[First Last Name]
[Date Month Year]
The Rights of an Accused in Canonical Penal Procedures
INTRODUCTION: SUU KYI’S LIFE
Born in 1945 in Rangoon (now Yangon), Aung San Suu Kyi rose to political power in 2016 as the first state chancellor of Myanmar (formerly Burma) (Baker and Sheridan 1). She grew in a family with parents deeply involved in the politics of mid-twentieth century Burma. Her father, Bogyoke, founded the modern Burmese army in 1947 and negotiated Burmese independence. Her mother, Khin Kyi, was ambassador to India and Nepal in 1960.
Kyi graduated in Masters in Politics from the University of Oxford in 1968, after which she moved to New York. Her ability to speak four languages (Burmese, English, French, and Japanese) helped her get into the United Nations although she primarily worked on budgetary matters. When she returned to Burma in 1988, she helped organize the National League of Democracy and spoke against U Ne Win and his military during the 8888 Uprising, which resulted to her house arrest. The political tide turned on her favor in 2015 when NLD won the majority seat in the Burmese Parliament and appointed her State Chancellor.
KYI’S UNDERSTANDING OF DEMOCRACY IN BUDDHISM
Kyi (173, 174) identified her understanding of democracy with that of the people of Burma, which traditional culture founded upon Buddhism. From this viewpoint, democracy is, unlike the Western conception, not merely a form of government or a political system, but, more importantly, an “integrated social and ideological system” (173) based on human respect. Most Burmese simply wanted to proceed with their own business of earning an upright living with unfettered freedom and peace and without anxiety or fear.
In the Burmese democratic perspective, the leader (or traditionally, the “king”) is tasked to restore peace and justice when the Burmese society has deviated from its original pureness into a socio-moral anarchy (Kyi 169). This traditional ruler may either be of its three known forms. The Mahasammata is named leader (i.e. ruler) through a unanimous popular consent. The Khattiya is named so for its dominion over agricultural lands. The Raja is chosen the leader for winning the people’s affection through his observance of the dhamma, which comprised of virtue, justice, and the law (169-170). This ‘kingship’, however, provides the leader no divine right to govern the people and the country as he pleases.
The people expects the ‘king’ to follow the “Ten Duties of Kings”, the “Seven Safeguards against Decline”, the “Four Assistance of People”, and the guidance of several codes of conduct, namely: the “Twelve Practices of Rulers”, the “Six Attitudes of Leaders”, the “Eight Virtues of Kings” and the “Four Ways to Overcome Peril” (Kyi 170). These leadership guidelines, regardless, the popular consent of the Burmese people when choosing the Mahasammata constitutes the basis for Kyi’s contention that democracy is Asian, too.
THE 2016 SITUATION IN MYANMAR
When Kyi took over the Burmese civilian government as State Chancellor, which is equivalent to the functions of a prime minister, by popular vote in March 2016, Myanmar finally saw the promised reformist agenda. In June 2016, the Gems and Jewellery Entrepreneurs Association (GJEA) accused former mines minister U Myint Aung for embezzling money from the €93 million ($104 million) gem fund account, leaving only €7 million ($8 million) at the onset of the new government (“Former Burma Minister” n. p.). The said account was funded by one percent tax on official gems sales. The accusation came into public after the GJEA filed a complaint in May, naming government officials under former President U Thein Sein of the previous administration, including former President’s Office minister U Soe Thein.
The current impetus towards accountability of government officials from the previous administration is consistent with the five traditional Buddhist precepts of morality, which includes refraining from acts of theft, a trait that destroys popular trust and respect and must be followed by the former Burmese leadership and his officials (Kyi 171). Morality is one of the “Ten Duties of Kings” (170).
Aung denied the charge, admitting that the referred funds were allocated for corporate social responsibility initiatives with €12 million of which he confirmed as under the management of U Thein Sein and U Soe Thein (“Former Burma Minister” n. p.). He insisted that no money was lost from the fund due to graft. The Burmese people widely believed that the gem fund had been abused to enrich the Burmese military and the political elite. Whatever the truth was, the current democratic government under Kyi is a far cry from the 25-year totalitarian socialism under previous administrations (Kyi 169, 168).
