Myanmar: Annan report calls for review of 1982 Citizenship Law 

Ongoing issue, one that reflects poorly on Myanmar:

An advisory commission tasked with finding sustainable solutions in Rakhine State has submitted its final report to the government, where it called for freedom of movement for all people in Rakhine and a review of the controversial 1982 Citizenship Law.

The Advisory Commission on Rakhine State, headed by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, was formed by State Counsellor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in September 2016. It was formed by the October 9 attacks in northern Rakhine State, which led to a military crackdown that has come with allegations of human rights violations.

An estimated 1.1 million Muslims – many who identify as Rohingya, a term the government rejects – are denied access to citizenship in line with the citizenship law, which was enacted by former dictator U Ne Win. The law does not recognise the Rohingya as one of the country’s 135 recognised ethnic groups.

The commission’s report, released on Thursday, urged the government to bring the law in line with international standards and abolish “different distinctions between different types of citizens”. The law currently recognises full citizens, associate citizens and naturalised citizens.

The report also urged the commission to begin a process to review the citizenship law “to ensure the equitable treatment of all citizens”.

Many of the Rohingya in the state face severe restrictions on movements, and while the commission acknowledged recent efforts by the government to improve freedom of movement in the north of the state, it said it had only effected those holding the correct identification.

“To have greater impact, freedom of movement should be delinked from the citizenship verification process, meaning that all individuals in Rakhine State should be able to move freely irrespective of whether they hold an NVC [National Verification Card], NRC card [National Registration Card] or citizenship documentation, consistent with the basic right of all people to free movement,” the report said.

An estimated 120,000 Muslims are confined to IDP camps in Rakhine, many without access to basic livelihoods such as education, healthcare and livelihoods. The report said that efforts to allow the return of people home has “shown little progress”, and called on the government to develop a “comprehensive strategy towards closing all IDP camps” in the state.

It said the process should be developed through consultation with affected communities and should have clear timelines, adding that all returns and relocations must be voluntary and should allow people to return to their place of origin as a priority.

In the interim, it suggested improving shelter, water, sanitation and livelihoods in the IDP camps.

In northern Rakhine State, humanitarian and media access has largely been cut off since the October attacks, and the commission urged the government to ensure full and regular access to all parts of the state.

The military has been accused of using disproportionate force in its operations, including allegations of mass rape, extrajudicial killing and torture. The government and military have continuously denied all charges.

In March, the UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution to form an investigation team to probe rights abuses in Myanmar, with a particular focus on Rakhine. However, the Myanmar government has denied visas to its members.

The commission called for an “independent and impartial investigation” into the facts on the ground in order to ensure that those who conducted violations are held accountable.

Additionally, the commission called on the government form a ministry tasked solely with implementing its recommendations. It said the appointment should inintially be a one-year appointment and deliver public quarterly reports.

“The secretariat’s staff should be in permanent consultation with groups in Rakhine State in the implementation of its work,” the commission said.

Source: Annan report calls for review of 1982 Citizenship Law | Frontier Myanmar

Myanmar’s ‘national races’ trump citizenship | East Asia Forum

Interesting article and explanation by Nick Cheesman regarding the status of the Rohingas in Burma:

Taingyintha, or ‘national races’, is among the most important political ideas in Myanmar today. Although the term is not well recognised or readily translated in English-language scholarship on Myanmar, it lies at the heart of the country’s contemporary politics. It also helps to explain the so-called ‘Rohingya problem’ on which so much has been written in recent times. So how did the idea of taingyintha become politically salient? And what is its relationship to state formation and national identity?

Rohingya refugee workers carry bags of salt as they work in processing yard in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh, 12 April 2017. (Photo: Reuters/Mohammad Ponir Hossain).

To answer these questions requires a little bit of digging into the recent past. As a term, taingyintha has neither a long nor glorious history. It was not a significant idea in colonial-era politics, where it seems to have been a signifier of ‘native’ identity. At the end of World War II, taingyintha featured in negotiations on the country’s draft constitution, which was ratified in 1947, but it got only two modest references in the chapter on citizenship, where it is translated as ‘indigenous races’. It wasn’t mentioned in the 1947 Panglong Agreement, which is mythologised as laying the foundations for national unity, and it remained peripheral to politics in the country prior to a military coup in 1962.

