1

' Let us build a non-disintegratable Federal Union of

Myanmar .
D R AFT
by U Shwe Ohn .B.A.,B.L.,D.M.A., Advocate .
( Note for citations:- -At the back of the book , Books of Reference, are mentioned under 5
headings.i.e. (A)Constitutions and Constitutionalism -28- books,(B)History-43-books,
(C) Politics-75-books (D) Personal Collections-8-books or Files and (E) Files-9-files .
In the citation , if it is shown as e.g. C-11/p.199, please turn to page 199 of Reference
Book No. C-11,i.e. nDnGwfa&;ta&;awmfykH )

Foreword
Let me introduce myself to the audience , before proceeding further .
( 1 ) I am a Shan national among the 8 principal races of Myanmar ,
but not a narrow nationalist ,anyway.
( 2 ) I am an ardent believer in a Shan-Myanmar friendship since my
early childhood, and therefore no inkling of any anti-Myanmar feeling ,
though some of my frank and sincere remarks may mislead the reader .
( 3 ) Like in the example of two men, one riding on the shoulder of another,
the man on the shoulder does not feel the weight felt by the one below. But
the man below knows the burden from experience . I am speaking from
the stand-point of the one below ,who knows by experince .
( 4 ) I am 86 years old, and , a part-time politician, so to speak , because
my political experiences of 70 years were intermittent from time to
time. And I am not claiming myself to be a political leader anyway.
Besides, I had studied history,politcal science and law in my University
days and am still studying as a hobby uptil now, without claiming to be an
academician. Anyhow I can confidently say that I am an above-average in
those fields . So I am submitting this paper as a historian, as well as, in
those capacities as academic awareness based on my own experiences .
( 5 ) I am a believer in a true Federal Union of Myanmar. Therefore, my
remarks and suggestions aims for a perpetual Federation only. You may rest
assured that I am not repeat not a secessionist .
PROLOUGE
Since the very beginning of State Building in 1948 , we had erred
by building a bogus (or) quasi federation instead of a true federal one ,and
it has lasted uptil now for about 60 years.Of course two attempts had already
been made to rewrite the constitution ,but it had gone from bad to worse .
This essay is just an attempt to find out the disease in our so-called
Federal Union of Myanmar and point out a proper medicine.The success
or failure of the attempt will depend on how our Federal citizens re-act .

We must be able to see our problems in a true perspective. With

this purpose in mind , I will try to point out , in short (a) history of
Myanmar with emphasis on how our ancestors had arrived and settled
in various parts of the country (b) how their culture and civilization had
evolved uptil this day,forming wide gaps among themselves .(c) how British
colonial masters had utilized those gaps to their advantage , and practised
divide and rule policy (d) how our nationals had acted and counteracted
among ourselves (e) how we had erred at the time of drawing our constitutions and how to amend them (f) how we should amend our ways of
thinking among our-selves and eradicate unnecessary mis-understandings
among us ,i.e. among different races, tribes and clans and also among
different stratas of society (g) how we should see the picture of a true
federal state in a proper perspective and lastly (h) how to amend those
errors in all repects .
Chapter I .
A short history of Myanmar and its inhabitants .
( A ) Ancient and Mediaeval .
Archaeologists say that man of about forty million years' ago had
lived in Myanmar. But historians say that those ancient man have migrated
to the south and can be found only as Salons in Mergui Archipelago. The
present inhabitants migrated mostly from Tibet Highlands and a few from
India.They were in 3 different groups ,namely (1) Austro-Asiatics,(2)TibetoBurmans and (3) Tais. Under Austro-Asiatics , Mons, Palaungs, Pale's and
Was were listed.Tibeto-Burmans,western branch consisted of Nagas,Chins,
and Kachins, while eastern branch consisted of Burmans , Rahkines ,Yaws
Tavoyans , Inthas ,Lishaws , Danus, Lahus, Karens, Kayas, Paohs, Padaungs
and Pare's and under Tais , there was only one race , e.g. Tais or Shans.
Out of them, 8 races,i.e. Kachin,Kaya, Karen,Chin, Burman, Mon, Rakhine
and Shan are outstanding, the remainder being 127 tribes and clans.
Those races , tribes and clans, totalling 135 , migrated into Burma
wave after wave,differing for so many decades,the latter pushing the former,
and dispersed very widely when they finally settled in Burma.Those lucky
settlers e.g. Burmans,Mons,Rakhines,Karens had settled in fertile ,flat, delta
and coastal regions and thus got the chance to improve their standard of living enormously, while unlucky settlers e.g. Shans, Kachins, Chins , Kayas
and so many others moved to higher up mountains and hills ,were stuck
up in their old ways, their speed of advance slow like a snail, and thus ,after
so many decades,their standard of living , culture , education , health ,etc.
left far behind after other luckier brothers.(See B-5/p.128,B-8/p.1,B-29/36,
B-13-14)

Those settling in the plains, delta and coastal regions founded city
states and later kingdoms and dynasties, while settlers on the hills remained
under their feudal chiefs ,such as Sawbwas in Shan Hills, Sawkais in Karen
Regions,Duwas in Kachin Hills, Taung Oaks in Chin Hills and Sawpyas in
Karenni States.
It is noteworthy to know that there never was such a State as Burma,
until it was formally declared as a Federated State in the name of Union of
Burma in 1948.Here the statement made by Bogyoke Aung San on 16-6-47
in his 7 directives ,was an example and should be quoted .In that speech, he
stated as follows."Now, we had not constituted a STATE yet in BURMA."
( C-72 ./p.34 ) Before that period,they were only Kingdoms such as
Prome,
Pagan, Ava, Sagaing, Pinya, Hanthawady, Mandalay, etc , centering in
their respective cities. They were parallel kingdoms mostly and there were
some annexations among themselves at times.But their domain never extended beyond the area we later called Burma Proper . Mon and Rakhine had
their seperate kingdoms until they were annexed later .
Burmese kings never bothered to rule over the hilly areas .Relationship between them was just as kings and vassal chiefs, the latter paying
tributes , daughters and ralatives to the King occasinally,recruiting and sending warriors in time of war,only foregoing their suzerainty,but never losing
their sovereignty.As for Shans,they even ruled over Burma ,founding a Shan
Dynasty for about 200 years .( See B-8/p.58 )It was also noteworthy that the
Shan Kings of Burma treated their Shan Sawbwas as their vassal Chiefs.
The Karennis were left out of Burmese Kings' control under a treaty with
Kinwun Mingyi and British authorities .(B-9/p.82) Rakhines and Mons were
annexed later.And,thus,when King Thibaw was dethroned in1885,the Shans,
Karennis, Kachins and Chins were left with their sovereignty intact.
Here I shall have to elaborate to some extent about the sovereignty
and seperate idenitity of those peoples,starting from Shans and Burmans . In
earliest times of history ,there were 9 principal Shan States,popularly
known as " Koe-Shan-Pyi " or " Nine Shan States ".They were 3 States in
the north known as " Mao Shan States , and 6 States in the Eastern Hills
known as " Kanbawza Shan States " .When the British annexed Thibaw's
Kingdom in 1885 ,those 3 Mao Shan States together with some portion of
Momeik State
were taken direct under their own,amalgamating with SagaingDivision. And
thus the status of sovereignty of Mao Shan States was eliminated while those
in Kanbawza State was left with their sovereignty intact, though under
their sovereignty .

At this juncture , I would like to point out shortly , about the

identities we have preserved about ourselves . I belonged to Yawnghwe
of Southern Shan States , and so, in my young days, when I went to Man
dalay or Thazi I simply said "I will go to Bamapyi " or " Burmese country ",
and when I came back I simply said " I came back to Shanpyi " or " Shan
country ".This showed we felt our seperate identities, from time immemorial
and thus we were inclined to long for a separate state by ourselves ,a sort
of 2 seperate peoples serving under the same British Crown. Similar feelings
of seperate identity had to be recognized about other ethnic national peoples also .
Kachin State was only creation of Panlong Agreement in 1948. In the
days of Burmese Kings,their area was simply referred to as Kachin Taung .
Burmese sovereignty over the Kachin area never existed .So also, Burmese
suzereignty over them was almost nonexistent in spite of a few mobilization
as soldiers in marching towards China . Burmans regarded the Kachins as
a wild tribe and would not treat them as equals .In spite of this , you would
be mistaken if you think that , the Kachins would like themselves to be
transformed as Burmans .Not so.They simply loved to accept their identity
as Kachins or more correctly as Jinhpaws ( B-43 (Vol.I) /p.16) and nobody
else . They emphasized this fact in post independent days, very clearly.
Their aloofness from the Burmans is also proved in post-occupation days.
They opposed British Forces very arrogantly that they were annexed only
in 1889, just four years after annexation of King Thibaw's kingdom in
1885. They were treated as backward and governed seperately as Kachin
Hill Tracts.(See A-10/p.94 )
Chin area was more difficult in communication and transport , and
so much fighting was faced in occupation that , only in 1896, after 11 years
of King Thibaw's dethronement that Chin Hills was finally occupied or
pacified.Chin is only a word used by Burmans to denote them.As for
themselves, they simply recognized themselves as Tashones, Zahongs, Liazos,
Lushays, Kunlis,Zomies, Hwanlangos, Zingyets,etc so many tribal names.
They reserved and valued their own identities in their own tribal names .
As for Karennis, Burmese kings had no sovereignty over them but
only suzereignty .They had to send tributes to Burmese Kings and conscript
fighting man in times of war .But by a treaty made by King Mindon, under
pressure ,with Viceroy of India in 1875, (B-9/p.82) the Karenee States were
recognized as independent from Burma and so, after annexation,they were
simply put under the rule of British Governor together with Shans, Kachins
and Chins .As in the case of Shans, they identified themselves as Kayas ,not

