(II) FAILURE TO SEEK PRIOR AND FREE CONSENT In most cases companies sought some from of consent from residents for the acquisition of their land, but interviewees’ descriptions of the consent given frequently indicated varying degrees of coercion. Speaking about Zaykabar Co. Ltd., Ni Don resident Nai Thein said:
Company authorities offering donations to a senior monk in Ni Don.
“We are not pleased about what we gave to them against our wishes.”187
Farmers in Mae Gro, Ni Don, and Ka Don Si villages reported that they, or others in their village, had been threatened or intimidated over the course of acquisition talks.188 Referring to Pacific Link’s negotiations with Ka Don Si villagers, 53-year-old resident Nai Htun said, “The company members do not speak politely to villagers.”189 A common threat used by all three companies was the insistence that farmers’ land was needed for a State-level project and if farmers did not hand over their land for the compensation offered, it would instead be forcibly confiscated for no payment whatsoever.190 “The authorities and the [June Industry] company threatened the owners, 187
HURFOM Interview K5, Ni Don village, July 2013. HURFOM Interviews K1, K3-4, K9, Mae Gro village, April-August 2013 (regarding June Industry); HURFOM Interview K5, Ni Don village, July 2013 (regarding Zaykabar); HURFOM Interviews K10 & K15, Ka Don Si village, August 2013 (regarding Pacific Link); Letter from Pyar Taung and Natural Environment Watch Network to the President regarding Pacific Link, 27/06/13 (Source K3). 189 HURFOM Interview K10, Ka Don Si village, August 2013. 190 HURFOM Interviews Nos. K1-4 & K9, Mae Gro village, April-August 2013 (regarding June Industry); Letter from Mae Gro farmers to Land Investigation Commission regarding June Industry, 27/04/13 (Source K1); HURFOM, ‘When I became desperate’, 18 January 2011 (regarding Zaykabar); Letter from Pyar Taung and Natural Environment Watch Network to the President regarding Pacific Link, 27/06/13 (Source K3). 188
HURFOM Ι October 2013
68