migrant Training on how to appropriately deal with 10.7% illegal migrants Training on how to identify fraudulent 9.1% documents

Training on national legislation concerning 6.6%

smuggling of migrants No training needs 0.0%

2. Illicit Drugs and Drug Precursors Component

Have you dealt with cases that Yes 34.8% 2.1 involved drug precursors? No 65.2%

Daily 18.2% Every 2-4 Days 9.1% If yes, how often do you deal with

cases involving drug precursors? Weekly 0.0% Every 2 Weeks 9.1% Monthly 63.6%

Sulphuric Acid 19.0% Ephedrine 15.1% Acetone 12.7% Acetic Anhydride 12.7% Which of the following substances Methamphetamine 11.7% are drug precursors? Please tick as 2.2 Pseudoephedrine 9.3% many answers as you consider appropriate. Toluene 5.9% Morphine 4.9% Cocaine 4.4% Cannabis 3.4% Don’t know 1.0%

Have you dealt with drug trafficking Yes 37.0% 2.3 cases? No 63.0% Daily 25.0% Every 2-4 Days 6.3% If yes, how often do you deal with Weekly drug trafficking cases? 6.3% Every 2 Weeks 18.8% Monthly 43.8%

Yes 97.8% Does your national legislation 2.4 No 2.2% criminalize drug trafficking Don't know 0.0%

2.5 Did you ever receive any of the Training concerning drug legislation 25.3% following trainings? Please tick as many answers as you consider Never received any training in this area 24.1% appropriate. Training on how to search potential drug traffickers and their respective transport 14.9% vehicle Precursor identification training 13.8%

Drug identification training 12.6% Training on how to interview a suspect 9.2% drug/precursors trafficker

Country of origin 41.3% Do you consider your country more as a country of origin, transit or Country of transit 47.6% 2.6 destination for drugs? Please tick Country of destination 4.8% as many answers as you consider Nothing at all 0.0% appropriate. Don’t know 6.3%

Synthetic Drugs (Ecstasy, From your own experience, which Methamphetamine Pills, Crystalline 4.3 kinds of drugs are more commonly Methamphetamine [Ice]) trafficked across your border area? Heroin 2.6 Please rank the options listed 2.7 below in order of importance by Opium 1.8 ticking the number 0 (not trafficked Cannabis 1.1 in the area) or 1 to 5 (1: least Cocaine 0.4 trafficked; 5: most trafficked). Don't know 0.0%

Compared to wildlife/timber Yes 80.0% trafficking, hazardous waste trafficking and human No 13.3% 2.8 smuggling/trafficking, do you consider drug trafficking to be a Don't know 6.7% priority problem at your border section?

Hidden in cars, trucks, motorbikes or other 3.5 According to your own experience, vehicles how are drugs mostly trafficked Through unofficial checkpoints 3.2 across the border? Please rank the 2.9 options in order of importance by By human mules or couriers on foot 3.1 using the numbers 1 to 5 (1: being By boat 2.2 the least common; 5: the most common). 0 if it does not occur. Through negotiation with the border officer 1.1 Don't know 3.0%

What article in the Narcotics Drug Article 15 4.3% Law identifies the quantity of drug Article 26 17.4% 2.10 possession that is necessary to consider it as an act of Article 28 6.5% selling/trafficking? Don’t know 71.7%

Mr. Y is found at the border Yes 97.8% 2.11.1 carrying 80 grams of opium. Can No 0.0% Mr Y. be immediately arrested? Don't know 2.2%

2.11.2 Does Mr. Y have the right to a Yes 84.8%

lawyer? No 4.3% Don't know 10.9%

Yes 93.5% Is Mr. Y considered a drug trafficker 2.11.3 No 4.3% according to the law? Don't know 2.2%

Mr. K. is stopped at the border for Yes 97.8% carrying 50 grams of marijuana 2.12.1 No 0.0% resin in his bag. Can Mr K be immediately arrested? Don't know 2.2%

Yes 87.0% Does Mr. K have the right to a 2.12.2 No 2.2% lawyer? Don't know 10.9%

Yes 91.3% Is Mr. K considered a drug trafficker 2.12.3 No 6.5% according to the law? Don't know 2.2%

Training on how to identify drug precursors 26.4% Training on national legislation concerning 20.0% drug trafficking With regard to drug trafficking, what Training on how to identify different drugs 19.2% kind of training do you think would Training on how to search potential drug 17.6% 2.13 be most useful to you? Please traffickers select at most three of the given Training on how to proceed after a major 13.6% options (max. 3). drug seizure Training on how to identify fraudulent 3.2% documents No training needs 0.0%

