4 4.9 With respect to the judiciary, reforming the rule of law in Myanmar has been a major focus of President U Thein Sein’s administration. The Government’s “Framework for Economic and Social Reforms” notes “the lack of effectiveness and predictability of the judiciary”. 608 The judicial system is widely considered to be “under-resourced, politically influenced and lacking in independence”. 609 However, reform will take a long time, and substantial resources – and not least – changes in attitude to the rule of law, starting from the bottom up, with attention to legal education. The legal education system has been eroded by decades of under-investment, and the legal profession greatly constrained by long-term political restrictions, leading to a major shortage of lawyers taking up cases. 610 Judicial independence in Myanmar to date has been essentially non-existent, 611 with judges accustomed to acting “as administrators rather than arbiters, basing decisions on state policy, instead of legal reasoning and the application of precedent”. 612 While there are basic principles of separation of powers provided by the Constitution, it is not complete. A 2013 report by the parliamentary Rule of Law and Stability Committee, led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, found “continued intervention by administrative officials in the judicial system”. 613 This indicates that structural changes will be required to put in place a rigorous separation of powers. There is no Ministry of Justice. Systemic corruption in the administration of justice is a major concern, manifesting itself through bribes, delays, and obstructions, 614 with a widespread local perception that the courts in Myanmar are corrupt and unfair. 615 As a result, many would “[resort] instead to local-level dispute resolution mechanisms they perceive to be more reliable, accessible and affordable”. 616 These local-level mechanisms generally involve village leaders and/or elders’ councils. Although the village leader has an obligation to inform the police about serious crimes, smaller issues and petty crimes can be settled by the village leader and/or the elders’ council, a small group of respected men in a village. If one party to the problem does not agree with the solution reached, they can take the matter to the township level, but this rarely happens because it is seen as being too expensive, considering both the administrative legal costs and bribes that would have to be paid. There is currently little in the form of a legal aid system in Myanmar, making it impossible for many to afford the time and cost commitments of using the court system. In conflict areas, the issue may be taken to the administration of the controlling armed group. 617 In addition to the courts, other bodies responsible for the administration of justice, including 608 Government of Myanmar, “Framework for Economic and Social Reform - Policy Priorities for 2012-2015 towards the Long-Term Goals of the National Comprehensive Development Plan (FESR)” (January 2013), para 116 609 OECD, “OECD Investment Policy Reviews: Myanmar 2014” (March 2014), pg. 27. 610 See: International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), “Right to Counsel: The Independence of Lawyers in Myanmar”, (Dec 2013) 611 Human Rights Resource Centre, “Rule of Law for Human Rights in ASEAN: A Baseline Study” (May 2011), pg. 163, citing Asian Legal Resource Centre, Amnesty International, “Myanmar: No Law At All – Human Rights Violations under Military Rule” (1992). 612 International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute, “The Rule of Law in Myanmar: Challenges and Prospects” (Dec 2012), pg. 56. 613 The Irrawaddy, “Interference in Judicial System Harming Burmese People: Lawmakers” (14 August 2013). 614 ICJ, “Right to Counsel: The Independence of Lawyers in Myanmar”, (Dec 2013) 615 See: USIP, “Burma/Myanmar Rule of Law Trip Report” (June 2013), pg. 5 and 34. 616 Ibid, pg. 5. 617 Ibid. 242 PAGE CHAPTER 4.9: STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT & GRIEVANCE MECHANISMS