Commentary

Commentary

Report of the Government Advisory Committee on the Amendment of the Constitution as proposed by the Shan State Government and its people (8 January 1962) 

Had the military stayed in its barracks and allowed to let things as they were, would a genuine federation of states have emerged? 

According to the report of the advisory board appointed by U Nu in 1961 to advise the government as to what course to follow with regards to the "Shan proposal", the answer is definitely no. 

Background 

In response to the need for amendment in the constitution with regards to the Union boundaries, after signing a boundary agreement with Beijing in 1960 the then Prime Minister U Nu had decided "to take advantage of the opportunity thus offered to round off the rough edges of the Constitution". Accordingly a Constitution Revision Committee, chaired by Judicial Minister U E Maung, was appointed. 

U E Maung, was said to have told a Shan representative that they could "bring forward any amendment that would not infringe any of the (guiding) principles set out" by the government, namely: 

1. Not to infringe the principles underlying the Constitution; 

2. Not to infringe the principle of Democracy; 

3. Not to suggest any amendment that will sow dissension or promote discord among the races living within the Union. 

Thus was born the Shan proposal that was unanimously supported as follows by the Inter States Conference in 1961. 
"We the people present at this meeting support the principle underlying the Report for the Amendment of the Constitution". 

Further Background 

It is best provided by the CRC report itself: 

"The territories that are now comprised within the Union were all British territories. When the Second World War broke out in 1942, the British retreated to India, leaving their territories in the occupation of the Japanese. When the Japanese retreated in turn from Burma in early 1945, the sons of the soil were left in complete control, that is to say, the Burmans were in control of Burma proper, the Kayah people in control of Kayah, the Shans in control of the Shan States, the Kachins and the Chins in control of each of their Hill Tracts, until the return of the British Government. When the British Government returned and resumed control over those territories, their control was nominal and shadowy. 

In those circumstances, the Burmese people pressed their claim to Independence earnestly and vigorously. When the Shans, Kachins, and Chins knew that the Burmese people were going to get Independence, they took counsel with each other and decided to ask for Independence and join Burma in a federation. They, however, made two stipulations: One was that they should got complete autonomy and the other was the right to secede."

The Panglong Agreement signed by Burman, Chin, Kachin and Shan leaders on 12 February 1947, forming an association of free and equal states on a voluntary basis was thus regarded by the non-Burmans as the principle underlying the Constitution. 

What the non-Burmans wanted 

The Shans and other non-Burmans thought that a genuine federation of States was the best guarantee for the perpetuity of the Union. Accordingly, their demands were five-told: 

1. To make Burma a State. 

2. To grant equal power to the two Houses of Parliament. 

3. All States should be allowed to send an equal number of representatives to the Upper House, i.e. the Chamber of Nationalities. 

4. To reserve the following subjects for the Central or Union Government and the remaining subjects for the States: - 
   (a) Foreign Affairs 
   (b) Defence 
   (c) Finance 
   (d) Coinage and paper currency 
   (e) Posts and Telegraphs 
   (f) Railways, Airways and Waterways. 
   (g) Union Judiciary (Federal Judiciary) 
   (h) Sea Customs Duty 

5. To distribute the revenue collected by the Federal or Union Government among all the States in fair proportion. 
   What the GAB saw 

The Government Advisory Board (GAB) clearly saw things differently and took pains to express them, especially with regards to the first item: "To make Burma a State" that was obviously the central point of the whole set of the Shans' call. 
Therefore, while agreeing that "Federation means an association of independent States on a free and voluntary basis", it argued that in practice "there is no real type of Federal Government. 

Even if there is a real form of Federal Government on paper, yet in actual practice it becomes unitary. The reason for it is not far to seek. It is for national security and safety. In this modern life of stress and struggle for survival, a unitary type of Government is more essential than a federal type of Government …" 

It went on to say that " Under such a structure there will not and, in fact, cannot be a strong and stable Government. There will be constant bickering and quarrel among the members of the Central Government. Similarly, there will be a constant quarrel and fight between the two Houses. The Union will thus in no time break up. 

The Federal Form of Government as proposed in the Shan State Government 'Blue Book' is thus not only unpractical and impracticable but eventually will lead to the break-up of the Union. 

The Shan State Government's proposed Federal Form of Government cannot for these reasons be accepted." 
On the other hand, the GAB thought that " We have thus all the essential characteristics of a true type of Federal Government present. Our Union Government is therefore more federal than unitary." " Each Government is supreme and independent in its own sphere. One cannot encroach upon the sphere of the other." 

Instead, it advised the government that " The Union Government is the Government that rules Burma proper. It is therefore not necessary to set up a separate Government for Burma proper, thereby entailing enormous cost and administrative difficulties. As it is, the Constitution is working smoothly and amicably. It is therefore not necessary to make Burma a State as suggested." 

Conclusion 

It all meant that, dictatorship or otherwise, the non-Burmans' quest for a Genuine Federal Union of Burma would still be an uphill job. 

The only difference is that within a democratic society, they have a chance while under despotic rule they don't.