3. Wildlife and Timber Trafficking Component Trade in wild plants, parts of wild plants, or 0.0% derivates made from them Trade in wild plants and animals and their 33.3% parts and derivates 3.1 What is wildlife trade? Trade in wild animals, parts of wild animals, 61.5% or derivates made from them None of the above 0.0% Don't know 5.1%

Which main piece(s) of national Protection of Wildlife and Wild Plants and 3.2 26.9% legislation regulates the wildlife and Conservation of Natural Areas Law, 1994 timber trade? Please tick the The Forest Law, The State Law and Order 23.7% appropriate legislation(s). Restoration Council Law No. 8/92 Sea Customs Act and Land Customs Act, 5.4% March 12, 1992

Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 15.1% Flora (CITES) Wildlife and Forestry Protection and Act, 20.4% 1994 Don't know 8.6%

Yes 40.0% 3.3 Have you heard of CITES? No 60.0%

An international convention which regulates international trade in endangered species of 34.8% animals and plants Don't know 52.2% An international convention which regulates 3.4 What do you think CITES is? international trade in certain wild 6.5% endangered species of animals An international organisation which gives 4.3% money for conservation projects A non-government organisation (NGO) 2.2%

Are permits and/or certificates Yes 51.1% needed to trade wild animals or 3.5 plant species and their parts and No 2.2% derivatives that are listed in Don't know 46.7% CITES?

Orchids 2.3 Snakes 1.8 Pangolins 1.8 Which are the most commonly Aloe Wood 1.4 traded species across your border Resin 1.3 area. Please rank the options in order of importance. Please use the Monitor Lizards 1.0 3.6 numbers 1 to 5 to show often Porcupines 0.8 wildlife is smuggled (1: being the least common; 5: the most Turtles 0.4 common). Tigers 0.3 Bears 0.3 Monkeys 0.3 Don't know 12.1%

Yes 41.3% Do you need permits and/or 3.7 No 10.9% certificates to trade timber? Don't know 47.8%

3.8 Did you ever receive any of the Never 71.7% following trainings? Yes 28.3% Timber identification 18.8%

Plant identification 18.8% How to apply CITES 18.8% Detection of smuggling and smuggling methods 15.6%

Roles of responsibilities of different agencies 12.5% involved in the implementation of CITES Wildlife identification 9.4% Case studies of some commonly smuggled 6.3% species in your country

Rarely 78.3% On average, how often do you Never 10.9% observe wildlife and/or their 3.9 Every week 0.0% products crossing your border area? Every month 6.5% Every day 4.3%

Rarely 78.3%

On average, how often do you Every month 6.5% 3.10 observe timber crossing your Never 8.7% border area: Every day 2.2% Every week 4.3%

Have you ever encountered cases Yes 54.3% where attempts have been made to 3.11 smuggle wildlife (and/or wildlife products) or timber across your No 45.7% border area?

Through unofficial checkpoints 2.7 Which is the most common way Hidden in cars, trucks, motorbikes or other wildlife is smuggled across your 2.9 border area? Please rank the vehicles 3.12 options in order of importance by By human mules or couriers on foot 1.9 using the numbers 1 to 5 (1: being By boat 2.1 the least common; 5: the most common). 0 if it does not occur. Through negotiation with the border officer 1.2 Don't know 24.2%

Through unofficial checkpoints 3.0 Which is the most common way timber is smuggled across your Hidden in cars, trucks or other vehicles 3.1 border area. Please rank the By human mules or couriers on foot 1.1 3.13 options in order of importance by using the numbers 1 to 5 (1: being By boat 2.3 the least common; 5: the most Through negotiation with the border officer 1.4 common). 0 if it does not occur. Don't know 24.2%

3.14 When you are in doubt about the Contact the relevant authorities 89.1% legality of a wildlife or timber Confiscate it 8.7%

shipment, what would you do? Let it go 2.2%

Contact someone that can help you decide if the shipment is legal and ask for advice on 97.8% If you have a potentially dangerous how to handle the animal in question animal in a shipment that has been Handle the animal yourself in order to 3.15 0.0% detained because you suspect it is confiscate it Allow the shipment to continue as the animal illegal, should you: 0.0% is too dangerous to handle Kill the animal so that it cannot harm anyone 2.2%

A shipment of turtles is Nothing, the number of living animals accompanied by a CITES permit 6.5% matches the permit which states that there are 150 turtles in the shipment. When you 3.16 check the shipment some animals Stop the shipment, the total number of are dead. There are 150 live turtles 93.5% animals does not match the permit and 50 dead turtles. What should you do?

