Constitutional change in Burma


Shewe Aung reports in the Democratic Voice of Burma that Aung San Suu Kyi and the ’88 Generation’ continue to work for Constitutional change in Burma.

Under attack is Article 436. Article 436 is a clause under Chapter XII (Amendment of the Constitution). Basically it states that for there to be any amendments to the 2008 constitution, there must be a 75 percent majority. As 25 percent of parliamentary seats are reserved for the military any changes are unlikely.

Ko Jimmy, leader of the 88 Generation Peace and Open Society explains:

‘To amend any of the articles in Constitution, Article 436 is the key,” he said. “Now, all the people in Burma, including ethnic people, are aiming towards democracy, ethnic equality and a federal union. Achieving these goals will be impossible without amending Article 436.’


2 thoughts on “Constitutional change in Burma

  1. Seeing this news, I discovered interesting paradoxes. I will write these in a couple of sentences.

    (a) Elite people are trying to eliminate elitism in Burmese society.
    (b) With her high regard to the military, Aung San Su Kyi is attempting to eradicate military dominance in Burma’s Constitution.

    (a) is impossible unless the ‘elite’ eliminate ‘being the elite’ in their minds. Praise, fame and honor are swiftly spoiling once-fighters for Democracy as a rising elite class. Whether these good-willed people can eliminate a classified social-tier ego from their minds, that is our next history.

    (b) is also impossible and my concern is its infinite regress. “High regard” to a special class is a moral justification not only limited to the present circumstances but also for infinite futures. This presentation, that is the main ideological method of opposition groups, asserts whether the military people act good or bad, these people must be highly regarded. The rationale is

    ” Military is the essential instrument for our democratic nation”.

    A gravely false hypothesis with contradictions, we can be amused to evaluate from the above sentence.

    We can refute (b) by direct quoting of Buddha’s “Brahmana Sutta” that said “A mercenary is someone who is just skilled in warfare. I (Buddha) can’t pay my regard to this warfare person as a Brahmin…; A priest is someone who is just skilled in priest craft. I can’t pay my regard to this priest-craft person as a Brahmin…”. Buddha needed to boldly claim this text among the military dictators and religious Popes, for the opposite approval of this doctrine will lead to infinite regress(ion) of a society for they will forever vindicate their “class welfare”.

    The same refutation can be performed by Bhramajala Sutra: ” The highly regarded one is none other than a reflection of your Phassa; it is just a form; it’s a fettered form”. If a form is taken by our desire as “some material or some essential”, our unquenchable lust for this reality-assumed form projects another looking-more and-more-real substances (Mind) to generate countless affirmative statements (Words) to support the morality of the “highly regarded”.

    With my due regard to Aung San Su Kyi, I like her to see what is seen as the seen, none other than that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s