even as Karennis as they were popularly called by the Burmans . Therefore ,

it is clear that , all indegenous races , e.g. Shans ,Kachins,Chins and Karennis had preserved their own identities apart from Burmese .That is the most
important reason why in the time of founding a new nation,in 1948 , the
eth-nic nationalities were adamant not to build a Unitary but a Federal
State.
( B ) Modern .
(1)Evolution leading to formation of " Burma Proper and Excluded
Area."
(a) Earlier days under the British .
As we all know now , King Thibaw's territories become Britain's
territory with effect from 1st. January, 1886, but the whole country was
not easily subjucated . Many insurrections arose nearly all over Burma ,
especially in the plains , and it took about a year to pacify them . They
took about 10 years to pacify the remaining hilly areas .
Thus,when Burma was annexed finally,the plain areas were administered directly by the British,while the Hill areas were put under indirect
adminstra-tion through their existing Chiefs .The conquering British
took lessons from their Indian experience i.e. keeping Indian Maha Rajas
aloof from remaining Indian states, saving cost of administration by
indirect rule and , on the other hand, using the diplomacy of divide
and rule, which was more friutful and advantageous politically. The
British Forces could annex the Shan States only on 1 st.February,1889,
Kachin Hill Tracts only in 1893 and Chin Hill Tracts only in 1896.
Under the India Act ( Administration) of 1919, Burma got the status
of Diarchy Administration with effect from the 2 nd. January,1923, with the
except-ion of Shan States, Kachin Hill Tracts and Chin Hill Tracts , which
were treated as " backward tracts ". However various Shan States were
amalgamated into Federated Shan States witheffect from 1st.October,1922 ,3
months earlier.
( C-1/p.36 )
( b) Shan Sawbwas' desire in 1930.
Due to various grievances of Burmese politicians against the
Diarchy System, a Round Table Conference was summoned in London in
1930.In this First Round Table Conference, held in 1930 between the
British Government and Burmese leaders, Shan Chiefs were not
allowed to attend but were only permitted to put up their case through
the Secretary of India in Britain. Shan Chiefs put up their grievences
against the administration under the system of Federated Shan States. No
direct reply,whatsoever,was given by the British Gov-ernment. However, in

a letter from H.E. the Governor of Burma, to the Shan Chiefs dated 28-91930, as a sort of reply . ( See excerpts below )
10. The Shan Chiefs desire to state that Shan States have never been
treated as part of Burma. They were proud of their ancient independence, and were totally different from the Burmese.
11. The Shan States , however , would not object to a federal form
of Government with Burma in the future constitution of Burma on
condition that (a) No interference in the affairs of the States. (b) Their
ancient rights ,customs and privileges shall be unaltered. (c) It should be
on the same lines with the Indian Princes and(d)Hereditary rights of Shan
Chiefs shall be acknowledged and safeguarded.
12.The Shan States were always part of British India, not part of
Burma."
(c) Opinion of Hkun Kyi ( Myosa of Hsatung ) in his famous booklet
of 7th,September,1935, titled *Errors of the Shan States* ( in Burmese )
At this stage,I shall have to mention for the sake of history,the name of
a man who should be remembered and revered as the first Shan citizen
( a Paoh or Taungthu ) who wrote and spoke about politics in the Shan
States. He was, Hkun Kyi, the Chief of Hsatung State in the Southern Shan
States. His state was just a small one and he was designated , not as Sawbwa, but as Myosa ,i.e. one rank below that of a Sawbwa.He was one among
the feudal chiefs.In 1936 only, i.e. the year next,that U Tin E , a Shan citizen
among the masses sprouted as a politician along with the Rangoon University Students' Strike .
Khun Kyi wrote a book in Burmese about politics,
(&Srf;_ynf.trSm;awmfykH)
which can be translated as" Errors of Shan States ".The following extract
showed how he had dreamt of a Federal State of Burma,some thirteen years
before the founding of the Union of Burma in 1948 .
"After making known about the Talaings, Karens,Taungthus, Chins
Rakhines ,Kachins,Shan States'affairs should be expressed.After that Burma
should be formed as a federal state in the name of (United States of Burma).
In that Union,the status of Shan States shall be just below Burma." (C-10/p14)
(d) Conclusion .
As such , all the Shan Chiefs' opinion were evident that they did not
want to be part of Burma State(i.e. Unitary State ) ,but wanted only to be
incorporated as part of a " United States of Burma ".( i.e. Federal State )
As a result of these deliberations , (1) Government of Indian Act of
1935 and (2) Government of Burma Act of 1935 were promulgated . Under

this Government of Burma Act,1935,though administrative status of Burma

was raised from the status of a Province of India to a separate country ,i.e. to
a higher level, some areas were excluded from the application of this Act,
and Second Schedule was attached to the above Act defining the areas
to which Special Provisions apply. These areas were hence regarded as
" excluded areas ".
Under the above schedule,two parts were defined, i.e. Part I and Part
II .Part I consisted of Shan States, Kachin Hill Tracts, Chin Hill Tracts, and
some others.Part II consisted of Kya-in township,the Myawadi Circle, Karen
Hill Tracts in Toungoo and Thaton Districts.These Part II areas were considered as more advanced. All the other areas of Burma not included in this
schedule are simply called as " Burma Proper ", though it was not written so
in the Act itself.
(2) Backward or Excluded Areas .
As such, Burma was divided as (a) Burma Proper (or) Ministerial Burma and (b) Backward Areas. Though those regions were called as
back-ward,their sovereignty was kept intact ,under that ugly name. As such,
while Burmans in the plains lost their sovereignty,the 3 backward peoples
were sovereign. It is a sorrowful affair to note that most of our Burman
brothers failed to differentiate and appreciate those two important values .
( 3 ) A brief history leading to the founding of the Federal Union
of Burma in 1948 .
(a) Burmese political leaders' opinion evolved on the question of
the Federal Union.
(1)Since the days of Young Mans' BuddhistAssociation(Y.M.B.A.)
in 1908 to the days of Dobama Asi-ayone in 1939, for 31 years ,Burma's
political struggle was directed only for independence of Burma i.e.(Burma
Proper only).Interests for other indigenous people were ignored, or regarded
as " non of our business".
(2) Only in the Fouth Congress of Dobama Asi-ayone, held in
1938, at Moulmein, a resolution was passed saying * By the term Burma's
Independence, it also includes independence of Shans, Kachins, Chins,
Karennis and Karens. (C-1 /p.57)*(But, it literally meant just a Unitary
State ,not Federal Union)
(3) At the first Congress of A.F.P.F.L. held at Naythurein Hall on 19 th.
of August,1945, it declared that an Independent Burma will be built
according to the wishes of all indigenous races of Burma.Just a vague
declaration.No mention of the word Federal Union ,which is not originated
yet .(C-1/p.133)
(4) First hint of a Federal Union came out during A.F.P.F.L.'s Con-

gress on Shwedagon's Middle Terrace from 17th. to 23rd. January, 1946,

announcing minorities' rights(i.e. Karens)in Resolution No. 6.It vaguely
said that Burma will be reformed as an " Association of Burma", not Union
of Burma, a term not yet coined.In U Pe Khin's Resolution No.7 also,it did
not mention a word of Federal Union. These facts revealed that A.F.P.F.L.
itself had yet no clear-cut idea about the creation of a Federal Union.
( C-1/p.138 )
th
(5) At the first Panlong Conference held from 26 . to 28th. March,
1946 Thakin Nu on behalf of A.F.P.F.L. made a speech, stressing for a
common struggle against British Imperialism, but not a word of
Federation. But U Saw spoke for a common struggle for independence with
an emphasis that only after attaining independence , the indigenous races
shall have the right to scecede. He did not mention a word about
"federation",but as the word "scecede" was related only to a Federal
Union , it may be regarded as the first hint about a Federal Union . It may
be , but , a political ambiguity also for U Saw.(C-1/p.155)
(6) A clear demand for a Federal Union first came out in the
Declaration No.4 of Shan State Freedom League issued on 5-2-1947, on the
eve of Panglon Conference.It stated in its attitude No. 3 that " To gain
strength after attaining independence, we'll cooperate with Burma in the
Constituent Assembly, and after consultation with other indigenous
races, wish to stay alongside Burma Proper in a new Constitution , if
solemn promise is received beforehand that (1) equal political status,
(2)internal self determination and (3)the right to scecede is granted .
Demand for a Federal State ( C-1/p.250 )
(7) One day after that, on the eve of Panlong Conference on 6-2-1947,
at a preliminary meeting of Shan Saohpas , Shan Peoples's delegates , and
Kachin delegates,it decided that they will agree to participate in the
Governor's Execetive Council if (a) equal status is given (b) Kachin
separate State is granted and (c) right of scecession is recognised.Chin
delegates supported above decision on 7-2-47. A clear demand for a Federal
Union.(C-1/p256)
(8) On that very evening of 6 th. February,1947. a mass meeting held
in Taunggyi, under the auspices of Shan State Freedom League demanded
to unite Shan States with Burma Proper with the right to scecede. This
was a clear demand for a Federal Union .( C-1/ p.252 )
( 9 ) At a meeting held at Rangoon on 7 th. February,1947, a day
before departure to Panlong , Bogyok Aung San told Mr. Arthur Bottomley,
who was Under-Secretary of State for Colonial and Domonion Affairs
in the British Government, and was delegated as an observer to the Panlong

