By Pyae Thet Phyo   |   Tuesday, 04 April 2017 

Police have prevented 20 protesters from demonstrating in front of the Nay Pyi Taw  Supreme Court office.

Police Major Aung Than from Ottarathiri township stopped the group, led by U Lin Lin Naing and Daw Thinzar Maung Maung, near the Supreme Court office at around noon.

The police major told the media, “We did not hurt anyone. We stopped them for fear that they might break the law.”

“According to section 4(f) of Peaceful Assembly and Peaceful Procession Law, as protests are not allowed in the ministerial areas and areas restricted by the State, the police had to intervene,” he said.

The protesters from Bago Region say they are protesting because there is no “rule of law and rule of righteous and fair law.”

One leader of the group of protesters said that “Local order is found to be more powerful than the Peaceful Assembly and Peaceful Procession Law signed and stipulated by the President. There are people above the law. It is a meaningless act to stop the protest for truth. Such kind of ban is absurd in a democratic nation.”

The protesters peacefully marched from Shwe Kyar Pin junction, Danatheiddhi, that is adjacent to Zabuthiri and Dekkhinathiri townships, passing along the Nay Pyi Taw boundary road until the Pyinmana-Taungnyo junction and then on to the Wunnathiri township near the entrance to Ottarathiri township.

The procession was stopped for two hours by police interference when Supreme Court IT Department Director U Zaw Min Aung offered to negotiate with the group. Three representatives, including Daw Thinzar Maung Maung, went to the Supreme Court office and it is learnt that an amicable solution was cobbled.

Daw Thinzar Maung Maung was accused of borrowing K20 million two months ago although she actually borrowed only K10 million from a billionaire in Bago.  She lost a civil suit over the matter at the district court. She appealed but the matter was rejected. She came to the Supreme Court to protest the verdict.

“I told them that as our country doesn’t have a right and fair judicial system, the people have been suffering a lot. I called the truth to be revealed in my case. I have a friend. In her case, the signature in the contract was to be verified by the CID. It wasn’t her signature but the  CID replied that it was verified as her signature. So, she had to serve two years imprisonment. That was the wrong on the part of the CID. Because of that, I am also very doubtful about the CID actions in my case.” she said.