On Sunday, prominent Muslim lawyer, and legal adviser to Aung San Suu Kyi, U Ko Ni, was fatally shot by an alleged assassin. Melissa Crouch reflects on the life and legacy of Myanmar’s legal voice of conscience.
This week people in Myanmar were forced to confront the kind of country that it is becoming. On 29 January 2017, U Ko Ni, a prominent lawyer and legal advisor, was tragically assassinated at Yangon International Airport. He was returning from a trip to Indonesia with the Information Minister U Pe Myint. U Ko Ni was outspoken in his advocacy for law reform and was also a well-known Muslim in majority-Buddhist Myanmar.
His untimely death is an unspeakable loss for the country.
Ko Ni was born near Katha in Saigang Division in 1953, and was the son of a Muslim father from India and a Burmese mother. This was not unusual for the time. In the early 1900s, his father came to Burma through his work with the British Indian army. Burma at the time was considered to be part of the British Indian colonial empire. His mother was a Burmese Buddhist, although she herself was also the daughter of a Muslim father and a Buddhist mother.
In the town where he grew up, he recalls a small Muslim community, of perhaps 180 families or 1,000 people. He completed his schooling in Katha and passed his matriculation by the early 1970s. His schooling was in Burmese (not English) because this was largely during the socialist period.
When I asked him why he decided to become a lawyer, his response was that his mother told him to become one because he was good at arguing. His great oratory skills were clearly developing at an early age. He also met a lawyer in Katha who he recalls was a true gentleman and who had earned the respect of many people in town. He became interested in studying law because of this man and the encouragement of his mother.
Ko Ni entered Yangon University in the early 1970s. He resided at Ava Hall, one of the dormitories on campus for students. He completed a four-year BA degree and then a one year LLB course, as was the common path to study law at the time. There were about 180 students in his BA course, and about 50-60 of them were women. His favourite subjects were civil law and evidence. He said that his favourite professor was U Tin Ohn, the Head of Department.
When asked about whether particular professors were an inspiration to him, he recalls two kinds of teachers. There were the permanent staff, most of them women, who were admired by the students for their dedication and tireless service to their students. The other type of lecturers were part-time and included many famous lawyers, retired judges or retired officials from the Attorney General’s Office who gave up their time to lecture to students.
U Ko Ni was in his fourth year of study when the socialist government introduced the 1974 Constitution. He recalls the 1972 referendum to approve the draft socialist constitution. From his memory, most of the students objected to the draft Constitution that would see the country shift from parliamentary democracy to a one-party, unicameral parliament and socialist-military state. On the day of voting he remembers that polling booths were set up around the campus with a black box with a cross for ‘no’ votes, and a white box for ‘yes’ votes. Many of the students put their votes in the black box. Yet by the evening, the socialist regime had announced that most of the students had voted in favour of the 1974 Constitution. This was clearly false, he said.
When he was contemplating what to do after his degree, a university teacher suggested he work for U Ko Yu, a famous criminal lawyer and a former lecturer at the university. In the late 1970s, he did just that and recalls the strong influence U Ko Yu had on him. He learnt two things from him – how to teach and how to be a good lawyer.
His chamber master U Ko Yu contributed to the Bar Council statement regarding the 1988 democracy uprisings and he was at one time a Central Executive Committee member of the National League for Democracy. I never asked U Ko Ni how much his own political ideas had been influenced by the example of U Ko Yu. U Ko Ni became qualified as a Higher Grade Pleader and became a member of the Yangon Bar Association in 1978. During that time U Ko Ni also worked as a teacher at the Yangon University of Distance Education. He recalls learning closely from other senior lawyers at the time such as U Maung Maung Aye.
Before 1988, he moved from U Ko Yu’s office and established his own small chambers in his house, mostly focusing on civil law. In 1994, he established Laurel Law Firm with seven lawyers. He would become a highly popular Advocate (senior lawyer) and chamber master himself. In 2014, he told me that he had supervised over 100 chambers students.
We talked only briefly about 1988, the pro-democracy uprising that was brutally crushed by the military in Myanmar. He did once mention his involvement in a political party at the time, which was later banned by the military regime. He mentioned that he had young children at the time and felt the responsibility as a father of having to earn a living and care for his family.