Conference , that he was prepared to grant internal autonomy to

Highlanders, the right to secede from the Union shall be acknowledged
,and no rights of the Shan Chiefs will be jeopadized .It was just a
clarification that he was prepared to grant a Federal Union of Burma.
( C-1 / p.246 )
( 10 ) On that very night, i.e. 7 th; February, 1947, a never-thought-of
and historic decision was passed by a mass meeting in Panlong, demanding
that the old Federal Council of Shan States shall be abolished in lieu of
the newly proposed Shan States Council , a clear decision that the Shan
Chiefs were now prepared to accept a sort of unity with Burma. Gen. Aung
San and party heard this news in the morning of 8 th. February ,just
before departure for Panlong . A clear political weather for Bogyoke Aung
San under which to negotiate at the Panlong Conference .
( C-1/p.258)
th
th
( 1 1 ) After 2 days' , i.e. on 10 . and 11 . February,1947, of hard and
but sincere bargaining between Bogyoke Aung San and Frontier leaders ,
agreement was reached on the night of 11th.February,1947 .Bogyoke Aung
San was prepared to accept the terms , with a few clarifications, of
demands made by leaders of Frontier Leaders,i.e.(1) a Federation will be
established (2) Political equality will be granted (3) Right of selfdeternination shall be given to the States and (4) the right to secede will
be incorporated. These terms will have to be finally decided at the coming
Constituent Assembly.
( C-1 / p.274 )
( 1 2 ) Based on those agreements , the historic Panlong Agreement
was signed on 12-2-1947. This is the Written Agreement popularly
known .
( C-1 / p.277 )
( b ) The Unwritten Agreement (or) Panlong Spirit .
( 1 3 ) Before proceeding further on this subject , some explanations
had to be made in order to understand the subject fully . I have to quote
again Bogyoke Aung San's speech made on 16-6-47, at the opeening
day of the Constituent Assembly , in the course of defining 7 directiv
principles,as follows ,
onfwdkif;_ynf_yKv$wfawmfrzGJhpnff;rDtcgrSm
wdkif;_ynf_yKv$wfawmfzGJhpnf;&eftvdkhiSg
uGsefawmfwdkhoabmwlnDcsufawG/pmcsKyftrsKd;rsKd;csKyf
wJhtcgwkef;uawmifwef;pm;vS,fawGeJh
usGefawmfwdkhcsKyfqdkcJhwJhpmcsKyft&qdkvdkh7Sdv#if_z
ifh_zpfap/
aemuf_yD;awmhawmifwef;a'oqdkif&m
pkHprf;a&;tzGJhtpD&ifcHpmrSmaxmufcHcsufrsm;udkuGsefa
wmfwdkhvufcHvmcJhonfhtwdkif;_zpfaptJ

10

onfvdkvufcHxm;wJh onfpmoabmwGifrubJ ( Not only the letter of

agree-ment
)
onfpmoabmudkuGsefawmfwdkhoabmwlnDvmcJhwmwGifrubJ
uGsefawmfwdkhtbdkhrSm qdkvdkh&Sd&if
(The
spirit
of
agreement
)
oabmwlnDvmcJhwJhwu,fht&if;cHoabmw&m;udkvufcH_yD;
awmh/
onftwdkif;bJ
onfwdkif;_ynf_yKv$wfawmfrSmvkyfrSmygbJqdkwm/awmifwef
;e,fqdkif&m
udk,fpm;vS,frsm;/
wnfhwnfhvif;vif;em;vnfapcsifygw,f?
uGsefawmfwdkhay;_yD;om;uwd/ em;
vnf_yD;om;oabmwlnDcsufawGudke,fcsJhorm;vdkuGsefawmf
wdkhazgufzsuf_cif;rvkyfygbl;/tJonf
vdkay;_yD;om;uwdESifhem;vnf_yD;om;oabmwlcsufawGudk
azgufzsufrnfvm;vdkhoHo,&SdwJhvl
awG[mOuUXrif;
cGifh_yKcsuft&a_ym&v#ifuGsefawmfwdkh&Jh ( Sense
of
honour ,Sense
of
self-respect , Sense
of
pride )
wdkhudkapmfum;w,fvdkhuGsefawmfwdkh,lqygw,f? tJonf
awmhuGsefawmfwdkhay;_yD;om;uwd/em;vnf_yD;om;oabmw
lnDcsufwdkht&awmifwef;e,fuudk,fpm;vS,fawG[m
wdkif;_ynf_yKv$wfawmfxJa&mufvmwJhtcg/
aoaocsmcsmem;vnfapcsifwmu
b,fenf;eJhr#uGsefawmfwdkh
Armvlrsm;pk_zpfwJhvlawG[m
cifAsm;wdkhudktwif;tm;_zifhuGsefawmfwdkh
_ynfaxmifpkxJrSmroGif;ygbl;/
oabmrwlbJraeEdkifwJh
ta_ctaersKd;udkvufwvkH;_cm;vdrfwJh
enf;ESifhvnf;uGsefawmfwdkhrvkyfygbl;qdkwmtwnfhtvif;em;v
nfapcsifygw,f ?
(C-2 / p.462-3) ( C-72 /p.-35 )
It can be translated precisely as follows." We had reached prior agreements between the Hill Peoples' Delegates and us , and had also accepted
the recommendations made by the Frontier Areas Commiittee of Enquiry,
before the agreements were actually signed . In doing so , we had
followed not only the letter of agreement but also the spirit of the
agreement or basic reasons leading to those agreements .We would ask the
Hill Peoples' Delegates to accept that we will also follow the same
principles in this Con-stituent Assembly . We will not break any promises
given or understanding reached as Imperialists used to do.If any one doubt

11

whether we will break our promises ,with the permission of the Speaker ,
I'll have to say that it is an insult to our " Senes of honour, Sense of
self-respect , Sense of pride .
So in conclusion, I will sum up that all the events mentioned from
para (1) to (3) above were distant and from para (4) to (10) were immediate
causes evolving for so many years and leading to signing of the Panlong
Agreement. These are the Panlong Spirit, or the Unwritten Agreement ,
on which foundation the Panlong Agreement of 12 th. February, 1947
were supposed to be built.
The Panlong Spirit can thus be summarised in a nutshell, as follows:( 1) A Federated States of Burma shall be constituted,
(2) There shall be political equality,
(3) Internal Autonomy shall be given---and,
(4) Right of Secession shall be granted .
Chapter II
( A) The Constitution of the Union of Burma ( 1947 )
(1) Deviation from the Panlong Spirit from the outset . It is both very
embarrasing and dangerous to mention that Panlong Spirit was so deviated
from the very outset, but I have to say so with clear conscious, because I
sincerely believe it to be true .Please let me elaborate.
I have just mentiond above that, on the opening day of the
Constituent Assembly , on 16th. June, 1947 , Bogyoke Aung San , as the
President of the A.F.P.F.L. ,in his speech on 7 directive principles, had
clearly promised to abide by both the letter and spirit of agreement.
Nobody will have any doubt about that . But, repeat, but please let me
remind you that on that same occasion, Bogyoke Aung San had
submitted two documents before the Assembly, e.g. (1)Draft constitution
adopted by the AFPFL and (2) Seven directive principles to be followed by
the delegates . These 2 documents were found to be deviating from the
Panlong Agreements.
In the draft constitution ,you will not notice any thing important or
extra-ordinary after the first reading, because nobody at that time in his
right sense, will expect such a thing. But,if you read it carefully,you'll see
between the lines,new Federation will be formed in 2 stratas (1) Burma
Proper taking the place of Federal Union (Higher) and (2) other component
states(Lower).
At that exact moment, or after some months of couse , people
were simply awed and could not notice any significance in the document.
For the people in those days, inclusive of all Frontier peoples and

12

myself , Bogyoke Aung San was simply infallible. His esteem at that
moment was so high that, anyone who questioned against him must be an
outcast or an idiot. All believed that everything Bogyoke Aung San touch,
must turn to gold.
The final result was that the Union so constructed became two tired,
i.e. Burma Proper at the higher tier, while the other constituent states,
were left downstairs. This is the main defect from which other defects
and grievances followed, leading to the final blow by Genaral We Win in
1962.
At this point,a few important points which led to such confusions had
to be pointed out.In paras 2 & 3 of the draft constitution of A.F.P.F.L., how
the new Union of Burma is to be constructed is mentioned.It desccribed how
the other constituent states other than Burma Proper are to be constructed,
but the status of Burma Proper was just kept silent,which led to formation of
Burma Proper as a Union State,while the remaining States were left as ordinary States, a status below Burma Proper, culminating into inequality.
In the Directive Principles, direction 2 also stated in vague terms
which is analogous to A.F.P.F.L.'s draft constitution.Those 2 parallel
documents were drawn under Bogyoke 's guidance .One may argue that it
might have been done due to an oversight,but his later actions ,will show
Bogyoke's similar intentions and thus does not help that oversight theory.
Panlong Agreement was the base of the Union of Burma, and if the
unwritten Agreement to that effect was to be valued so much, as shown
in the Bogyok's above speech , this Panlong Spirit , which is the
foundation of the agreement should be mentioned elaborately as one of the
guiding directives for the delegates attending the Constituent Assembly,
which was the direct outcome of Panlong Agreement.If this was done so,
deviation from the Panlong Agree-ment could not have resulted.The couse
of our history may have altered in the right direction. The failure to
mention so is presumed to be intentional , for whose collaboration I will
have to point out in later pages.
But I shall have to point out here again that, according to my
historical understanding,the seed of destruction, like a banyan seed, was
laid in the foundation of the Constitution, and in due couse of time it
deterioated itself. In this regard, most of our citizens tried to put the blame
of failure in the Constitution on Thakin Nu , Bogyoke's successor, as U
Aung San cannot be wrong , and Thakin Nu spoiled the show during
his tenure. I can say that this is clearly wrong factually.In the Convention
held at Burma Broadcasting Station in 1962, U E Maung, the Judicial
Minister,had eluciated clearly that Bogyoke Aung San's deeds and

13

directions were meticulously followed and there is no deviation in its course.

