The establishment of the Scrutinizing Committee was cautiously welcomed by former prisoners of conscience, their representatives and international actors. The release of a large number of prisoners of conscience later that year and the inclusion of prominent representatives of former political prisoners on the Committee provided some reassurances to those who questioned the Scrutinizing Committee’s independence and transparency. However, it quickly became clear that the Scrutinizing Committee was deeply flawed and had serious shortcomings. No terms of reference, mandate or any information about the Committee’s procedures and activities was ever made publicly available, and no reports on its activities were ever published. Amnesty International’s interviews with former Committee members confirm that the Committee was not consulted prior to Presidential amnesties, and it was not able to provide input on whom to release. Indeed, despite repeated requests, some members of the former Committee were unable to obtain access to prisoners and other places of detention or review prison records, severely hindering their efforts to identify individuals imprisoned on politically motivated grounds who should be released. By the end of 2014 it was unclear whether the Scrutinizing Committee was even operational, leading to increasing national and international criticism.150 On 5 January 2015, President Thein Sein announced the reconstitution of a new Prisoners of Conscience Affairs Committee (the Committee), which was to comprise 28 members and which would “promptly [carry] out prisoners of conscience affairs at the grassroots level.”151 Human rights groups, including Amnesty International, expressed hopes that the new Committee would embark on genuine efforts to resolve the remaining cases of prisoners of conscience and other political prisoners. 152 However, as far as Amnesty International is aware, the Committee did not meet in 2015 and there has been no information made publicly available regarding its mandate, procedures or activities. Amnesty International wrote twice to the Chairman of the Committee asking for information, but received no reply. Indeed, in a meeting with the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission in December 2015, the Chairperson, when questioned on the new Committee and its activities, stated: “it does not work”.153 The lack of information and action appears to justify earlier concerns that the Committee had been reconstituted merely to deflect growing national and international criticism, rather than to resolve the issue of remaining political prisoners. 154 Despite these flaws, Amnesty International believes that a properly resourced Committee, whether a reconstitution of the Prisoners of Conscience Affairs Committee or a newly formed Committee, with a clear mandate and procedures, and able to operate independently and effectively, could be an important mechanism to address both short and long-term issues relating to political imprisonment. Amnesty International believes that any new or reconstituted Committee should not only review all cases where individuals have been deprived of their liberty solely for the peaceful exercise of their human rights, with a view to securing the release of the individuals concerned, but also all the cases of those currently on trial who may be arbitrarily imprisoned in the future, in order to ensure no new prisoners of conscience are imprisoned. It should also review the cases of all those who may have been subjected to politically motivated prosecutions and/or unfair trials, and determine whether the individual should be released or given a prompt and fair retrial which complies with international fair trial standards. See for example, Statement by Ms. Yanghee Lee, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, 69 th session of the General Assembly Third Committee Item 68 (c), 28 October 2014; and Radio Free Asia (RFA) “Myanmar Political Prisoners Panel Moving Slowly Amid Ongoing Arrests”, 10 June 2014, available at: http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/political-prisoners06102014165749.html, accessed 22 February 2015. 151 The Global New Light of Myanmar, “Prisoners of conscience affairs committee reconstituted”, President Office Notification No. (18/2015), 6 January 2015. 152 Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch Joint Open letter on the establishment of the Prisoners of Conscience Affairs Committee, (Index: ASA 16/0007/2015), 6 February 2015 and Burma/Myanmar’s Prisoners of Conscience Affairs Committee needs urgent reform by 23 organizations, 20 April 2015, available at: http://burmacampaign.org.uk/burmamyanmars-prisoners-of-conscience-affairs-committee-needsurgent-reform-22-organisations/, accessed 30 January 2016. 153 Amnesty International interview, Yangon, December 2015. 154 See Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch Press Release, Myanmar: Prisoner committee should not be a smokescreen, 6 February 2015. 150 NEW EXPRESSION MEETS OLD REPRESSION ENDING THE CYCLE OF POLITICAL ARRESTS AND IMPRISONMENT IN MYANMAR Amnesty International 47