2010 Election Report of FDB (ENG Version)

8/7/2019 2010 Election Report of FDB (ENG Version)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2010-election-report-of-fdb-eng-version 1/92



BURMA’S 2010BURMA’S 2010BURMA’S 2010BURMA’S 2010

ELECTIONS:ELECTIONS:ELECTIONS:ELECTIONS:

A DEVASTATINGA DEVASTATINGA DEVASTATINGA DEVASTATING

FRAUDFRAUDFRAUDFRAUD





2010 ELECTIONS

PUBLISHED BY FORUM FOR DEMOCRACY IN BURMA (FDB)

LAYOUT DESIGN

Information Committee and Documentation Committee

Forum for Democracy in Burma

DISTRIBUTION


P.O Box (142)

Mae Sot PO, Tak - 63110

Thailand

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.fdburma.org

Contents

Acknowledgement

Objective

Prelude

Chapter I The absence of secret voting

Chapter II Illegal votes

Chapter III Illegal invalid votes absent votes and lost votes

Chapter IV Frauds regarding early votes

Chapter V Incidents of not being able to vote

Chapter VI Percentage of the voting

Chapter VII The right of observing and media coverage for the elections

Chapter VIII Voices from election contested parties and individual candidates



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter IX Positions of National League for Democracy and other 90 election won parties

Chapter X Positions of armed opposition groups

Chapter XI Reactions and positions of the international community

Chapter XII General

Conclusion

Appendix (A)

Appendix (B)

Supplement (1)

Supplement (2)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Forum for Democracy in Burma (FDB) would like to thank members and working groups

of FDB for carrying out data collecting, documentation and research for this report. FDB also

would like to thank people, political parties, individual candidates, media groups, internet

websites which effectively shared and informed about election frauds and other people who

helped in various ways to make this report possible.


January 31, 2011



2010 ELECTIONS


OBJECTIVE

This report is published:

Regarding the elections

1. To expose the military regime’s abuse of power and violations of laws

2. To expose the biased and unfair nature of the Election Commission

3. To expose the intimidation towards people, and contestant political parties committed by the

military regime, the Election Commission, Union Solidarity and Development Party and all levels

of authorities

4. To expose the un-free and unfairness of the 2010 elections

5. To expose the military regime’s “Arbitrary attempts to legitimate and elongate the militarism in

Burma.”

6. For democratic forces from inside and outside of Burma and the international community to

firmly and systematically oppose the 2010 election results.



2010 ELECTIONS


PRELUDE

Negatives of the 2010 elections

The military regime in Burma held the elections on the 7th of November 2010. 37 political parties

including Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) and National Unity Party (NUP) contested in

the elections.

From the elections, 330 seats for People’s Parliament, 168 seats for National Parliament, 665

seats for States and Regions Parliament; in total 1,163 seats were elected.

However, on the 16th of September 2010, the Union Election Commission (UEC) issued

notifications 99/2010, 100/2010, 101/2010, 102/2010 and 103/2010 and partially excluded 300 village

groups in 32 townships of 5 states, without desire of actual voters, reasoning that “they are in no

position to host free and fair elections” and “where security reasons prevent the vote from being free and

fair.1”

1 NLM (17 Sep 10) Union Election Commission issues Notification No. 103/2010, NLM (17 Sep 10) Union Election Commission

issues Notification No. 102/2010, NLM (17 Sep 10) NLM Union Election Commission issues Notification No. 101/2010, NLM (17

Sep 10) Union Election Commission issues Notification No.100/2010, NLM (17 Sep 10) Union Election Commission issues

Notification No. 99/2010



2010 ELECTIONS


Thus, the elections were held in designated areas as planned. However, one question remains;

can democracy be automatically brought just by holding elections?

For people of Burma, there was a flash memory about a historical event; the 1990 elections.

The military regime with the name of State Law and Order Restoration Council had to hold the

1990 elections because of the 8888 pro-democracy uprising.

International community recognized the elections as relatively free and fair. From the 1990

elections which were held on May 27, the National League for Democracy (NLD) won 396 seats out of

485 seats (NLD: 392 seats, Patriot Veterans: 1 seat and National Democracy Party: 3 seats). Shan

Nationalities Democracy party won 23 seats and became the second party to win most seats. However,

after the elections the regime refused to accept the election results.

The 1990 election results still did not get any chance to be in the process of building a

democratic Burma.

Thus, it can be said that democracy will be automatically brought by just holding elections.

The 2010 elections were far below the essence and standards compared to the 1990 elections.

Everything such as the establishment of UEC, electoral laws, directives and notifications were

very chaotic and numerous cunning frauds occurred before and during the elections.

When indicated by 16 international standards, which any elections should meet with, the 2010

elections were far below the level of the standards of free and fair elections.

The Basic Standards for a Free and Fair Election

The Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance published “International Electoral

Standards” in 2002 based on human rights treaties, accords and conventions, which international

governments ratified, including the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In this book, the following 16 basic norms for free and fair elections regarding international

electoral standards were detailed as 16 different chapters;

1. THE BASES OF INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED ELECTORAL STANDARDS

2. STRUCTURING THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK

3. THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM

4. BOUNDARY DELIMITATION, DISTRICTING OR DEFINING BOUNDARIES OF ELECTORAL UNITS

5. THE RIGHT TO ELECT AND TO BE ELECTED



2010 ELECTIONS


6. ELECTORAL MANAGEMENT BODIES

7. VOTER REGISTRATION AND VOTER REGISTERS

8. BALLOT ACCESS FOR POLITICAL PARTIES AND CANDIDATES

9. DEMOCRATIC ELECTORAL CAMPAIGNS

10. MEDIA ACCESS AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

11. CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND EXPENDITURE

12. BALLOTING

13. COUNTING AND TABULATING VOTES

14. ROLE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES AND CANDIDATES

15. ELECTORAL OBSERVERS

16. COMPLIANCE WITH AND ENFORCEMENT OF ELECTORAL LAW

Any elections of any country can be indicated by using those above mentioned standards to tell

whether they are free or fair.

In those international standards, pre-election, on Election Day and post-election standards are

already included to indicate whether the elections are free or fair.

The elections in Burma held on the 7th of November 2010 can be seen as un-free and unfair

elections with full of election frauds and intimidations by looking at the incidents which occurred duringthe election process and by comparing with those international standards.

Pre-Election Report

Forum for Democracy in Burma (FDB) released a pre-election report on 1st

November 2010

predicting that the elections, held on 7 November 2010, by the military regime in Burma, would neither

be free, fair nor democratic. The report, titled; “The Elections with Full of Cunning Frauds” looks at

violations that occurred in the months leading to the elections in relation to international standards. It

clearly details how the military regime staged the elections to legitimatize and elongate the military ruleand also highlights the numerous unfair electoral laws that were put in to place, extensive flaws in the

system, lack of media freedom, the use of early votes, and the disadvantages faced by political parties

and candidates who were not USDP party members.

What happened during the Elections?



2010 ELECTIONS


As mentioned in the pre-election report, there were numerous accounts of election fraud, vote

rigging and cases where citizens were forced to cast an early vote. The Election Commission showed

clear signs of favoring the USDP throughout the pre-election period. In the aftermath of the election

when votes were counted, there was further rigging and consequently a victory by the USDP.

Forum for Democracy in Burma has collected and documented election related violations, and

explains in this report with 12 chapters to expose that the 2010 elections were the elections in which

people of Burma were intimidated, threatened and faced numerous cunning frauds committed by the

military regime, USDP, UEC and all levels of authorities.

Chapter I

THE ABSENCE OF SECRET VOTING

All people of Burma knew that the military regime’s 2010 elections were not only designed to

activate the 2008 Constitution, but also set-up elections designed and prepared for USDP to win.

By analyzing the elections, the free and fairness of an election can highlight the reality of that

election. The lack of secret voting is the best proof to highlight that elections were anything but free and

fair. The interference of voting, the situation of polling stations and the presence of authorities inside

and near polling stations are the main facts affecting the secret voting.

The records of the absence of secret voting

When observing the 2010 elections to see whether there was secret voting, the followings were

found out:

1. A resident informed about an incident in which Ma Nwe Nwe Oo from 2nd Ward, North Okkapala

Township was followed by a polling station official when she was inside No. 23 polling station

opened at No. 29 primary school in 2nd

Ward to vote, as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


To whom it may concern 7/11/2010

Ma Nwe Nwe Oo from 2nd Ward, North Okkapala Township was followed by a femalepolling station official when she was inside No. 23 polling station opened at No. 29 primary

school in 2nd

Ward to vote so she was annoyed. Other voters were followed and watched as

well. Instead of voting secretly behind covered voting places, voters were instructed to vote in

groups and watched to see what party they voted for.

There were 29 polling stations in 2nd Ward, North Okkalapa Township and very few

voters came to vote.

Report by a resident from North Okkalapa about the absence of secret voting (020_fdb02)

2. A resident from Twante Township, Rangoon Division also informed about the absence of secret

voting by threats of authorities as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


To whom it may concern 7/11/2010

In Pokanbay village of Adon village group in Twante Township, U Myint Aye, an official

of Village Peace and Development Council made door to door visits, distributed voting tokens

and urged residents to mark2 next to lion symbol (USDP symbol). He also warned residents that

he would not be responsible for any consequences if residents would not mark next to USDP

symbol. He also told residents to mark in front of him or come to the polling station. Hethreatened people that if they wouldn’t mark in front of him or wouldn’t come to the polling

station, he would find out exactly who and those people would suffer from consequences.

Twante

Report by a resident from Twante about the absence of secret voting (018_fdb02)

3. A resident from South Dagon Myo Thit reported the absence of secret voting due to the

interference of USDP members by the permission of the chief of the polling station as follows:

2Translator’s note: marking ( √ ) next to a party symbol means voting for that party



2010 ELECTIONS


To whom it may concern

70 Ward, South Dagon Myo Thit 7/11/2010

At the polling station 4 for which Maung Win was assigned as the chief of polling station,

two female persons urged voters to vote for USDP, and they voted those voting cards

themselves.

Report by a resident from South Dagon Township about the absence of secret voting

(019_fdb02)

4. Residents from Myo Thit, Zaiganai south and north, Hanthawaddy, Sein Tun, Hinthagon,

Thanappin, Zaypine, Payazay, Mon Sanpya, Inwa, Bahosi, Oatha, Oathathiri and Socialist wards

of Pegu reported about the absence of secret voting in some polling stations of some wards in

Pegu as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


Records of the absence of secret voting

At the polling station No. 1 of the constituency 1 opened at Alinyaung school, ward

authorities from 14th

Ward, pretended to help voters but actually they checked people’s voting

cards and asked them where they marked or what they voted for. They also annoyed voters byurging them to vote for USDP and threatened them if they would not vote for USDP, they would

face consequences.

The other fact is that in Inwa, Oatha and Oathathiri wards, ward authorities made door

to door visits and distributed USDP membership cards and pamphlets about the biographies of

USDP candidates to contest from the constituency. In Alinyaung 1 and 2 and Mon Sanpya wards,

ward authorities urged residents to fill in USDP membership application forms and took photos

of residents (for membership cards) with free of charge.



2010 ELECTIONS


At the polling station opened at Basic Education High School No. 6 in Kyitawgon

(Nantawyar), the headmistress of the school who was also the chief of the polling station urged

parents of students to vote for USDP. Such kind of pressure towards voters was seen in many

other places.

In Myo Thit, Zaiganai south and north, Hanthawaddy, Sein Tun, Hinthagon, Thanappin,

Zaypine, Payazay, Mon Sanpya, Inwa, Bahosi, Oatha, Oathathiri and Socialist wards of Pegu,

there were many incidents more or less affecting the absence of secret voting.

Report by a resident from Pegu about the absence of secret voting (022_fdb05)

The polling station survey performed by FDB (021_fdb05)

At the polling station No. 1 of the constituency 1 opened at Alinyaung school, ward authorities

from 14th

Ward, pretended as helping voters but actually they checked the voting cards of people and

asked them where they marked or what they voted for. They also annoyed voters by urging them to

vote for USDP and threatened them if they would not vote for USDP, they would face consequences.

At the polling station opened at Basic Education High School No. 6 in Kyitawgon (Nantawyar),

the headmistress of the school who was also the chief of the polling station urged parents of students to

vote for USDP. (021_fdb05)

Not only the data and documents collected by FDB exposed the absence of secret voting, but

media statements also disclosed the absence of secret voting as following:

5. U Aung Myo Oo, contested for People’s Parliament representing Difference and Peace Party,

stated about the psychological insecurity of voters regarding voting in polling stations in

Kyimyindine Township in Rangoon Division, and which was published by Mizzama News Agency

on the 7th

of November as follows:

“Regarding the voting, as far as I know, there should be a separate voting room, but now it’s not

separated. Voting places were just separated by curtains like in internet cafes. Polling station

officials such as those who make the voting lists or those who distribute the voting cards were



2010 ELECTIONS


sitting very close to the voting places. So, the voting is not secret at all. For voters, they might

feel insecure like being watched by someone from behind? Who will see if they vote for a certain

political party? So, they have worries. When voters have that kind of worries when they vote,

that’s not good,” he said.

6. On the 7th of November 2010, Mizzima News Agency broadcasted what residents of Bilin, Mon

State stated about security troops guarding polling stations in Bilin as follows:

“Polling stations were guarded by local authorities, election commission officials, teachers,

members of Red Cross, militia and reserved fire brigade. In Bilin, USDP and NUP are the only

contestants.”

“I marked a cross on the voting card.3

First, I thought I would not go there to vote. But I was

worried about consequences because they (authorities) have lists of eligible voters and they

might know who voted and who didn’t. So, I went there and voted because I was worried.” A

resident from Bilin said to Mizzima.

7. Even though Electoral Laws restricted political parties from campaigning, Daw Bao Ja, the

representative for National Democratic Force (NDF), for Pyithu Hluttaw, stated that USDP

officials violated all these restrictions. These laws prevented contestants from wearing any

clothing resembling political slogans or symbols and posting posters within 500 yards of polling

stations. This was broadcasted from VOA on the 7th

of November 2010 as follows:

“Authorities and officials were wearing those campaign shirts. And campaign posters were

everywhere, about 10 yards from polling stations. Sign posts were also there. In most of the

polling stations, people were forced to vote for USDP by marking next to USDP sign on already

distributed voting tokens. So, by seeing those, it is very obvious that what they (authorities) did is

not honest at all.”

“At every corner, there were security guards. Some were wearing reserved fire brigade uniforms.

Voting places were uncovered. People could see each other and anyone could peek at a who

voted for what. I also heard that provided ball pens were not good and when voters marked on

voting cards with those, they had to mark two or three times, and most of those votes became

invalid votes with the reason of being messy.”

8. Voice of America broadcasted on the 7th

November about an incident in Myaypon, Arakan State,

which was the hardest hit area during Cyclone Giri, in which a USDP representative campaigned

inside the polling station encouraging individuals to vote for him.