( C-6 / pp.204-208 )
And I have to concurr with him after careful study and consideration.
All the good, as well as bad results lied on Bogyoke Aung San squarely.
How much my deduction in this respect is true or not,will have to be judged
by future historians only.As for myself,I have to stop here.
At this juncture,I think it will be most appropriate to refer to Bogyok's
speech in English made at the First Meeting of the " Union and States
Sub-Commiittee " of the Constituent Assembly , on 23-6-47 as follows:" I think it is a truism to say that we cannot blindly copy any
foreign constitution. We shall, of couse , take lessons from other countries,
and their constitutions, and their experience but we should not slavishly
follow them. When we consider our own case we should also take our
own conditions and circumstances into account.Now in our country,we have
different region with varying types of civilizations, so to speak, and when
we come to think of this factor,it is to be considered whether it is possible
for us to adopt the same kind of principles which might hold good in the
case of equally advanced units of the same country. Now certain parts of
our country are not as advanced as other parts. So in such circumstances,
we should consider whether we can adopt the principle that all units are
equal, so to speak.
We have also to look to the future.If, in future,we mean to plan our
national life and develop it systematically then we should consider
whether any arrangement now made might hamper any attempt to develop the country as a whole"
(C-2/p.483)
As he pointed out correctly, there were much discrepencies in
civilizations, so to speak. But how to adapt those conditons is a different
matter . Many other approaches existed and alternate and better approach
or tactic may cure the defects more efficiently.
( 2 ) Adaptation from Wrong Models .
It is correct to say that we should not copy the other Constitutions slavishly, as Bogyoke had stated. But we must take lessons from other models,
and adapt correctly. In this respect , we have erred much. It had been stated
earlier that in drawing a constitution for a Federal Union , we had copied
heavily from U.K.,which was a Unitary State. (e.g. Scotland and Ireland
were amalgamated with Britain to form United Kingdom.No seperate Legislature for Scotland but only a sub-committee consisting of Scottish members of Parliament took the responsi-bility for Scotland, thus save expenditure)( C-2 / p.625-6 ) Likewise,Shan States, Kachin Hill Tracts, Chin Hill
Tracts and Karenni States were amalgamated with Burma Proper to form

14

Union of Burma. No seperate Legislature for those States were to be established just on the ground of saving expenditure.I have pointed out that it
was a wrong policy of penny wise and pound foolish, because this wrong
policy caused so many grievances between the Burmans and the indigenous
races and finally resulting in the ruin of the Union .
No doubt they had adapted some few points from U.S.S.R., and
U.S.A. but leaned more towards India and Canada , which were Quasi
Federal ( This aspect of adaptations from India and Canada will be
discussed more in detail in the paragraph below.And, lastly they moved
independently and heavily to an extreme type,which the world had never
experienced.This is just a brief expression , and some more explanations
in support of it , will have to be made .)
( 3 ) Bogyoke Aung San, the sole Architect with guidance from India .
All Burmese political leaders,including Bogyoke Aung San were
primarily in favour of a Unitary State. But later,Bogyoke Aung San,changed
his position towards a Federal Union , only after some discussions with
Frontier leaders just before departure to Britain in 1947, for Independence
talks . At that moment ,his knowledge of Federal principle may be only
sketchy, so he took the opportunity, to stay some few days in India, as
Jawahalal Nerhu's house guest, before proceeding to England. India and
Pakistan , had already been granted Dominion Status at that moment ,
and were starting to draw their respective constitutions, under the
guidance of Mr; B.N.Rau , supposed to be an expert in constitutional law.
Bogyoke Aung San had discussions with Mr. Nerhu and Mr. Ali Jinna ,
but mostly with Mr.B.N.Rau .
After the Panlong Conference , at the A.F.P.F.L. Conference held
from 19th. to 23rd. May,1947, it drew up a draft constitution under the
patronage of Tha-kin Mya , a one-time criminal
lawyer turned
politician. He was a well-respected political leader also, but his knowledge
of constitutional law may not be sufficient enough for the occation .
Bogyoke Aung San was also a law graduate and he had just returned from
England , with fresh knowledge in constitutional law he had gained from
Mr. B.N.Rau while in India . So, it will be no doubt that the preliminary
constitution drawn by A.F.P.F.L. Conference shall be under Bo Gyoke Aung
San's guidance .
Before the Constituent Assembly was convened in 9 th. June ,
1947, Bogyoke sent U Chan Htoon, the Constitutional Adviser of Burma , to
India, in April 1947,to get further advice from Mr.B.N.Rau.U Chan Htoon
came back to Burma in May, 1947 just before the start of A.F.P.F.L.
Conference . The first preliminary draft which was put up at the Conference

15

, was the one drafted , by Mr.B.N.Rau , in English and brought back by U

Chan Htoon. After the Consti-tuent Assembly had completed its final draft
constitution ,it was again submitted to Mr. Rau,who came purposely to
Burma's Constituent Assembly,for necessary corrections.So, it is clear that
our constitution was much overshadowed by India.
( C-2 / p.430-431 )
Furthermore,to understand our case of constitution making properly,
we will have to trace back the international constituional making history.The
constitution of U.S.A.was a model drawn in 1789 , and when the Canadian
constitution was drawn later, it has already been stated somewhere above,
that the British majority took the upper hand over French minority and the
U.S.A ' s principle of granting minority rights was reduced to the possible
minimum. ( A-2 / pp.1 to 7 )
When the Australian Constitution was in the making, in 1900 ,
the Australian
lawmakers
reviewed
both U.S.A. and
Canada
Constitutions, and they finally refused to follow the Canada example ,
which was quasi-federal. But in the case of India it was the other way
round.( C-2 /pp. 35-38 )India was facing the problem of Indian
Princes.Their feudal status had to be reduced and minority rights to be
curtailed to the possible minimum.Thus the Canadian Constitution was put
to the forefront and copied much to their advantage.Burma was facing
the same feudal problem,and Bogyoke Aung San's approach was identical
with India and thus followed India and Canada as the models.They were
merely Quasi-Federal States, thus Burma was reduced to a lesser bogus
Federal one.Burma's other leaders were not matured enough in the
constituional matters and could not make any useful suggestion or
criticism.The delegates from the Frontier Areas were far more handicapped
in this matter,and left the whole matter with Bogyoke Aung San alone ,
honouring his sense of straightforwardness and character ,thus Bogyoke
Aung San had to shoulder this immense burden unaided.
So, shall we put the whole burden of failure of the constitution
on Bogyoke alone ? It will be unfair to do so. Bogyoke Aung San
was , no doubt , the top leader of the country ,but he was also amenable to
criticism . If the other Burmese leaders, as well as leaders from the
Frontier Areas raised any criticism or objection in his policies, he won't
neglect them.The real fault was with the other leaders who failed in their
duty to do so . In support of my above opinion , I have to elucidate my
personal experiences with Bogyoke Aung San, in detail. It may amount to
blowing my own trumpet ,but to make the picture more vivid , I have
chosen that way, in clear conscious .

16

At the time of Panlong Conference, in 1947, I was just a student in

the Rangoon University in day time, and serving as part-time Night Editor
in the Myanmar Alin(Light of Burma )Newspaper.As I was also a part-time
politician, so to say , I tried and got the opportunity to attend the Conference
as Myanmar Alin's representative. All the political leaders of Shan States
People's Freedom League , (S S P F L) attending the Conference at that
time were co-leaders in the anti-feudalism struggle.So,after the day Panlong
Conference was concluded , i.e. on 13th. February, 1947, I was assigned to
act as Chairman of the Panlong Mass Meeting, the farewell gathering for
Bogyoke Aung San.So I got the first oppor-tunity to aquaint with Bogyoke
Aung San , on the stage, and only casually , of course .
I have attended the Panlong Conference from the earliest days to the
end. The political tempo was accelerating rapidly from day to day
culminating to the signing of the Panlong Agreement on 12 th. February.
I,being a parttime politician, a position I have claimed for myself, was
carried with the tempo of the time. On that very day I acted as chairman at
the Panlong mass meeting ,I decided to quit my University classes , to join
politics again.The independence was in a critical stage , and I decided that
I had to accept the call of the times. I was assigned as the Executive
Committee Member in S.S.P.F.L. , and in a few days,was nominated as
one of the Peoples' representatives to attend the first " Shan States Council
" , as a preparatory body to attend the Constituent Assembly ,which was
soon to be convened .At the S.S.Council, 33 Shan Chiefs sat on the right
side of the Speaker,( say Government side ) while we 33 repre-sentatves
sat on the left side( as Opposition ).U Khun Saw,as President of
S.S.P.F.L.took the position as de facto leader,while I myself took as de facto
co-leader. One of the main tasks of the S.S.Council was to decide for the
guidelines to be followed in drawing up the constitution for the future
Shan States. So,a special meeting of the SSPFL was convened on the night
of 15th.May to discuss the matter .I took the lead in the discussions and
pointed out that the strength on the side of the masses was not strong
enough yet, while the Sawbwas were in full control .So ,we should have
two seperate Houses, the Upper House for the Sawbwas and the Lower
House for the people, with equal powers. Thus we can check the feudal
lords for the time being,while we build up our people's strength and prepare
for the second round of fight with the feudal system. All accepted and was
submitted accordingly in the S. S. Council next day. The Sawbwas also
accepted our proposal and our scheme of two houses in future Shan States
was unanimously passed and our future strategy was soundly established.I
was much delighted .

