Burma multi-party political landscape is one of the most diverse in the world.  In the last general elections, there were more than 20 political parties in the race, and currently more than 10 political parties have their representatives in the national parliament. Democratically speaking-notwithstanding difference in resources endowment and organization effectiveness-the electoral landscape in Burma looks relatively inclusive and promising as citizens have more choices to choose their preferred candidates when they go to the polls.

Looking at them on the surface, Burma seems to offer more options than the U.S because the latter offers only two political parties for 330 million citizens while the former has more than 20 parties for just 60 million people.  Out of the 20 or so political parties in Burma, more than half of them are ethnic-based parties.   One would assume that ethnic parties would have many seats in the parliament because they are the most numerous in term of numbers. But unfortunately this is not the case.

Currently only about 10 percent of the total national parliamentary seats belong to ethnic-based parties although ethnic groups represent almost forty percent of Burma’s population. Additionally, many ethnic political parties exist in name only and have no representatives at the national level. A major problem that lies at the heart of this inadequate representation for ethnic political parties in the national parliament is the majority or winner-take-all electoral system.

Burma’s current electoral system tends to favor mainstream and established political parties such as USDP or NLD because in a winner-take-all system the party with the most votes, regardless of percentage they receive, win the seat. This means that ethnic parties – which tend to be smaller and weaker in term of funding and resources – will end up not winning seats even if they manage to secure many votes but not enough to claim the majority. For example, an ethnic party in Karen or Shan States could receive a substantial amount of votes in many constituencies it contests but still end up not winning any seats if it fails to secure a majority.  As a result, they are less likely to have any representation in parliament in spite of their relative support in some parts of the country. To remedy this disparity and make the system fairer, Proportional Representation System or a mixture of some sort would be a favorable choice for smaller and ethnic political parties.

Under a Proportional Representation (or PR) system, parties are allocated seats proportional to percentage of votes they receive in the elections regardless of a majority or not. In this respect, ethnic political parties will have more chance of gaining seats and receiving equal share of representation in the parliament. In the 2010 general elections, it is estimated that many ethnic political parties have won a substantial number of votes in areas where they contested but not enough majority to win the seat. As a consequent, many of them have to sit outside the parliament.

On the other hand, some of the ethnic parties that secure seats in the national parliament are also underrepresented because they garnered substantial support but not enough votes to claim the majority in many constituencies they contested. Given that the National League for Democracy is certain to compete in 2015 general elections, the race will be a lot more competitive and ethnic parties will find it a lot harder to compete than the previous elections.  As democratic and reform process continue to evolve, to level the playing field and improve the chance of ethnic parties gaining more seats and having fairer representation in the parliament, it’s imperative that Burma explores, and if possible, adopts an electoral system that awards seats according percentage of votes a party receive.

Posted by Greh Moo

What a great news!  The four Karen political parties are preparing to merge.  This news would encourage other ethnic political parties to merge into one. Two Mon political parties have been trying to merge into one for almost a year, but have not yet succeeded. If Karen political parties will be able to merge, then Mon parties need to learn from this process too. Upcoming 2015 elections will be different from 2010 elections because NLD will be contesting the elections this time.  There will be great challenges for ethnic political parties to win seats in their areas if they are divided into different political parties.  For example, in constituency A, Mon political party A won 60% of votes in 2010 election, and the party won the seat. But now there are two Mon political parties will contest in upcoming election. These 60% of voters in Constituency A will be shared by two parties--let's say 30% each and assuming that NLD will win the rest of the vote (40%). Mon political parties will no longer be a majority in that constituency and both of them will lose the seat. This is just an example of what could happen if Mon political parties or other ethnic political parties kept dividing into two or three political parties. It is not too late for Mon or other ethnic political parties to merge into one or form a more powerful alliance. If not, they must have better strategy to win seats in their areas in 2015 election.

Posted by Pon Nya Mon

Between DBN and TTD villages, there is a little river called Weh Loh.  So, the village situated on the river bank is called Weh Loh village.  Weh Loh had never known a school, until recently. Even though the villagers farmed the land, the war had forced out any coordinated  educational effort.  Weh Loh’s children travelled to neighboring  villages for their lessons or went without.  More often than not, they  went without.
 
In recent years, a KNLA commander was moved  by the plight of Weh Loh: while children in peaceful democracies all  over the world spent the daylight in classrooms, the children of Weh Loh were at home, playing in the street, or working the fields alongside  their parents.   And so, he undertook a coordinated effort with village  elders to establish a school.  His efforts were successful.  

Today, the School at Weh Loh provides basic education to the future leaders of Weh Loh.  The children of Weh Loh now have reading, writing, and spelling courses – in three languages: Karen, English, and Burmese.  And
despite the constant presence of war—of depleted rations, ambushes, and threats of violence, the School boasts three teachers and thirty  students this year, from kindergarten through fourth standard. With  these seeds of educational growth, the School’s founders hope that the  children of Weh Loh will experience the promise of a better life.
 
Until recently, I only knew the school by reputation.  Weh Loh is bordered on all sides by the Dictatorship’s military battalions, always at attention.   But, on my way home this year, I unexpectedly stumbled upon the village of Weh Loh. The School’s founders built the school on a  track of land adjacent to the village entrance, a testament to strength  in the face of the most oppressive adversity.  I could hear it before I  saw it: the voices of children singing, reading, and reciting. 
 
What I see through the School at Weh Loh is an organically home-grown effort for development in the war zone.  No Norwegian Initiative is needed.  Weh Loh obviously does not seek attention of the international  community.  There is no complaint as to how they have been disregarded  by the caring world in the face of extreme misfortune – war.  They may  not be able to get very far with their humble effort.  But, theirs is a  genuine effort, an authentic little step to what they understand as national development through education for children.
 
Naw May Oo
July 2012