Ministry of Environmental Conservation 32.4% Authority Forest Department 23.4% Customs 14.4% Please select the government CITES Management/Scientific Authority 8.1% agency or agencies you would 3.17 contact to help determine the National Police 8.1% legality of a shipment that contains Environmental Police 7.2% plants and animals: Ministry of Commerce 6.3% UNODC 3.6% ASEAN-Wildlife Enforcement Network 1.8% Don’t know 0.0%

Ministry of Environmental Conservation 33.0% Authority Forest Department 26.6% Customs 13.8% Please name the government Ministry of Commerce 12.8% agency or agencies you would 3.18 National Police 7.4% contact to help determine the CITES Management/Scientific Authority 4.3% legality of a timber shipment: Environmental Police 2.1% ASEAN-Wildlife Enforcement Network 1.1% UNODC 1.1% Don’t know 0.0%

Do you have access to copies of Yes 56.5% 3.19 legislation relevant to wildlife and No 23.9% timber trade at your place of work? Don't know 19.6%

Do you have access to copies of Yes 37.0% 3.20 the latest CITES Appendices at No 34.8% your place of work? Don't know 28.3%

Roles of responsibilities of different agencies 20.0% involved in the implementation of CITES Detection of smuggling and smuggling What kind of training do you think is 19.2% methods the most important for you in your role as a border enforcement officer How to apply CITES 17.5% 3.21 working on wildlife trade and timber Case studies of some commonly smuggled 14.2% issues? Please select at most species in your country three of the given options (max. 3). Wildlife identification 13.3% Timber identification 11.7% Plant identification 4.2%

4. Trafficking in Hazardous Waste and ODS Component

Yes 50.0% 4.1 Do you know what ozone layer is? No 8.7% I just know something about the ozone layer 41.3% from common sense

Yes 32.6% Do you know what hazardous 4.2 No 8.7% wastes are? I just know something about hazardous 58.7% waste from common sense

No 57.8% Yes 42.2% Carbon dioxide 39.4%

Do you know what Ozone Refrigerant cylinder labeled as R-12 or CFC-12 16.9% 4.3 Depleting Substances (ODS) are? Hydrocarbon (HC) 14.1% Refrigerant can labeled as HCFC-22 or R-22 12.7% Fire extinguisher containing Halons 9.9% Pesticide cylinder labeled as methyl bromide 7.0%

4.4 Which of the following are Waste lead-acid batteries 26.5% hazardous wastes in your opinion? Please tick as many answers as Waste drugs and medicines 22.7% you consider appropriate: Waste oils 19.7% Certain waste electrical and electronic 18.2% assemblies Waste computer monitor 7.6% Waste asbestos 3.0%

Wastes paper 2.3% Don’t know 1.5%

Don’t know 40.0% A convention on the control of trans- boundary movements of hazardous wastes 35.6% and their disposal What in you opinion is the Basel 4.5 An international organization 11.1% Convention? An environmental agreement that regulates 11.1% ODS A non-governmental organization (NGO) 2.2% A book 0.0%

Don’t know 47.8% An environmental agreement that regulates 28.3% ODS The Montreal Protocol on A convention on the control of trans- 4.6 Substances that Deplete Ozone boundary movements of hazardous wastes 17.4% Layer is: and their disposal An international organization 4.3% A non-governmental organization (NGO) 2.2% A book 0.0%

Country of origin 2.1% Do you consider your country more as a country of origin, transit or Country of transit 31.3% 4.7 destination for illegal trade of ODS? Country of destination 12.5% Please tick as many answers as Nothing at all 18.8% you consider appropriate. Don’t know 35.4%

Do you consider your country more Country of origin 5.7% as a country of origin, transit or Country of transit 28.3% destination for illegal traffic of 4.8 Country of destination 17.0% hazardous wastes? Please tick as many answers as you consider Nothing at all 17.0% appropriate. Don’t know 32.1%

4.9 If you encounter potential Yes, you will: 71.0% hazardous waste in a shipment Contact competent authorities 100.0% when you are on duty, would you detain it? Confiscate it 0.0% Check and handle it by yourself 0.0% None of the above 0.0% No, because: 29.0% You do not know what the substance was when 38.9% you encountered it You do not know how to handle it 27.8% No regulations 11.1%

