|
.gif)
|
 CRPP/NLD
|
|
|
Representatives
of the People elected to the Parliament in the 1990
multiparty democratic elections
(Committee Representing People's Parliament)
CRPP
Notification 10/2000
1. Duties assigned to members of parliament can only be withdrawn in accordance
with law. In most countries the process for this is written into the constitution.
This is because by virtue of a free and fair election the member is a
representative of its constituents legally. The intention of the law must
be respected at all times. In the Pyithu Hluttaw Law (Law 14 of 89) decreed
on 31.5.89 by the State Law and Order Restoration Council (now the State
Peace and Development Council) there is no provision for withdrawing duties
assigned to elected members of parliament.
2. Sections 1 to 82 of the Pyithu Hluttaw Elections Law which is in force
and which enabled the holding of free and fair multiparty general elections
does not contain any provisions for the voters to withdraw the responsibilities
and duties assigned to their elected representatives.
3. Chapter 2, Section 3, of the Pyithu Hluttaw Law reads " Pyithu
Hluttaw shall be convened with the elected representatives from the constituencies
as set out under this law". This law is still in force and its provisions
must be fulfilled.
4. Withdrawing the responsibilities and powers given to Pyithu Hluttaw
members; obtaining signatures from constituents and staging "no-confidence"
demonstrations against the respective members are activities, which are
not empowered by law. They are lawless activities.
5. The Pyithu Hluttaw Law must be meticulously adhered to. This maxim
of law has been reported in Burma Law Reports 1971, Vol. XI (U Ba Nyunt
and two versus Sein Kyi and eight) The judges pronounced that they couldn't
maximize or minimize the provisions prescribed by law which must be adhered
to meticulously. This ruling is a precedent that must be followed.
6. Section 26 of the Pyithu Hluttaw Law provides that " Eligible
voters in the constituency shall elect their Pyithu Hluttaw representative
by secret ballot". Hence a member elected in secret cannot be removed
by any dictator, any group of individuals, or by any commission demanding
signatures and staging demonstrations of no confidence.
7. Section 29 of the Pyithu Hluttaw Law, which provides for secret ballot
enables the individual the right to elect the person of his/her choice
without fear of any repercussions. In a way it safeguards provisions set
out in the Declaration of Human Rights. Presentations of papers with signatures
in public functions and demonstrations of "no-confidence" in
the elected representatives only proves the obvious fact that the people
have been pressured and intimidated through illegal tactics and strategies.
8. Doing whatever one wants to, making the people shout and scream with
no regard whatsoever for the provisions in the Pyithu Hluttaw Law contradicts
the aim and objects of the Law. Therefore, these activities in which people
have been pressured to shout and demonstrate loss of confidence in the
members of the Pyithu Hluttaw are in violation of the law.
9. Rules and Regulations to the Pyithu Hluttaw Law 14/89, passed by the
State Law and Order Restoration Council now the State Peace and Development
Council contain no provisions for such procedures as making motions and
resolutions for withdrawing duties of members elected to the Pyithu Hluttaw.
10. The 1947 Constitution of the Union of Burma also contains no provision
for the withdrawal of duties assigned to elected representatives of the
Pyithu Hluttaw.
11. Only in Chapter 13, Article 187, of the Constitution of the Socialist
Republic of the Union of Burma 1974 there is provision for recall, resignation
and replacement of people's representatives. Such action can be taken
in accordance with law and on the following grounds:- (a) violation of
any provision of the constitution; (b) inefficient discharge of duties
or (c) misbehavior.
12. Though it is ten years since the general elections was held, the State
Law and Order Restoration Council, now the State Peace and Development
Council has not convened a Pyithu Hluttaw to enable the members to take
the oath of office and sign their names in the records.
13. In this sort of situation how can it be said that anyone has violated
a provision of the constitution when the Pyithu Hluttaw has not even been
convened and the members have not been allowed to draw up a constitution.
Also, since parliament has not been convened, the people's representatives
have not been sworn in, nor have they taken their seats in parliament
nor have duties been assigned to them. How can they be accused of inefficient
discharge of duties? How can there be any misbehavior while undertaking
duties assigned to them?
14. In civilised society where the rule of law prevails the people are
not manipulated to commit acts that are in violation of the law. Criminal
minded thugs who dare to blatantly commit offences and abuse the law will
surely be judged and someday punished.
15. We therefore make this notification that all those who are blatantly
violating the law by boisterous demonstrations and forcing people to put
their signatures on papers and resorting to all kinds of bullying tactics
making it appear that the constituents have lost confidence in their legally
elected Hluttaw representatives will be held accountable for the consequences
of their actions in accordance with law.
Committee Representing People's Parliament
29 March 2000
|