BIAS AGAINST BUDDHISM
One of the popular prejudices against Buddhism consists of the idea that democracy is an Anglo-American and European construct, not Asian. From the Western cultural perspective, the personal king lacks the continuity of a ‘truly’ democratic leadership, which consists of “a body politic and a body natural” (170). However, this culturally conditioned perspective of the Buddhist concept of kingship or leadership failed to considered that for the Buddhist cultural and political practice, the king must be chosen by popular consent and is required to govern the country and the Burmese people according to just laws. In effect, the concept of elective democracy has never been alien to the traditional Burmese thought of Buddhist democracy.
The bias against the Buddhist perspective of democracy evidently centers on a failure to listen accurately to the unique cultural discourse of Buddhist democracy as understood among Burmese citizens. It operates under a presumption that democratic principles originated from Western political thought, failing to recognize that democratic principles are well-entrenched even in the sociocultural life of Asian nations and their citizenry. It presumes that democracy was an intellectual invention of the West when, in fact, it is a universal ideal of government that can be found in the fundamental values of Asian cultures and societies.
Having said that, however, does not presume that this universal ideation of democracy does not possess culturally condition variations even if the fundamental principles are practically consistent. For instance, while Western thoughts on democracy may essentially view it as form of government, Buddhist view centers on a democracy that is an integral part of the Burmese lives and a component of their culture and lifestyle. Thus, the bases of the bias against this Buddhist view of democracy were products of an erroneous understanding on the fundamentals of cultural democracy, which is prevalent among Asians, including Burma.
CONCLUSION
The Buddhist leadership ethics in Myanmar offers enumerable principles that people in the modern times around the world may emulate and seek guidance from for their own government’s ethical behavior. Kyi’s vision of a Buddhism-based democracy had gained popular support, which catapulted her party to an overwhelming political victory in the November 2015 elections and Kyi herself into the post of the State Chancellor under the new President. Apparently though, her brand of Buddhist democracy was not shared by some influential groups in the Burmese society, such as the monk-dominated party Ma Ba Tha, which ran against Kyi’s National League for Democracy during the elections (“Myanmar’s Hardline Monks” n. p.).
As a religion, Kyi’s Buddhism is largely pacifist, which can contribute uniquely towards peace around the world. This value-centered religion showed no essential problem when dealing with technological advancement like most religions of the world today. For Kyi, Burmese Buddhism, in fact, is even more liberal than biblical religions in the West, indicating an essential confidence that Burmese Buddhism can easily adapt to the changing tides of global high technology development and growing environment even more than the West if her observation can be assumed accurate.
However, her view of the non-liberalist nature of biblical religions in the West may as well be described also as narrow unless she is referring to the tightly authoritarian culture of Islam or her definition of liberalism is freedom of action without restraint. And yet the precepts of the traditional Buddhist morality alone, which recommend non-commission of killing, theft, adultery, falsehood, and indulgence in intoxicants (Kyi 171), are far from being without restraint. Perhaps Kyi’s liberalist perspective of Buddhism may as well be understood as liberalist within the limits of Buddhism’s morality. And yet, in this definition, such adherence to traditional morality cannot be understood contemporarily as liberal.
Moreover, except for Islam’s continued authoritarian culture, Christian religions today are far from being authoritarian in general. The pluralism in the United States’ Protestantism, for instance, cannot be understood apart from liberalism. Even the more traditional Catholic and Orthodox Christianity provide ample freedom of action to be authoritarianist. Instead, these forms of Christianity can be alike liberal Buddhism as Kyi described it, sounding like a liberalist traditionalism than total liberalism.
Works Cited
“Former Burma Minister Denies Embezzlement of $100 Million Gem Fund.” Asian
Correspondent 4 June 2016. Web. <https://asiancorrespondent.com/2016/06/former-burma-minister-denies-embezzlement-100-million-gem-fund/>
“Myanmar’s Hardline Monks Regroup after Political Change.” China News Asia 4 June 2016.
Web. < http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/myanmar-s-hardline-monks/2845314.html>
Baker, Elias and Phillip Sheridan. “Life of Aung San Suu Kyi.” No date. PDF file.
Kyi, Aung San Suu. “In Quest of Democracy.” (168-179). In: Freedom from Fear: Essays in
Honor of Bogyoke Aung San. No Date. PDF file.
