16/06/2026
CAS 114th International Labour Conference - Special Sitting on Myanmar
Intervention by ITUC
Phyo Sandar Soe (Assistant General Secretary of Confederation of Trade Unions-Myanmar)
2026 June 06 s
3:00 pm to 6:00 pm (ILO-ROOM GB)
Madam Chairperson,
I speak on behalf of Myanmar workers.
We have read carefully the written information submitted by the Myanmar military junta concerning the implementation of the ILO Commission of Inquiry recommendations. Let me begin by recalling a simple but important fact.
This is not the first Commission of Inquiry on Myanmar.
More than two decades ago, the ILO's highest investigative body examined the widespread use of forced labour in Myanmar. The ILC, the GB, the ILO Office, and us the workers and people of Myanmar invested enormous effort over many years to help bring the country into compliance with Convention No. 29. The international community believed that meaningful progress was possible. Today, we find ourselves once again discussing forced labour in Myanmar.
But this second COI has something more.It found not only continuing concerns relating to Convention No. 29, but also grave and systematic violations of Convention No. 87 concerning freedom of association.
This Conference, GB and the Committee on FOA have heard these concerns before and repeatedly.
And workers in Myanmar continue to suffer this every day.The workers' group does not raise these points to assign blame to anyone.
On the contrary, the history of Myanmar demonstrates how much effort the ILO and the workers group have already devoted to supporting the people of Myanmar.
Rather, the lesson is that the situation in Myanmar is far more complex than many originally anticipated.
The authorities have become highly deceitful at managing international criticism while preserving the infrastructures that give rise to the violations themselves.
The written submission before us illustrates this problem.
The authorities emphasize the release of trade unionists and other detainees.
Of course, this is welcome.
The military authorities ask this Conference to believe that the rule of law is functioning, and that detainees are treated fairly.
Yet, more than five years after the coup, the international community still lacks independent proof of life and well-being of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.
This is not merely a political question. It is a question of transparency, accountability and basic human dignity.
If the authorities are confident in their claims, they should permit independent verification of her condition and the condition of all those detained for peacefully exercising their civil liberties.
Until then, this Conference has every reason to remain concerned about the state of fundamental freedoms in Myanmar.
Every worker, every trade unionist, every human rights defender who regains freedom is a positive development.
But this Conference must ask a fundamental question: Should the international community praise the release of persons who should never have been arrested in the first place?
When children were forcibly recruited into the armed forces and subsequently released, the world was asked to view those releases as evidence of progress.
When trade unionists were illegally arrested, detained, prosecuted and imprisoned, the world was later asked to view their release as evidence of compliance.
When charges were withdrawn, the world was asked to celebrate.
Yet the underlying violations remain.
All of those released have reportedly been forced to sign commitments not to undertake any protest actions against miltary junta.
Many continue to live under threat of renewed arrest and unable to exercise their rights freely.
And nobody can say with certainty how many others remain imprisoned, intimidated, in hiding, or forced into exile.
This is not a new pattern.
It is precisely the pattern that the ILO confronted during the implementation of the first COI.
The junta repeatedly argue that trade unionists were not arrested because of trade union activities but because they violated other laws, particularly legislation relating to national security and counter-terrorism.
This argument misses the point.
Convention No. 87 is not limited to the internal administration of labour organizations.
Freedom of association cannot exist without the political and civil liberties necessary for its exercise.
The Committee on FOA, the Committee of Experts, and successive COI have consistently affirmed that freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention, due process, and personal security are indispensable preconditions for freedom of association.
Madam Chairperson,
Let us not forget the hundreds of thousands of Myanmar civil servants who joined the Civil Disobedience Movement. Their only offence was refusing to submit to military rule. For that decision, many lost their livelihoods, were forced into hiding or exile, and remain separated from their families, who continue to live under threats and intimidation. Their sacrifice stands as one of the clearest expressions of the Myanmar people's rejection of repression and their determination to reclaim dignity, freedom, and democracy.