U Ko Ni was a frequent commentator on legal affairs in the media, and lectured to a range of audiences from young lawyers to senior members of parliament. He was outspoken on a wide range of legal issues from the need for constitutional change, the right to peaceful protest, to the thorny issue of hate speech. He also part of group of lawyers who demonstrated to protest the government’s proposed sale of the High Court and the Police Commissioners Office that was rumoured to be turned into a hotel.
He was even of the view that the parliament could suspend section 59(f) of the Constitution, the provision that is regarded as barring Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from becoming president. This was one demonstration of his deep understanding of constitutional issues from the 1950s, when a provision of the 1947 Constitution was suspended.
Yet he could never escape the fact that he was Muslim. Since 2012, anti-Muslim violence had spread from Rakhine State to many major towns in Myanmar. A new radical Buddhist movement had emerged, inciting further anti-Muslim sentiment. It was in this context that things became increasingly difficult and politicised for many Muslims in Myanmar, including for U Ko Ni.
In February 2014, U Ko Ni was prevented from giving a public speech at an NLD event in North Okkalapa township, after monks demanded that he and another Muslim lawyer should not be allowed to speak.
In 2015, in the lead-up to the historic elections in Myanmar, things took a turn for the worse for the Muslim community, particularly for the Rohingya in Rakhine State. White card holders (those with ‘temporary’ identity cards) were barred from running for political office or from voting. Many white card holders are Muslim. This ran contrary to political practice, as white card holders had been allowed to vote and run for public office in the 1990 elections and the 2010 elections. U Ko Ni was critical of the Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling on this matter.
In addition, U Ko Ni was outspoken against the NLD for what he perceived to be its decision not to field any Muslim candidates and not to appoint any Muslim candidates to the Central Executive Committee. I recall the deep frustration and despair with which he spoke about this issue at the time. He was under no illusions that this may have been because of the intimidation tactics of radical Buddhist monks.
While the international media have often labelled him as a ‘Muslim lawyer’ and as a legal advisor for the National League for Democracy, he needs to be remembered as so much more than that. I often recall him emphasising that he saw himself as independent, and he became more emphatic about this as the NLD caved to pressures of radical Buddhist groups in recent years.
U Ko Ni was a regular at our Australia-Myanmar Constitutional Democracy Project events on constitutionalism from 2013 to the present. The learning, however, was very much mutual. We are deeply indebted to the time he gave us and his expertise added immeasurably to our workshops on constitutional democracy. His patience and support of our endeavours were sincerely appreciated.
Over the years, he leant support to a range of lawyers’ organisations and advocacy causes. He more recently become involved in the Myanmar Muslim Lawyers Association, although it seems that he did so only out of a sense of necessity and the need to defend the basic rights of Muslims.
In August 2016, U Ko Ni was particularly concerned when I spoke to him on the phone about the current situation. I had never heard him talk in such pessimistic tones before, his concern for people’s safety, human rights and security paramount. He warned that it was not safe for locals to be talking in public forums about constitutional or human rights issues, but encouraged us to continue to do so.
In November 2016, my colleagues and I visited U Ko Ni at his new office. He was so proud to welcome us and we discussed many constitutional issues at great length that day.
It has been a privilege and honour to sit at the feet of great legal minds such as U Ko Ni. More than once he would go out of his way to buy books for me that he knew I was looking for.
There are many other things that can be said about U Ko Ni. He was also a devoted family man, husband, father and grandfather. He was not only concerned about the future for his children, but also for the future of Myanmar as a country.
When preparing the book Islam and the State in Myanmar, I briefly profiled several prominent Myanmar Muslim figures of the past who made substantial contributions to the history of Burma, such as U Raschid (who served in several government positions during the period of parliamentary democracy 1948-1962 before being imprisoned twice for several years during the socialist era) and U Razak (who was assassinated along with General Aung San on 19 July 1947).
I did not mention contemporary figures such as U Ko Ni, despite him becoming a key voice in the period of democratisation in Myanmar. It seems far too early to have to write a tribute for a man who should have been a voice for legal reform in Myanmar for many years to come.
U Ko Ni needs to be remembered alongside some of the great legal minds and Muslim public figures in Myanmar’s history. He was a respected and prominent legal advisor who knew the personal risks that speaking out entails in a majority-Buddhist country emerging from decades of military rule.