17

When we choose for the delegates to the Constituent Assembly, two

groups were chosen among the leaders, one for the Assembly and the other
to organise the masses for future struggle, which was to fight for independence in one year. I was left behind with others for organisation purposes,
while U Tun Myint , the then Secretary of S.S.P.F.L. and some other leaders
were assigned the task of attending the Constituent Assembly .
Within a few days,I read from the newspapers that A.F.P.F.L.had finished drawing a draft constitution. As far as I understand, their constitution
meant only a single House for our Shan States . It was in agreement with
the news sent from our delegates in Rangoon.I was much disappointed ,as it
was
diametrically opposed to our strategy adopted in our Shan States Council ,
and will be overwhelmed by the Sawbwas in the coming Constituent Assembly .
I had to think of my personal problem . By that time, independence
was a near certainty.By continuing in a struggle , which seemed unfruitful ,
I had to lose my education,So I decided to quit politics again and returned to
Rangoon University, in the first week of June. Within a few days U Tin E
was nominated as a special member in the Constituent Assembly and thus
arrived back in Rangoon ,and in close contact with me .
I learnt from him that in the meetings of Sub Committee for Union
and States Affairs , he and U Tun Myint were in opposition with Shan
Sawbwas on the question of office of profit , by which all the Sawbwas
shall have to quit their right to stand for future elections .Besides , they both
were planning to go to Bogyoke's house on 29th.June to discuss this matter
with him. At that moment I was not much interested in the " office of
profit " affair , but still filled with dissatisfaction regarding A.F.P.F.L.'s
decision to accept only singlehouse system for the Shan States. I suggested
to U Tin E that , I will accompany them on that occasion,which he accepted.
Thus, on the morning of 29th. June, Sunday , three of us were in Bogyoke's
house .I had a second chance to meet Bogyoke again in person , and more
intimately also.
While they talked about " office of profit" affair ,for some moments, I
just sat and watched in silence.Only when the conversation seemed to pause
I asked Bogyoke for permission to say some words , for which he granted.
Then only,I put up my case of single house system for the Shan States.I told
him it will be at a disadvantage for the Shan masses .Sawbwas and the mass
were two adversaries ,such as deers and tigers .If they were to sit in a single
house in equal numbers, the delegates for the people shall be devoured
by Sawbwas one by one , within a short time .

18

Then only , Bogyoke replied with his own 2 questions ," From
where you will get money?, and From where you will get man power ? "
Then he proceeded as follows .
" Our country, after two wars, had been ruined and have to be
started from the ashes . We had to start with a loan from Britain.Man
power is also in short supply. We had to be very careful in spending our
resources ." I retorted him , that , for the sake of power , I think some
amount of money should be spent , however poor we may be .Then only
Bogyoke made the remark that , the question of number of Houses for the
Shan States was not yet decided by AFPFL and that question was to be
resolved by the Shans themselves,when the subcom-mittee for that
purpose meet in August.
I was much relieved to learn that the question we are worrying is
not hopeless as we had understood .But at that time ,I am no more a politician but just a student and hoped the finishing task will be carried on by
U Tin E and colleagues. But I am sorry to say that they had failed to do
their part .
I have spent much time and space in this matter, but I have to do so
as they are of historical importance. It made me clear in the following
points:(1) Bogyoke Aung San was a man of reason. He was amenable to criticism even from a young student such as myself.In the Constituent Assembly,
if other responsible delegates made suitable remarks and criticisms, he will
without doubt listen carefully.The only disdvantage was that our leaders did
not talk.They were simply unprepared or immature for the task.
(2) At the first session of the Constitutnt Assembly,when Bogyoke gave
his speech and 7 directive principles,almost all the delegates from the Frontier Areas, including such dignitaries as Sao Shwe Thaik, U Tin E , U Tun
Myint of Shan States ,Duwa Sinwa Naung , Duwa Zaw Laun , U Dein Ratan
of Kachin State, and Chin leaders etcwere all present ,only clapping their
hands in full support.But in 1962,those same delegates were staunch fighters
for a change criticising the Constitution. However, they were wise enough
later, to admit their wrongs made before .
(3) At that moment , the leaders of S.S.P.F.L. , including myself ,were
not matured enough to face the situation effectively.Our political experience
was very tender , and most of us were just novices in that matter .We Shan
leaders were mostly preoccupied with antifeudalism and all our energy were
centered on that objective too much.Of course,Federalism was our cherished
goal, and we knew only just a few important ingredients of a federal state ,
but we did not know how to build a federal state. We all left those matters to

19

the A.F.P.F.L. and its leaders , especially Bogyoke Aung San ,with full faith
and trust.They will do the needful for all of us ,was our thinking .Only after
some time ,we began to know the defectives in our constitution , but too late.
Therefore,while I am now putting the blame on those leaders,I have to admit
that I am also one of them .
(4) Two houses system for the Shan States was unanimously resolved
in the Shan State Council ,and demanded by the Sawbwas themselves in the
Constituent Assembly,yet Shan leaders of the people led by U Tin E himself
failed to change their stance. ( C-2 / p.548) This caused much disadvantage
in the coming years.The result was that Shan Sawbwas took the lion's share
in the Shan State Council upto 1962 when the Constitution was dissolved .
(5)The concept of economy in money and manpower was originated by
Bogyoke himself and followed faithfully by U Nu,U ChanTun,etc..This concept of economy was repeated byU ChanTun often,in the Constituent Assem
bly,but it really was repetitions of Bogyoke Aung San's words .(C-6 / p.204)
I have stated clearly and uneqivocally that Bogyoke had made some
mistakes.But he could be liable to err as a human being, and he was only
32 years old then.But we had to recognize that he was a selfless, sincere
,intelli-gent,hard working, and patriot giving his whole lifetime and his life
at last,
for the sake of the country's independence. Even if he was regarded to be
inclined to the wrong side in assessing the Frontier peoples, I can say with
all my head and heart that he erred so not on his ill will but on his misjudgement alone.We should forgive and forget him for that.We must acknowledge that he was left without any sufficient help in this immense struggle.
Other delegates who failed to take their part of responsibility along with
Bogyoke should take their responsibility also for their lack of sufficient
support.Politics was a teamwork and if the game failed ,it was not only
the captain but also the whole team who were to be blamed .
( 4 )Time taken too short and interrupted by the Great Assassinations .
Great Britain granted their Dominion States, e.g. India 3 years and
Pakistan 9 years respectively to prepare for their constitutions. But Burmese
leaders from the very outset did'nt expect to get their quest for independence
so easily and thought the British Imperialists may drag on unnecessarily.So
to be on the safe side, a time limit was deemed required to be set and so demanded one year'stime,as the last date to grant independence,so short a time
for the task. The British granted accordingly.
Constituent Assembly was started in 10-6-1947 and as it has to be approved by the British Parlament in December 1947, Burma's Constituent
Assembly have to complete the draft by end of September 1947, about 4

20

months' period. Bogyoke Aung San and party were assassinated on the 19 th.
July and so a few days elapsed in a most sorrowful state.So the remaining
task for completing the constitution was rushed in remaining 2 more month's
time, in a great haste.
Thus it is not strange that the constituion so produced was full of defects.
( B ) Defective points in the Constitution .
( 1 ) Points , in short , in the defective Constitution .
(a) Inequality in the basic structure.
Their model was Great Britain,a country based on England in the centre,amalgamated by other states gradually,and thus culminating to a unitary
state. As in the U.K., Burma Proper stood in the centre as a basic State without losing their identity, and amalgamated Shan,Kachin,Kayah and Karen ,
Chin States etc as satellites after the Panlong Agreement.Thus Federal
theory of equality was lost structurally from the appearance,then followed
by actual practice. Dis-satisfactions arose out of this wrong structure.Such
form of Federation never existed in history and we stood as an extraordinary
one.
(b) The Central Government was not represented equally or proportionately.
The central Government was formed with a majority Burmese Ministers,representing the Centre, added by a minority members representing the
States.So,there was no check and balance.The Burmese were always in great
majority thus making the State Ministers' presence ineffective always, thus
federal principle of equality disappeared. This unequal or inproportionate
representation should be ratified.Switzerland's example, should be followed .
(c)The principle of the Heads of Constituent States representing in
the Central Government is wrong.
In fact, choosing the Head of States as Ministers in Central Government
was structurally wrong ,on the principle that the States and Central Governments should be independent and seperate from one another.Under this practice the Prime Minister of Central Government got a prerogative right to appoint according to his decisions. But the Heads of States were also to be
cho-sen by their respective State Councils , and thus some conflicts arose
from time to time,e.g.Shan , Chin and Karen States.This prerogative right
gave the
Prime Minister of Central
Government to accept or refuse the elected person thus, The States' right of
selfdetermination was destroyed .
(d)Constituent States were not equally represented in the Upper House