“In Panga village, the USDP Township Secretary stationed there, whose brother is the Polling

Station Chief official and the headmaster of the village school, campaigned inside the polling

station and forcefully urged people to vote for the USDP. Our polling station representative

asked him to stop but it was useless. Likewise, in Taungpaw Ward of Myaypon Township, the

eligible voter list was just posted. Very few voters were only able to vote and there were many

3Translator’s note: Marking (X) next to a party symbol on voting cards means voting against that party



2010 ELECTIONS


people left to vote. Taungpaw Ward is a Muslim dominated ward but they were very likely to

vote for the Arakan party. What I think is that they (authorities) know that so they were trying to

delay the voting in purpose.”

In the afternoon, in Nazi Ward in Sittwe in which most of residents are Muslims, USDP organizer

interfered the voting inside the polling station and eventually the chief of polling station refused to take

responsibilities as the polling station official.

“In the polling station, there was a representative. However, U Ba Tin from the USDP was there

as well. He took voting cards from the people and marked them in support of the USDP. Voters were not

allowed to vote even though they were in the polling station. When our representative tried to prevent

him from forcing people to vote for him, he was violently threatened. Thus, our representative, U Than

Wai, complained about that to the chief of the polling station. The chief of polling station couldn’t do

anything and outside of the polling station, there were many Muslim people in chaotic situation so the

chief of the polling station said that he couldn’t handle the polling station anymore.”

Chapter II

ILLEGAL VOTES

Using illegal votes is one form of fraud from numerous ways of frauds in 2010 elections. Illegal

votes include illegal extra votes, votes from underage people, votes with the names of deceased people,

votes from names that do not exist, votes by threats, votes received with money, and stolen votes.



2010 ELECTIONS


From the election surveys collected by Forum for Democracy in Burma, it was found out that

there were votes on behalf of voters which were defined illegal.

Union Election Commission’s frauds collected by FDB (038_fdb02)

Over Extra Votes

In some constituencies, there were more votes than actual eligible voters. It can be clearly seen

in the corrections of the military regime’s newspapers. The military regime’s voice The Mirror newspaper

had to publish corrections regarding the election results due to the huge amount of extra votes;

Corrections

-in the appendix page (2) of the newspaper dated November 13, 2010, a correction was made to No. 37;

from 152614 voters to 205785 voters and instead of 100% votes, 74.16% in Kyaukpadaung constituency

-in the appendix page (25) of the newspaper dated November 15, 2010, a correction was made to No.

187; from 26065 voters to 37886 voters and instead of 104.28% votes; 71.74% in Amn No. 1 constituency

-in the appendix page (28) of the newspaper dated November 15, 2010,a correction was made to No. 235;



2010 ELECTIONS


from 1082445 voters to 108197 voters and instead of 6.51%; 65.09% in South Dagon Myo Thit No. 1

constituency

-in the appendix page (28) of the newspaper dated November 15, 2010, a correction was made to No.

236; from 867956 voters to 102864 voters and instead of 8.15%; 68.79% in South Dagon Myo Thit No. 2

constituency

Corrections

-in the appendix page (17) of the newspaper dated November 15, 2010, a correction was made to No. 45;

from 74645 voters to 76535 voters and instead of 102.09%; 99.57% in Taungoo No. 1 constituency -in the appendix page (17) of the newspaper dated November 15, 2010, a correction was made to No. 46;

from 84537 voters to 82647 voters and instead of 85.64%; 87.60% in Taungoo No. 2 constituency

Vote stealing/ rigging

Vote rigging includes the over adding of a higher percentage than the actual voter turnout, over

counting of actual voters, voting again and again, changing of votes from one party to another, andvoting of one person on behalf of other voters.

It was found out that most of polling station officials were USDP members. That clearly assisted

USDP for vote rigging easily. The followings incidents are some examples of illegal votes:

Incident 1

When Ko ---- went to vote at the polling station No. 9 opened at primary school No. 27 in North

Okkalapa Township, Rangoon Division, he voted twice because he did not know that every voter had to

vote for 3 times for 3 parliaments. When he was told by others, he went back inside the polling station

to complete his voting, he saw that someone already signed for him for the 3rd signature. When he

complained about that, polling station authorities retorted that he signed himself the third signature,

and drove him out of the polling station.Incident 2

A resident from Bauthabyaykan village in Thanlyin Township, Rangoon Division, informed that U

Win Sein, USDP organizer of the village, voted over 100 votes.



2010 ELECTIONS


In No. 1 polling station of Bauthabyaykan village, U Win Sein, father of U Khin Aung Shwe who was

organized by U T member of USDP, voted over 100 votes. Another anonymous person also voted over

100 votes.

(Letter from a resident of Bauthabyaykan village: typed copy of the original)

Incident 3

The followings are the evidences of a couple voted in No. 5 polling station opened at Shweku

primary school and No. 1 polling station of Khayangon 2nd

Ward, Zegon Township:

The evidence of voters voted in two constituencies (034_fdb02)

Incident 4

Most of the polling station officials of No. 2 polling station, Titud constituency, Prome, are

members of USDP. Thet Lwin Oo, Pa Pa Win, May Thinza Win, Wa Wa Oo, Phyu Phyu Aung and Leah



2010 ELECTIONS


Leah Khaing are members of USDP. At that polling station, Ko Aye Min Soe voted three times for USDP

for Region and State voting box.

Incident 5

It was reported that at the polling station of Tagondine village, Pegu Division, U Khin Maung Yee

voted for 5 other voters.

Underage Vote

There were many reports stating about USDP’s illegal collection and using of underage votes. A

witness reported about the voting of Maung Thiha Zaw, age 17, in Thadebin constituency, Prome

Township, Pegu Division, as follows:

Thadebin Constituency

U Kyaw Win, an official of Ward Peace and Development Council of Thadebin, provided a USDP

membership card to Maung Thiha Zaw, age 17 (DOB June 9, 1993), son of U Khin and Daw Moe Moe

Khaing, and added him on the eligible voter list. Maung Thiha Zaw went to the polling station and voted

because he received a voting token.

Incident of underage voting in Pegu Division (035_fdb02)

Threatened to vote

At the whole country level, there were many occasions in which levels of authorities; village,

ward, township, division peace and development and council officials, threatened people to vote for

USDP.

During the first week of November, U Myint Aye, an official of 19 Ward of South Dagon

Township, made door to door visits and threatened people to go to voting stations and vote on the

Election Day, and if not they would face consequences of not voting (punishments) after the elections.

Furthermore, officials of No. 1 polling station opened at High School No. 4 of Ywabae, Prome

Township, distributed voting cards on which codes numbers were written to know who voted for what

party. That is also a way of threatening people to vote for USDP.



2010 ELECTIONS


No. 1 polling station of Ywabae (location: High School No. 4)

Special Occasion 1

At the polling station No. 1, voters were provided with code written voting cards. The polling station

representative from Union of Myanmar Federation of National Politics questioned the polling station

chief U Min Than about that. U Min Than replied that, “I don’t know about that and it’s not my

responsibility. People who were responsible for distributing voting cards did that mistakenly.”

Number of code written voting cards: 400 (4 books)

The incident of the distribution of code written voting cards in Prome, Pegu Division (036_fdb02)

A witness stated that at the polling station No. 2 of Zaytan, Padaung Township, Pegu Division,

when two votes were needed for National Parliament voting box, invalid votes were added as votes for

USDP and some votes were added to USDP votes, at the Township Election Commission office. In that

polling station, most of the polling station officials were USDP members and they urged voters to vote

for USDP by pointing out to mark next to USDP’s Lion symbol. Furthermore, it was also found out that

they marked (voted) for USDP on behalf of some voters.





2010 ELECTIONS


The result list of NUP and USDP representatives published as supplement (r) of the regime’s newspaper

dated December 15 2010 (024_fdb06)

Incident 2

In a polling station in western part of Pegu Division, it was found out that many voting cards had

marks out of the designated blocks instead of inside the blocks. Under electoral laws, those votes must

be recognized as invalid votes but polling station officials and authorities made those votes as valid

votes for USDP.

At the polling station No. 2 of Moteshae village which I observed, there was no information or

education about how to vote but instead polling station officials yelled and scolded at voters

who came to vote. Thus, people voted without knowing the purpose of the voting and how to

vote. It was seen that most of people who voted did it with fear of what would happen if they

did not. The polling station was located in a middle of an open space and voters were

threatened to vote as mandatory voting. Most of the early votes were for lion (USDP). Thus the

elections were one-sided and unfair. When votes were observed, there were many occasions inwhich invalid votes with marks (√) over the blocks were counted as valid votes.

Report from a resident of Moteshae village in western Pegu Division (025_fdb06)

Incident 3

Residents of Natlin and Zegon townships in Pegu Division reported the making of invalid votes to

valid votes for USDP by local authorities as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


By the instruction of U Myint Than, the Chairperson of Tainthae village group Peace and Development

Council, village authorities U Aye Myint and U Win Myint, village teacher U Win Zaw, and U Myint Swe

and some other authorities forcefully collected early votes from about 15 underage (from 14 to 16 years

old) people. They also provided national IDs for those teenagers reasoning that Immigration office

granted national IDs for them. While votes were counting after the polling station was closed, teacher U

Win Zaw collected and kept invalid votes without showing anyone else. A female teacher saw that U Win

Zaw turned a valid vote for the Democratic party as invalid vote and she could not prevent that. At No. 1

polling station of Myoma Ward, officials accepted that Daw Than Khin voted for 3 times.

At a polling station in Zegon Township, even though some votes for USDP were with marks (V)

instead of (√), those votes were still added as USDP votes. Another vote for USDP was with a mark (\)

instead of (√) and even though a representative from the Democratic party complained about that,

polling station officials added that as a valid vote reasoning that the voter was a left-hander.

220 invalid votes from Hlapagyin village were turned into valid votes and added to NUP votes. U

Khin Hlaing, the Chairperson of election commission and U Aung Myine Tun, member of USDP, made

door to door visits and threatened those who did not go vote to vote for USDP. A voter stated that

people were told lies, that USDP was Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, so many voters voted for USDP.

Report of residents about frauds in Natalin and Zegon townships, Pegu Division (026_fdb06)



2010 ELECTIONS


Incident 4

According to Pyithu Hluttaw Electoral Law, Article 59 (i), entering inside polling stations without

permission during the elections is a violation and can be charged under the Chapter 13 of Election

Offenses and Penalties.

Because the polling station officials let people, who were not responsible for voting process, be

inside the polling station, U Sein Hlaing, individual representative for Pyithu Hluttaw from Moenyo

Township, Pegu Division officially submitted a complaint to township election commission stating that

the voting result cannot be accepted as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


U Sein Hlaing, individual representative for Pyithu Hluttaw

Moenyo, Pegu Division

No. 1/ Plan/ Individual-99/ 2010

Date: November 9, 2010

Chairperson

Township Election Commission

Moenyo

Re: : Submission to not being able to accept the election result of Moenyo Township

1. I, U Sein Hlaing, contested in the elections from Moenyo Township, in accordance with election

rules and regulations, with the believe that polling stations in villages and wards in Moenyo

Township would be free and fair as the government officially promised to both people inside

Burma and the international community.

2. However, in some polling stations in Moenyo Township, some election commission officials and

polling station officials did not follow election rules and regulations by letting people, who were

not responsible for the voting process, to take responsibilities of the voting process. I cannot

accept such inappropriate interference and the violations of electoral laws. Thus, by referringreports of voters and self-witnesses, I submitted the complaint stating not being able to accept

the election results.

U Sein Hlaing

Individual Representative contested for Pyithu Hluttaw

Moenyo Township

Copies to

District Election Commission, Tharawaddy

Chairperson, Township Peace and Development Council, Moenyo

Chairperson, National Unity Party, Moenyo BranchChairperson, Union Solidarity and Development Party, Moenyo Branch

88 Generation Student Youths (Union of Myanmar)

Voters to know the reality based on their experiences

Office Copy

The complaint of U Sein Hlaing, individual representative for Pyithu Hluttaw from Moenyo, Pegu Division

(027_fdb06)

Incident 5

A member of All Mon Region Democratic Party (AMRDP) stated that polling station officials of

Mudon village constituency, Chaungzon Township, Mon State, committed violations of electoral lawsand which was broadcasted by VOA on the 7th


In Mudon village constituency, Chaungzon Township, Mon State, about 500 votes for AMRDP

disappeared. A party member said, “The disappearing means the amount or number of votes AMRDP.

That was in Mudon village. 500 eligible voters from Mudon village, Chaungzon Township, who would

definitely vote for AMRDP, were missing. What I think is that polling station officials are responsible for

that.”

Chapter IV



2010 ELECTIONS


FRAUDS REGARDING EARLY VOTES

Chapter 8 of FDB’s pre-election report “The Elections with Full of Cunning Frauds”, titled;

“Forced Early Votes,” draws attention to the tactics employed by the military regime in order to secure

their election victory, highlighted was their use of forced pre voting.

During the pre-election period, the military regime collected early votes in many places by using

numerous ways of intimidations. Early votes must be collected in accordance with the statements of

Article (54) of their own directive 1/2020 Pyithu Hluttaw Electoral Law, Chapter X, Early Votes from

voters outside of constituencies.

However, in reality, the military regime used numerous illegal ways in collecting early votes from

ineligible voters for early votes since pre-election period. When early votes were collected, the military

regime used numerous cunning ways to get early votes for USDP.

When the military regime used frauds and intimidation for winning of the proxy party USDP, it

was found out that the use of early votes was the worst.

When early votes were collected, headmasters or headmistresses were required to vote on

behalf of all teachers in their schools. All employees from numerous government departments were

assigned to be on excursions in groups or forced to be on trips in groups purposefully set up to be

eligible for early votes. Furthermore, the regime forced family members to cast early votes on behalf of other family members on trips, instructed chiefs of government departments to cast early votes for

everyone in their departments and ordered military units to cast early votes including family members.

Thus, it is very clear that early votes collected during the pre-election period were not legal or

valid votes. After FDB released the pre-election report, from new documents collected by FDB, it was

found out that there were many incidents in which government employees were forced to cast early

votes. The following cases can be taken as some examples from documents collected by FDB:

On the 3rd

of November 2010, in Hlaing constituency in Rangoon Division, it was informed that

local authorities threatened U Tun Sein, a government employee from the constituency, to vote for

USDP candidate for Pyithu Hluttaw Dr. Win Myint.

On the 2nd of November 2010, in Kyaukse constituency, Mandalay Division, U Thaung, the

current Minister of Science and Technological Ministry and USDP candidate, forced teachers fromKyaukse Technological Institute to cast early votes for him.

The form of the collection of illegal early votes (014_fdb04)



2010 ELECTIONS


USDP and local authorities collected illegal early votes in wards and villages as well. A resident of

Dawpon Township reported the collection of early votes for USDP on 25th

of September in Dawpon

Township, Rangoon as follows:

U Win Naing, the Secretary of Dawpon USDP and the owner of Gandawin Restaurant, USDP organizer (1)

U Myint Swe, organizer (2) U Han Thein, organizer (3) U Kyaw Naing and some other USDP members;

Naing Lin Aung, Hla Aye and Hla Moe Kyaw collected early votes from Bo Teza, Bo Min Yaung, BoSuanpat, Bo Aung Kyaw, Bo Tun Myat, Metta, Thisa, Min Nanda and Bo La Yaung Streets in Bo Tun Zan

Ward of Dawpon Township, Rangoon, starting from the middle of September 2010. They collected early

votes disguising it as census. For example, on September 17, 2010, they visited households in Bo Teza

Street, checked household lists and asked breadwinners to sign on behalf of every eligible voter over the

age of 18. They told to residents such things as, “If you want to travel, you can go anywhere. Your

signature is for the elections and you don’t need to vote on the Election Day.” They also told to some

families such as, “If you sign here, you don’t need to go vote on the Election Day. You don’t need to skip

work to vote.” The interesting point is that those USDP members avoided family members of NLD to

collect early votes.

