Of all the non-Burman ethnic nationalities, only the Wa are enjoying their right to self determination at the expense of others seeking similar ends, according to Legal Aid Network (LAN) paper which was released Thursday, 16 May.

“(T) hey govern their respective territory, form their own army and conduct their self-rule, without any embarrassment from successive ruling military regimes,” say the paper prepared by legal experts which include well-known human rights lawyer Aung Htoo, Josef Silverstein, Suzannah Linten, David Fisher, Simon Young and Venkat Iyer. “However, it may not be fair and just when the Wa alone enjoy it at the expense of other ethnic nationalities who are seeking for similar ends. “

The State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), that came to power during the 1988 democratic uprisings, it says, had entered a ceasefire with the United Wa State Party/United Wa State Army (UWSP/UWSA), formed by the Wa mutineers following their overthrow of the Communist Party of Burma (CPB), and provided a formal recognition of the existence of its territory, organization and army, “by violating laws in force.”

Scrutinizing the situation from the aspect of the Rule of Law, one of whose principles, is that equal situations must be treated equally, it argues the action of the Burmese government is discriminatory and against the Rule of Law. “Undisputed facts indicate that other non-Myanmar ethnic states such as Kachin, Chin, Shan, Arakan, Mon, Karen, Karenni etc …. (had) existed independently in history.”.. They should therefore “also have the right to enjoy equal status, at minimum, similar to Wa. Unfortunately, this is not taking place.

The right to self determination of other non-Myanmar ethnic nationalities have been consistently denied by successive military regimes although such right has been granted to Wa nationals in practice since May 19899.”

In view of this, it reasons that “the 2008 constitution and other organic laws need to be amended.”

The paper however not only dwells an legal as pects but also on actual situation on the ground. It points out to the fact that the UWSP/UWSA is being let off while Naypyitaw is still dealing with other ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) until they “have been annihilated — or, at minimum, neutralized — by the regime after the nationwide ceasefire. Hence, it means that the UWSA survives now at the expense of the other EAOs (but like them), it may also face a similar fate in the end.”

It sums up its argument this way: The government does not operate under the law but merely through it.