21

We see that,in the House of Nationalities,the members were represented

as follows:- Shan State--25, Kachin State--12,Chin Special Region--8, Karen
State3, Other Karen Nationalities24 and Burma Proper--53.This shows
that,as all the States combined got 72 seats while Burma Proper got only 53
seats,and it was a fair representation.It was totally wrong.It was not a Union
of Burma composing of two Units, ---e.g. (1) Burma Proper as one unit and
(2)the other 5 States combined as the other unit.In fact,each constituent State
should have an equal seats as a free and equal partner.This clearly showed
that Burma Proper had taken the lion's share over its constituent units.It was
clear that our Federation was wrongly built,and wrongly represented as well.
(e) No equality between the House of Representatives and the
House of Nationalities .
Section 83 (2) enacted that,House of Representatives must have double number of seats as House of Nationalities.This showed that,if two houses
have to sit a joint sittin g, in case of dispute between them , the House of
Representatives shall always have an upper hand. Clearly unfair indeed.
(f) No equal Power between two Houses .
House of Nationalities had no right to initiate Money Bills ( the most
powerful ), in its sittings, therefore House of Nationalities was reduced to
just a show-case, or just a paper tiger only .
(g) Wrong practice
of Burma Proper by not equally representing
as a seperate State with other Constituent States .
For choosing this wrong practice, Burmese leaders led by Bogyoke
Aung San gave their reason as economy both in men and money. It was
totally wrong and unacceptable. They reasoned that , by not setting up a
seperate Burma State , both men and money was saved , and it was for the
good of the State. But this fundamental fault caused many dissatisfactions,
misunderstandings, and grievances among the different nationalities, which
was more worthy than money.It was a case of penny wise and pound foolish.
They choose not to make separate elections for Union Parliament and
Councils of Member States , to save money. Then , why did they failed to
constitute seperate Burma State apart from the Union and save money likewise. It would be more correct in form and save money as well.Neglecting
this reasonable method,showed that their reasons were just excuses only.
I think it amounted to unjust and unfair judgement on the part of Burmese leaders.Reasons given for saving in menpower will face the same answer.
(h) Reasons given that there was a wide difference in population,size,
and wealth,for not constituting a separate Burma State.

22

In building a Federal State,(1) sovreignty of the State and (2) Its voluntary decision to enter the Federation is the most important ingredient to be
considered If those two ingredients were clearely proved, then there is no
question of size, population,wealth, etc,as clearly practiced in other Federations,such as U.S.A.,U.S.S,R.,Switzerland,South Africa,Yugoslavia ,etc
We have clearly shown in the foregoing history section, that the eight States
now composing our Union were all sovereign or semi-sovereign although
their size,population,wealth,etc.. may not be on equal status .
Thus , by refusing to acknowledge the equality between Burma Proper
and other States,they simply accepted the accusation that they were followers of the Greater Burma mentality .
(2) Conclusion to be drawn .
All the 8 reasons shown above were more than enough to conclude
that the Federal State we had formed in 1948 as " the Union of Burma " was
not a true Federal State but only a Bogus or Quasi-Federal State at best ,
or only a Unitary State,or a Greater Burma State , or
( r[mArmEdkifiHawmf ) .
I would like to express the whole situation, that we had build a Federal
State,in our own peculiar way, i.e.in " a Burmese Way to Federalism ",which
was certain to be doomed,the same way as"the Burmese Way to Socialism",
later invention of General Ne Win,is to be so doomed in later couse of time.
When we tried to amend the then Constitution in 1961,there were sufficient reasons to conclude that if the negotiations were allowed to go forward
as planned, there was a possibility that a common solution acceptable to
both, though may not be the best, was just in the horizon. But we were
unlucky .

Chapter III.
The Constitution of the Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma .1974.
Just a sketch treatment will be enough for this section.
We have said enough about the Panlong Spirit (pp. 9 & 10) on which
our Union of Burma was built . They were in short (1) Political Equality
(2) Right of self determinitaion and (3) Right of Secession.We have to leave
the third for practical purposes and will only discuss the remaining two, (1)
Political equality and(2) Right of self determination.
(1) No Political Equality.
Not at all.This Federation was just a union of 7 states and 7 divisions,
which were not equal in status. The 7 States e.g.Shan, Kachin,Karen,Chin,
Kayah, Mon and Rakhine had their own sovereignty,while the 7 divisions
had no sovereignity at all , because they were just administrative regions

23

forming a part of the States and as such ,there was a vast difference between
these two .By combining those dis-similar units together , political
equality
was destroyed from the origin. Burma Proper which was eligible only for a
constituent State was intentionally divided into seven states to have more
seats in the Union, thus a political ploy was practiced .Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi ,during a conversation with her on this subject,expressed her acceptance
of this policy as unfair .
(2) No Right of Self Determinition .
The Constitution expressly enacted that it will practice a centrally
controlled system of Government ,and thus power was held at the top and
flowed downwards through 4 levels of (1) Union (2) State or Divisions (3)
Townships and (4) Wards or Village Tracts. There was no flow upwards.
Thus the States had no authority to act themselves inedependently.Thus
right of self determination was non-existent.
(3) It was just a one party State.
Only Burma Socialist Programme Party was allowed to exist , and thus
its control and high-handed-ness was evident , causing a lot of grievences .
(4) Centrally controled economy.
All the private enterprises were eliminated .Most of the Indian busines
-smen were forced to leave the country. Many Chinese businessmen were
forced to leave their business. All the foreign ventures had to abandon their
enterprises. All the State ventures showed no progress and their productions were inferior as well as dearer.Therefore the economy of the country
was forced to the standstill. Machinery of distribution of commodities were
not worthy enough , black market flouished and the prices sour. All these
factors made the general public disgruntled and the country was forced to a
status of Least Developed Country .
( 5 ) Conclusion to be drawn .
Above factors led to the downfall of General Ne Win's government
and mass demonstrations in the streets of Rangoon, leading to final establishing of the State Law and Order Restoration Committee in 1988.

Chapter IV.
Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar( 2008.)
( A ) Preliminary period before the National Convention .
In the above heading,the word " Militaric " was written in bold letters,
but only the " wise "can see it. So, I ,"the wise", have to expose it in short.

24

Under the SLORC's supervision, a general election was held in 1990

with a promise that the Military will leave after handing over the Government to the winners in the elections.
Though the N.L.D. had gained about 85% of the seats in the General
Elections,the Parliament was never convened and was thus refused to call a
National Convention, against the solemnly declared promises made by the
authorities themselves.Instead,the State Law and Order Restoration Committee,convened a National Convention of its own.Out of over 1000 members
so choosen for that occasion,the winning N.L.D, got only 83 seats,a negligible portion, while the remaining seats went to their hand-picked persons .
U Tin Oo and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,the President and SecretaryGeneral of N.L.D. were detained for their failure to cooperate with them.In their
absence the remaining Exective Committee Members were given pressure
to attend the Assembly convened by them . There was no alternative under
such pressure , and they had to bow down.Their 2 leaders had to be expelled
from their responsibilties,possibly under undue pressure.Thus ,their National
Convention proceeded according to their whims and wishes.
After some months,U Tin Oo and Daw Suu Kyi were released from
detention.The 2 leaders were duly reinstated in their posts.In the
Convention the N.L.D. members of the Convention raised some questions
regarding the procedures of the Convention ,which they were unhappy .But
no reply was given after which they were dismissed for default to attend the
Convention.
Meanwhile, during the country tours of U Tin Oo and Daw Suu Kyi ,
a massacre occurred near the village of Depe'yin causing many deaths and
casualities,but paring U Tin 0o and Daw Suu Kyi from death. Many fled the
country,and no proper enquiry was made by the authorities.Instead of exposing the culprits , U Tin 0o and Daw Suu Kyi were put under house arrest
again . After some months, the convention was reconvened , and the N.L.D.
was invited again, without solving the existing differences .So N.L.D. delegates refused to attend. The authorities continued the convention without
N.L.D.'s attendence,and the draft constitution completed during that period.
That completed draft constitution was approved with 92% supporters
in the Referendum , as claimed by the authorities. International observers
were not invited or simply rejected. The N.L.D. objected the results as the
Referendum was not free and Fare,but to no avail .
( B ) Defects of the new Constitution .
Out of many defects,only a few outstanding ones, (1) whether it is a

25

democratic one and (2) whether it is a Federal Republic will be discussed .In
this discussion,the respective sections of the Constitution will be mentioned.
( 1 ) Democractic Principles .
Before going further,a basic classification in democracy have to be explained. As differences in methods of elections, and methods of forming
governments occurred in couse of time, two basic forms of democracy arose
e.g.(1)Westminister Form and (2) Consensus Form.( A-28 / p.27)
(1)In most simple terms,Westminister Form denotes the form followed
in United Kingdom.Those who gets a majority vote in the General Elections
gets the chance to form government of their choice.This practise was usually
followed in European States, where there is no much questions about,
religion,race,language, culture.etc.
(2) Consensus Form is mostly followed in Federal States ,because of
existing various kinds of races ,religions ,languages ,cultures,etc...Opinions
of different groups had to be taken into account to get consensus agreement.
Therefore, in assessing the correctness of the Federal States,we have to
judge according to how much their methods correspond with the Consensus
form of Democracy .Besides ,in democratic countries ,all citizens are equal
and thus,nobody or class has a special place.We proceed under this principle
Section 7 mentions that "The Union practises genuine,disciplined multiparty democratic system ".
Section 8 mentions that " The Union is constituted by the Union System.
This two sections shall have to be examined together. I have to remark
that the word "disciplined "is an unnecessary adjective,inserted only to justify some deviations made in their own interests, such as , Communist Democracy,Socialist Democracy,Proletariet Democracy,Working Peoples' Democracy, Nazi Democracy, Fascist Democracy, Guided Democracy.We have
to adhere to the internationally accepted definition of President Abrahim
Lincoln of the U.S.A. as " The Government of the people, by the People,for
the people." Genuine, multiple democratic system is quite enough for the
matter.As such,disciplined democracy is un-democratic .
Section 11(a) says " The 3 branches of sovereign power, e.g. legislative,
executive and Judicial are equal,to the extent possible, and exert reciprocal
control, check and balance among themselves ". The words to the extent
possible"is superfluous and should be deleted,for it gives room for the authorities concerned to intervene whenever they desire to do so, and thus destroy
the real purpose of the law in a democratic State.
Section 14 says that "The ---Hluttaws include the Defence Services Personnel as Hluttaw representatives nominated by the Commander-in-Chief of
Defence Services in numbers stipulated by this Constitution.(i.e.one fouth )

26

This practice clearly destroys the democratic principles .