Report of a resident of Dawpon regarding the collection of illegal early votes (001_fdb01)

A resident from South Okkalapa Township reported about the forced collection of early votes

for U Aung Thein Lin, the then Rangoon Mayor, on 16 October 2010, in South Okkalapa Township as

follows:



2010 ELECTIONS




2010 ELECTIONS


In the 5th Ward, South Okkapala Township, Rangoon, to educate people about the elections, USDP

displayed where to mark on the voting card and how to vote. During that time, USDP members also

urged people to cast their votes as early votes. U Aung Than Oo, uncle of U Aung Kyaw Moe who

contested in the elections for State and Region Parliament from South Okkapala Township, is a member

of Ward Peace and Development Council. The ward council members campaigned for USDP by

pretending for educating for voting. Some USDP members had been appointed as local authorities to be

able to misuse authority to help USDP for the elections. Similar occasions were seen in many other

townships. Around 7pm on Saturday evening (on the 6th

November?), U Aung Than Oo, U Aung Htwe, Ko

Zaw Hein Aung and two other people made door to door visits and did the above mentioned activities.

When they displayed how to vote, they crossed (on voting cards) in blocks for other parties (voting

against) and marked (√) in the block for USDP. Furthermore, they verbally urged people, “Vote for Uncle

Aung Thein Lin,” and forced people to cast their votes as early votes.

During visits, residents would say things like, “No responsible people at home right now” “What party

are you from” “To be honest, I’m totally not interested in the elections” “My grandmother has shaky

hands so it’s better not to mark on voting cards (not to vote)” “What will I get if I vote for your party?”

so they did not face any big difficulties. However, when they visited the house dealing with illegal ‘Chae’

lottery, the dealer confessed that the household needed to vote for USDP because local authorities

provided protection for the illegal business so even they did not want to vote for USDP they would haveto. Municipal and USDP used land to deter fire and posted a signboard stating “USDP Property. No

Trespassing.” Furthermore, they build shops and rented for funding. So, businesspeople in the ward

cannot really avoid dealing with USDP.

Report from a South Okkalapa resident regarding the collection of illegal early votes for U Aung Thein Lin

from USDP (002_fdb01)

A resident from the military compound of Light Battalion 139 reported the collection of early

votes from military families of LB 139 in Tanyin Township on the 5th




2010 ELECTIONS


Capt. Soe Naing Oo, the Director of the Municipal office near the market in Tanyin, instructed

employees from his office to cast early votes on the 5th of November. He also ordered and threatened

the employees such as, “Check next to the Lion. I will be watching you when you do that and do not care

about any organization or anyone. You will be fired if you do not do as I told you.”

Report of a resident regarding the collection of early votes from family members of LB 139 in Tanyin

Township (003_fdb01)

People from LB 139 were not only forced to cast their votes as early votes but Col. Myat Soe, the

Vice-Chairperson of District Election Commission, arbitrarily committed vote rigging. A resident reported

the incident as follows:

7/11/2010

Soldiers and family members of LB 139, former LB 90 near Kyikekhauk pagoda in Tanyin Township, had

to cast their votes as early votes on the 5th of November 2011. After the collection of early votes, Col.

Myat Soe, the Vice-Chairperson of District Election Commission, opened envelopes and checked the

early votes. When he saw many votes against USDP, he took 100 voting cards from the Commission

office and marked on those as voting for USDP.

Report about the change of early votes of family members from LB 139 in Tanyin Township (004_fdb01)



2010 ELECTIONS


The following is the statement regarding the illegal collection of early votes from Bagan Myo

Thit, Nyaung-U District, Mandalay Division on the 1st

of November 2010.

Starting from the 1st of November 2010, in Bagan Myo Thit, Nyaung-U District, Mandalay Division,

chairpersons of Ward Peace and Development Councils collected early votes from residents. It was

informed that breadwinners voted on behalf of all household members and had to vote for USDP.

In Bagan and Nyaung-U constituencies, USDP and NUP were the only contestants for the elections.

Residents reported that USDP campaigned in surrounding villages and threatened residents to vote for

USDP. Also in 2008 Constitutional Referendum, residents were threatened to vote for the referendum.

Report of a resident from Nyaung-U District, Mandalay Division regarding the illegal collection of early

votes (005_fdb01)

By observing the above mentioned reports, it is obvious that USDP representatives who were

also officials of SPDC abused power by forcing and threatening government employees under their

supervision to cast early votes for USDP.

Furthermore, during the counting after the closing time of polling stations on the Election Day,

they committed obvious violations of electoral laws regarding early votes even in the public scene.

Article 48 (A) and (D) Counting of Vote and Declaring Confirmation of Chapter X, of the military

regime’s Pyithu Hluttaw Electoral Law issued on the 8th

of March 2010 states as follows:

48. (a) The Ward or Village-tract Sub-commission shall hand over the advance ballot papers already

casted under Sub-sections (b) and (c) of Section 45 and Section 46 and the list of those who have voted

with advance ballot papers in connection with the various polling booths to the respective polling booth

officer before the opening of the polling booths on election day.



2010 ELECTIONS


(d) The Township Sub-commissions shall count the advance ballot papers already casted under Sub-

section (a) of Section 45and Section 47 which they have received before 4 p.m. in the presence of Hluttaw

candidates or their election agents and the public and shall combine the respective voting list schedules

for each Hluttaw constituency in the manner prescribed.

It was found out that the Union Election Commission and levels of election commissions violated

the electoral laws issued by the military regime by vote rigging and other means of fraud in counting and

changing the results by making USDP candidates from the losers to winners.

Residents from Yaykyigon village, Oatsawe group, Prome Township, Pegu Division reported the

frauds in their village regarding early votes as follows:

Yaykyigon village, Oatsawe group, Prome Township At 10am on the 5th of November 2010

When Ko Khin Lat, a voter from the village, came and reported about the early vote frauds at the

residence of Ko Tun Min Zaw from Yaykyigon village, U Kyaw Kyaw Aung, Union of Myanmar Federation

of National Politics representative from Prome Township for Amyotha Hluttaw, U Aung Naing Oo,

representative for Pyithu Hluttaw and U Ye Lwin, District organizer of the party went to the residence

and found that Ko Tun Min Zaw was alone counting early votes that were not sealed in envelopes, which

is not in accordance with electoral procedures so they took some photos as evidence.

Report about early vote fraud in Yaykyigon village (006_fdb02)



2010 ELECTIONS


Photo evidences of early vote fraud in Yaykyigon village (007/008_fdb02)

The following is the report about one of the worst in history of 2010 elections. Authorities from

Wettikan District, Prome Township, Pegu Division made tradeoffs the early votes illegally collected.



2010 ELECTIONS


Innwin village group, Wettikan District, Prome Township (Innwin village + Kanbae village)

At the polling station in that district, Pwa Gyi (aka) Aung Zaw Myint, the Chairperson of Innwin village

Peace and Development Council, and Nay Lin Tun, the clerk of the village council illegally collected 150

early votes with the help of Ko Nge Gyi, member of Kanbae village Peace and Development Council. Two

polling station representatives from Union of Myanmar Federation of National Politics complained

about the 150 early votes. Then, the authorities said that they would only take 50 out of 150 early votes

into account and make the rest 100 votes invalid and requested the two representatives not to submit

the case to anywhere. However, after the agreement, the authorities ordered about 15 villagers to mark

on those 100 votes for USDP and added them back into the list. It was reported that Ko Nge Gyi alone

marked on 6 early voting cards.

Report about the tradeoffs of early votes in Prome Township (009_fdb02)

Totally not in accordance with the electoral laws, authorities from Prome Township changed

early votes collected one month before the elections into early votes collected as two days before the

elections. They also made those early votes as votes for USDP. The following is the report about the

incident:



2010 ELECTIONS


The important announcement regarding early votes political parties was that early votes collected

between October 27, 2010 and November 4, 2010 were cancelled as invalid votes. Only early votes

collected on the 5th and 6th could be recognized as valid early votes. Village and Ward election

commissions also knew about that announcement so they changed early votes from October 27 and

November 4 as early votes collected on the 5th

and 6th

of November 2010. U Maung Khin, Chairperson of

peace and development council, U Hla Min, Chairperson of Ward/Village Election Commission and Daw

Aye Aye Thin, secretary of the election commission, refused any accusation and claimed that early votes

were collected on the 5th

and 6th

of November. However, what they did was obviously a violation of

electoral laws. As early votes, 650 early votes from Kyaung Oh Ward alone were added into a polling

station. Early votes were added as votes for USDP. Furthermore, authorities helped voters to cast their

votes even on the 7th

of November; the Election Day.

Report about the violation of electoral laws regarding arbitrary adding of early votes (010_fdb02)

Residents from Moulmein, Paung, Kyikemayaw, Chaungzon, Mudon, and Thanbyuzayat

townships in Mon State reported how USDP collected early votes as follows:

All polling station chiefs were required to report to designated election commissions why they did notget enough early votes if their polling station received less than 50 early votes. USDP also collected early

votes creepily and arbitrarily. Early votes were collected mainly from government employees and people

related to illegal businesses such as illegal Che lottery, black market, human trafficking, illegal Thai-

phone business, massage, KTV and some company employees. Even though early vote casters were told

to vote freely for what they wanted, those people had to cast their early votes in front of collectors.

Furthermore, as an example, in an incident at a polling station, if there were 1000 eligible voters, 350

early votes had to be collected from those voters. Over 50% of early vote collectors were members or

related to USDP.

Letter from residents of Mon State typed as written in the original



2010 ELECTIONS


A resident from Payagyi Ward, Thanatpin Township, Pegu Division, reported with details about

arbitrary collecting of early votes in the area as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


We went to observe when polling stations were closed and began the counting. The vote counting from

the voting boxes was satisfactory but we were not satisfied with the early votes. 148 early votes for each

of three parliaments arrived. Out of 148 early votes, USDP received 141 votes each for Pyithu Hluttaw

and Amyotha Hluttaw and 138 early votes for Regions and States Hluttaw so USDP was totally ahead

regarding early votes.

Regarding early votes, USDP was arbitrarily collecting early votes even a month before the elections.

Daw Tin Yee, wife of U Kyaw Myint the Chairperson of Ward Peace and Development Council of Payagyi

Ward, is USDP organizer and the Ward Election Commission office was opened at their house. Their

residence was also a gathering point for USDP members. On the 30th

of October 2010, an announcement

was posted there urging people to come to cast early votes. USDP organizer U Zaw Naing Tun was also

there, sitting. On the 31st

of October, U Hla Aung, ward authority of the 12th

street of Payagyi Ward, and

his wife Daw Khin Ohn Myint (aka) Ohn Ohn, USDP organizer, required residents to gather at their

residence at least one per household for early votes. There, USDP organizers U Zaw Tun, U Zaw Naing,

and Ohn Ohn told residents that it was the collecting of early votes for USDP and after that, residents

would not need to go to polling stations on the Election Day because that’s the final and they would

take care of everything regarding voting. Even though residents were disappointed, they did not dare to

say anything, so they went home. I believe that early votes I saw from observing the counting werecollected that way.

Report about USDP’s illegal collection of early votes in Pegu Division (011_12_fdb03)

FDB conducted election surveys in a broader way. A remark of voters from Mingalataungnyunt

Township clearly highlights frauds in collection of early votes.



2010 ELECTIONS


There are two systems of collecting early votes in the election process; early votes submitted to Ward

Election Commission and early votes submitted to Township Election Commission. Furthermore,

candidates from political parties were not allowed to know about the counting of early votes. When

votes were counted at the ward election commissions, the result was sent to township election

commissions and these early votes were added for final results. That is not in accordance with the

electoral laws and the elections were not transparent at all.

Report about the scheme of early votes (014_fdb05)

FDB released an analysis paper “FDB’s Analysis Paper for not Recognizing 2010 Election Results”

on the 9th of November 2010. In that analysis paper, FDB exposed numerous ways of fraud regarding

early votes for USDP under a chapter.

By analyzing the surveys FDB conducted, reports from voters and media coverage, it is very clear

that USDP won 2010 elections by using numerous intimidations, frauds regarding early votes in the

nationwide level. Furthermore, according to the lists and statistics released by the Union Election

Commission, USDP won by adding thousands and thousands of early votes.

From losing, USDP candidate became the winner by adding over 20,000 early votes



It was found out that 62 USDP candidates became winners from losers by adding thousands of

early votes. The list of USDP representatives elect with early votes is attached as appendix (A).



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter V

INCIDENTS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO VOTE

Article (6), Chapter IV Eligible Voters, of the military regime’s Pyithu Hluttaw Electoral Law

states:

6. Persons possessing the following qualifications shall be eligible to vote at the election

irrespective of sex and religion:

(a) citizen, associate citizen, naturalized citizen or holder of temporary certificate who has

reached the age of 18 years on the day of commencement of election and who does not

contravene the provisions of this Law;

(b) person whose name has been included in the voting roll of the respective constituency.

However, there were many incidents in which even though some people were eligible to

vote in accordance with the military regime’s electoral laws, they were not allowed to vote.

Incidents of not being able to vote

Incident 1

The following is the report list by residents of Prome Township about voters not being able tovote in a polling station in Prome due to local authorities’ violation of electoral laws for 2010 elections.



