“Bittersweet Harvest” in Cambodia – A cautionary tale for Myanmar

In June of this year the European Union (EU) reinstated Myanmar’s access to the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), which provides for duty and quota-free exports to EU countries under the “Everything But Arms” programme, raising hopes for much-needed job creation in the country.

Countries classified by the UN as “least developed” qualify for this programme, which provides preferential access to EU markets for all products except for arms and ammunition in order to help alleviate poverty through export-led development. The EU had suspended the GSP for Myanmar in 1997 because of the widespread use of forced labour in the country.

But politics in Myanmar have changed in the past two years, and the June 2013 reinstatement was applied retroactively to June 2012, when the International Labour Organization (ILO) Conference recognized improvements in Myanmar’s labour rights situation. The ILO and others have noted that forced labour of villagers by the authorities has decreased, but is still occurring in some parts of the country. In April the EU lifted all sanctions against Myanmar, keeping in place an arms embargo.

Now that the EU GSP has been reinstated, the garment, fisheries, and agriculture sectors are expected to expand significantly in Myanmar, with potential new employment opportunities for thousands of its workers. Myanmar has a large population of working age people and high under-employment, with some 70% of the population engaged in farming. Much of its land is fertile and suitable for agriculture.

The stated goal of the Ministry of Agriculture’s Thirty Year Plan (2000 – 2030) is to convert ten million acres of land into large-scale export-oriented plantations. Such crops include rubber, biofuels, and sugar cane. While the sugar industry is still relatively small in Myanmar, foreign investors have expressed interest in expanding into the country, and a credible 2010 report, indicates that concessions have been granted for sugarcane cultivation on large plantations in Kachin and Shan States in the north of the country, dispossessing farmers in the process.

While reinstatement of the EU’s GSP is surely welcome and could potentially help lift tens of thousands of Burmese people out of poverty, companies need to proceed with caution when acquiring land for export-based industries benefitting from the scheme. The land tenure regime in Myanmar is complex, with few rural people possessing land title documents even though they may have farmed their land for generations. Moreover, the last two years have been characterized by widespread land disputes since the government lifted some restrictions on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly as part of its ongoing reform process. However, several peaceful land grab protesters have been arrested and imprisoned under a new law, which allows for peaceful gatherings, but provides for imprisonment if organizers do not seek or receive prior permission for a demonstration. Many of these land disputes have involved small-scale farmers throughout the country, who have lost or are at risk of losing their land to companies seeking land for infrastructure projects, plantations, and Special Economic Zones.

The desperate situation of dispossessed small-scale farmers in fellow ASEAN member state Cambodia is a salutary example which companies, donor governments and the Myanmar authorities should heed. “Bittersweet Harvest”, a report published in September by Equitable Cambodia and Inclusive Development International, reveals widespread land confiscations and forced evictions of rural people by the authorities in three provinces for sugar cane plantations run by Thai sugar companies and a Cambodian businessman.

Sugar produced from these plantations has been exported to EU countries as part of the “Everything But Arms” Initiative. EU companies sourcing products from Myanmar should be aware of the practices of companies it is sourcing from, to ensure that these companies have not been complicit in land grabs and other abuses in Myanmar.

In just one example from “Bittersweet Harvest”, during 2008 the Cambodian government granted three economic land concessions to three companies for industrial sugar plantations in Oddar Meanchey Province, northwestern Cambodia. The authorities did not consult with local villagers and in April 2008 and again in October 2009 over 250 homes were destroyed by police and workers believed to be employed by the sugar companies. Hoy Mai was pregnant when her home in Bos village was burned, leaving her homeless; her rice fields were also cleared for sugar cane. She then travelled to the capital Phnom Penh to seek justice from the Prime Minister. For her efforts she was thrown in jail for violating the Forestry Law, where she gave birth. She was only released eight months later after signing an agreement to relinquish all claims on her land and accept replacement land. She returned home, but never received the promised plot of land.

“Bittersweet Harvest” concludes that, “in the absence of effective human rights safeguards, Cambodia’s policy of granting large-scale land concessions to private investors for agro-industrial development and the EU’s policy of granting preferential tariffs to spur such investment in least developed countries both carry risks of devastating human rights impacts. These risks have materialized in forced evictions and land seizures that have been part and parcel of the development of Cambodia’s sugar industry. As a result, affected people suffered a severe rollback in their enjoyment of basic human rights, including the rights to adequate food, water and housing, as well as the right to work, the right to education and the right to health.”

The people of Myanmar are at continued risk of such human rights abuses if protections for rural people are not put in place immediately. In fact, land grabs have already been occurring throughout the country for many years, especially in Ayeyarwady (Irrawaddy) Region and Kachin State. The Myanmar government should ensure that customary land rights of farmers, including those practicing shifting cultivation in upland areas, are acknowledged and protected. They must also ensure that more forced evictions and land grabs do not occur in the context of development, including agribusiness.

While the people of Myanmar have waited long for development, it is important that their transition from poverty occurs in a manner that respects their human rights. “The Economics of Peace and Conflict”, a recent report by the Myanmar Peace Monitor, a group of civil society organizations, highlights continued grievances regarding land confiscation by the military government dating back to the 1990s and new land laws which make it difficult for farmers to register their land, thus favouring large companies who have such capacity.

In one case from the report, during June and July this year, hundreds of farmers in the Ayeyarwady Delta protested against military confiscation of their land, and several were imprisoned. The government, in recognition of the land rights problem, has established several investigative committees, but it is unclear if this will lead to justice for small-holder farmers.

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights establish the clear responsibility of companies to respect human rights. As part of that responsibility, companies are expected to undertake due diligence regarding human rights impacts. The Myanmar Centre for Responsible Business, a joint initiative of the Institute for Human Rights and Business and the Danish Institute for Human Rights, advises companies which seek to acquire land-use rights in Myanmar to conduct enhanced due diligence with regard to the history of land tenure on land for their operations, given Myanmar’s troubled past, and can put them in touch with relevant expertise.

Time is running out for the farmers of Myanmar, and the time for action to prevent and redress these abuses is now.