S. 17(b) says " In the executive of ..Defence Services Personnel, nominated by the Commander-in-Chief .to undertake responsibilities ..,,"
This clearly shows the interference of the military in the executive branch ,
which is in contravention with the democratic principles .
S. 26(a) says that "Civil services personnel shall be free from party politics." It is doubtful the Government will follow the spirit of the law, as in
previous practices .This will be against the democratic way of governing .
S. 38 says every citizen have the right to be elected, but in reality, 25%
is in their pocket,the remaining 75% also is greatly overshadowed by them,
in way of their influence in Armed Forces, State employees and in party
apparatus ,which will be in a overwhelming majority. So,in reality,this right
will be much curtailed. This is against the principle of real democracy .
S.60 prescribes the method of Electoral College for selecting President .
It really amounts to election of a Senior Military Officer to the Presidency .
No popular selection for the President and against democratic principles .
S.109 prescribes for formation of Pyithu Hluttaw of 440 members, 330
will be elected popularly while 110 will be nominated by the Military. Pure
deviation from usual democratic practice .
S.141 prscribes for formation of Amyotha Hluttaw of 224 members,
168 members will be elected popularly while 56 members will be nominated
by the Military.Pure deviation from usual democratic practice .
S,161(d) prescribes that in forming the Region or State Hluttaw,one
third of all the members shall be nominated by the Military.Purely against
democratic practices.
( 2 ) Federal Principles .
S.40 (a) , ( c) and 410 combined prescribes that , in case
of emergency,the President can impose his own power directly in the States,
or Region,Union Territory, Self Administered Area, i.e. direct intervention
in their internal affairs.Against both democratic and federal principles.
Section 9 (a) says " The existing 7 Divions ----and 7 States are of
equal status."As already explained previously on p.21, in para.(1) in Chapter
III, these two categories e.g. States and Divisions were proved not to be
equal politically and so this section is totally wrong .By constituting these
States and Divisions of unequal nature into a Union in S.49 is against the
principle of Federal Union .
Ss.248 and 262 combined prescribes for the formation of Region or
State Governments,headed by Chief Ministers and Ministers to be
appointed

27

by the President . They are not Heads of States or Ministers of States of a

constituent State of a Federal Union , and they are not to be elected by
the State authorities but simply appointed by the President .Not a federal
union .
S.436 prescribes the method to amend the Constitution . It
prescribes that it shall be amended by prior approval of more than 75 % of
all the representatives of the Pyithu Hluttaw which is impraticable.The method of amendment in Constitutions are regarded as(1)Rigid and (2)Flexible.The present
method does not fall in those 2 catagories and should simply be classified as
(3) Impossible . A very peculiar kind of federal union indeed .
( 3 ) Regarding Tribal Affairs .
In our Union , there resided 8 races , approximately 40 tribes and
roughly near 90 clans, thus tatalling 135 . In spite of all the failings in this
constitution ,one exception is to be praised, i.e. granting of autonomy rights
to some tribal peoples, e.g. Paos ,Danus, Palaungs, Kokants,Was, and Nagas.
I had the opportunity to put up my suggestions to the Constituent Assembly ,
in 1974 , requesting to grant such rights , but to no avail .And this is why I
have to mention this event as praiseworthy .
But ,Shan State , as a whole is in a losing position , as mentioned in
detail above. I likened this position, as the whole Shan State being a boat ,
in which Shans,Inthas,Karens,Lahus,Pa Ohs,Danus,Palaungs,Kokants, and
Was..are its occupants . Those tribes are given better seats in the Shan
State boat which is in a sinking position ,and if the boat sinks ,all the occupants will be sinking as well . I request our tribal friends to see the
picture, in real perspective , and try to see all the inhabitants of Shan
State as
" Going the same journey ,in the same boat " as the Burmese proverb says ,
"wpfavSxJpD;/ wpfc&D;xJoGm; " .
The above findings clearly conclude that this socalled Republic is
not Democratic as well as not Federal Union at all .
This peculiar form of our State should be more meaningfully termed
as" The Militaric Republic of the Union of Myanmar.As mentioned before ,
we have started from bad, and moved to worse , and to worst ,at last .
Chapter V
Facing the Future .
( A ) The Doctrines of " Fait accompli " and " Real-politik"
(1) Dictionary meaning of the words .

28

Before proceeding further , we should understand well the meanings

of these two words, and for this purpose I take this opportunity to quote the
meanings ,mentioned in the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English .
" Fait accompli " means..." something that has already happened or has
been done and that cannot be changed " and " Real politik " means "politics
based on practical facts or possibilities rather than on moral aims and directed towards the success and advantage of one's own country, political group".
(2) What is the " fait accompli " we are facing at present ?
The " Constitution of the Republic of Union of Myanmar " was
duly adopted on the 29th. May, 2008.Our,(i.e. including myself )dislike and
opposition to that Constitution was plainly shown but to no avail . According to my own judgment , this cannot be changed , abruptly at the moment .
(3) What is the " Real politik " for us ?
We are facing the fact that ,the constitution we all disliked and opposed had already been legally adopted .And ,according to my own judgement,
the possibility to change at this moment is rather difficult.Though our aims
and directions are morally correct, a meaningful change , is out of question
right now.We should acknowledge the fact that we are totally overpowered,
rightly or wrongly. We should plainly differentiate between what is our
wishful thinking ,and what are possible and practical .
As for myself , I don't like the already adopted Constitution from
the bottom of my heart,but I will have to accept it for the practical purpose.
I appeal to my brother political leaders to do the same.Let us do Real politik.
(4) Let us cooperate and unite .
The authorities are in full command . They shall be moving at their
own pace ,and the possibility of popping up mass organizations under their
present control into political parties is just plainly foresee-able . If we decide
to stay away from the present situation and boycott the actual politics , we
will be helping the opposing forces in actuality and we may be digging our
own graves .
We have to commandeer all the possible manpower for the struggle to
come.We have to set aside all the differences,if any, and ignore our sense of
confrontation among ourselves and follow the path of cooperation,and get
united as a strong force . So , what shall we do now? Please let me explain in
some detail .
(B) Let us build " Federal Democratic Grand Alliance "
We have to change our attitudes basically.In place of narrow Nationalism or Regionalism , it is to be replaced by a new policy of "Democratic
Federalism". The attitude of Frontier Peoples confronting the majority

29

Burmese in fighting for a Federal Union should be changed to a position of

co-operation .
Let us build a Federal Democratic Grand Alliance,on the basis of
equality,i.e. all the nationalities sitting together and strive for our goal .Our
struggle should be directed widely and wisely for all to accept it as their own
cause.And all nationalities should participate in this common struggle with
an undivided faith. We will get our rights back , not immediately, but in due
course of time .
Some request for our ethnic brothers. As we all are in an aggrieved
position,we should all be united for a common cause,even if there may exist
some differences among us, which are natural to pop up sometimes.But we,
at the same time,should not forget that we are also in the same boat with our
Burmese brothers , and we should be prepared to go along with them in a
cooperative way, with a new political theory of "Democratic Federalism ".
No more confrontations .
One important word for the N.L.D. and other Burmese leaders .Our
Grand Alliance is designed to give a proper, proportionate and equal leadership to all in the Alliance ,and I can say without doubt that the N.L.D. and
other Burmese leaders will have a proper place as leaders in the Alliance .
We all should consider that we all are fighting for a common cause to
build a true Federal Union of Myanmar , for the whole population .
Our struggle for a true Federal Union of Burma had originated in
the year 1930 in our Shan States , and struggled for 17 years to get a bad
result , in 1948 after the Panlong Conference .We had struggled for another
26 years to get a worse result in 1974, and after another 34 years we have
to accept a worst result now. But we should not be disappointed . Soon , the
cycle of history is to be completed. We are now in the darkest hour of the
midnight , but the dawn of next day is in the horizon ,and if we are wise
enough to struggle for it patiently, we will see the light of day again. It is not
easy but not impossible.
I would like to remind our citizens that we will not be left alone in
our struggle for change.There are many internal elements experiencing from
their respective angles expecting for a change. International conditions will
not be the same always.I guess they are changing in a better position for us.
We only have to survive and be in the right mood and the right move. We
should be in a standby position.We will see the good happy days of our long
expected " the nondisintegrable Federal Union of Myanmar " in due course
of time .
EPILOUGE

30

( A ) Expriences of first Union period .( From 1948 to 1962 )