2010 ELECTIONS


Before the Election Day, residents from near Garden Pagoda, Muyabin Ward, went to Ward Election

Commission and informed officials that they did not receive any voting tokens. Officials from the

commission office replied that they could not solve the problem and told residents to inform Ward

authorities at polling stations on the Election Day and authorities would take care of the problem. On

the Election Day, over 30 people who did not receive voting tokens went to No. 8 polling station and

informed the problem to U Tin Myint, Ward authority. U Tin Myint said, “eligible voter list with your

names was lost. So your names were already added as early votes. If you want to vote, you can vote with

other people’s IDs cards and names.” Those voters were dissatisfied with the answer because their right

to vote was violated. They could not do anything so they returned home. Some voters who lost the right

to vote, as being able to collect names, were in the following list:

1. U Sein 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 039515

2. Daw Hninsi 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 039999

3. Ko Aung Kyaw Win 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 080639

4. Ma Mu Mu Sein 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 039971

5. Maung Chan Myae Kyaw 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 134047

6. Ko Kyaw Soe Min 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 1111027. Ma Yi Mon Aung 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 113979

8. Daw Hla Shin 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 050200

9. Daw Khin Swe 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 053949

10. Ma Moe Thuza 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 179783

11. Ma Hla Hla Win 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 107740

12. Ma Tin Tin Nyo 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 179813

13. Maung Aung Ko Thet 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 193160

14. U Than Swe N/A N/A

15. Daw Thein Thein Myint N/A N/A

16. Maung Zaw Myo Lwin 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 161044

17. U Mya Win 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 05649918. U San Myint 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 057979

19. Ma Nilar 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 108011

20. Ma Thida 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 056051

21. Daw Aye Thein 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 056452

22. Daw Nyo Nwe 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 056052

23. Maung Pyae Phyo Thwin 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 143798

24. U Aye Kyu N/A N/A

25. Daw Cho Cho Myint 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 101403

26. U Thein Ngwe 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 055705

27. Daw Myint Myint Yee 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 057972

28. Daw Khin May Kyi 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 030562

29. Maung La Pyae Win 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 181495

30. Daw Than Nwe 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 034817

31. Ma Kaythi Lwin 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 061070

32. U Than Lwin 7/Pa-Ma-Na (Naing) 134917

Video interview with above people was also provided as video report

List of voters not being able to vote due to authorities’ violation of electoral laws at a polling station in

Prome Township, Pegu Division (028_fdb06)



2010 ELECTIONS


Incident 2

From the form 3 of FDB election survey, a list of voters from No. 1 Constituency, Pegu Township,

Pegu Division, who were not allowed to vote can be seen as follows:

Form 3 for voting

No. Constituency and Polling

Station #

Eligible Voters Left without

voting

Cheated votes Remark

1. No. 1 Constituency, No. 1

polling station

963 23 15 Left without votin

means people wh

were eligible to vot

but not in the eligibl

voter lists

Election Survey form regarding eligibility for voting conducted by FDB (029_fdb06)



2010 ELECTIONS


Incident 3

A resident from Tanyin Township, Rangoon Division, reported that some voters in Tanyin

Township were not allowed to vote as follows:

To whom it may concern

When Ko Tun Myint and Ma Ni Ni Maw, residents of Oakkyin Ward, Bogyoke Village, Tanyin Township,went to vote at No. 3 polling station, they were denied to vote because they did not have voting token.

Even though they brought their IDs with them, they were not allowed to vote. Some other residents

faced the same problem.

Tanyin Township

An incident of not allowed to vote in Tanyin Township (030_fdb06)



2010 ELECTIONS


Incident 4

A resident from Thingangyun Township, Rangoon, reported that authorities did not allow some

residents to vote as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


Country Burma

Division Rangoon

Township Thingangyun

Ward 6/A No. 11

Polling Stations 1, 2, 3, 4 (Education College)

Polling Station 1

Name of the Chief of Polling Station unknown (a headmistress)

Occurrence violators (members of Ward Peace and Development

Council)

“When I went to vote around 9 in the morning of the Election Day, my name was not in the eligible voter

list. From 3 households, 4 male and 4 female eligible voters lost their rights to vote. We told to the

polling station officials that we had been allowed to vote in 2008 Constitutional Referendum. However,

we lost our rights to choose any candidate we wanted for parliament for the betterment of the country

representing us. We lost the opportunity to choose those who govern us. What you did to us is that youignored the will of the people and did whatever you wanted unilaterally. We lost all our citizen rights. We

even lost the value of human being in the country full of unfairness. After saying that I returned home.”

Opinion

I think I lost all my human rights by being a human in Burma.

Name covered in the original document

Occuaption covered in the original document

Report about families were not allowed to vote in Thingangyun Township (031-1/2_fdb06)



2010 ELECTIONS


Incident 5

At a polling station in Prome District, Western Pegu Division, polling station chief and authorities

violated electoral laws as follows:

At the polling station No. 2 (opened at Koethaung primary school), Ywabae Ward, Ko Aung Hnin Moe

and wife, members of Union of Myanmar Federation of National Politics, were excluded from the voting.

Even though other family members were in the eligible voter list, they were excluded from the list

simply because they were members of that political party. The couple found out that they wereexcluded from the voting when other family members received voting tokens. So, Ko Min Htin Kyaw and

Ko Aung Hnin Moe, members of the party, went to that polling station and reported about the problem

to U Pho Khin, Ward authority, and the chief of polling station, but they were replied that they could not

vote.

Incident of the violation of electoral laws reported by a resident of Ywabae (032_fdb06)



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter VI

PERCENTAGE OF VOTING

Even before the 2010 elections, democratic forces inside Burma were launching campaigns to

boycott the elections because it was very obvious that the elections were designed to legitimize and

elongate the military regime. Democratic forces outside of Burma also launched lobbying campaigns

explaining why the elections should be boycotted.

The military regime also found out that people would boycott the elections; the regime

prepared everything for the elections such as forcefully collecting early votes, preparing illegal early

votes, vote rigging and intimidations forcing people to vote for the regime’s proxy party USDP. The

evidences of those activities are exposed in Chapter IV FRAUDS REGARDING EARLY VOTES, of this report.

Furthermore, the military regime purposefully announced the set up list of the voting

percentage of the elections.

The following is the example of the survey conducted by FDB in 10 villages in Kyaukpyu

Township, Arakan State:

Kyaukpyu Township

Village/Ward Eligible Voters Actual Voters Boycott Remark

Myitnartan Ward 839 386 453

Alaepine 864 420 349

Minkan 1 664 420 244

Lawtae Village 299 136 163

Kanyintaw 376 45 331

Masarai Village 241 102 139

Kyauktingyi

Village

255 95 160

Kyaukngyu Village 528 285

Panthuma Village 520 323

Report from residents of Kyaukpyu Township regarding the number of votes (032_fdb02)



2010 ELECTIONS


According to the report from residents, there were 4.586 eligible voters from 9 polling stations

in Kyaukpyu Township, Arakan State, but only 2,212 people actually voted. Thus, the percentage of

voter turnout is 48.23%.

However, when the military regime announced the voter turnout, it was announced that 71.99

percent of voters showed up in polling stations in Kyaukpyu Township.

Regarding the voter turnout of Taungoo Township, Pegu Division, the military regime chaotically

announced as follows:

The government-run The Mirror newspaper published on 14 November 2010 stated that from

No. 1 and No. 2 constituencies of Taungoo Township, there were 159.182 eligible voters and 128,153

people voted in the elections so the voter turnout percentage was 80.50.

However, on the next day, on the 15th of November, the Mirror newspaper published another

announcement that the voter turnout was that 99.57 from No. 1 constituency and 87.60 from No. 2

constituency, and the total was 93.58 percentage.

The Chart of the percentage of voting in Taungoo Township

Eligible

Voters

Actual

Voters

Early Votes Percentage Invalid

Votes

Confirmed

Votes

Percentage

159.182 118.030 11.123 80.51 6.712 121.441 76.29

The above chart is from the official announcement of the military regime

According to the chart, it can be seen that the percentage of votes is not 93.58 but 80.81 and

the percentage of confirmed votes is 76.29.

The military regime’s announcements regarding voter turnouts and percentages differed from

each other from one day to another.Furthermore, the regime’s propaganda newspapers illogically announced that percentages of

votes in constituency 1 and 2 of Pruso Township, and constituency 1 and 2 of Shadaw Township, Kayah

State were 100 percent.



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter VII

THE RIGHT TO OBSERVE AND EXPRESS

As announced in advance, the Union Election Commission seriously restricted the observation

and the media coverage regarding the elections.

However, no only polling station chiefs, authorities of ward, village and township level, watched

closely to voters on voting, but pointed out and urged people to mark next to USDP which they wanted

voters to vote for.

Designated election commissions banned the observation of vote counting for the nationwide

level. When there were observers, authorities stopped the counting and resumed it in the middle of the

night secretly.

In polling stations of Obokyun village group constituency, and Hinthachaung village group

constituency in Moenyo Township, Pegu Division, authorities restricted observers to be present while

counting. Furthermore, authorities instructed representatives from political parties to be at least 15 feet

away from the counting of votes. Polling station chiefs and other officials counted alone without

observers and did not let anyone see the invalid votes.

The following is the list of incidents collected by FBD in which some news journals were banned

by Censorship and Scrutiny Board for those journals published news about voting and counting:



2010 ELECTIONS




Form 5 regarding the permission to media coverage

No. Media Name What is not allowed How it is not allowed How to know

1. Weekly Eleven News about USDP campaigning inside

and around a polling station in Labuta

Tsp., Irrawaddy Division

Banned by Censorship

and Scrutiny Board

Indirectly

2. Yangon Time Results of political parties by townships Banned by C&S Board Indirectly

3. Popular News News about voters unable to vote due

to not being in the eligible voter list

Article Seeing, hearing and electing out

of the 500 yard range

Banned by C&S Board Indirectly

4. Article Seeing, hearing and electing out

of the 500 yard range


5. Voice Many voted in North Dagon without

being on the eligible voter list


6. True News Opinions of political party leaders afterthe elections


7. 7 Days Individual candidate from Laymyetnhar

lost by early votes


8. All media News about election results Banned by C&S Board Indirectly

Form 5 (1) regarding the permission to media coverage

No. Media Name Reporter Name What is not allowed How it is not allowed How to know

Self Seen Indirectly1. Pyithu KhitMessenger

Weekly Eleven

Venus

Eint Saung OoHtet Khaung Lin

-

Set Naing

Photos and News aboutearly votes from prisoners

in Insein Prison

Banned with reason of not reporting before the

publishing√

2. Favorite Journal U Khin Maung

Nyunt +3

Taking photos and news

from voters returned from

Security troops tried to

seize cameras reasoning

√



2010 ELECTIONS


polling stations photo taking was not

allowed under security

reasons

3. True News

Journal

Ei Mon Kyaw

(freelance)

Taking photos while South

Okkalapa early vote

problem was being solved

in Tsp., electioncommission

Arrested for

interrogation

√

4. 24/7 Journal Ko Kyaw Tun The journal was prohibited

from taking photos and

news because the reporter

asked strong questions at

the USDP PC

SB took personal data

from the reporter

√

5. All journals All reporters Not allowed to get news on

the Election Day

Stopped by police when

approaching polling

stations

Forms collected by FDB regarding media coverage for election related news (015/0



Furthermore, Opinion Poll Group registered at Censorship and Scrutiny Board four months

before the elections to be able to conduct election surveys to find out people’s positions and opinions

regarding the elections. However, even after the elections, Opinion Poll received no reply from the

Board about the registration.

No. Observation

Group

What is not allowed How to know Remark

Self Saw Indirectly News1. Opinion Poll The group submitted

registration at Censorship and

Scrutiny Board four months

before the elections to be able

to conduct election surveys to

find out people’s positions and

opinions regarding the

elections. The Board transferred

the registration to Ministry of

Home Affairs but never

permitted to conduct surveys.

√

There are some surveys about

election results and eligible

voters, and voter turnout by some

NGOs illegally obtained.

FDB survey regarding the right to media coverage about the right to observe the elections (017_fdb05)



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter VIII

VOICES OF POLITICAL PARTIES AND INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES CONTESTED IN THE ELECTIONS

There are 37 political parties contested in the elections for 3 parliaments.

Except Union Solidarity and Development Party, the other 36 political parties including National

Unity Party faced numerous intimidations and the biased-nature of the elections. For USDP to be the

winner of the elections, levels of SPDC authorities abused their political power and the Union Election

Commission favored USDP by violating their own electoral laws and decrees. The other 36 political

parties faced devastating bullies by USDP, authorities and the election commission so they voiced their

complaints regarding the 2010 elections as follows:

1. U Khin Maung Swe, from National Democratic Force, interview with VOA on the 6th of November

2010

“In this country, USDP and village or ward election commissions and village or ward authorities

are trying to steal votes from people. This is happening throughout the country, in every town

and village.” “There are many examples of vote buying particularly in Kengtung, Bogalay, Monywa and also a

few in Rangoon.”

“We even witnessed that in some areas, ward election commission officials took voting cards

from people and voted on their behalf. Many people have witnessed cases like this. We have also

been trying to solve a problem that occurred with the Election Commission because the Minister

of Electricity ordered over 100 employees and their families to vote for USDP.”

2. Shan Nationalities Development Party (SNDP) known as White Tiger party spoke to VOA on the

6th

of November regarding USDP’s forced collection of early votes as follows:

The illegal collection of early votes also occurred in Shan State so SNDP submitted a complaint

letter to the Union Election Commission but SNDP office in Taunggyi Township informed that SNDP

received no replied regarding the issue.

“We were told that the complaint was sent to the Union Election Commission. We

haven’t heard anything from the commission regarding the submission of the complaint.

We, based in Taunggyi, received complaints from (SNDP) other townships. We received

complaints stating that personnel from the commission and local authorities themselves

went to collect early votes. They reasoned that they had to do that under the instructions

from above and collected early votes from both well and unwell people, and anyone

above the age of 18. They also urged people to vote for USDP whether if they wanted or

not.”

3. Dr. Kyaw Swe from NUP spoke to RFA on the 6th

of November regarding the illegal and forceful

collection of early votes by local authorities for USDP as follows:

Dr. Kyaw Swe, NUP candidate to contest from Taungdwingyi Township for Region and State

Parliament, stated that in Taungdwingyi Township, USDP collected illegal early votes, with the help of



2010 ELECTIONS


ward commission and ward authorities, from residents. He stated about the incident at Kyaunggon

village on the evening of the 5th


“At that village, at the political campaign speech in the evening, people were urged to

cast early votes. Election commission chairperson and ward council chairperson told

people from the village to vote in the evening. We have prepared, with candidates from

other political parties, to sue those violators.”

“They violated all articles from 57 to 60 of the Electoral Law. Thus, we must sue them.

Many similar incidents have happened in many other places. So, we have sent our party

members as representatives to polling stations. There are only two polling stations

without our representatives. Those representatives informed us about many incidents.

So, we’ve been preparing to submit a complaint with all those reports. There are many

people who want to help us as witnesses. So, with our representatives as complainants

and those people as witnesses, we will submit our complaints.”

4. A member of All Mon Region Democratic Party (AMRDP) spoke to VOA on the 7th

of November

2010 regarding some people were not provided with voting cards and instead those cards were made

USDP votes as follows:

“Some observers also stated that in Kamawet village in Mudon Township, out of an

estimated 2500 eligible voters, only about 1000 were provided with voting cards. The rest

were unable to vote. Their votes had been made for them, without their consent, prior to

the elections and were in support of the USDP. Furthermore, residents stated that in

Kyonepike area in Mudon Township, about 50 USDP members were positioned inside

polling stations and forcefully taking voting cards from voters, marking them in support

of their party. Even though AMRDP complained the problem to Township Election

Commission, the party was only told to solve the problem by dealing with each other at

the party level.”

Likewise, In Mudon village constituency, Chaungzon Township, Mon State, about 500 votes forAMRDP disappeared. A party member said,

“The disappearing means the amount or number of votes AMRDP. That was in Mudon

village. 500 eligible voters from Mudon village, Chaungzon Township, who would

definitely vote for AMRDP, were missing. What I think is that polling station officials are

responsible for that.”

5. Voice of America broadcasted on the 7th November about an incident in Myaypon, Arakan State,

which was the hardest hit area during Cyclone Giri, member of Rakhine Nationalities Development Party

reported that a USDP representative campaigned inside the polling station encouraging individuals to

vote for him.

