Avoi 76nk UNGA seesion cu September 14-30 karlak tuah ding a si i, thaizing an awt cang lai. Myanmar ram aiawhtu ah Ralkap maw an cohlang hna lai, NUG dah, or cohlang lo veve dah an si lai timi zong an ceih chih lai. Credentials Committee tiah an thimmi ram 9 nih recommend an tuahmi cung ah tampi aa hngat lai.
UN nih NUG hi an cohlang awk a si tiah Legal opinion/ Expert minung 11 nih ca an chuahmi hi rel phu taktak a si. Pages 20 a sau i, a detail cu link ah rel khawh a si i, a biapimi point hi copy pasted ka tuah.
English a rel thiam lomi caah, a point te lawng langhter ning law,… A 1nk ah the Credentials Committee nihhin ralkap chuahpimi hi an cohlang khawh. Anmah phunglam he aa kalh viar ko bu ah. Asinain, UN phunglam, charter ningcun, Ralkap chuahpimi hi commitee nih an cohlang awk a si lo.
2nk ah Credentials Committee nih NUG hi an cohlang khawh. NUG cu mipi thimmi, CRPH nih an form mi Cozah a si caah dotla a si i, tlangpar hriamtlai he a dirti an si caah, control area zong an ngei ko caah, control area ngeih le ngeihlo kong hi buaipi ding a um lai lo. UNGA nih Sierra Leone (1996), Haiti (1991-94), and Honduras (2009). tbk ah an rak cohlangmi hna bantuk in, Cohlang tlak an si.
3nk ah Credentials Committee nihhin Ralkap lei siseh, NUG lei an si ah, an chuahpimi kong hi ceih piaklo in an um khawh. Cubantuk dirhmun a si sual ahcun, nikum ah rak cohlang cangmi Khaw Moe Tun nih a rian kha a peh rih lai tinak a si. Asinain, NUG lei chuahpimi an cohlang lonak ding sullam a um lo.
4nk ah Credentials Committee nihhin UN ah Myanamr thutdan/seat hi a ho hmanh tthut loin /vacant in chiah ding in biakhiahnak an tuah khawh. Asinain, UN member a simi, Myanamr ram hi, UN ah thutnak ngeilo in commitee nih an tuah awk a si lo. Cubantuk in an membership an suspend piak hna ahcun, Myanmar ram kong i ithlaknak ah a dawn chin chin hna lai.
First, the Credentials Committee could recommend acceptance of the credentials of the military junta. Even by its own standards the coup was illegal as a violation of the 2008 Constitution and was a direct result of the military’s refusal to accept the result of the November 2020 election. Subsequently, the military junta has failed to provide security and law and order to large areas of the country and, in the ethnic nationality areas, the armed conflict has intensified and spread.
The junta’s human rights record has been deplorable and rather than protecting its own people, the state security forces have been the primary source of threats to them, with the violations committed amounting to crimes against humanity. Its refusal to heed UN and regional calls for political dialogue, reform and a return to democracy is consistent with the military repression that the people of Myanmar have had to endure for decades. Since 1 February 2021, the military junta has consistently violated the fundamental principles and peremptory norms of international human rights law and has shown a blatant disregard for the Purposes and Principles of the UN Charter. Based on these considerations the Credentials Committee should not recommend to the UN General Assembly that the credentials issued by the Myanmar military junta be accepted.
52. Second, the Credentials Committee could recommend acceptance of the credentials of the NUG. The NUG was established by elected members of parliament following the November 2020 election which was won overwhelmingly by the NLD and associated parties,110 and the elected members of the parliament subsequently established and appointed the NUG. The NUG is the best representation of the will of the Myanmar people. While the NUG does not have effective territorial control over the entire territory of Myanmar, neither does the junta. The NUG does possess security forces and has links with ethnic armed groups that have territorial control in many parts of the country.
Moreover, total effective territorial control should not be a determining criterion for deciding credentials. Furthermore, the NUG’s founding charter commits it to uphold international standards of human rights and democratic practice, including the rights of minorities. Based on these considerations the Credentials Committee should recommend to the UN General Assembly that the credentials of the representatives of the NUG be accepted. The Credentials Committee has made similar decisions in relation to Liberia (1990-97), Sierra Leone (1996), Haiti (1991-94), and Honduras (2009).
53. Third, the Credentials Committee could defer a decision on the credentials. If the Credentials Committee is unable to decide on competing credentials submitted by the military junta and the NUG, then it could recommend to the General Assembly that it defer its decision on credentials, on the understanding that Myanmar’s current Permanent Representative to the UN in New York, Kyaw Moe Tun, continue to represent Myanmar provisionally at the General Assembly. While this outcome would ensure that the military junta does not represent Myanmar at the UN, the issue of the country’s accreditation to the General Assembly would remain open, which is not desirable as it would have implications for how it is able to represent itself internationally.
The Credentials Committee should only defer the decision if it can provide well-founded reasons why it has not been able to accept the credentials of the NUG. The Credentials Committee has made similar decisions in relation to Afghanistan (1997-2001), Guinea (2009-10) and Madagascar (2009) and Guinea-Bissau (2012).
54. Fourth, the Credentials Committee could decide to leave the seat of Myanmar vacant at the UN General Assembly. It could do this either by deferring its decision on credentials, explicitly on the understanding that no one will represent Myanmar at the Assembly’s 76th session (as in the case of Cambodia in 1997), or by deciding not to accept any credentials submitted for Myanmar (as in the case of South Africa during the apartheid regime, albeit in that case without any competing credentials). In the case of Cambodia, talks were underway to resolve the country’s political crisis which led to the formation of a national government.
In Myanmar, as stated above, there are no prospects of dialogue and therefore no real justification for leaving the seat vacant. Moreover, there are serious consequences to such a decision as it would effectively mean that Myanmar is unable to be represented in the UN General Assembly. That would be a de facto suspension of Myanmar’s membership not effected in accordance with the UN Charter’s provisions for the suspension of the membership of Member States. It would also seriously undermine the chances of reaching a political solution to the crisis. The Credentials Committee should not recommend that the seat of Myanmar be left vacant at the UN General Assembly. Credit: Zasang Cinzah