A natural disaster doesn´t in itself amount to a violation of human rights. It is the authorities´ handling of the situation that sometimes does. This certainly applies to the current situation in Burma, argues Marte Graff Jenssen, right, the Norwegian Burma Committee´s information officer. (07-MAY-08)

This interview was conducted and has been written by HRH F / Niels Jacob Harbitz.

-First, Graff Jenssen, in your opinion, what rights have been broken, and how, in the 1) Hvilke urgent relief situation caused by the cyclone Nagris?

-Well, by not informing the people properly about the upcoming cyclone, one can argue that the junta deliberately broke the Universal Declarion´s Article 3, stating everyone´s right to life, liberty and security of person. The junta did not prepare well enough for people to be able to take neceserry measures to protect
themselves. After the cyclone, the junta has been reluctant to help the people to clean up, to give their loved ones a respectful funeral, and by not allowing the international community immediate access to the affected
areas, the junta has violated article 22, about the right to social security and article 25 about the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family.

Can you also elaborate on how the conditions have been worsened, how the suffering has increased, by the junta´s lack of respect for ordinary Burmese citizens´ rights in the current situation?

-A natural disaster almost always affects the poorest the most. They have the most fragile housing situation, they are living from hand to mouth and do not have stocks they can rely upon when the disaster hits. By not
helping its people, the Burmese junta is denying people their basic rights, such as to access to medicines, clean water and food. And the situation is worsening hour by hour. If the junta had opened the country and immediately accepted international assistance, the affected areas would be recieving medical treatment and food by now, and the number of deaths would not have been continiously increasing. If they had allowed freedom of speech in the country, the media would have talked more about the possible dangers of the cyclone. If the junta had cared about its people, ut would have postponed the upcoming referendum in the whole country, not only in parts, and for more than two weeks. How are the people going to be able to discuss constitutional matters when they don´t have food, clean water and a roof over their heads?