Now more than ever, Myanmar needs more voices like U Ko Ni.
Dr Melissa Crouch, Senior Lecturer, University of New South Wales. This tribute is based on audio recordings and field notes of in-depth interviews with U Ko Ni over the past few years.
A sad and terrible thing. … It will be a test of the Burmese prosecutorial and judicial systems to see if they can put together a truly thorough investigation and arrive at a fully vetted narrative about responsibility. Or will it be like Thailand and Somchai Neelaphaicit, who had a similar role in Thai society, and whose death has been a matter of the crassest official failures to pursue.
0
0
Htuu Lou Rae Den, A pupil of Him on Facebook;
Sayar U Ko Ni, Supreme Court lawyer and legal advisor to Nation League for Democracy was fatally shot in the head at point-blank range by a lone gun man at Yangon International Airport on Sunday at 4.55 pm local time. To me U Ko Ni was a senior colleague who I consulted for legal matters, with who I worked side by side for religious freedom and minority rights and who I respected for his intellect, fearlessness, humility, wisdom and integrity. U Ko Ni was spearheading the amendment of the current Constitution of Myanmar which was designed by the military dictatorship and was a strong voice advocating for religious minority rights. U Ko Ni was also a Muslim himself. Surely, he had many foes who despised him for his work and the values he stood for. The motivation behind the murder is still unclear, yet it isn’t too hard to guess why he was targeted.
But whatever the goals those responsible for Saya’s untimely departure was trying to achieve, one thing is for certain. If there is anything you could learn from history of political movements, you can’t kill a movement by killing one of the active individuals taking a leadership role in that movement. This would only make the movement stronger, more united and more formidable. And this is exactly will what happen in the immediate aftermath of our loss of Saya U Ko Ni. The gun shot that took Saya’s life has provoked the country, for what he fearlessly stood for when he was alive were the same goals he shared with the majority of the citizens: amendment of the Constitution, full democratic reform, equal rights and justice. His opponents have provoked the public. They will face an opposition which is larger in number, tougher, fearless, more effective and unstoppable. Our loss of Saya U Ko Ni has not set us back from amendment of the Constitution, our struggle for democracy, our fight for justice and equality but they have awaken thousands of “Ko Ni”s among us with their minds set on bringing full democracy, justice and equal rights for all regardless of creed and ethnicity. Those responsible for Saya’s murder have made a strategic mistake. Tough times are ahead of them. Not us.
0
0
Thank you Ms Couch. A lasting tribute to U Ko Ni as a political moderate who believe entirely in ROL.
I am very much afraid that from now on the radical arm of Muslim Kala within Myanmar will be manifesting “freedom is nothing left to loose” using this senseless act as example.
This incident will hopefully led to sympathy with U Ko Ni sentiment of ROL instead of more acts against.
0
0
DID KO NI SIGN HIS OWN DEATH WARRANT?
A constitutional law expert, Ko Ni said in late 2016: If the military still focuses on protecting its interests, it will be impossible to change any part of the (current) constitution within parliament. That’s why writing a new one is the best way to pursue a democratic constitution.
Rogue elements are desperate and fear that Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party will again sweep the 2017 by-elections, scheduled for 1 April, to fill 18 vacant parliamentary seats. The growing number of seats could lead to a new push for a more democratic constitution, much like the liberal charter of 1947.
There’s another conspiracy to link the cowardly murder to the *simmering religious conflict*. Ko Ni was a Burmese first. He was an advocate for religious tolerance. Above all, he was passionate about fighting for a more democratic constitution for the people of Burma.
Ko Ni was a vocal critic of the controversial *military-dominated* 2008 constitution. He was riding the tiger’s back.
Earlier reports of death threats against him by *nationalist monks* are just a con. This was not a hate crime. It was the work of powers-that-be now running scared of by upcoming bye-elections in April.
Dark forces are using *fake* monks as an *Opposition* against Suu, *the Muslim lover*.
The Muslim card is a useful tool to keep Suu Kyi off-balance and muzzled. If she out for justice the *paid* monks will unleash violent mobs against the current government with massive street protests. A good military ploy.
The thugs are now attacking *Kala/foreigner* Ko Ni on social media. Burmese Muslims are convenient scapegoats caught in the power struggle.
