Burma’s Constitution Likely to Dash Suu Kyi’s Presidential Hopes

A supporter holds up a portrait of opposition leader Aung Sun Suu Kyi on June 19, 2013, at a celebration of her 68th birthday outside the National League for Democracy headquarters in Rangoon. (Photo: JPaing / The Irrawaddy)

A supporter holds up a portrait of opposition leader Aung Sun Suu Kyi on June 19, 2013, at a celebration of her 68th birthday outside the National League for Democracy headquarters in Rangoon. (Photo: JPaing / The Irrawaddy)

RANGOON — Her adoring compatriots believe democracy champion Aung San Suu Kyi is destined to become Burma’s next president. But don’t bet on it.

A year ago, the Nobel Peace Prize winner was feted at home and abroad and flush from her National League for Democracy (NLD) party’s landslide wins in April 2012 by-elections, which swept her into Parliament.

Even a military-drafted Constitution designed to exclude her from the highest office seemed a surmountable hurdle.

Now the journey from political prisoner to president appears much less certain, even as her ambition is clearer than ever.

“I want to be president and I’m quite frank about it,” she told journalists at the World Economic Forum in the capital Naypyidaw on June 6.

But to emerge as president after a 2015 general election, Suu Kyi, 68, must overcome challenges that would daunt a less formidable political survivor.

She must convince a military-dominated Parliament to amend the Constitution.

Even if she can do that, and the Constitution can be amended in time, she could then face a voter backlash over her position on a violent and widening rift between her nation’s Buddhists and minority Muslims.

Her rare public expressions of support for Muslims, who have borne the brunt of waves of sectarian violence, put her in a politically fraught position in the Buddhist-majority country.

Some people wonder if the violence is being exploited by conservative opponents to chip away at her support.

To win power, she would also have to fend off two former generals who covet the top spot. The first is Shwe Mann, the influential speaker of Burma’s lower house.

The other is the popular incumbent Thein Sein, whose quasi-civilian government took power in March 2011 after nearly half a century of military rule and launched a series of political and economic reforms. Thein Sein might seek a second term despite health concerns.

No Easy Task

Suu Kyi’s most immediate problem is the Constitution.

It bars anyone married to a foreigner or who has children who are foreign citizens. Suu Kyi and her husband, the late British academic Michael Aris, had two children who are British.

“By all accounts it was drawn up with her in mind,” Andrew McLeod, a professor at Sydney Law School and deputy director of the Myanmar Constitutional Reform Project, said of the Constitution, drawn up under the former military junta.

Any constitutional amendment would require 75 percent support in Parliament—no easy task when the constitution also reserves a quarter of seats for the military.

Most of the rest of the members of Parliament are members of the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), created by the old junta and largely made up of retired military officers.

If passed by Parliament, an amendment must win more than half the vote in a referendum. Some analysts say there just isn’t enough time to do all that before the 2015 election.

But even if she can pull off the amendments, the reality of partisan politics could threaten Suu Kyi’s presidential hopes.

Suu Kyi, the daughter of the hero of the campaign for independence from Britain, faces pressure internationally to defend the persecuted, including Muslims. But when she does, her once-unassailable popularity is threatened.

At least 237 people have been killed in violence between Burma’s Buddhists and Muslims over the past year and about 150,000 people have been left homeless. Most of the victims have been stateless Rohingya Muslims in the western state of Arakan.

Groups such as the New York-based Human Rights Watch have condemned Suu Kyi for not using her moral authority to speak in defense of the Rohingya for fear of upsetting the Buddhist majority ahead of the election.

A 1982 law bars most Rohingya from citizenship and the government—and many ordinary Buddhists—consider them illegal immigrants from Bangladesh even though many can trace ancestry in Arakan State for generations.

Alienating Voters?

When asked about her failure to strongly condemn violence against the Rohingya, Suu Kyi said at the World Economic Forum she didn’t want to “aggravate the situation” by taking sides. But she has criticized a policy in Arakan State limiting Rohingya women to two children.

Suu Kyi has also said the government should re-examine the 1982 Citizenship Law. But that prompted the Daily Eleven newspaper to warn that any attempt by her to change the law would alienate voters and cost her party the next election.

For Suu Kyi the presidency would crown a remarkable life.

The military put her under house arrest in 1989 following the suppression of pro-democracy protests. The NLD swept a 1990 election by a landslide but the junta ignored the result and kept Suu Kyi under house arrest for 15 of the next 20 years.

She was released in November 2010 a week after a general election, widely regarded as rigged, swept the USDP to power. The NLD boycotted the election as undemocratic.

The European Union and United States have lifted or suspended most sanctions against Burma, although Washington warned they could be reimposed if it backtracked on reform.

Denying Suu Kyi a crack at the presidency could suggest to the world that Burma is doing just that, said McLeod. This could prompt Western companies to halt investment in one of Asia’s last frontier economies.

