Myanmar Spring Chronicle – Scenes from March 7
(MoeMaKa), March 8, 2026
The National Unity Government and Accountability to the People
In recent months, a series of reports have emerged concerning accountability and responsibility in relation to the National Unity Government (NUG), particularly its Prime Minister’s Office and People’s Defense Forces (PDFs) in the central dry zone.
A complaint filed in November against the Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office—alleging arrogance toward subordinates, financial misappropriation, and the appointment of family members and relatives within the same department—was widely covered and discussed in news and social media for months, drawing extensive criticism.
Around the same time, clashes broke out in Pale Township, Sagaing Region, between Bo Nagar’s forces and NUG-aligned groups such as the PDF and Pa Ka Pha (People’s Defense Teams). After fighting began against Bo Nagar’s troops, he surrendered to the military junta the following day. Coincidentally, on the same day, a letter containing the findings of the investigation into the complaint against the Permanent Secretary was released.
The issue of the complaint against the Permanent Secretary resurfaced as a matter of public interest almost simultaneously with the widely discussed news of Bo Nagar’s surrender.
Given that the accused was the Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office, many had anticipated that the Prime Minister and other NUG ministers might face difficulties or conflicts of interest in conducting the investigation. Even without resorting to conspiracy theories suggesting that no effective action would be taken because members know each other’s weaknesses, it is clear that an entirely independent and impartial inquiry would be difficult under such circumstances. What should have been done, therefore, was to form an independent commission composed of external experts—not members of the cabinet—to investigate and issue a report, or to have the matter handled by a judicial body. This concerns accountability in relation to the complaint against the Permanent Secretary.
Regarding Bo Nagar’s surrender, questions have arisen as to why it was necessary to launch what appeared to be military-style operations against another armed group. Allied armed groups in the central region criticized the method of resolving disputes among forces that are all fighting against the military dictatorship, arguing that conflicts between partner groups should be handled differently.
However, from the NUG’s side, statements were issued only on the night of Bo Nagar’s surrender, listing allegations that he had committed and was responsible for various crimes.
If these complaints had already been received before the surrender occurred, why were they not publicly disclosed earlier? Why were allegations such as rape and extrajudicial killings announced only after the surrender? Such questions have also been raised.
In this context, an alliance known as the SRA—comprising revolutionary forces from Upper Sagaing, western Yaw, the eastern Shan-North border region, and Karenni (Kayah) State—held an online meeting with the NUG. Afterward, they told the media that they had discussed the need to avoid resolving conflicts between allied armed groups through armed confrontation. Subsequently, some leaders and members of the SRA alliance were arrested by NUG-affiliated PDF forces.
Arrests occurring among revolutionary armed groups and allies risk causing public disappointment and disillusionment with the revolution.
Another recent incident, widely circulated on social media and reported by some news outlets, involves a complaint that in Yinmarbin Battalion No. 20 under the NUG, a female member was detained for allegedly collecting donations in a village without informing the battalion. During her detention, she was allegedly raped by a responsible official and another member of the battalion.
In light of such alleged crimes within battalions under the NUG Ministry of Defense, as well as arrests among allied armed groups, the NUG must act swiftly and take decisive action, while transparently releasing information to the public.
Otherwise, there is a risk that people will conclude that the same types of crimes—such as rape and abuse of power—allegedly committed by Bo Nagar are also being committed by People’s Defense Forces under the revolutionary NUG.
If the NUG dismisses these reports circulating on social media and in certain news outlets as unworthy of attention, or believes it need not respond to every such allegation, it will indeed damage and diminish its accountability to the public. It should not hastily conclude that such reports are merely attacks by those who oppose the NUG or by hostile media outlets.
Only by taking action without favoritism, addressing matters impartially, and upholding human rights standards—holding accountable whoever commits violations—can the NUG maintain the trust and confidence of the people. This point bears repeating and emphasizing.