You are not aware of illegal trade in hazardous 22.2% waste

Control declaration documents such as 29.6% invoice, packing list and bill of lading, etc. How would you identify ODS and Control movement documents (license) 23.1% hazardous wastes in your 4.10 operation? Please tick as many Control the label 16.7% answers as you consider Tools to test it 15.7% appropriate. Shape of package 9.3% I don’t know 5.6%

Have you encountered any cross Yes 2.2% 4.11 border movement of ODS when on duty? No 97.8%

Have you encountered any cross Yes 2.2% 4.12 border movement of hazardous wastes when on duty? No 97.8%

Do you have access to copies of Yes 22.2% legislation regarding import and 4.13 No 57.8% export of ODS and hazardous wastes at your place of work? Don't know 20.0%

Do you have access to any Yes 22.2% operation guide regarding ODS and 4.14 No 53.3% hazardous wastes inspection and control at your place of work? Don't know 24.4%

Never received any training in this area 60.3% Training on combating illegal cross border 12.7% movement of ODS Training on combating illegal cross border 11.1% Did you ever receive any of the movement of hazardous wastes following trainings? Please tick as Training on ODS and hazardous wastes 4.15 6.3% many answers as you consider legislation appropriate. Training on how to handle seized hazardous 6.3% waste or ODS Training on how to interview a suspect smuggler of hazardous waste and/or ozone 3.2% depleting substances

None 33.3% Don't know 25.0% Which facilities do you have at your operation sites to deal with ODS Protection and safety facilities 13.3% 4.16 and hazardous wastes? Please tick Proper warehouse for storage 11.7% as many answers as you consider Refrigerants identifiers and other 8.3% appropriate. identification tools Laboratory able to receive samples of 8.3% hazardous waste and provide test reports

Training on national legislation concerning export and import of ODS and hazardous 23.8% wastes Training on international treaties and laws concerning export and import of ODS and 23.1% hazardous wastes With regard to ODS and hazardous Training on how to identify ODS and 20.8% wastes smuggling, what kind of hazardous wastes training do you think would be most Training on how to appropriately deal with 4.17 13.8% useful to you? Please select at ODS and hazardous wastes most three of the given options Training on how to investigate ODS and 9.2% (max. 3). hazardous wastes smuggling cases Training on how to identify fraudulent 8.5% documents Training on how to interview a potential 0.8% smuggler No training needs 0.0%

5. Operations, Training and Integrity Component Less than 1 year 47.8% How long have you worked at this 1 - 3 years 32.6% 5.1 border section? 3 - 7 years 8.7% More than 7 years 10.9%

Recognised international border check point 50.7% Does your agency have Unofficial border checkpoint 11.9% responsibility or jurisdiction for: 5.2 Demarcated international border between (Please tick as many answers as 28.4% you consider appropriate). checkpoints No jurisdiction in the border area 9.0%

5.3 Do you have regular meetings?

No regular meetings 53.5%

Once a year 20.9% Bilateral cross-border meetings 5.3.1 2-5 times a year 9.3% with BLO counterpart: 10-12 times a year 9.3% 6-9 times a year 7.0% More than 12 times a year 0.0%

No regular meetings 81.4% 2-5 times a year 9.3% More than 12 times a year 4.7% 5.3.2 Multilateral cross-border meetings: 10-12 times a year 2.3% 6-9 times a year 2.3% Once a year 0.0%

No regular meetings 59.1% More than 12 times a year 13.6% Meetings at the district/provincial 2-5 times a year 11.4% 5.3.3 level with other BLOs or provincial/district authorities: 10-12 times a year 9.1% Once a year 4.5% 6-9 times a year 2.3%

No regular meetings 59.5% Once a year 16.7% 2-5 times a year 11.9% 5.3.4 National level meetings: 6-9 times a year 7.1% 10-12 times a year 2.4% More than 12 times a year 2.4%

In your opinion, which of the Drug trafficking 4.1 following forms of crime do you Trafficking in persons 3.9 consider most serious for your border section? Please rank the Smuggling of migrants 3.0 5.4 options in order of importance. Use Smuggling of timber 2.8 the numbers 1 to 5 to implicate the Smuggling of wildlife 2.1 importance of your choice (1: not serious at all; 5: very serious). 0 if it Smuggling of hazardous wastes 1.5 does not occur. Smuggling of ozone depleting substances 1.3