But Bertil Lintner, a veteran journalist and author of several books on Burma, said that was not likely.

“I think the foreign business community would prefer to have the USDP and the military in power,” he said. “For them, it means stability and continuity.”

Additional reporting by Soe Zeya Tun.

7 Responses to Burma’s Constitution Likely to Dash Suu Kyi’s Presidential Hopes

  1. “But Bertil Lintner, a veteran journalist and author of several books on Burma, said that was not likely.

    “I think the foreign business community would prefer to have the USDP and the military in power,” he said. “For them, it means stability and continuity.”

    Bertil lintner is expert in about Bama military thugs.

    It is urgent to scrap the Nargic 2008, fox than shwes’ casual killing right at once for DASSK presidential 2015 election right. US, EU, Japan and China have obligation to press cruel fox than shwe and puppet thein sien for DASSK eligibility of presidential candidate.
    All oversea business should be started after 2015 election because fox than shwe is now selling the faked lottery business tickets to US, EU, Japan with various kinds of faked shows in ethnics’ peace process and etc. Do not trust dying fox than shwe. Military or ex-military ruling in Burma must be ended forever. Aung thaung, shwe man, thein sein, ming aung hlaing are all opportunistic.

  2. One thing the people who called themselves ‘Burma experts’ have no where near scratched the surface when analyzing and commenting on Burmese politics was the nature of the Burmese mind. They rarely see the mental or metaphysics side of things but just the physical side and solid or substantial things. They do not have the concept of what destiny means to the Burmese. They neither have the capacity to read the signs and symbolism to understand what Burmese politics is all about. No so-called Burmese experts have ever come out to admit when their predictions are wrong. It’s more like the doctor who always write down on a sticky note ‘a girl’ when he told his expectant mother to be on her visit. If the mother got the boy after being told that she will have a ‘girl’ she will not bother to complain. However, if one was told that one would have a son and got a daughter instead, the doctor has already the sticky note to tell his patient that he has predicted just that. I’m sure they will love to have something like the 3D printer just to print out what they predict things to turn out.

  3. It is not the issue of what it (constitution) is dashing DASSK’s hopes, it is the issue of shattering all the hopes of all the citizens residing in the nation state, Myanmar/Burma.

    It is a “Killer Constitution”

    It is a constitution drafted by a despot whose only purpose is to entrench his power base for many years to come.

    We are in the same scenario somewhere in a time frame before a national uprising in 1988 which was eventually caused by a similar screw up constitution drafted in 1974 by former despot Gen Ne Win whose sole purpose was also to entrench his power base.

    To put in plain language, it is a “Killer Constitution” and the only eventual results it will produce might be something we don’t want to perceive as it might push us downhill, typical of Cambodia’s “Killing Fields”and turning later into failed state similar to Pakistan with a daily killings fashion. Just look at the communal strife happening now there !

    DASSK aired for her Presidential bid seems like reminding us to be proactive to amend it – maybe not the issue of presidential post.

    And if we are not proactive to amend this screw up Constitution, who knows what consequences we will have in hand, maybe few years down the line.
    It is a matter of time only.

    And we are really running out of time.

  4. I agree with Bertil Lintner concerning with the Western investments. For Aung San Suu Kyi’s presidential bid and prospect, I’m deeply concerned with her being who initiate an awful and inappropriate legacy to become a president by a citizen who married a foreign citizen and having sons and extended foreign citizens. Even, her father, our revered and most loved leader, could never agree with her if he were alive today.

    Drawing a law in a constitution with some one in mind is not always at fault and in her case, it’s even very necessary for the country to sealed all loopholes not such undesirable things could happen in future. What she did with her life must bare an appropriate consequence. I support her almost in all things, but not this one. She is wasting precious time, but she can definitely do a lot more for the country without such portfolio. I believe she will never become a President of Myanmar.

  5. When Lintner (the Swedish guerrilla man) says:
    “I think the foreign business community would prefer to have the USDP and the military in power ; for them, it means stability and continuity.”
    does he mean businessmen from China, Hong Kong, Singapore and Thailand?
    Those guys have strong ties to the USDP, the ex-junta guys and their business cronies as everyone knows. It’s all cosmetics, like skin-whitening creams that are so popular in Asia. Nothing fundamental really changes in Burma, only the marionettes changing clothes and Lintner should know that.

  6. In some countries people can get college credit credit for life experience. Surely Suu Kyi’s years under house arrest would help her to circumvent the Burmese Constitution prohibiting her from running for office because she has foreign born children and a British national (late) husband. She’s earned the chance more than any of the other candidates.

  7. Suu Kyi was able to shake Burma. But military still wants to cling on to power. Give the people a chance to elect their representatives to serve them. Personally, I want no soldier to serve me. I did not need them and I do not need them. I will not need them until I die.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available. Comments with external links in the body text will be deleted by moderators.