Since
Myanmar’s Joint Parliamentary Constitution Review Committee submitted its
report to the Union Parliament on 31 January 2014, the constitutional amendment
saga has taken another twist.
The
Committee was given the task of reviewing the 2008 Constitution, which had been
drafted by the previous military junta. It was required to make recommendations
to the parliament, yet it ultimately avoided this responsibility. Many
activists now agree that the amendment process is not genuine.
Yet
public confidence in the process was shaken when the Committee’s initial
deadline to submit its recommendations to the parliament, 31 December 2013,
was extended to 31
January 2014. For many democracy activists, especially the older generation,
this announcement heightened fears of prolonged constitutional discussions
leading to negligible outcomes, like in the past.
When the
Committee was established in 2013, there was some scepticism mixed with a
glimmer of hope. Confidence in the process grew as a clear timeframe was set,
making it possible that any proposals might have time to go through the
necessary approval process before the 2015 elections.
A call
for public submissions was even issued. This generated a flurry of
constitutional campaigns and conversations across the country as political
parties, social organisations, ethnic groups and religious groups held
discussions and finalised submissions to the Committee. Reports suggest
that the Committee received a huge number of submissions.
The
constitutional review process has also been marked by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s
failed request for an audience with the president. In November 2013 and on
several occasions since then, she has called for a meeting with
the president, the speaker of the lower house and the commander-in-chief. She
has insisted that this is a necessary step to discuss the constitutional
amendments.
The
Committee’s report appears to have confirmed the fears of sceptics. It simply
collated data on the number of provisions that were suggested to be amended and
those that should stay the same. The Committee failed to come to any
conclusions on the substance of the Constitution’s text — that is, which
provisions should be amended and how.
The most
controversial aspect of the report was that it noted that there were three key
aspects of the Constitution that should not be amended. This was based on what
appears to have been a petition signed by 106,102 people, although it does not
confirm the source of this petition.
The first
was the role of the military. The report noted that the petition wanted the
military to retain its role in politics (and as the country’s armed forces). It
also noted that the petition’s signatories were in favour of retaining the
section that grants immunity from prosecution for past and present members of
government.
The
second affirmation was of the section on presidential requirements, which
currently does not allow a person to be nominated if his or her spouse or
children ‘owe allegiance to a foreign power’. The report noted that the
petition did not want this changed. This would mean that Aung San Suu Kyi could
not be nominated by the presidential electoral college after the 2015
elections.
Third,
the same 106,102 people of the petition recommended that the provisions on the
constitutional amendment process be retained. This process requires 75 percent
approval of parliament, and for some provisions also requires more than 50
percent of eligible voters at a national referendum. These provisions would
remain an obstacle to be overcome for any future amendments.
Yet this
alleged petition has been heavily criticised and suspicions have been raised
about its validity.
Some
activists are now drawing parallels between the current situation and the lead
up to the approval of the 1974 Constitution. In the early 1970s, Ne Win’s
socialist regime claimed to have widely consulted the people and gathered a
large number of signatures in support of the draft constitution. This alleged
show of support for the constitution was used to justify its approval, yet it
only entrenched another 14 years of Ne Win’s rule.
Where
will Myanmar’s road to constitutional amendment lead today? After the
Committee’s report was delivered, on 3 February the parliament established a
committee for its implementation. Consisting of 30 members of parliament, this
new committee must now make a final report on constitutional amendments.
Yet if
this second committee proceeds on the basis of the validity of the first
report, the road to amendment will not see any reduction in the role of the
military in politics. Nor will it promote greater fairness in the presidential
nomination process. This has serious implications for the elections in 2015,
and suggests that the reform process itself has stalled.
This
article first appeared on 27 March 2014 in the East Asia Forum Quarterly, ‘On the Edge in Asia’. Republished in The Glocal
