Global Freedom of Expression

Español

The Case of Aung Kyaw Naing or “Par Gyi”

Closed Contracts Expression

Key Details

  • Mode of Expression
    Press / Newspapers
  • Date of Decision
    June 23, 2015
  • Outcome
    Other
  • Case Number
    N/A
  • Region & Country
    Myanmar, Asia and Asia Pacific
  • Judicial Body
    First Instance Court
  • Type of Law
    Other
  • Themes
    Violence against Speakers / Impunity
  • Tags
    Violence

Content Attribution Policy

Global Freedom of Expression is an academic initiative and therefore, we encourage you to share and republish excerpts of our content so long as they are not used for commercial purposes and you respect the following policy:

  • Attribute Columbia Global Freedom of Expression as the source.
  • Link to the original URL of the specific case analysis, publication, update, blog or landing page of the down loadable content you are referencing.

Attribution, copyright, and license information for media used by Global Freedom of Expression is available on our Credits page.

Case Analysis

Case Summary and Outcome

A freelance Burmese journalist, Aung Kyaw Naing (also known as “Par Gyi”), who reported on conflicts at the Thai border, was murdered by military officers while in their custody. The court ruled that the journalist had been murdered but no individual or party has been prosecuted for the incident.

“Global FoE could not identify official legal and government records on the case and information on the case was derived from secondary sources. Global FoE notes that media outlets may not provide complete information about this case. Additional information regarding legal matters will be updated as an official source becomes available.”


Facts

In October 2014, the Irrawaddy, an independent Burmese independent newspaper, reported that it had received a statement issued by the Burmese military which stated that Par Gyi had been arrested and taken into custody near Kyaikmayaw Township in the southeastern state of Mon on September 30, 2014. The journalist was reportedly covering a fight between the Burmese Armed Forces and a group of fighters from the Democratic Karen Benevolent Army (DKBA). According to the statement, on October 4, 2014, the journalist was shot death by the military officers while still in detention. His body was buried without his family’s notice at Shwe War Chong, a village outside Kyaikmayaw.

The forensic examination showed that the journalist had been shot five times, and that one of the shots had been fired from point blank range. His exhumed body showed signs of torture such as a cracked skull, broken ribs, and broken arms. The military statement claimed that Par Gyi had attempted to steal a gun and escape detention before the incident occurred. He had been arrested because the military wanted to interrogate him over the whereabouts of DKBA fighters. The statement also claimed that Par Gyi was believed to be a “communications captain” of the Klohtoobaw Karen Organization (KKO), the political wing of the DKBA. This affiliation has been denied.

Following the incident the Myanmar Human Rights Commission (MHRC), under the command of President Thein Sein, conducted an investigation. Its 16-page report mainly described the fighting between the two armed groups and devoted little attention to the details of the case.

On 27 November 2014, two military officers who had been alleged to have been involved in the murder were released unconditionally following a military trial held behind closed doors. Their release was made public only several months later, and the announcement of their release claimed that the officers had been acquitted under Section 71 of the Defence Service Act and Section 304 of the Criminal Code of Procedure. The verdict was approved by the commander of the Southeast Command, and the Defence Ministry stated that the actions taken against the officers had complied with the 2008 Constitution, the Code of Criminal Procedures, and the Military Act. Following the verdict, the MHRC recommended the case to be tried by a civilian court “for attainment of the fundamental rights of the citizens and also for transparency in the eyes of the public.”


Decision Overview

The case was heard by the Kyaikmayaw Township Court, a civilian court, from April to June 2015. It heard testimony from a motorbike driver who was the last person to have spoken to the journalist before his arrest. He recalled that Par Giy had just returned from a work trip and that he had asked the driver to take him to a bus station. Both of them were stopped by military officers when they passed a monastery, and Par Gyi was arrested. He stated that a military truck came to take the journalist away a few minutes later.

The Court then heard from the two military officers. They reportedly testified that Par Gyi asked Private Naing Lin Tun to go outside, and that a scuffle ensued. Lance Corporal Kyaw Kyaw Aung then arrived on the scene and shot the journalist from behind, killing him.

The Court ruled that the journalist had been murdered, but, as a civilian court, could not hold any military officers responsible for his death. Following the verdict, the journalist’s wife, Ma Thandar and her lawyer, Robert San Aung, announced that they would appeal. However, on March 21, 2016, the commander of the Kyaikmayaw Township Police Station reportedly sent a letter to Ma Thandar stating that the public prosecutor declared it to be “erroneous” to open a criminal case against military officers.


Decision Direction

Quick Info

Decision Direction indicates whether the decision expands or contracts expression based on an analysis of the case.

Contracts Expression

The proceedings are considered to have many flaws, starting with the acquittal of the two military officers in a closed trial in military courts. There were procedural irregularities in the civil case that followed. It was reported that Par Gyi’s wife had initially not been notified that the case was being tried by a civilian court. Furthermore, during the proceedings the public prosecutor of the court was transferred to another court, and the Court that heard the case had no jurisdiction over the military officers, and so only heard from the suspects as witnesses. Claims that the journalist had been involved with armed resistance fighters were not substantiated.

 

Global Perspective

Quick Info

Global Perspective demonstrates how the court’s decision was influenced by standards from one or many regions.

Table of Authorities

National standards, law or jurisprudence

  • Myan., The Unlawful Associations Act
  • Myan., Defence Service Act, Sect. 71
  • Myan., Criminal Code of Procedures, Sect. 304

Case Significance

Quick Info

Case significance refers to how influential the case is and how its significance changes over time.

This case did not set a binding or persuasive precedent either within or outside its jurisdiction. The significance of this case is undetermined at this point in time.

Official Case Documents

Reports, Analysis, and News Articles:


Have comments?

Let us know if you notice errors or if the case analysis needs revision.

Send Feedback