Workers do not cease to be trade unionists when they speak publicly.
Trade unionists do not cease to enjoy Convention No. 87 protection when they criticize public policies.
Workers do not lose their rights when they advocate democratic governance, oppose unlawful conscription, defend labour rights, or seek to organize peacefully.
The junta state that no measures have been taken to restrict freedom of association and that no laws have been enacted to curtail such rights.
Yet the COI concluded otherwise.
The COI specifically called for the revocation of military orders and measures that restrict freedom of association and the restoration of the civil liberties necessary for its exercise.
The recommendation was not accidental.
It reflected extensive evidence that workers, trade unionists and civil society actors have been subjected to arrest, prosecution, detention, intimidation and surveillance for peacefully exercising rights protected under C 87.
The authorities further point to the registration of over 3,000 labour organizations as evidence that freedom of association is fully respected.
But FOA cannot be measured merely by counting registration certificates.
The true test is whether workers can organize independently, elect their representatives freely, bargain collectively, assemble peacefully, express their views openly, and challenge authority without fear of arrest, retaliation or violence.
Workers' organizations continue to report that independent unions face intimidation, dispersal of meetings, surveillance and harassment.
Trade union leaders continue to operate from exile.
Many workers are afraid to identify themselves publicly as union members.
That is not an environment in which freedom of association can flourish.
The junta also state that only one CTUM leader, U Maung Maung, had his citizenship revoked.
CTUM respectfully submits that this statement illustrates the serious problem rather than resolves it.
The President of Myanmar's largest and internationally recognized trade union confederation should never have been stripped of citizenship because of his trade union activities and advocacy.
The fact that only one trade union leader was subjected to such a measure does not diminish its gravity.
It highlights the chilling message sent to all workers who might seek to exercise their rights.
Madam Chairperson,
Particularly troubling is the assertion that the proposed monitoring mechanism exceeds the scope of Conventions Nos 29 and 87 because it would examine fundamental rights violations and related civil liberties.
This position is fundamentally inconsistent with long-established ILO jurisprudence.
Freedom of association does not exist in isolation.
The ILO supervisory bodies have consistently recognized that the civil liberties essential to the normal exercise of trade union rights include freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of assembly, protection against arbitrary arrest and detention, fair trial guarantees, and protection against violence and intimidation.
These are not external political considerations.
They are the foundation upon which C 87 rests.
Without these civil liberties, freedom of association becomes merely a legal fiction.
The Commission of Inquiry itself expressly addressed these issues because it recognized that attacks on civil liberties directly undermine the exercise of freedom of association.
The proposed monitoring mechanism therefore does not expand the mandate of the ILO.
It reflects the reality identified by the Commission of Inquiry.
Madam Chairperson,
The authorities ask this Conference to judge progress by the number of pardons granted, organizations registered, awareness sessions conducted, and disputes settled.
Workers ask this Conference to judge progress by a different standard.
Can workers organize without fear?
Can we return home safely?
Can we operate openly?
Can we criticize public policy without being labelled enemies of our own country?
Can we refuse participation in armed conflict without fear of punishment?
Can trade union leaders advocate for workers' rights without risking arrest, exile, or imprisonment?
Until the answer to these questions is yes, the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry remain far from fully implemented.
The workers of Myanmar are not asking for special treatment.
They are asking for the rights guaranteed under the ILO Constitution, under Conventions Nos 29 and 87, and under the recommendations adopted by this Organization.
The International Labour Conference has confronted these issues before.
The lesson from the first Commission of Inquiry is clear.
Symbolic gestures cannot substitute for structural change. Individual releases cannot substitute for freedom.
Pardons cannot substitute for justice.And administrative registration cannot substitute for genuine freedom of association.
The workers' group therefore urges the Conference to maintain its vigilance, support robust monitoring of the situation, and ensure that implementation of the Commission of Inquiry's recommendations is assessed not by promises or isolated concessions, but by measurable improvements in the daily lives and freedoms of workers throughout Myanmar.
Thank you.