“In Panga village, the USDP Township Secretary stationed there, whose brother is the

Polling Station Chief Official and the headmaster of the village school campaigned inside

the polling station and forcefully urged people to vote for USDP. Our polling station

representative asked him to stop but it was useless. Likewise, in Taungpaw Ward of

Myaypon Township, the eligible voter list was just posted. Very few voters were only

able to vote and there were many people left to vote. Taungpaw Ward is Muslim



2010 ELECTIONS


dominated ward but they were very likely to vote for Arakan party. What I think is that

they (authorities) know that so they were trying to delay the voting in purpose.”

In the afternoon, in Nazi Ward in Sittwe in which most of residents are Muslims, USDP organizer

interfered the voting inside the polling station and eventually the chief of polling station refused to take

responsibilities as the polling station official.

“In the polling station, there was a representative. However, U Ba Tin from USDP was

there as well. He took the voting cards from the people and marked them in support of

USDP. Voters were not allowed to vote even though they were in the polling station.

When our representative tried to prevent him from forcing people to vote for him, they

were violently threatened. Thus, our representative, U Than Wai, complained about that

to the chief of the polling station. The chief of polling station couldn’t do anything and

outside of the polling station, there were many Muslim people in chaotic situation so the

chief of the polling station said that he couldn’t handle the polling station anymore.”

6. In the VOA interview, on 8 November, U Khin Maung Swe said that so many early votes arrived

to polling stations for USDP as follows:

“By looking at the votes last night, we could see that we had won about 18 seats in

Rangoon. In the morning, the situation changed. Early votes were added. If a USDP

candidate needed 1.000 votes to win, they added 1.000 early votes, if 2.000 votes were

needed, they added 2.000 votes. So the result became very confusing.”

“They prepared early votes in big plastic bags. When USDP representatives needed more

votes to win, those bags were brought to polling stations. When these bags were opened,

all early votes were for the USDP. Similar counting happened everywhere. We decided to

submit a complaint to the Election Commission requesting that they let us know how the

early votes were collected because those early votes eliminated the true desire of the

people, if they did not we stated that we would not sign any confirmation of the election

results.”

7. Daw Bao Ja, the representative for National Democratic Force (NDF), for Pyithu Hluttaw, spoke

to VOA on the 7th of November as follows:

Even though Electoral Laws restricted political parties from campaigning USDP officials

violated all these restrictions. These laws prevented contestants from wearing any

clothing resembling political slogans or symbols and posting posters within 500 yards of

polling stations.

“Authorities and officials were wearing those campaign shirts. And, campaign posterswere everywhere, about 10 yards from polling stations. Sign posts were also there. At

most of the polling stations, people were forced to vote for USDP by marking next to

USDP sign on already distributed voting tokens. So, by seeing those, it is very obvious

that what they (authorities) did is not honest at all.”

In PaKan region, there were 101 polling stations. U Ohn Myint, the USDP representative

and the regime’s local authorities provided temporary IDs for over 20,000 non-resident

workers working at gem mines.



2010 ELECTIONS


Furthermore, Daw Bao Ja stated that, those miners brought already marked voting cards

provided by USDP when they came to polling stations.

8. U Kaung Myint Htut, contested from South Okkalapa Township, Rangoon Division as an

individual candidate, spoke to VOA on the 7th

of November about the winning of U Aung Thein Lin,

current Rangoon Mayor and USDP candidate, by adding early votes, and VOA broadcasted as follows:

“At the contest, which people were really interested, between U Kaung Myint Htut, a

former political prisoner and individual candidate, and U Aung Thein Lin, the current

Rangoon Mayor and USDP candidate, from South Okkalapa Township, U Aung Thein Lin

became the winner by adding early votes after counting votes from polling stations in

the 5th

Ward of South Okkalapa Township, U Kaung Myint Htut told to VOA.”

9. RFA broadcasted on the 12th of November 2010 about the joint-statement of 6 individual

candidates stating the elections were not free and fair as follows:

6 individual candidates who contested in the elections released a statement today on the

12th

of November, announcing that the elections were not free and fair.

In their statement, they described that they did not recognize the election results for theelections as they were not well organized and fair.

They also analyzed that there might be more sanctions from western democratic

community due to the unfairness and frauds of the elections.

The statement was jointly released by individual candidates: U Win Cho, U Win Ko Ko

Win, contested from Tanyin for Region and State Parliament, U Soe Kyi, Daw Khin Thein

Win from Shwepyitha township, Dr. Soe Lwin from Laymyatnhar Township and U Zaw

Min Thein.



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter IX

POSITIONS OF ELECTION WON PARTIES OF 1990 ELECTIONS INCLUDING NATIONAL LEAGUE FOR

DEMOCRACY

2010 elections were shameless elections held without handing over power to the winning

political parties of 1990 elections. The National League for Democracy (NLD) decided not to participate

in the 2010 elections as the political boycott.

NLD also decided to establish an inquiry committee to take legal actions against nationwide

frauds and intimidations during the pre-election campaign period and on the Election Day.

U Win Tin, member of NLD Central Executive Committee, spoke to VOA at the interview on the

8th of November as follows:

“There were many frauds, intimidations and unfair winning by using early votes in the

elections. Even though those issues were not related to those who boycotted the

elections like NLD, those issues were devastating issues for politics in Burma or political

process in Burma. We suppose that politics in Burma will be deteriorated as well if there

are cunning frauds and intimidations in Burmese politics.” So, we have to act in any way we can. If we stand doing nothing with the reason that we

are the boycotted organization so the problem is nothing related to us, we believe that

the situation will lead to a huge drawback or huge problem for political situation in

Burma. Thus, we need to act, we need to stand against the bullies, and we need to

expose the truth by documenting to inform the international community.”

Position of Shan Nationalities Democracy Party (SNLD)

SNLD also conducted election surveys in 60 townships in Shan State and 10 townships in Kachin

State to prove that the elections were not free and fair. The survey conducted areas were Shan ethnicpeople dominated areas and it was informed that the results of surveys would be released.

U Sai Laik, member and spokesperson of SNLD, spoke to VOA on the 30th of November as

follows:

“The most problematic issue is early votes. And the other is added votes. We just want to know

whether the elections were free, fair or democratic, and about the process of the elections. We

mainly conduct election surveys in 60 townships in Shan State and 10 townships in Kachin State.”

“In general, there is almost no freedom, fairness and democratic practices. Even if the

procedures are different from one place to another, eventually, frauds happened almost

everywhere. The only difference is how big the frauds were. Almost in every town, early votes

issue is the main problem and other frauds through intimidations happened. We have found

many cases regarding forcing people to vote, excluding from voting, and turning valid votes for

other parties into invalid votes.

Position of Arakan League for Democracy (ALD)

U Aye Tha Aung, Secretary General of ALD, Secretary of Committee Representing People’s

Parliament, member of the Secretariat of Union Nationalities League for Democracy, spoke to Mizzima

on the 29th March 2010 regarding ALD’s position on 2010 elections as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


“Election is a procedural step of a country’s democratization. It can’t be said that a

country can become a democratic country automatically only by holding elections. Thus

holding election is just one step of democratizing Burma. Before the elections, certain

political preparations or changes are necessary. In Burma, people face the lack of

national unity. In particular, there is a division among the military, ethnic nationalities

and democratic forces. For all those forces to be united, national unity is necessary. To

build national unity, dialogues must be conducted before the elections and set plans for

national unity, and draft constitutions. Those steps are necessary before the elections.

The current political situation is not prone to build a democratic country.”

Position of Zomi National Congress

U Pukyin Shin Tang, Chairperson of Zomi National Congress (ZNC), representative elect from No.

1 Constituency of Tedim Township from 1990 elections, member of CRPP and United Nationalities

Alliance, spoke to Mizzima on the 29th

of March 2010 regarding ZNC’s position on the 2010 elections as

follows:

“A genuine election should be for inclusive dialogue regarding all problems. Then, we need to

draft constitutions to move on with the participation of all forces. Based on that inclusively

drafted constitution, political parties will emerge and political leaders as well. Elections will be

the next step for people to be able to choose their leaders from those political parties or from

individuals. People will choose presidents or prime ministers by electing who they think are best

to serve the country on behalf of them. Elections stand for a fair choice of leaders. Now, the

drafted constitution is not fair and totally biased. Elections will absolutely not be free and fair.

Nothing is good. All good doings for the country is already prohibited. I believe that earning

money by other ways is better than contesting in the elections to earn salary and benefits as

parliamentarians.”

Position of Mon National Democracy Front (MNDF)

U Nai Ngwe Thein, Vice-Chairperson of MNDF, spoke to Mizzima on the 29th of March 2010

stating that MNDF cannot accept the 2010 elections because it was based on the 2008 constitution:

“From the very beginning, we did not accept the National Convention. We did not accept

the convention because we did not agree with the procedures of the convention. When

the law was published, we analyzed the new laws and we found out that nothing is in

accordance with any democratic procedures. We don’t think national reconciliation can

be brought by that. When we read the Article 405 of the new constitution, it states that

“A political party shall : (a) accept and practice a genuine and discipline-flourishing

multi-party democratic system; (b) abide by and respect this Constitution and the

existing laws; (c) form and register as a political party in accord with the law. So, we

sensed that political parties would face difficulties under that statement. I warned

everyone at that moment that political parties would be allowed to establish after

signing to accept that statement. It is impossible for anyone who does not accept the

constitution to sign the statement of that constitution for the permission to establish

political parties. Since then, we already decided not to contest the elections if and when



2010 ELECTIONS


elections are held. Thus, United Nationalities Alliance (UNA) released a statement dated

the 20th

of January 2010 urging the release of all political prisoners, engaging of

tripartite dialogue and reviewing of undemocratic points in the new constitution. We

decided to not participate in the elections if those are not met.”

“We couldn’t accept the elections based on 2008 constitution, from the very beginning.

We knew that elections would not bring democracy to Burma and would not be able to

establish a genuine federal union. We already had our point of view that the elections

would not bring development, peace and any betterment to the country. We are still

holding that position.”

Position of United Nationalities Leagues for Democracy (UNLD)

U Thaung Kho Tang, representative elect from Tamu constituency from 1990 elections, member

of presidium of UNLD, stated the UNLD position not accepting 2010 elections due to 2008 constitution

as follows:

“The main reason why we decided not to participate in the 2010 elections is because we

cannot accept the 2008 constitution. So, we roughly decided not to participate in the

elections even after the constitution was drafted. The decision became stronger when

electoral laws were announced. Even though we’ve been in politics since 1990, we knew

that we could not become ministers or deputy ministers and after all, not even orderly

status for ministers. If asked why we have been in politics then, our answer is that we

hope we can choose our representatives from our state, we can choose ministers from

our state, we can write our own constitution for our state as residents of our regions.

That’s why we have remained in politics. When the 2008 constitution came out, there

was nothing we needed and wanted in the constitution. We, ethnicities of the country,

have no reason to accept the 2008 constitution. Because we cannot accept the

constitution, we cannot participate in the elections. So, we decided not to register toparticipate in the elections.”

“For rights for ethnic people, State Parliaments do not have any power to refuse any

State Prime Ministers appointed by the President of the Union. If State Parliaments do

not like State Prime Ministers appointed by the President, the President will send

another one. And again, State Parliaments have no power to refuse this one.”

“Now, in the constitution, State Parliaments are not permitted to refuse anyone

appointed by Union President as Prime Ministers. In politics, administration is the main

mandate. For state residents or ethnic people, it is the devastating disadvantage

regarding that issue. Furthermore, the appointing of military representatives by theCommander in Chief and their role as leading role are also effective in State Parliaments.

Thus, ethnic people or state residents cannot accept that point.”



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter X

POSITION OF ARMED ETHNIC FORCES

Armed ethnic forces also released their positions on the 2010 elections as follows:

Position of New Mon State Party (NMSP)

Even on the 18th

of October 2010, NMSP released a statement “NMSP’s position on the elections

on the 7 th

of November 2010.” There are six points in this statement including the facts that 2010

elections on the 7th of November is partially designed by the military regime, designed to activate 2008

constitution which is not in favor of genuine federal union system, designed to eliminate 1990 election

results and to legitimize military rule in Burma, designed to favor USDP in many different ways, with no

transparency and in denial of international observation.

Due to the above mentioned points, NMSP released the statement on its position to boycott the

elections.

Position of Karen National Union (KNU)

Pado David Takapaw, the Vice-Chairperson of KNU, spoke to RFA about KNU position on the

2010 elections while during the 3rd Session of the 14th KNU Congress held in a revolution area in Karen

State from 14th to 18th of December 2010 as follows:

“The upcoming new government from 2010 elections looks like a civilian government but

in reality, is still the military government. So, they (the military regime) will not change

any of their policy, plans or activities. They will still oppress ethnic people and violate

ethnic people’s rights. We will continue the fight until the regime accepts the tripartite

national reconciliation.”

Position of Shan State Army (South) (SSA-S)

Lt. Gen. Yawd Serk, leader of SSA-S, spoke to Irrawaddy stating that 2010 elections would not

bring democracy to Burma as follows:

“Their elections are not held within democratic procedures and are not fair at all. None

of the problems of Burma can be solved either. The aim of the regime is to cover their

wrong doings with the elections. The new government will appear with civilian clothes

but the essence will not be changed. When the parliament is called, that parliament will

also go under the military control and military mind-set. What I want to inform people isthat there is no peace and stability in Burma. Even when the elections are over; Burma

will not become a democratic country. So, nothing will happen from the elections.”



2010 ELECTIONS


Position of United Wa State Army (UWSA)

The People’s government of Wa autonomous region released a statement on the 5th

of

November 2010. In this statement, Wa government stated that elections would not be held in Pan Kam,

Naphan, Pang Wai, and Mongmaw townships in Wa autonomous region so over 460,000 Wa ethnic

people from Wa region would not recognize any 2010 election results.

Position of Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA)

Col. Saw La Pwe, the commander of the 5th Brigade of DKBA, spoke to Irrawaddy on the 10th of

November 2010 stating that 2010 elections would not bring any equality to ethnic nationalities as

follows:

“The elections will not bring democracy for people of Burma and ethnic nationalities in

Burma will not be able to enjoy any equality. This is not democracy. The reality is that

military generals changed their clothes, that is all.

People did not support the elections. The elections were not genuine elections either. It

is important that international community come and observe what is going on in ethnicareas.”

Position of Re-establishing Council for Shan State (RCSS)

On the 11th

of November, RCSS released a statement of not recognizing the 2010 elections. Shan

Herald Agency News published 4 points from that statement on the 15th


There are 4 points in the statement but the main point states that the election results are not

acceptable. The statement also explains that the elections on the 7 th

of November cannot be acceptable

because people were forced to vote for the regime’s proxy party USDP and election commission officials,

illegal early votes were collected, village chiefs were forced to vote on behalf of residents, polling stationswere moved under numerous reasons when elections became close, and other political parties faced

abuse of power by authorities and partiality.