Vehicles (trucks, cars, motorbikes, etc.) 15.1% Medicines 14.2% Goods of daily use 13.3% Counterfeit material (medicines, toys, electronics, clothes, DVD's, Computer 9.3% software, etc.) According to your experience, apart Poor quality food 8.9% from the above illegal smuggling activities which other trans- Gas/Gasoline/ Petrolium Products 5.8% 5.5 boundary illegal smuggling Persons of Interest / criminals avoiding the 5.8% activities is occurring in your border law area? Please tick as many answers as you consider appropriate. Gems or other precious metals 5.8% Artifacts / Antiques 5.3% Domestic animals (pigs, chicken, cows, etc.) 4.9% Furniture 4.4% Weapons, including explosive or material 3.6% used in the manufacturing of explosives Fake currency 3.6%

In your opinion, where do you believe a majority of the items are smuggled across 5.6 the border? 5.6.1 Trafficking in persons Recognised International Check Point 0.0%

Local Check Point 4.3% Border Area Between Check Points 60.9% Mixed 32.6% Unsure 2.2%

Recognised International Check Point 0.0% Local Check Point 4.5%

5.6.2 Smuggling of migrants Border Area Between Check Points 43.2% Mixed 45.5%

Unsure 6.8%

Recognised International Check Point 0.0% Local Check Point 0.0% 5.6.3 Smuggling of wildlife Border Area Between Check Points 62.2% Mixed 17.8% Unsure 20.0%

Recognised International Check Point 0.0% Local Check Point 6.7% 5.6.4 Smuggling of timber Border Area Between Check Points 60.0% Mixed 13.3% Unsure 20.0%

Recognised International Check Point 0.0% Local Check Point 4.9% 5.6.5 Smuggling of hazardous waste Border Area Between Check Points 31.7% Mixed 17.1% Unsure 46.3%

Recognised International Check Point 0.0% Local Check Point 5.0% 5.6.6 Smuggling of ODS Border Area Between Check Points 25.0% Mixed 20.0% Unsure 50.0%

Recognised International Check Point 0.0% Local Check Point 0.0% 5.6.7 Drug trafficking Border Area Between Check Points 54.3% Mixed 41.3% Unsure 4.3%

5.7 What equipment do you require to Intelligence database 4.6

be able to complete your duty Mobile telephone 4.3 requirements in the detection and All relevant National Laws 4.1 suppression of transnational crime. Answers are ranked between 1 Camera and video camera 4.1 (Not required) to 5 (Urgent) Vehicle (Patrol vehicle, or motorbikes) 4.0 Radio Communication Systems 3.9 Forensic and test kits 3.9 Procedure Manuals on encountering illegal 3.9 activity Internet access 3.9 Infrastructure – Office 3.8 Illegal Item Identification Manuals 3.6 Computer, printer and scanner 3.4 Boat (for river patrol) 3.4 Navigation Equipment (Compass, map, 3.3 GPS) Field Equipment (for patrolling) 3.1 X-ray machine 3.0 Detection dogs 2.8

What further training do you require to fully implement your duty in the interdiction 5.8 and suppression of transantional crime? Not needed for my position 9.5% Not needed, I have already received training 0.0% 5.8.1 Transnational crime investigation Received training but require more 23.8% advanced training Require training 64.3%

Not needed for my position 5.3% Not needed, I have already received training 2.6% 5.8.2 Check Point Anti-smuggling Received training but require more 18.4% advanced training Require training 73.7%

Not needed for my position 2.3%

Transnational Crime Intelligence Not needed, I have already received training 0.0% 5.8.3 Received training but require more Collection and Analysis 27.3% advanced training Require training 70.5%

Not needed for my position 5.4% Not needed, I have already received training 0.0% 5.8.4 Field Border Patrolling Received training but require more 27.0% advanced training Require training 67.6%

Not needed for my position 0.0% Not needed, I have already received training 0.0% 5.8.5 Transnational Crime Awareness Received training but require more 21.1% advanced training Require training 78.9%

Not needed for my position 0.0% Not needed, I have already received training 11.9% 5.8.6 Computer Training Received training but require more 40.5% advanced training Require training 45.2%

Imagine that Mr. Y is an old friend Let him pass because he knows that Mr. Y 0.0% of your colleague Officer JK, is a respectable person working at the border. Mr. Y is a Let him pass but tells him the next time he respectable family man who runs a 6.5% small business that entails frequent has to bring all of the valid papers border crossings. One day he Make a thorough inspection on Mr. Y’s 5.9 arrives at the border to cross it with minivan and then decide whether or not to 45.7% his minivan, and for the first time he allow him to pass does not have all of the necessary travel documentation. He apologizes and invites Officer JK Refuse him to pass 47.8% for lunch. What do you think Officer JK will do?

