The cold-blooded assassination of prominent constitutional lawyer U Ko Ni, an advisor to Aung San Suu Kyi, is emblematic of the deep political and social divisions that challenge democratic governance and political stability in Burma. As information has emerged about the case, the impact is inevitable on efforts to reform the country’s structures and unify its people.

Muslim mourners in Yangon carry the coffin of Ko Ni, a slain NLD member and lawyer, Jan. 30, 2017. (Paul Vrieze/VOA)
Muslim mourners in Yangon carry the coffin of Ko Ni, a slain NLD member and lawyer, Jan. 30, 2017. Photo Courtesy of VOA/Paul Vrieze

As he waited for transportation in front of the airport terminal in Yangon on Jan. 29, U Ko Ni was shot from behind by a hired gunman with a long prison record. With the help of some determined taxi drivers who chased down the gunman, the police captured him. 

On the basis of his testimony, the police announced that a retired military officer had paid the suspect a large sum of money to kill the lawyer. The police later arrested two additional suspects, one a former military intelligence officer and the other the brother of the alleged mastermind and a former prison inmate.  The alleged mastermind himself, a former Army lieutenant colonel, has yet to be apprehended.
The facts that have emerged so far point to the nativist extremism that lurks in dark corners of the Burman Buddhist psyche. Politically, there is the fact that U Ko Ni was known to be advising Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy (NLD) party on constitutional revisions to eliminate the heavy military influence over the country’s political process. After 55 years of strict military rule, leaders of Burma’s armed forces are not ready to relinquish the provisions in the constitution that give them veto power in the parliament and control of all decisions affecting the country’s security. 
Against the backdrop of the religious divisions between Burma’s majority Buddhists and the minorities such as the stateless Rohingya Muslims, the fact that U Ko Ni was Muslim became the basis for extremist monk U Wirathu to praise the assassin.  
Other military connections in the case are revelatory too. According to the police, all the people implicated in the case thus far are retired military.  And the brazen nature of the assassination—with a military weapon in a public setting in broad daylight—suggests that the incident was planned purposely to instill public fear and to demonstrate that powerful forces behind the scenes have the capacity to derail the country’s political course.

Police have attributed the motivation for the assassination to a “personal grudge.” They elaborated by saying that the mastermind had confided to his co-conspirators that he resented U Ko Ni’s political activities, and his brother solicited the hired assassin to “kill a diplomat of a foreign religion” in full public view, because it would be “good for the country, race, and religion.”

Attributing the act to extreme nationalism, the authorities asked rhetorically why all the perpetrators are ex-military and were they trying to sow discord between the government and the military?
Burmese officials and other observers with whom I’ve spoken report that the public tends to view the assassination as a warning to liberal reformers that conservative elements aligned behind the scenes with the military are still prepared to act as spoilers to protect their perceived interests. Not surprisingly, the case has sent a chill through the body politic.

Related Publications

South Sudan’s Pitfalls of Power Sharing

South Sudan’s Pitfalls of Power Sharing

Friday, February 16, 2018

By: USIP Staff; Susan Stigant; Aly Verjee

This week, a new proposal for a power sharing government was tabled at the ongoing Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) High Level Revitalization Forum (HLRF) peace talks for South Sudan. An earlier, 2015 peace deal also contained a formula for power sharing; that arrangement failed and the civil war re-ignited a year later. Power sharing arrangements are appropriate if certain conditions are met, but not enough has been done to ensure the latest proposal will overcome the obstacles present in South Sudan, according to Susan Stigant, USIP’s director for Africa programs and Aly Verjee, a visiting expert at USIP and a former senior advisor to the IGAD mediation, who comment on the proposal and suggest how it could be improved.

Democracy & Governance; Fragility and Resilience; Global Policy

Understanding China’s Response to the Rakhine Crisis

Understanding China’s Response to the Rakhine Crisis

Thursday, February 8, 2018

By: Adrienne Joy

Following attacks on police posts by an armed Rohingya militia in August 2017, reprisals by the Burmese government have precipitated a humanitarian crisis. More than six hundred thousand Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh, where they face an uncertain future. Publicly stating that the root cause of conflict in Rakhine is...

Global Policy

Reframing the Crisis in Myanmar’s Rakhine State

Reframing the Crisis in Myanmar’s Rakhine State

Monday, January 22, 2018

By: Gabrielle Aron

In the aftermath of attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army and subsequent military clearance operations, two competing narratives have emerged. One frames the attacks as a critical threat to national security and the majority cultural-religious status quo. The second focuses on the human cost...

Global Policy; Human Rights

View All Publications