Furthermore, instead of problems of Burma solved by the new government from the winning

USDP, the civil war in Burma will be fueled by unfairness, intimidations and frauds of the elections

committed by the regime and proxy parties. RCSS requested the international community focus on the

fact that only by eliminating war crimes and unfairness in Burma, political problems can be solved.



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter XI

RESPONSES AND POSITIONS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

The military regime tried to convince not only people in Burma but also the international

community that they were changing.

However, the international community correctly responded the sham elections. The

international community started responding the military regime’s electoral process even before the

elections, since the one-sided process and intimidations were truly obvious.

Position of the Foreign Minister of the Philippines

At the ASEAN Summit held in Hanoi, Vietnam on October 30, 2010, The Philippines says the

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) will be undermined if next month's elections in military-

ruled Burma are a sham. Philippine Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo said Saturday that flawed

elections "will cost Asean not only goodwill but its own position. They are also putting at risk Asean

itself." Philippines: Flawed Burma Vote Will Damage Asean

Position of the Foreign Minister of Czech Republic

Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg said on October 12 that the forthcoming election

on November 7 could not bring about any progress in Burma's situation.

http://www.burmapartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Weekly-Political-Events-Regarding-

the-SPDCs-Election-040-2010-Eng.pdf

Position of the Western Community including the United States

The military regime announced on November 1, 2010 stating delegates from embassies in

Burma could observe designated polling stations. However, most western embassies rejected the offer

to observe polling stations with the reason that they would not want to recognize that the 2010

elections also had the right to observe by observing only limited and designated polling stations.

Position of British Ambassador

The British Ambassador to Burma, Andrew Heyn, had appeared at the FCCT in Bangkok on

Thursday evening before returning to Burma for the elections. A phone interview was conducted with

him at 3:40 p.m. yesterday while voting was still in progress. He said that while many people were

voting, they seemed “resigned”, as if going through the motions of a necessary chore – which was

perhaps a quite appropriate description, given reports that ballots had been individually numbered and

were thus traceable, raising fears of reprisals should they vote the “wrong” way.

http://www.mizzima.com/edop/analysis/4555-observers-foresee-little-change-after-elections.html

Positions of Mike Hammer; a spokesman for National Security Council of US and Bill Burns;

undersecretary of state

Ahead of Sunday's elections, the White House on Thursday said there has been no effort by the

Burmese military regime on the engagement process initiated by the Obama administration, but

reiterated that it will not give up on its year-old policy.

“We have tried to engage with the Burmese government. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like they've

made much of an effort on their part,” Mike Hammer, a spokesman for National Security Council, told

foreign correspondents on the eve of Obama’s departure on a four-nation Asian trip.



2010 ELECTIONS


The undersecretary of state for political affairs, Bill Burns, said by all accounts Burma is headed towards

a sham election. http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=19954

Position of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC)

On November 5th, 2010, members of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC)

sent an open petition letter to ASEAN leaders urging them not to recognize the 2010 elections in Burma

because the elections would not be genuine free and fair elections.

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/11/aipmc-to-asean-leaders-burma-elections-are-a-farce/

Positions of Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton

US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Sunday strongly

condemned the general election in Burma that was marred by reports of large scale fraud and

intimidation conducted by the military junta and its proxy political party, the United Solidarity and

Development Party. The United Nations, however, remained silent, apparently because its members

failed to reach a consensus on how to respond to the polls.

Obama said the Nov. 7 election was neither free nor fair and failed to meet any of the

internationally accepted standards associated with legitimate elections. “The elections were based on a

fundamentally flawed process and demonstrated the [Burmese] regime’s continued preference forrepression and restriction over inclusion and transparency,” he said.

“One of the starkest flaws of this exercise was the regime’s continued detention of more than

2,100 political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi, thereby denying them any opportunity to

participate in the process. The unfair electoral laws and overtly partisan Election Commission ensured

that Burma’s leading pro-democracy party, the National League for Democracy, was silenced and

sidelined,” Obama said.

Clinton is currently on a trip to Australia, and in an interview with the Australian Broadcasting

Corporation she said that holding flawed elections once again exposed the abuses of the military junta.

“It is heartbreaking,” she said.

“We were concerned by the regime’s refusal to allow international journalists and election observers to

monitor or cover the voting. Reports of intentional Internet slowdowns, voter intimidation and fraudulent 'advance voting' schemes were also very troubling,” said Clinton.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=19994

Position of UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Monday urged the junta to turn the Burmese election

into a new beginning for the country and its people. He said the authorities must demonstrate that the

election is part of a credible transition towards a democratic government, national reconciliation and

respect for human rights, said a statement issued by Ban’s office. Ban also urged the junta to release all

remaining political prisoners and lift restrictions on Aung San Suu Kyi so that they can freely participate

in the political life of the country.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/election/news/600-ban-calls-on-junta-to-commit-to-new-beginning.html

Position of Nobel Women’s Initiative

Six Nobel Peace laureates have expressed disappointment over the general elections in Burma

and said that the conditions under which they took place made clear that the elections were a means by

which to entrench military rule and legitimize an undemocratic constitution.

“We call on the UN secretary general and all states to condemn the undemocratic constitution of

Burma and the flawed elections. We call on the government of Burma to respect the human rights of the



2010 ELECTIONS


people of Burma and to unconditionally release all political prisoners and to immediately cease hostilities

against ethnic nationalities,” said a statement by the Nobel Women’s Initiative.

The statement said that the election procedures were not in accordance with international

standards and prevented the exercise of fundamental freedoms and political rights.

“Election laws barred a number of political parties and candidates from running, either by

disqualifying them or making it nearly impossible for candidates to participate. Over 1.5 million citizens,

internally displaced or part of ethnic nationalities struggling against the government, were prevented

from voting. Journalists and observers were banned,” the statement said.

“The people of Burma are ready for change—real change. Now is the time for the international

community to support them in making that change.” The Nobel Women’s Initiative was established in

2006 by sister Nobel Peace laureates Jody Williams, Shirin Ebadi, Wangari Maathai, Rigoberta Menchú

Tum, Betty Williams and Mairead Corrigan Maguire.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/election/news/600-ban-calls-on-junta-to-commit-to-new-beginning.html

Position of UN 3rd

Committee

A key committee of the United Nations on Thursday slammed the Burmese military junta for

“the ongoing systematic violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms” of the people of Burma,

even as it welcomed last weekend's release of Aung San Suu Kyi.Sponsored by the European Union, the United States and other Western countries, the six-page

resolution by the UN Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Affairs Committee (also known as the Third

Committee) was passed 96 to 28, with 60 countries abstaining.

Burma’s two big neighbors, India and China, were among those who voted against the

resolution, while fellow Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) members Indonesia and

Thailand abstained.

The resolution also urged the Burmese rulers not to restrict Suu Kyi's fundamental freedoms in

the future and to release all other prisoners of conscience, currently estimated at more than 2,100,

including ethnic Shan leader Hkun Htun Oo and leading student activists Min Ko Naing and Ko Ko Gyi.

http://www.irrawaddy.org/print_article.php?art_id=20122

Position of VJ Nambir

A UN special envoy to Burma said Sunday he told its military government that it must address

concerns about recent elections, which critics charge were rigged. Vijay Nambiar, who is also chief of

staff for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, spoke Sunday to reporters as he was ending a two-day visit.

He said he listened to as many parties as possible about their "hopes, expectations and concerns

at this critical juncture" following the Nov. 7 polls and the release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi

from house arrest. He said concerns about the elections have to be addressed "as transparently as

possible."

"This is important for laying the foundation of a credible transition" to democratic rule, he said.

Nambiar said he also called for the release of political prisoners, estimated by human rights

groups to number more than 2,200. Nambiar met Saturday with Nobel Peace Prize laureate Suu Kyi,

who said the talks were "very valuable" but that they might need "many and frequent meetings to sort

out all the problems we are facing."

http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=20202

Position of UN Friends of Burma

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Monday that developments in the next two months

could potentially determine the future course of Burma, after a general election that was far below the

expectations of the international community.



2010 ELECTIONS


Ban, who again expressed his disappointment over the developments in Burma, briefed the

Friends of the UN Secretary-General in Burma, in a closed meeting at the United Nations headquarters

in New York.

He was accompanied by his Chef de Cabinet Vijay Nambiar, who also spoke to the Group of

Friends of Burma about his recent visit to Burma in his capacity as special adviser dealing with that

country. The European Union was a special invitee to the meeting.

Few details of the meeting were forthcoming. “The Secretary-General told the Group of Friends

that, regrettably, the conduct of the elections was far below the international community’s expectations.

Looking ahead, we need to keep encouraging the authorities to take steps to make the political

transition broad-based and inclusive,” said spokesman Martin Nesirky.

“He (Ban) said that the next two months will be a crucial period that could potentially determine

the future course of Myanmar’s political development and its place in the international community. The

authorities, in particular, should be in a better position now to meet their responsibilities,” Nesirky told

UN correspondents at his daily noon briefing.

Later in the afternoon, Nambiar briefed the members of the UN Security Council, the details of

which were not provided. Nambiar has come under criticism from some diplomats for his stance on

Burma and some diplomats have urged the secretary-general to replace Nambiar with a full-time envoy

for Burma. http://irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=20260

Position of Amartya Sen from the article in The Nation on December 25, 2010

In his article, Amartya Sen said, “the military generals designed the recent election, the first in

twenty years, in a crooked way to ensure that they, or their proxies or cohorts, will stay in power. Most

gratuitously, 25 per cent of the seats were reserved for military rulers; strong pro-democracy candidates

were barred from participation; opposition leaders and activists were kept in confinement; and criticism

of the regime was totally banned in pre-election speeches.”

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/12/25/opinion/Ten-things-we-can-do-about-Burma-

30145136.html

Regarding the military regime’s 2010 elections, it was clear that the international noticed the

reality in Burma and recognized that the military regime’s elections were full of frauds, intimidations

and unfairness. Even though the diplomatic tones were differ from one country to another, most

countries recognized the 2010 elections were not free, fair and undemocratic.



2010 ELECTIONS


Chapter XII

GENERAL

The military regime not only violated laws such as the discounting of secret voting, making USDP

winner by using illegal votes and illegal early votes, and not allowing voters who did not support USDP to

vote, but also committed numerous electoral mistakes.

The military regime’s propaganda newspapers published many wrong voting lists of 2010

elections.

(A) Wrong Announcements

The military regime’s Union Election Commission released the Notification 103/2010 dated

September 16 announcing the areas in which elections would not be held as follows:

Notification No. 103/2010

8th Waxing of Tawthalin 1372 ME

September 16, 2010

On the 16th of September 2010, the Union Election Commission (UEC) issued notifications103/2010 under Article 8 (f) of the Union Election Commission Electoral Law announcing that the

follow areas are in no position to host free and fair elections, so no elections will be held in the

following areas:

--------------

--------------

--------------

9 Mongla Township



2010 ELECTIONS


1. No. 1 Ward (Mongla)

2. No. 2 Ward (Mongla)

3. Wan Pa Kha village group

4. Mongma village group

5. Wanpon village group

6. Wan Mong Lon village group

7. Htapanlon village group

8. Mong Wa village group

9. Sunpale village group

Even though Mongla Township was recognized as the area with no elections, in the appendix (f)

of the Mirror published on November 15, 2010, it stated that there were 1,290 eligible voters in Mongla

constituency for Pyithu Hluttaw. Thus, by adding the list of eligible voters from Mongla Township, the

Union Election Commission mistakenly announced the overall eligible voters as 29,021,608.

Furthermore, The Union Election Commission issued Notification No. 143/2010 on the 7th

of

December; “Announcement on figures of multiparty democracy general elections for respectivehluttaws.” Even though it stated the overall voter turnout as 22,421,123 (77.26%), other

announcements from the regime’s newspapers chaotically stated the voter turnout as 218,914

(75.43%).

According to those, the voter turnout of the 2010 elections is incorrect as announced by the

regime’s Union Election Commission.

(B) Repetitive Announcements

The regime’s propaganda the Mirror stated repetitive announcements for voter turnouts, early

votes and confirmed votes as follows:

-in appendix (c) of the newspaper on November 13, 2010, and in appendix (a) of the newspaper

November 15, 2010, Kyikemaraw constituency for Pyithu Hluttaw

-in appendix (a) of the newspaper on November 12, 2010, and in appendix (a) of the newspaper

November 15, 2010, Thaton constituency and Bilin constituency for Pyithu Hluttaw

-in appendix (b) of the newspaper on November 12, 2010, and in appendix (d) of the newspaper

November 15, 2010 Kyauktan constituency for Pyithu Hluttaw

-in appendix (c) of the newspaper on November 12, 2010, and in appendix (f) of the newspaperNovember 15, 2010, Kamayut constituency and Bahan constituency

-in appendix (a) of the newspaper on November 12, 2010, and in appendix (c) of the newspaper

November 13, 2010, 8 constituencies for Naypyitaw Region



2010 ELECTIONS


-in appendix (h) of the newspaper on November 12, 2010, and in appendix (k) of the newspaper

November 15, 2010, Rangoon Region and Ethnic Hluttaws, Karen and Arakan ethnic

constituencies

(C) Original Results and Corrections

The case of Dr. Saw Naing, an individual representative who contested for Region and State

Hluttaw from South Okkalapa Township, Rangoon Division, clearly shows that the result for Dr. Saw

Naing was changed again and again until his victory was taken away from him by the regime to make the

USDP candidate the winner. The case was highlighted in detail by media groups.

In the morning of the 8th

of November, Dr. Saw Naing was declared the winner with 145 more

votes than his contestant U Aung Kyaw Moe from USDP. Again, in the evening of the 8th

of November, U

Aung Kyaw Moe was announced as the winner by 8 more votes. After the announcements were made

back and forth, the Union Election Commission finally announced on the 10th

of November that U Aung

Kyaw Moe was the winner.

U Saw Naing’s case shows that even after signing his recognition as the winner by the

commission, the Union Election Commission announced the different result by making the reality upside

down to make the USDP candidate the winner.

(D) Adding representatives elect who were not in daily announcements of election results

On the 8th of November 2010, the Mirror published the Union Election Commission Notifications

119/120/121-2010 which declared, under Article 41 (A), that there were 57 representatives elect each

from 57 constituencies for parliaments.

Even though those lists were announced after the elections as daily results in newspapers, the

following 3 representatives were added as representatives elect, who were not in any daily result

announcements, to National Parliament (Amyotha Hluttaw):

U Ne Win Tun 13/TaKaNa (Naing)044190 Constituency No. 9 Pa-O National League

U Tun Kyaw 13/NaSaNa (Naing) 003180 Constituency No. 10 Ta-aung (Palaung) National Party

U Lieu Kwe Shi 13/MaSaTa (Naing) 031834 Constituency No. 11 USDP

(E) Counting and Declaring

Regarding the counting of vote and declaring confirmation, Pyithu Hluttaw Electoral Law,

Chapter 10, Article 48 (B) states that:

Immediately after the ballot papers are casted in the relevant polling booth, the polling

booth officer himself or a member of the polling booth team assigned by him shall count

the votes in the polling booth in the presence of the members of the polling booth team,

the polling booth agents and the public. In counting, valid votes and invalid votes are to



2010 ELECTIONS


be differentiated in accord with the Rules. The polling booth officer shall prepare the list

of number of votes counted and compiled voting list schedules as prescribed and send

them to the Ward or Village-tract Sub-commission. A copy shall be sent to the Township

Sub-commission.