He did the right thing: generally this should not be done but in specific cases exceptions 15.2% are acceptable If your colleague Officer JK decided He did the right thing only if he checked the 19.6% 5.10 to let Mr.Y pass, what would be vehicle first your reaction: He should not do these things 43.5% You would report Officer JK to your 21.7% supervisor

Are there any rules on being Yes 80.0% 5.11 offered presents at your border section? No 20.0%

Have you had any training for this Yes 28.3% 5.12 kind of situation? No 71.7%

Annex II – Select Geographical Analysis

C-L T Muse 8 Chin Shwe Haw 7 Myawaddy 7 Please tick your duty station: Lweje 6 Tachileik 10 Wanpon 1 Kaw Thaung 7 Total 22 24 Provincial Police Force 18.2% 12.5% Police Department on TOC 13.6% 4.2% Border Trade Department 13.6% 12.5% Please tick your agency/unit/department: Customs 13.6% 12.5% Immigration Department 9.1% 12.5% CCDAC/Anti-Narcotics Task Force 18.2% 33.3% Forest Department 13.6% 12.5%

C-L T Which form of trafficking in Trafficking of man for labour 4.0 3.9 persons do you consider to be Trafficking of women for sexual more common across your border 4.2 3.3 exploitation 1.12 area? Please rank the options in order of importance by using the Trafficking of children for begging 2.2 1.8 numbers 1 to 5 (1 being the least Don’t know 0.0% 0.0% common; 5 the most common).

Do you consider your country Country of origin 53.3% 30.3% more as a country of origin, transit Country of transit 0.4% 54.5% 2.6 or destination for drugs? Please Country of destination 3.3% 6.1% tick as many answers as you Nothing at all 0.0% 0.0% consider appropriate. Don’t know 3.3% 9.1%

Hidden in cars, trucks, motorbikes or 3.9 3.0 According to your own experience, other vehicles how are drugs mostly trafficked across the border? Please rank Through unofficial checkpoints 4.3 2.2 the options in order of importance 2.9 By human mules or couriers on foot 3.4 2.8 by using the numbers 1 to 5 (1: By boat 1.8 2.4 being the least common; 5: the Through negotiation with the border most common). 0 if it does not 1.2 1.0 occur. officer Don't know 0.0% 0.0%

3.6 Which are the most commonly Orchids 2.6 2.0 traded species across your border Snakes 2.6 1.1 area. Please rank the options in Pangolins 2.1 1.5 order of importance. Please use Aloe Wood 1.3 1.4

the numbers 1 to 5 to show often Resin 1.6 1.0 wildlife is smuggled (1: being the Monitor Lizards 1.3 0.8 least common; 5: the most Porcupines 0.8 0.8 common). Turtles 0.5 0.3 Tigers 0.3 0.4 Bears 0.4 0.3 Monkeys 0.3 0.4 Don't know 6.1% 6.1%

Less than 1 year 54.5% 41.7% How long have you worked at this 5.1 1 - 3 years 36.4% 24.2% border section? 3 - 7 years 4.5% 12.5% More than 7 years 4.5% 16.7%

In your opinion, which of the Drug trafficking 4.1 4.1 following forms of crime do you Trafficking in persons 4.0 3.8 consider most serious for your Smuggling of migrants 2.8 3.1 border section? Please rank the options in order of importance. Smuggling of timber 3.2 2.4 5.4 Use the numbers 1 to 5 to Smuggling of wildlife 2.3 1.9 implicate the importance of your Smuggling of hazardous wastes 1.8 1.3 choice (1: not serious at all; 5: Smuggling of ozone depleting very serious). 0 if it does not 1.3 1.2 occur. substances

Picture 6. The survey team (from left): Liu Ning (UNEP), Giovanni Broussard (UNODC), Songsatit Kittikhunwatchana (UNODC), Pol. Col. Thein Kyi (CCDAC), Chalinsa Varanyananda (UNODC). NB: The data analysis and reporting was carried out by Michael Pauloski (UNODC)

35 rd United Nations Building, 3 ﬂoor, Rajadamnern Nok Avenue, Bangkok 10200, Thailand Tel. (66-2) 288-2091 Fax. (66-2) 281-2129 http://www.unodc.org/eastasiaandpaciﬁc