Let us go back ,some 60 years , i.e. to 1947. At that time , British
Burma was divided into three parts , e.g. (1) Burma Proper (2) Frontier
Areas , consisting of Federated Shan States , Kachin Hill Tracts and Chin
Hill Tracts and (3) Karenni States , which was literally independent from
Burma .Then , we all were at the cross roads . Under British Government's
Simla Plan ,Burma Proper would be granted independence soon, while the
remaining parts were to be left behind under Frontier Areas Administration
for some years,after which they will have the right to decide,whether to join
with Independent Burma or stay aloof as a seperate entity .
Indeed Shan States stood at the head of all others .Shan Sawbwas
started manoeuvreing for advance, and they were later assisted by the mass.
Some educated elders who were under the service of Sawbwas as ministers ,
and those who were in the service of British Administration, formed a nucleus and started giving advice to their chiefs. Among them ,U Kya Bu and Dr.
Ba Nyan of Hsipaw were most notable.They started advicing to add peoples'
representatives in the Shan States Council. In the Panlong Conference they
held meetings among themselves and discussed how to proceed in the
independence struggle.They were of the opinion that Siamese or Thais were
of the same blood with Shans in Burma , but they were aliens after all .
Burmans were of different blood but living together for long decades .They
were of the opinion that " the devil we know may be better than the devil
we dont know" , and adviced their Chiefs to side with the Burmans rather
than Thais .On the other hand Shan youths were much more advanced politically,and mostly anti-feudalists.Most were favouring to side with Burmans.
These forces joined together in achieving understanding with Burmese
leaders in Panlong Conference in 1947. These Shan movements were followed by Kachin and Chin delegates and later by Karennis .Thus
culminating in the Panlong Agreement .
But looking back to the past,we highlanders were right,at least in principle,in deciding to side with the Burmans to join forces together to gain independence from the British Imperialists and formed a Federation with Burma.But we were unprepared for the important task of drawing the Constitution. We were tender politically, we did not know the pros and cons of the
subject we were discussing .We simply trusted the leaders of A.F.P.F.L. led
by Bogyoke Aung San, in whom we have a great faith , or a kind of Hero
Worship ,which was popular and usually followed up to the present as well.
We had tried to finish the constitution,in a hurry.As a result,we had accepted
a Bogus Federal Union blindly.

31

But we faced the disadvantages of the Bogus Federal Union gradually.

Our powers were much curtailed to do for the good of our State.We were not
equals in the Union.Burma had taken the place of the Central State ,while we
were one status below. From those inequalities arose many problems and
grievences multiplied. Our internal affairs were mishandled by the Union
Government .Then only , we recognized that ,we have derailed from our
goal of a true federation .We started to know that , while we were right in
principle , we were wrong in applying the principle into practice ,i.e. wrong
in practice .
There were some imaginative dreams formulated later. What will
happen, if we Shans and other hill peoples had stayed aloof under Frontier
Areas Administration while Burma Proper alone got independence from
Britain ? No Panlong Agreement what-so-ever . Our slavery under British
would be prolonged, no doubt. But , we the Frontier peoples will not stay
standstill forever. We had started to learn politics and got some valuable
lessons. With those experiences behind us and if we struggled enough for
some years , say about ten years , i.e. by 1958 , we will be able to claim
our independence from the British for sure .We can cite Federated Malay
States for our example . Federated Malay States was under the British rule
in 1948 along with us. But she got independence in 1957 .
If that dream come true, we could continue further.We could then
rethink about our dream of a true federation with our old friend Burma . We
will be able to negotiate meaningfully with the leaders of new Burma State .
At that moment, we,as well as Burma's new leaders,would be mature enough
for a meaningful negotiation and will then be successful to create a true
Federated State of Burma .But the fools get a right thinking only too late ,
as the saying goes. (vlrdkufaemufrStjuH&). We might have been
wrong in
signing our famous Pinlong Agreement . Our attempts to amend the then
constitution was crushed with a heavy blow , and were annihilated at last ,
may be, for ever .I Say Bad Luck .
( B ) Experiences of second Union period .( From 1962 to 1988 )
This period started with the direct military administration under
Genral Ne Win ,then followed by one Party Rule under the Burma Socialist
Programme Party,of which U Ne Win was chairman .
In 1974,a Constituent Assembly was promulgated and a new constitution was drawn with so much fanfare.But,apart from the appearance,the who
-le show was highly manipulated from the top. Our country was designated
as a Union in English, and as Pyidaungsu in Burmese, which is equivalent to

32

a Federal State .Apart from that semblance in name ,the constitution was actually a Unitary State. Seven States, which have some sort of sovereignty
together with seven Divisions which were administrative parts of the Burma
Proper were amalgamated together to form the Union . Thus equality among
the races was lost.
There was only one house representing the entire people but no other
house representing the races. All power was centered in the top flowing
only downwards .Heads of the States and Divisions were appointed by the
President , not elected by the people .Economic policy was a socialist one ,
all private enterprises were closed down.Public enterprises only were allowed ,so that inefficiency reigned supreme and the whole economic system
collapsed. At last Burma was reduced to the Less Developed Country level.
All paper money was devaluated and the whole country was doomed resulting to great communal gatherings in the Streets , which led to the downfall
of U Ne Win's domain in 1988 .
( C ) Experiences under Military Regimes from 1988 to 2008 .
(1) Good deeds to be complimented .
(a) Improvements in infra structure .
We can not turn a blind eye for the improvements made in the
direction of infra structure . Many new roads,bridges, railway tracts , canals,
irrigation works, hydroelectric projects ,dams , banks ,educational institutes,
Universities, Colleges , schools, hospitals ,hotels , etc. are plain enough to
be seen with our own eyes, and for that deeds , we have to pay compliments
to the authorities .
(b) Market Economy in the right direction .
Private sector economics is seen to be improving .Enterprises in
the Industrial Zones seemed to be in good shape . Many local products are
seen in the local market and some are understood to be exported .Tourist
business seems to be flourishing .
(c) Economic Projects seems to be thriving .
Sea-shore drilling of natural gas , inland drilling of oil , mining
projects are seen as improving.Projects under Departments of Forest , Agriculture ,Health ,Tourisim , etc seemes to be in good shape .
We have to congratulate the authorities for all these improvements .
( 2 ) Some draw-backs and mis-deeds .
But all these deeds are done mostly under Military Organization,and
in military precision for which the local population had to bear the burden .
Some human rights abuses are reported from time to time , for which the
authorities should look into .
( 3 ) What if not a Military Government ?

33

On account of being a military government , International Communities such as United Nations and agencies under it , and many
international organizations are reluctant to invest in the country.
Economically advanced but democratic governments such as United
States of America, United Kingdom, European Community, Japan,
Republic of Korea, Australia, India etcare reluctant to give the
necessary aids to the military government.
Therefore , some speculates that , if , not a Military Government ,
but a Civil Government ,is in control , the situation may be improved much
better . And I think the present regime was in agreement in this point .
( 4 ) National Reconciliation .
National reconciliation is the most important aspect in the present
stage of the country .Whether you admit it or not , it is evident that there
existed much differences between the authorities and the adversaries to
be solved .It was a situation which cannot and should not be ignored .
In 1990 multi-party elections ,N.L.D. had won a landslide victory.This
fact was accepted and recognized by the authorities .Official announcements
have already been made to this effect . The authorities had already made
official promises for the N.L.D. to convene a National Convention . But the
authorities failed to honour it , for which much confusions and dissatisfactions between the authorities and N.L.D. arose . Whether the authorities
honour the result of the elections or not, the N.L.D. has a de jure position ,
if not a de facto status.This difference is well known throughout the world ,
and cannot be wiped out easily , as if nothing had happened. Though the
authorities claimed that a 92% victory in the Referendum had superceded
the 1990 elections ,it is not a proper way to solve the problem . It is only an
excuse but not a sufficient reason .
According to my thinking ,the following 5 steps to the National Reconciliation should be followed .
(1) Take the opportunity to get all existing ,as well as, new parties registered in due course , after the required law is promulgated . And try to get
them united in a single bloc for a united action . My suggestions to
form the " Federal Democratic Grand Alliance " is one such theory .
(2) Let all those parties participate in the forth-coming general elections
in 2010 , without fail , with a view to get sufficient seats , if not majority ,in
the Parliament , but to form a respectable minority.It is almost a possibility
to get popular support by then .
(3) Try to fight and get our voices heard loudly in the Hluttaw .
(4) From then only, proceed to get a meaningful dialouge,between the
opposition and the Government .I hope the authorities will heed our request .

34

(5) From dialouge , possibly after necessary Gives and Takes , try to get
our much sought for " National Reconciliation."
These 5 steps are the sure way to success , for the attainment
of " National Reconciliation ",we had longed for so many years .
( 5 ) Some important steps to be taken at present .
All political prisoners ,(including those who are charged with criminal offences ) shall be released forthwith .
All basic democratic rights ,such as freedom of speech , expression,
organisation, faith , etc shall be granted forthwith.
( D ) Conclusions .
In conclusion, I would like to mention a very important point at
this historical moment . In the term " we ", which I have used all along , I
mean to include all the citizens of our Union, i.e. including all the fighting
sons of our Tatmadaw, as they are also sons of parents of our fellow
citizens of Myanmar .
Dated,
( SHWE OHN )
the
day of
, 2008.
Ex-President .
Democratic League for Shan State Nationalities ,( De-registered ),
Taunggyi .
Shan State , Myanmar .
Home Address .
No. 8 , Shin Saw Pu Pagoda Road ,
Sanchaung Township ,
Yangon. Myanmar .

Phones :01-510541
01-510764

35

Books of References
( A ) Constitutions and Constitutionalism
Sr.No.
A-1 Constitutions of Modern States
A-2 Text of Modern Constitutions
A-3 Constitutions and Constitutionalism
A-4 Laws of the Constitutions(7th.Edn.)
A-5 Principles of Political Science
A-6 Comparative Government
A-7 Constitutional Government of India
A-8 Federal Government (4th.Edn.)
A-9 History of Political Thought
A-10

Author
L.W. Phillip
B.N.Rao
G.W. Andrews
A.V.Diccey
R.N.Gilchrist
J.H.Price
M.V.Pylee
K.C.Wheare
Gettel