However, in practice, authorities and election commission officials violated their own rules and

regulations. It was found out that votes were not counted in the presence of voters, and not

systematically and tidily separated between confirmed votes, invalid votes and early votes. FDB

collected these violations:

-No. 1 polling station of Ywabae constituency, Western Pegu Division

-No. 2 polling station of Moteshae village group constituency, Prome Township

-No. 4 polling station of Wayone Ward, Prome Township

-No. 8 polling station of Muyaqin Ward, Western Pegu Division

Furthermore, in the letter of Daw Cho Cho Kyaw Nyein, contested from Kyobingauk Township,

Pegu Division for Pyithu Hluttaw, vote rigging was mentioned as follows:



2010 ELECTIONS


U Tin Maung Win, a teacher and polling station chief of Kywethe village group polling station brought

votes to his house and counted there. U San Hlaing, an USDP organizer, was also there to count votes. I,

Daw Cho Cho Kyaw Nyein from Democratic Party (Myanmar) am dissatisfied with the procedure of the

counting and about the incident, so I sincerely request the Union Election Commission, Naypyitaw to

unravel the problem.

Daw Cho Cho Kyaw Nyein

Representative for Pyithu Hluttaw

Kyobingauk Township, Pegu Division

Copies to

1. Union Election Commission (Naypyitaw Region)

2. District Election Commission, Tharawaddy District, Pegu Division

3. Township Election Commission, Kyobingauk Township, Pegu Division

4. Out letter

Vote rigging from the submission of Daw Cho Cho Kyaw Nyein (039_fdb02)

(F) Elections and Arrests

The military regime did many election related arrests. 18 people including a monk were arrested

during pre-election, on the Election Day and post-election periods.

Ko Khin Zaw, organizer of National Democratic Party for Development from Kyikeyoebin, was

arrested under the accusation of disturbing voting at a polling station. Over 100 supporters of NationalDemocratic Party for Development in Buthidaung and Maungtaw townships were arrested after the

elections.



2010 ELECTIONS


Conclusion

It was found out that during pre-election period and on the Election Day, the military regime

systematically and carefully committed organized frauds.

The ultimate goal of committing those cunning and devastating frauds is to make sure USDP

gains 75% of seats and military officers 25% at the parliament after the elections. It was systematicallydesigned to gain control in all three parliaments as well as to elongate military control over judiciary,

legislative and executive levels.

During pre-election period, the regime

1. Established the Union Election Commission as proxy body and granted it much authority

2. Over restricted political parties, individual candidates and people with electoral laws, decrees,

notifications and instructions

3. Created a barrier to prevent political parties which won 1990 elections from involving

themselves in political process

4. Prohibited activities or denied permissions for possible rival political parties of USDP from

standing as political parties

5. Prohibited any rival individual candidates to USDP from contesting the elections

6. Allowed USDP from using government revenue, buildings, and authority at will even under

electoral laws

7. Created financial crisis for political parties and individual candidates

8. Restricted political parties from recruiting, making speeches during campaigns, and publishing

political documents under numerous decrees and laws

9. While making political speeches through TV, restricted political parties from freely expressing

their political rights but only allowed to express what the regime wanted

10. Used numerous means forcing people not to vote for other political parties but to USDP

11. Violated own rules and regulations regarding the collection of early votes but forcefully and

illegally collected early votes

Those violations and frauds were already highlighted in FDB’s pre-election report, “The Elections

with Full of Cunning Frauds”, under 14 chapters, published on the 1st

of November.

During the elections, the regime

1. Overly restricted other political parties’, except USDP, freedom of campaign, speech and

expression until almost those rights came to an end from existing

2. Not only created a gap of rights between USDP and the other 36 parties by using electoral laws,

decrees and instructions, but also favored USDP to win

3. Failed to provide electoral education for voters, to make eligible voter lists in time, and instead,

excluded some constituencies from the elections. Furthermore, the regime violated electoral

laws by adding votes of underage people, people who do not really exist and names of deceasedpeople as votes for USDP

4. Created the absence of secret voting by letting USDP members and local authorities to interfere

in the voting process not only near but inside polling stations and forced voters to vote for USDP

5. Prohibited both local and international observation teams to protect freedom and fairness and

to prevent from frauds regarding elections. The regime also banned any media freedom to cover

the election news but on the other hand, the regime’s media aired and published propaganda

for USDP all the time



2010 ELECTIONS


6. Violated abundant vote rigging, vote stealing and abuse of power at the nationwide level. The

worst is the ugly use of early votes to make USDP winner

7. Only targeted the winning of USDP and left counting and declaring results unclear.

8. Even though announced that from 29,021,608 total eligible voters, 77.26% voted for Pyithu

Hluttaw, 76.78% voted for Amyotha Hluttaw and 76.72% voted for State and Region Hluttaw,

the actual voter turnout was not that much. The announcements were total lies by counting two

or three times, forced people to vote repetitively, in disguise of the real will of people

9. Sued some election representatives who could make it through those frauds to replace with

USDP candidates

Because of the military regime, election commission, USDP and levels of authorities’ favors,

frauds and intimidations in both pre-election and election periods, political parties and individual

candidates, who participated in the elections with the hope that the situation would not be that bad,

could not bear it anymore and submitted complaint letters, and sued USDP and officials who violated

electoral laws.

There are 16 international standards to indicate if elections are free, fair or democratic. Pre-

election, during and post-election periods can be indicated with those standards to see if an election is

free or fair.The elections held in Burma on the 7th of November 2010 were not free, fair and democratic

according to those indicating standards and it was found out that many frauds, intimidations and favors

happened.

It is obvious that whatever the internal and international condemnation of the elections, the

military regime has been continuing its plan to legitimize itself in disguise of a civilian government.

As the election result, the Union Election Commission announced on 17th

of November 2010

that USDP won 259 seats (79.6%) out of 325 seats for Pyithu Hluttaw, 129 seats (76.7%) out of 168 seats

for Amyotha Hluttaw, 494 seats (74.8%) out of 661 seats for State and Region Hluttaw. On the 8th

of

December 2010, it was also announced that 882 out of 1,154 USDP candidates were elected on the

nationwide level.



2010 ELECTIONS


Because of the frauds at will, the list of representatives elect for parliaments is as follows:

The chart of People’s Parliament in which the percentage of representatives from military is more

than it was supposed to be

Pyithu Hluttaw

Parties Quantity Percentage

USDP 259 59.54%

NUP 12 2.76%

SNDP 18 4.14%

RNDP 9 2.07%

NDF 8 1.84%

Other 6 parties 13 2.99%

4 Alliance Parties of USDP 6 1.38

Representatives from Military 110 25.29%

Total 435 100%

In Pyithu Hluttaw, the percentage of the USDP representatives and representatives from military

combined is already 84.83%. That is the percentage for control over any decision making or making

changes in the parliament. The regime gained that control for three powers: legislative, executive and

judiciary with cunning frauds.

By the 2008 constitution, the percentage of representatives from military must be 25% of the

total percentage of representatives. Now, it’s a surprise that the regime seized 25.29%. Instead of

electing 330 civilian representatives, the Union Election Commission illogically announced that only 325

were to be elected, and as the consequence, the number of representatives became 435 (325 civilian

representatives + 110 representatives from military).



2010 ELECTIONS


The decision to add 110 representatives was not changed, no matter how many civilian

representatives were short or no matter how many constituencies were excluded from the elections.

The Chart of the percentages of election won parties for People’s Parliament in which 5 vacancies

were included

The Chart of the Percentages of Parties won for National Parliament



2010 ELECTIONS


Amyotha Hluttaw (National Parliament)

Parties Quantity Percentage

USDP 129 57.59%

NUP 5 2.23%

SNDP 3 1.34%

RNDP 7 3.13%

NDF 4 1.79%

Other 6 Parties 13 5.80%

4 Alliance Parties of USDP 7 3.13

Representatives from Military 56 25.00%

Total 224 100%

In Amyotha Hluttaw as well, the percentage of USDP representatives elect and representatives

from military combined is 82.59. The decisive control over the parliament is in the hands of USDP

representatives and military representatives.

In both parliaments, there is almost no important role for other political parties. The regime

purposefully created that situation.It was announced that Pyithu Hluttaw, Amyotha Hluttaw and Region and State Hluttaw would

be called on the 31st

of January 2011. Even if individual representatives elect and representatives elect

from other political parties want to work for the betterment of the country and the people, there will be

no changes and their efforts will be useless. It is very clear that USDP representatives elect and military

representatives will bully other representatives with the use of majority role.

The military regime held fake elections with many frauds in order to legitimize it and to hold the

decisive control over all three parliaments and executive, legislative and judiciary sectors as well.

Thus, Forum for Democracy in Burma

Does not recognize the 2010 elections as free, fair and democratic electionsDoes not recognize the 2010 election results either


1. Will continue to oppose the 2010 election results

2. Will also continue to oppose the 2008 Constitution

We, members of Forum for Democracy in Burma, would earnestly like to request and urge all

nationalities in Burma, political forces both inside and outside of Burma, armed ethnic forces, patriot

soldiers of the military in Burma, activists abroad working for democracy in Burma, international

governments and people who support democracy in Burma, and international organizations including

the UN to cooperate with democratic forces for democratization in Burma and to oppose and to not

recognize the 2008 Constitution and the 2010 election results.



Appendix 1

List of USDP candidates won by too many early votes from losing

ReceiveNo. Parliament Constituency Representative Name Party/Individual

Normal E

U Saw Ba Thein USDP 31452 3801. Pyithu Hluttaw Thaton

U Aung Chit NUP 33888 989

U Kyi Than NDF 30250 7462. Pyithu Hluttaw Kyauktan

U Aung Kyaw Zin USDP 28714 303

U Kyaw Min Hlaing NDF 8799 1723. Pyithu Hluttaw Kamayut

Dr. Soe Yin USDP 8100 104

Dr. Khin Maung Wint USDP 13813 1954. Pyithu Hluttaw Bahan

U Aung Myat Tun NDF 14506 280

U Saw Ohn USDP 17954 1745. Amyotha Hluttaw Mandalay Region No.

9 Constituency U Thaung Shwe NUP 18851 326

U Zaw Win USDP 21768 3126. State or Region Hluttaw Mandalay Region No.

10 Constituency U Aye Hlaing NUP 22387 114

U Maung Maung Nyunt NUP 18539 3377. State or Region Hluttaw Thaton No. 2Constituency U Thein Zaw USDP 17739 172

Dr. Khin Maung Thwin USDP 12354 1178. State or Region Hluttaw Bilin No. 1

Constituency U Shwe Maung NUP 12959 322

U Hla Aung NUP 10642 3749. Pyithu Hluttaw Yaypyu

U Win Oo USDP 8851 860

U Soe Yi NUP 18048 10510. Pyithu Hluttaw Taninserim

U Yon Bie USDP 15896 458

Dr. Kyaw Myint USDP 27215 33711. Pyithu Hluttaw Chanaye Tharzan

U Khin Maung Thet NDF 28431 856

U Ngwe Thein AMRDP 16281 91812. Pyithu Hluttaw Kyikemaraw

Daw Mi Yin Chan USDP 15924 299

Dr. Tin Maung Kyine USDP 23021 21613. Pyithu Hluttaw KyankinU Thein Lwin NUP 23486 113

U Poe Reh Aung Thein USDP 22 13614. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 8 constituency of

Kayah State U Sai Ohn Myint NUP 37 183

U Khin Maung Htwe UMFNP 5710 31015. Region or State Hluttaw Magwe, Tilin No. 1

Constituency, U Thein Swe USDP 5607 891



2010 ELECTIONS


U Shwe Maung (aka) Abdul

Rorzat

USDP 46408 55716. Pyithu Hluttaw Buthidaung

U Abul Tarhayl NDPD 47393 409

U Than Maung Individual 6087 73 17. Pyithu Hluttaw Man Aung

U Aung Sein USDP 5708 612

U Nyi Lay (aka) U Kyi Tha USDP 11802 14118. Pyithu Hluttaw Gwa

U Maung Kywin NUP 10854 329U Kan Nyunt USDP 18514 46619. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 2 constituency of

Karen State U Saw Mya Tun Palon-Sawaw

Democratic Party

20648 140

U Saw Tin Maung Lwin NUP 1823 37420. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 6 constituency of

Karen State Daw Nan Ni Ni Aye USDP 1421 976

U Kyaw Kyaw Oo NUP 11645 38221. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 5 constituency of

Taninserim U Maung Sein USDP 8394 843

U Saw Ohn USDP 17954 17422. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 9 constituency of

Mon State U Thaung Shwe NUP 18851 326

U Zaw Win USDP 21768 31223. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 10 constituency

of Mon State U Aye Hlaing NUP 22387 114

U Maung Aye Tun USDP 42050 60724. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 9 constituency of Arakan State U Mustafa Khamal NDPD 43756 370

U Aye Maung USDP 21 13625. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency,

Shataw, Kayah State U Phya Reh Sue NUP 38 161

U Kyi Soe Tun NUP 1944 34726. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency,

Papon, Karen State U Pado Aung San USDP 1407 100

U Maung Shwe NUP 21585 65827. Ethnic Hluttaw Mon State, Karen

State U Aung Kyaw Thein USDP 20973 227

U Tun Win USDP 20005 71628. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency,

Chanmyaethazi,

Mandalay Division

U Win Shein AMRDP 20052 267

U Myo Nyunt USDP 5548 76629. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency,

Thanbyuzayat, Mon U Win Shein AMRDP 5720 228U Maung Maung Nyunt NUP 18539 33730. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency,

Thaton, Mon State U Thein Zaw USDP 17739 172

Dr. San Shwe USDP 12450 18931. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency,

Sittwe, Arakan State U Aung Myat Kyaw RNDP 23844 367

U San Khin RNDP 8124 14932. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency,

Ramree, Arakan U Win Naing (aka) U Ba USDP 7547 101



2010 ELECTIONS


Thein

U Maung Thein NUP 6524 90 33. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency,

Taunggup, Arakan Daw Thein Sein USDP 6465 743

Daw Sanda Myint NUP 3202 60 34. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency,

Lanmataw, Rangoon U Win Naing (aka) U Win

Naing Oo

USDP 3185 183

U Kyaw Tin Shwe USDP 6946 16335. Pyithu Hluttaw Mongshuconstituency U Sai Lao Pan Pha SNDP 7322 245

U Sai Ngao Sai Hein USDP 780 44036. Pyithu Hluttaw Maukme

constituency U Sai Tin Aung (aka) U Sai

Aout

SNDP 3483 939

U Tin Oo (aka) U Than Aye USDP 9580 22237. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Tavoy, Teninserim U Than Aung NUP 7516 478

U Kyaw Htwe USDP 5937 91938. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Longlon, Teninserim U Htein Lin NUP 6769 176

U Tun Thit NUP 7432 22639. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Yebyu, Teninserim U Shwe San USDP 4856 525

