Debbie Prasad, MAAPPSS // Jan 26, 2015
On my last blog post I discussed Myanmar’s candidacy in the EITI and how their participation in the organization was contrary to the argument that they joined the EITI as a means to attract foreign aid and a better world reputation through increased transparency. It’s been just a day since that post and I’m not so sure I can stand by what I said earlier…..
As I’ve been studying the extractive industry in Myanmar, I am seeing a hot mess. On the one hand, the government is passing new mining legislation and anti corruption laws, but on the other hand, they have passed the 2014 Electronic Transfers Law, which in essence limits public access to information. A key component of becoming an EITI member is transparency- as listed in the name! If there are laws which limit public access to information, coupled with only the Central Bank having the jurisdiction to publish annual fiscal reports, (which are not readily available, and unavailable online) how will Myanmar meet transparency goals?
In addition to all this, according to article 1.3 of the EITI Standard, Myanmar has pledged to refrain from obstructing freedom of expression in relation to the extraction of natural resources. This is not so much the case in Myanmar. The recent conflict in Letpadaungtaung has lacked government action on police and military brutality towards civil society in areas that are closely located to mining operations. To take this a step further, Myanmar military-owned companies and holding groups such as UMEHL (Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited) and MEC (Myanmar Economic Corporation) are heavily invested in the extractive sector. The recently established EITI goals of encouraging local reporting makes civil society an integral part of the picture, but in the case of Myanmar, this will prove difficult, when civil society is not given freedom to protest and express their concerns about extractive industries in the region. If the military is heavily invested in industry, how will civil society be able to express concerns without the fear of military coercion and violence? How will living in fear from the military allow civil society to work with other stakeholders to achieve goals to become an official EITI member? It’s high time for the government to mean what they say, and to take responsibility for allowing civil society to express their concerns freely.
Sources:
Thet Aung Lynn and Mari Oye “Natural Resources and Subnational Governments in Myanmar: Key Considerations For Wealth Sharing. June, 2014”
“Whistle Blowers Report Myanmar to Global Mining Body” http://www.elevenmyanmar.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8650:csos-report-govt-s-breach-of-intl-eiti-standard&catid=33&Itemid=356