How intriguing the gunman knew of Ko Ni’s schedule? To top that a photographer was present to document the crime that went viral. There’s no sign of the only witness to the execution.
The alleged killer was caught with two handguns – in a country where air rifle was hard to get.
The people of Burma demand justice. The world is watching.
You can kill the dreamer but not the dream.
0
0
Indeed a great loss for Myanmar’s democratization process.
0
0
Greatly appreciated your tribute to U Ko Ni. I am an Australian formerly Burmese who practicing Islam now domicile in Melbourne. Both of my grandfather were Bengali from British – India and grandmother were Burmese alike U Ko Ni. We became half caste due to history and not our fault at all. But they did not recognize full citizen as you know. U Ko Ni is Burmese constitutional expert of 1947, 1974 and 2008 who reveled military’s conspiracies in 2008 constitute that they drew.
U Ko Ni is the only one competent to advised to Aung Sun Su Kyi (NLD) about the constitution that barred her to be President. U Ko Ni is the one who sought the loophole and advised to Su Kyi to amend the constitution that she became a “State Councilor” on top of the president legally now. Despite you and other foreigners writing personal tribute for him, I didn’t see or heard any of Su Kyi’s personal tribute to U Ko Ni is extremely shameful and absolute sad over this assassinate tragic.
0
0
My heartfelt sorrow and condolences for the untimely death of U Ko Ni and thanks for publishing a personal tribute.
As reported in The Irrawaddy, it is interesting to note “A crowd gathered on 34th Street with some shouting to “storm the apartment” and others urging burning down the houses of Chinese residents, although the suspect’s ethnicity is unconfirmed.”
However, since all life matters, it is at best dubious that New Mandala failed to publish any news or show any sympathy for the death of a dozen Myanmar security forces in Maungdaw, Rakhine state, at the hands of islamic terrorists.
The fact that U Ko Ni is a muslim has been highlighted several times. However, when muslim leaders / educators were assassinated by islamic terrorists in Maungdaw for not participating in jihadi terror, practically no body shed a tear. The muslims killed or abducted in Maungdaw are highlighted below.
December 22 – A Bengali muslim librarian was killed after he gave interview to the media.
December 24 – A muslim Bengali office clerk from Maungdaw Township, Yaydwinkyun village administrator’s office was killed
December 26 – A Bengali muslim man called Sirazuhut was similarly killed
December 29 – A Bengali muslim man and head of 100 family village was abducted by six islamic terrorists
Thus, the above selective and discriminatory publications by New Mandala raises the question – Is it for real human rights and peace or it is mouth piece for sinister overlords and paymasters.
0
0
According to the police the killer Kyi Linn confessed that he was hired by Myint Swe to kill Ko Ni. Several men named Myint Swe (at least four) were rumoured to be arrested and interrogated by police.
One of them was exposed as a former Burmese Army Captain who was once in a Burmese prison together with killer Kyi Linn and his mate Aung Soe for the crime of smuggling ancient Buddha statues out of Burma to Thailand.
According to ex-convict Aung Soe, Myint Swe once tried to recruit him for a similar hit but he refused. Aung Soe also claimed that Myint Swe has clandestine connections to DKBA (Democratic Karen Buddhist Army) which basically is turning into the Buddhist militia of Shin Wirathu the well-known nationalist Buddhist monk and a leader of Ma-Ba-Tha (The extremist nationalist Buddhist monks group).
The civil war between Buddhists and Muslims in Burma has just started on last Sunday 29 January 2017.
0
0
A touch of a too much credit to the Wirathu gang which is in fact more deeply rooted and virulent in lower Burma than in Mandalay. Although the monks of Gene Sharp’s education camps at the border regions since 1990’s are well organised and vocal and effective, this was a precise military style execution for maximal “Beat the chicken to scare the monkey” effect. There is only one organization that can do so in Burma.
As for Buddhist/ Muslim all out war everyone has been toting or rooting or hoping for, the success in that direction in Burma since 2011 initiation of that effort has been minimal. And indeed not likely to escalate unless there is worsening economic situation in the country.
0
0
Well said Melissa.. and it was such a personal tribute to him along with other courageous Muslim leaders contributed in the country of Myanmar and I believe this must be well acknowledged and respectfully recognised. Thanks for writing this piece of your supportive hands. Cheers!
0
0