Democratising Myanmar's Security Sector
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Democratising Myanmar’s security sector Enduring legacies and a long road ahead November 2019 Democratising Myanmar’s security sector Enduring legacies and a long road ahead Kim Jolliffe November 2019 Acknowledgements About the author From the author Kim Jolliffe is an independent researcher, writer and resource person specialising in security, This report has drawn heavily on research produced development and humanitarian affairs in Myanmar. by Myanmar civil society organisations, including He has worked with Saferworld’s Myanmar human rights organisations, women’s organisations, programme since 2013 and with people affected civil society groups and policy institutes, particularly by conflict in Myanmar since 2008. the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners and the Tagaung Institute for Policy Studies. The research also depended on the time and crucial insights provided in interviews by dozens of members of parliament, government officials, journalists, civil society leaders, independent lawyers, former military officers, and international practitioners and experts. The central inspiration for This research – and a wider Saferworld project this report and for Saferworld’s engagement with the focused on security, justice and peace in Myanmar – security and justice sectors in Myanmar has been is funded with UK aid from the UK government; the tireless and humbling work of the many local however, the views expressed here do not organisations and individuals pursuing justice and necessarily reflect the UK government’s official an effective security system. policies. This report also benefited greatly from input provided by three external reviewers – namely Cover photo: Military representatives attend the regular Ye Myo Hein, Andrew Selth and Renaud Egreteau, session of the Union Parliament in Naypyidaw, Myanmar, 25 July 2018. as well as input from other distinguished experts © MPA through regular discussions. Many thanks to all staff at Saferworld, especially Mai Hla Aye, Saferworld’s Policy and Advocacy Coordinator, to whom I want to express huge thanks for her studious and assiduous work as a research assistant, identifying and liaising with interviewees and shaping the overall focus and message of the report through regular discussion and reflection. Thanks also to Martha Crowley, Lindsey Hurtle and Ilya Jones for the publications and editorial support, and to the Myanmar team, including John Bainbridge, Country Manager, and Saw Lin Chel, Programme Manager, whose hard work and fast-growing programme have made this research possible. I am also grateful to Kay Humphrey for copyediting support, and to Jane Stevenson for design. © Saferworld, November 2019. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without full attribution. Saferworld welcomes and encourages the utilisation and dissemination of the material included in this publication. Contents Foreword i Executive summary iii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Conceptualising the democratisation of Myanmar’s security sector 2 1.2 Methodology, structure and limitations 3 2 Background 7 2.1 The making of a militarised state (1825–2015) 7 2.2 Civil-military relations since 2016 16 3 Developing the mandate of elected civilians 29 3.1 Who controls the security and justice institutions? 30 3.2 Civilian government finding its role 35 4 Transforming institutional practices and cultures 49 4.1 Early efforts at civilian-led reform 50 4.2 The Myanmar Armed Forces 52 4.3 The criminal justice system 58 4.4 Intelligence services 65 5 Public oversight and engagement in the security sector 71 5.1 Education 73 5.2 Civil society 75 5.3 Policy institutes 77 5.4 Independent media 80 6 The way forward 85 6.1 Developing the mandate of elected civilians 86 6.2 Transforming institutional practices and cultures 88 6.3 Public oversight and engagement in the security sector 90 Annex 1: Constitutional provisions determining control of security 91 and justice institutions, and amendments proposed by the National League for Democracy Glossary of terms The military, Defence Services, armed forces and where they are separated. This report looks in the Tatmadaw: these are all common terms for particular at the armed forces, the police, the Myanmar’s military and are used relatively prisons, the courts and the intelligence services. interchangeably in official publications. They all refer The courts are accurately understood more as part of to the tri-service armed forces of the army, navy and the justice sector than as part of the security sector, air force, as well as the other departments and units but they are central to the way that the latter organised directly under the commander-in-chief functions. Myanmar’s security sector also arguably and administered by the Ministry of Defence, which includes the General Administration Department include military intelligence, the judge advocate and the Ministry of Border Affairs, which carry out general, the inspector general and people’s militia, security and justice functions. Immigration could among other bodies. Another distinction between also be seen as part of the security sector but is not these institutions and other parts of government is covered in this report. that all personnel have a rank that forms part of their Security sector governance: this term refers to the title. The definitions are confused, however, by the way that power and authority are exercised over the pre-eminent role that the military plays in politics security sector. It relates to the way that all of the and administration in Myanmar. There are ranking aforementioned institutions are run, overseen and officers in government who are not explicitly serving scrutinised. It can include all of the formal and under any specific armed service. This report uses informal processes, actors and values that shape the term ‘military’ as the most general term, the provision of security. particularly when referring to the institution’s general role in society, politics or the hierarchy of Civilians: civilians are people who do not hold government. ‘Defence Services’, which article 3f of military positions. This can technically include the Defence Services Act defines simply as ‘the army, former military officers, of which there are many who the navy and the air force’, is used when referring to hold civilian positions in Myanmar’s government. parts of the constitution or other laws that use the This report therefore sometimes refers to ‘lifelong term. Myanmar Armed Forces, the armed forces or civilians’ to emphasise when individuals are the Myanmar vernacular, Tatmadaw (meaning royal civilians with no military background in their career – or imperial force or army) are used when talking an important distinction when discussing civil- specifically about the tri-service armed forces, military relations in Myanmar. people’s militia, border guard forces and their Elected civilians: this report regularly refers to operations. ‘elected civilians’ or ‘elected officials’. This means Parliament: this report refers to Myanmar’s union- all civilian officials (see above) whose appointments level legislatures collectively as the Union ultimately trace back to the democratic electoral Parliament, or to the lower and upper house, rather system. In Myanmar, as in many countries, than the equivalent Burmese terms Pyidaungsu parliament is elected by voting citizens. Parliament Hluttaw, Pyithu Hluttaw or Amyotha Hluttaw. then elects the president, who selects personnel for Similarly, it refers to the legislatures in general as most executive positions. All officials selected parliament, rather than hluttaw. through this process are understood as ‘elected’ and are contrasted with those nominated by the Security and justice sectors: the security sector commander-in-chief, who – although appointed by refers to all the state institutions mandated to presidential decree – are not ultimately accountable provide security for the government and the public. to the electorate. The security sector overlaps considerably with the justice sector and there is no strict definition of i Foreword For three decades, Saferworld has been working with This report looks in depth at relations and the partners to prevent violent conflict and help build division of legal powers between the Tatmadaw and safer lives. In many of the countries where we work, the National League for Democracy, which currently the way security is delivered and experienced share power in a coalition government. The report intersects with a complex web of factors that also explores the widening space in Myanmar for determine how a country or society can move civilian engagement on security sector governance, towards lasting peace. We work with local groups – including an examination of the institutional governments, security services and civil society – cultures and practices of the security and justice to support them to build more peaceful and just bodies. These include changes in the national societies. Since Saferworld began working on peace political system, and in the wider relations between and security issues in Myanmar in 2012, it has the military and non-state civilian actors such as civil become clear that without genuine countrywide society, policy institutes and universities. Changes transformation in the security sector, genuine peace have been seen in these areas since 2010, but much will remain