U Hla Shwe NUP 5716 11940. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Kawthaung,Teninserim

Dr. Win Aung USDP 7619 995

U Sai Ba Oo USDP 3221 42141. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Loilem, Shan U Sai Shwe Tun (aka) U Ywet

Tai

SNDP 4422 174

U Sai Tun Kyi SNDP 2951 81042. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Kunhein, Shan U Sai Nu USDP 313 345

U Sai Hla Aung SNDP 1497 16543. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Mongpan, Shan U Sai Aung Kham USDP 570 126

U Khin Kyaw Nyunt USDP 11054 10144. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Kyangin, Irrawaddy U Thein Htay Win NUP 11071 718

U Nyein Myine USDP 25666 40745. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Pantanaw, Irrawaddy U Myint Aung NUP 28052 833U Than Nyunt NUP 18473 12846. Pyithu Hluttaw Homelin

constituency U Aye USDP 17612 552

U San Tun USDP 22937 35347. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 11 constituency

Kachin State U Myint Shwe NUP 24839 117

U Suan Doat Kyint USDP 4824 12848. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 6 constituency

Chin State U Lan Zaman Chin National Party 5099 547



2010 ELECTIONS


(CNP)

U Mana Nai USDP 2310 59949. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 10 constituency

Chin State U Mana Shin Chin Progressive

Party (CPP)

2582 133

U Salai Khwe Yan USDP 5720 35550. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 12 constituency

Chin State U Buu Lwin CPP 5695 63

U Sai Kham Hline SNDP 65901 22151. Amyotha Hluttaw No. 3 constituencyShan State Dr. Sai Mauk Kham (aka)

Maung Ohn

USDP 54245 268

U Kum Saung Sam Aoun USDP 2299 37952. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Tanai, Kachin State U Khin Maung Than NUP 2422 67

U Kam Lian Thang CNP 5201 51653. State or Region Hluttaw No. 6 constituency

Chin State U Nan Zamon USDP 4762 136

U Kyaw Myint NUP 19431 46654. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Sagaing Division U Sein Win USDP 18132 238

U Khin Maung Tun USDP 8875 31055. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Paungpyin, Sagaing U Thein Win NUP 8979 151

U Sai San Aye USDP 1815 53156. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Theindi, Shan U Sai Win Myint SNDP 4873 833U Sai San Maung USDP 7101 18157. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Tanyan, Shan State Dr. Sai Maung Pwint (aka) U

Sai Maung Pwint

SNDP 7170 34

U Tun Kyine USDP 5427 10058. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Mansi, Kachin State U Thant Zin Htay NUP 5545 218

U Kyaw Myint (aka) U Win

Maung

USDP 7757 26759. State or Region Hluttaw No. 2 constituency

Namhkam, Shan

U Sai Saw Hla SNDP 9135 640

U Kya Tun Ta-aung (Plaung)

National Party

10053 80560. State or Region Hluttaw No. 1 constituency

Kutkai, Shan State

U Sai Sa Lu USDP 9698 464

U Khin Maung Kywe Karen People’s Party 10165 54061. Ethnic Hluttaw Teninserim Division,Karen U Saw Harvey USDP 9464 138

U Pe Mya (aka) U Khun Pe

Mya

USDP 8953 55962. Ethnic Hluttaw Mon State, Pa-O

U Than Tun NUP 9327 155



Appendix (B)



2010 ELECTIONS




2010 ELECTIONS




2010 ELECTIONS




2010 ELECTIONS


Date: November 21, 2010

To

Honorable Daw Aung San Suu Kyi (aka) Aunty Su

With all due respect, I am writing a report to you. My name is U Khin Maung Win, I contested

the 2010 elections from No. constituency, Thegon, Pegu Division for State and Region Hluttaw

representing National Unity Party (NUP).

I am a retired Lt. Col from military as well as a retired director from the Ministry of Construction.

I am much interested in both internal and international politics as a person used to serving my country

with high positions in both military and civilian services.

When the 2010 elections were announced to be held, I wanted to participate in the first ever

elections after the 1990 elections to bring changes to the population, which people of Burma have been

craving for.



2010 ELECTIONS


I wanted to contest the elections, first as an individual candidate and second, as a NLD

candidate. However, it did not work out as an individual candidate and NLD decided not to run for the

elections. Therefore, by the urging from the people who support me, I registered at the Union Election

Commission, one day before the deadline, to contest the election from Thegon Township, as a NUP

candidate.

I was successful in campaigns and speeches since I communicated with people by using Aunty

Suu’s political stands; brave to speak out, brave to act, and brave to face unfairness.

I decided to contest the elections because I trusted Prime Minister U Thein Sein and Minister of

Foreign Affairs U Nyan Win promised again and again at UN Assembly and ASEAN summits that elections

would be free and fair. Furthermore, I also believed in U Thein Soe, the Chairperson of the Union

Election Commission, on his words stating that authorities had enough international level election

experience and would not need any help regarding the elections.

However, everything went upside down in spite of what I believed. The electoral situation

between the 1990 elections in which Aunty Suu’s party won and the 2010 elections was totally

incomparable. The elections are now over with extensive elections violations recorded.

Thus, I would report you what happened in the elections based on my firsthand account.

1. By electoral laws, voters, from No. 1 polling station opened at Innma High School where I voted,

were supposed to show their national ID cards to get voting tokens, and then they would vote inthe station. However, in reality, the voting was done without showing any national ID but only

with voting tokens. Thus, similar to the 2008 constitutional referendum voting, there was no

overseeing of the voting of actual eligible voters. Aunty Suu can evaluate my report whether it

was true or not.

2. When I observed the polling station which was opened at Ma-U Kan elementary school in

Tagondine village group, I saw U Nyo voted for himself and his son Maung Moe, and U Aung

Aung voted for himself and his mother Daw Kyi Kyi Myint. When I complained about that to the

chief of polling station, a blame game occurred and ended up with no answer. Also, when I went

and observed the polling station opened at Pyasi elementary school in Pyasi village group, I saw

a voter, Ma Nay Chi Thwin, voting for herself and her parents. When I complained about it to

the commission official and chief of the polling station, it ended up as the same above. AuntySuu can decide whether a voter could vote only for self or could vote for others, no matter how

many.

3. Regarding the collection of early votes, it was supposed to be done by the chief of polling

stations and candidates of contesting parties or representatives of candidates in accordance

with the electoral laws. However in reality, by taking an example, U Naing Oo, a clerk of Village

Peace and Development Council, collected early votes alone in Yaydashae village, Kyaytha

village group. The procedure to collect early votes was that a group of officials collected early

votes from elderly people or voters who would be on trips on the Election Day, sealed early vote

envelopes, and opened and counted them during the counting in front of the polling station

officials. However, by that example, a clerk from the village council went alone door to door and

collected early votes. Aunty Suu can tell that early vote collecting incident was right or wrong.

When I observed some polling stations, I found out that many polling stations did not even meet

the standards for polling stations and those polling stations were very different from the

showoff polling stations given to the media and international observers. Thus, I assumed that no

one was allowed to take photos and video in and around those polling stations.

The counting started and quickly came to an end, even at the very beginning, because all votes

became invalid votes. Pyithu Hluttaw Electoral Law states that;



2010 ELECTIONS


(a) Votes without approved marks by the Union Election Commission shall be regarded as

invalid votes

Votes I saw from my constituency were not with any commission approved marks. It was totally

wrong to make valid votes from votes without any approved marks.

Township or village election commissions did not provide any education regarding election to

residents so people did not know how to vote and faced many difficulties while voting. The time

frame for campaigning was not enough so candidates could only go to main villages of village

groups and had to skip other villages.

Even though electoral education was aired through TV and Radio and published in newspapers,

many villages were without TV, Radio and newspapers so many voters did not know about any

electoral information.

Aunty Suu, the elections were successfully over without meeting any ASEAN or international

standards for free and fair elections.

4. Township election commission did not release any clear election results with valid votes, invalid

votes and early votes for each political party. I did not know how the Union Election Commission

announced the election results without consents of candidates with Form 19. Aunty Suu can

also decide whether it was right or wrong.

Even though we lost by frauds and early votes, candidates from NUP and other contestingparties and individual candidates won over USDP candidates regarding reputation and dignity.

I was extremely happy on your release from house arrest.

As you have more responsibilities for the country and the people, I would like you to:

Take care of your health

Take care of your security

Sincerely

Ret. Lt. Col. Khin Maung Win

Winyadana StoreNo. 585

Aungchantha New Ward

Innma, Thegon Township

Ph: 053 58153



2010 ELECTIONS


Supplement 1

Political Parties Contested in the 2010 Elections

No. Name of Party Registration No. Date of Permission

1. Mro or Khami National Solidarity Organization (MKNSO) No. 1 April 28, 2010

2. National Unity Party (NUP) No. 2 April 29, 2010

3. Lahu National Development Party No. 3 April 29, 2010

4. Kokang Democracy and Unity Party No. 4 May 7, 2010

5. Pa-O National Party (PNO) No. 5 May 13, 2010

6. Democratic Party (Myanmar) No. 6 May 20, 2010

7. Kayan National Party No. 7 May 20, 2010

8 Rakhine State National Force No. 8 May 20, 2010

9. Kayin People’s Party No. 9 May 21, 2010

10. Wa National Unity Party No. 10 May 21, 2010

11. Taaung (Palaung) National Party No. 12 May 24, 2010

12. All Mon Region Democratic Party No. 13 May 24, 2010

13. Peace and Democracy Party No. 14 May 24, 2010

14. Shan Nationals Democratic Party No. 15 May 26, 2010

15. United Democratic Party (UDP) No. 16 May 26, 2010

16. The 88 Generation Student Youths (Union of Myanmar) No. 17 May 26, 2010

17. Union of Myanmar Federation of National Politics No. 18 May 26, 2010

18. National Political Alliances League No. 19 May 27, 2010

19. Chin National Party No. 21 May 27, 2010

20. Wanthanu NLD (The Union of Myanmar) No. 22 May 27, 2010

21. Modern People Party No. 23 May 28, 2010

22. Union Democracy Party No. 24 May 28, 2010

23. Peace and Diversity Party No. 25 June 1, 2010

24. Chin Progressive Party No. 26 June 1, 201025. Inn National Development Party No. 27 June 1, 2010

26. Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP) No. 28 June 1, 2010

27. Wa Democratic Party No. 29 June 2, 2010

28. Phalon-Sawaw Democratic Party No. 30 June 4, 2010

29. National Development Party for Development No. 31 June 4, 2010

30. Union Solidarity and Development Party No. 32 June 8, 2010

31. Ethnic National Development Party (ENDP) No. 33 June 16, 2010

32. Kaman National Progressive Party No. 36 July 5, 2010

33. Khami National Development Party No. 37 July 9, 2010

34. National Democratic Force No. 38 July 9, 2010

35. Unity and Democracy Party of Kachin State (UDPKS) No. 40 August 2, 201036. Kayin State Democracy and Development Party No. 41 August 19, 2010

37. National Development and Peace Party No. 42 August 24, 2010



2010 ELECTIONS


Registered Political Parties Disbanded by the Union Election Commission

(Until 14 September)

No. Name of Party Registration No.

1. Union Kayin League No. 11

2. Myanmar New Society Democratic Party No. 20

3. Myanmar Democracy Congress Party No. 34

4. Mro National Party No. 35

5. Regional Development Party (Pyay0 No. 39

Unregistered Political Parties Disbanded by the Union Election Commission

No. Name of Party

1. Union Pa-O National Organization

2. Shan Nationalities League for Democracy

3. Shan State Kokang Democratic Party

4. Wa National Development Party

5. National League for Democracy

3 Kachin Parties Rejected to Stand as Political Parties

No. Name of Party Remark

1. Kachin State Progressive Party Registered on April 5, 2010

2. Northern Shan State Progressive Party Registered on April 23, 2010

3. United Democracy Party (Kachin State) Registered on April 30, 2010

-47 political parties registered to stand or to continue to stand as political parties

-3 Kachin parties out of 4 which registered were not allowed to stand as political parties

- Unity and Democracy Party of Kachin State (UDPKS) was allowed to stand as a political party on July 16,

2010. The party was allowed to register to contest the elections on August 2, 2010 (the only Kachin

party allowed). In total, 42 political parties submitted registrations and all 42 were allowed

-5 political parties already registered were disbanded by the Union Election Commission

-5 political parties which did not register were disbanded by the Union Election Commission

-37 political parties left eligible to contest the elections

The last party to register is Kayin State Democracy and Development Party, which submitted registration

on August 11, 2010. The party was granted permission on August 12, 2010 and registered as a political

party on August 12. It was allowed on August 19. On the same day, the party submitted the partymember list to the Union Election Commission.

(Information collected by Research Department of Democratic Party for a New Society)



2010 ELECTIONS


Supplement 2

Results of November 7, 2010 Elections

(Information collected by Research Department of Democratic Party for a New Society)

No. Name of Party Pyithu

Hluttaw

Amyotha

Hluttaw

Region/

State

Hluttaw

Total of 3

Hluttaw

Remark

1. Union Solidarity and Development Party 259 129 494 882 From 8 to 18 Nov

2. Shan Nationals Democratic Party 18 3 36 57 From 11 to 16 Nov

3. National Unity Party 12 5 47 64 2 ethnic reps so 63 in

total, about 980

candidates contested

From 8 to 16 Nov

4. Rakhine Nationalities Development Party 9 7 19 35 From 11 to 13 Nov

5. National Democratic Force 8 4 4 16 From 11 to 12 Nov

6. All Mon Region Democracy Party 3 4 9 16 1 ethnic rep so in total

16 (11 Nov. DVB)

34 contested and 16

won

From 11 to 13 Nov

7. Pa-O National Party (PNO) 3 1 6 10 From 8 to 13 Nov

8. Chin Progressive Party 2 4 6 12 From 15 to 18 Nov

9. Phalon-Sawaw Democratic Party 2 3 4 9 Until 13 Nov

10. Chin National Party 2 2 5 9 Until 16 Nov

11. Wa Democratic Party 2 1 3 6 From 8 to 18 Nov

12. Taaung (Palaung) National Party 1 1 4 6 Until 8 Nov

13. Kayin People’s Party 1 1 4 6 From 11 to 13 Nov

14. Unity and Democracy Party of Kachin State

(UDPKS)

1 1 2 4 From 13 to 14 Nov

15. Inn National Development Party 1 3 4 From 13 to 17 Nov

16. Kayin State Democracy and Development

Party

1 1 2 From 8 to 13 Nov

17. Democratic Party (Myanmar) 3 3 From 11 to 13 Nov

18. National Democratic Party for Development 2 2 Until 13 Nov

19. Kayan National Party 2 2 From 13 to 18 Nov

20. 88 Generation Student Youths (Union of

Myanmar)

1 1 Until 8 Nov

21. Ethnic National Development Party (ENDP) 1 1 Until 15 Nov

22. Lahu National Development Party 1 1 Until 18 Nov

23 Individuals 1 1 4 6 From 13 to 14 Nov



Date post:	08-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	kmhtaik
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

2010 Election Report of FDB (ENG Version)

Documents