PREVIEW
What barriers do you think people might face when they apply for scrutiny cards?
A person may be a legal citizen under the law, but if that person does not possess documents that prove their legal citizenship status, that person might be at risk of statelessness. They may have less access to rights and may be mistreated by others.
There are many structural barriers faced by persons applying for documents that prove their legal citizenship status in Myanmar. This means that the barriers are part of the country’s laws and policies or the way the laws and policies are implemented. Some barriers violate the right to due process because the implementation of the 1982 Burma Citizenship Law according to its 1983 Procedures can be unfair for persons applying for scrutiny cards. Some of the major barriers are:
Exclusion Based on Ethnicity: The requirements for full citizenship relate to ethnicity. Only eight ‘main’ ethnic groups are specifically mentioned in the Burma Citizenship Law (in addition to other ethnic groups who meet certain criteria), which makes it more challenging for persons who are not members of these groups to apply for scrutiny cards. The right to full citizenship is often denied to persons who are not seen as being members of the current officially recognised 135 taingyintha groups.
Obstacles for Self-identification: Persons applying for scrutiny cards might not be allowed to self-identify their ethnicity and/or religion.
Discrimination: Immigration officials may not treat everyone equally. Members of certain religious minority groups or certain ethnic minority groups may be asked to provide additional documents with their applications for scrutiny cards.
Fear of Downgrading One’s Legal Citizenship Status: Persons might be afraid of renewing their scrutiny cards if they are at risk of immigration officials giving them scrutiny cards with a ‘lower’ legal citizenship status than the one they have. There might also be a risk of not receiving any scrutiny card at all, which could place a person at risk of statelessness.
Lack of Transparency: Immigration officials do not have to be held accountable for the decisions they make about a person’s documents related with legal citizenship status. Article 71 of the Burma Citizenship Law states that “No reason need be given by organizations invested with authority under this Law in matters carried out under this Law.” Therefore, government departments and officials do not have to explain the decisions they make on a person’s application for scrutiny cards.
Inconsistent and Unpredictable Procedures: Applicants may face arbitrary and inconsistent decisions during the application process. The duration of the application process might vary significantly between applicants.
Bribery: Applicants may be asked or expected to pay unofficial fees to support their application process. They may be asked to pay fees to brokers or to government officials in order to have their application approved. Sometimes bribes are required to receive the necessary application forms or to be treated respectfully during the process.
Administrative Reach: Persons who live in rural and remote areas in Myanmar, including border areas, may not easily access immigration offices.
State-Society Relations: Some persons are not interested in applying for scrutiny cards. For example, members of ethnic minority groups who live in areas under the governance of a non-state actor may not believe that the central government is legitimate.
Lack of Awareness of How to Access Documents that Prove a Legal Citizenship Status: Some persons may lack knowledge about the importance of documents and how the application process works. They may not have the correct documents prepared, and so their application is denied. For example, an applicant may not have a Birth Certificate or a Household List.
The Burden of Providing Proof Rests on the Individual: In Myanmar, the applicant has to prove their eligibility for receiving scrutiny cards. The applicant needs to be well-informed about the application process and collect all necessary documents, and sometimes also provide additional documents that are not officially required, for their application to be processed. This places much more responsibility on the applicant. In some countries, it is the responsibility of government authorities to register members of the population properly and to collect, document and store personal information about individuals to ensure that they can access documents that prove their legal citizenship status.
FOCUS ON MYANMAR:
facing challenges to access citizenship
Twenty-four year old Aung Kyaw Min Tun has lived in Myanmar for his whole life. His mother-tongue is Burmese and his parents and grandparents were all born in Myanmar. However, he is not officially a legal citizen of the country he calls home. As a Hindu and an ethnic Tamil, he faces challenges in accessing documents that prove a legal citizenship status in Myanmar. Aung Kyaw Min Tun is not a member of any of the current officially recognised 135 taingyintha groups.
His father and his brother have cards that prove legal citizenship status. His mother and older sister only have cards that prove residence and identity. He and his younger sister do not have any cards.
Aung Kyaw Min Tun estimates that two-thirds of his Tamil Hindu community in Yangon also face problems in applying for scrutiny cards, including not having enough money to pay large unofficial fees. Without a scrutiny card, he is unable to travel freely within Myanmar, apply for a passport, or buy property.
“If someone tried to kick us out, we’d have to go because we have no documents. It’s scary,” he said. “I was born here and will die here, so I should have documents to show it.”
Aung Kyaw Min Tun’s story may be similar to members of other ethnic groups that are not identified in the current officially recognised 135 taingyintha groups, including people of Chinese, Indian and Nepalese heritage. Persons who have a foreign parent or grandparent and persons who are members of religious minority groups may also have a difficult time trying to get scrutiny cards.
The Seagull, a human rights and peacebuilding organisation, surveyed 100 members of ethnic or religious minority groups in Mandalay and found that almost all of them faced challenges receiving scrutiny cards.
They reported long and arbitrary wait times, and many applicants were told by immigration officials that they must state a different ethnicity or religion in order to receive a scrutiny card. Some also reported they had to pay bribes of up to 500,000 Kyat and some said their children were being excluded from programmes issuing scrutiny cards at schools. Several people, particularly Muslims, said they were forced to accept NCSCs or they would not receive any cards at all.
U Myint Kyaing, Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population, said the government was trying to reduce corruption by conducting checks at immigration offices and by promptly investigating all complaints.
အမျိုးသားရေးဝါဒီ
လှုပ်ရှားသွားလာနိုင်မှု
အမွေအနှစ်
ကိုလိုနီဝါဒ