But on 12 February 1964, taingyintha went from having limited political salience to becoming a centrepiece in the project for military-dominated statehood. The junta leader, General Ne Win, used the Union Day address to urge ‘national races’ to come together for the good of the nation. In so doing, he inaugurated a new programme of action based on a state-sponsored conception of taingyintha as political community. Within the same year, the government had set up an Academy for the Development of National Races. The following year, staff from universities around the country began state-directed fieldwork to document and publish authoritative studies on national races’ culture.

Although Ne Win’s one-party state collapsed under the weight of nationwide protests in 1988, the idea of national races not only prevailed, but also emerged stronger than ever. A newly comprised military junta that seized control of government announced that ‘non-disintegration of national [taingyintha] solidarity’ was the second of its three main causes. For want of any other unifying motif, national races were invoked on every broadcast and publication, and at every major event.

The new military junta used the term to mean different things. On the one hand, ‘national races’ was used to describe the members of a single political community, united in struggle against common enemies inside and out. On the other, it was used to denote people living in remote parts of the country who had failed to progress due to civil war and ignorance. Between them, these usages worked to justify relentless military campaigns against armed groups operating under the banners of multitudinous national races.

Today, Myanmar’s 2008 constitution cements national races in the country’s formal institutions. It establishes a conceptual relation between taingyintha and citizenship, such that the former is irreducible to the latter. Legally and by definition, national races trump citizenship. To talk of the political community ‘Myanmar’ is to talk of taingyintha, and to talk to that community is above all to address its members not as citizens but as national races.

Because taingyintha identity had trumped citizenship, the place of people belonging to groups not recognised as national races, like people identifying or identified as Rohingya, is precarious. The only means available for the Rohingya and other excluded groups to achieve any political recognition within Myanmar is to submit to the politics of domination and insist that they too are taingyintha.

This means that Rohingya advocates must also engage with and support the idea of national races. That is, they must reproduce the idea in order to make a claim for political identity and membership. They must give assurances that if included in the schema of national races, they would be committed to the idea of taingyintha; that, ironically, they would be the most vociferous defenders of ‘national race’ identity.

Myanmar’s problem is not a ‘Rohingya problem’, but a ‘national races’ problem. The idea of taingyintha obligates groups wanting political recognition — like the Rohingya — to acquiesce to its terms as the price demanded for admission to the ‘Myanmar’ political community, only to expose them to the ire of the members of other groups already recognised as national races.

Source: Myanmar’s ‘national races’ trump citizenship | East Asia Forum

ICYMI: Myanmar Begins Controversial Citizenship Verification Process

Disturbing. Linking citizenship to ethnicity and religion in Myanmar:

Many Rohingyas are skeptical that a government that already classifies them as Bengalis will grant them citizenship based on the testimonies of village elders.

Washington has, in the past, pressured the Myanmar government on the 1982 Citizenship Law. And in its 2014 report on religious freedom, called on authorities to promote the rights of Rohingya Muslims and provide “durable solutions” for refugees outside the country.

Matthew Smith, director of the international human rights group Fortify Rights, says giving Rohingya equal access to citizenship rights is crucial to preventing the conflict in the future. He says foreign nations should press the government more on the issue.

“The fact that the immigration department is handling this issue is indicative of the perception that all Rohingya come from Bangladesh,” Smith said. “Immigration is an issue on all of Myanmar’s borders, but the wholesale denial of Rohingya citizenship, Rohingya ethnicity, has contributed to these abuses that we’ve been documenting now for two years.”

Have not seen much Canadian government representation on the citizenship issue although Andrew Bennett, the Ambassador for Religious Freedom, routinely mentions Rohingyas in his speeches.

Casts a blemish on Aung San Suu Kyi and Myanmar’s democratization.

Myanmar Begins Controversial Citizenship Verification Process.