The Myanmar revolutionary National Unity Government’s (NUG) handling of a high-profile corruption case has drawn backlash. Critics say that its response to the case lacks accountability, while supporters argue it’s the best possible outcome.

On November 19, 12 staff members of the NUG’s Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) accused Permanent Secretary Kyi Pyar and her husband, Nyi Nyi Min, of verbal abuse, nepotism, abuse of power, financial misconduct, and exploitation of staff. An internal investigation later confirmed ethical lapses, resulting in warnings and the removal of family members of Kyi Pyar from official posts, but cleared the couple of allegations of major corruption. Kyi Pyar then resigned on health grounds last month amid public outrage.

In their 25-page complaint, which was submitted to authorities including the NUG’s prime minister and acting president, the staff members alleged that the couple treated the PMO as a “family business,” blocked staff access to ministers, misused funds, hired relatives, and even spent money on a dog’s birthday party. Later, a case of sexual harassment against Nyi Nyi Min was also filed by one of the staff members responsible for the first complaint. According to the initial complaint, the pair threatened staff that the People’s Defense Forces, the NUG’s armed wing, could get rid of them.

A local media outlet, Myanmar Pressphoto Agency, broke the story on November 20, sparking widespread anger. Kyi Pyar denied the allegations on her Facebook page, citing her clean record and pledging cooperation. Kyi Pyar is a former member of the National League for Democracy party who served as MP for Yangon’s Kyauktada township during 2015–2020, during which she sat on the parliament’s Public Accounts Committee. In 2020, she criticized the misuse of public funds in a government office project.

The NUG suspended Kyi Pyar and her husband on November 22, forming a five-member investigation team led by then Minister of Health and Education Zaw Wai Soe (now the minister at the Prime Minister’s Office) with two ministers (Lwin Ko Latt and Win Myat Aye) and one deputy minister (Ja Htoi Pan) serving as members, and Naw Susanna Hla Hla Soe, former minister for Women, Youths and Children Affairs, serving as the secretary. The probe was expected to conclude within a month.

The “Kyi Pyar Government”

The complainants subsequently launched a Facebook page named “Those Unravelling Kyi Pyar’s Corruption Case,” on which they posted updates about the case. The NUG’s investigators asked for its removal, arguing that its use of the phrase “one who practices corruption” violated rules, but the page remained active. On December 18, Kyi Pyar filed a counter-complaint accusing the 12 staff members of leaking secrets and discrediting the NUG. The public was furious, with some dubbing the NUG the “Kyi Pyar Government.”

After weeks of silence, Zaw Wai Soe reassured the public on December 29 that the NUG had a “zero-tolerance policy” on corruption. But the case stalled until February 18, when an internal letter signed by NUG Prime Minister Mahn Win Khaing Than cleared Kyi Pyar of corruption due to lack of evidence, but warned her to treat staff more politely and kindly.

“At a time when staff members are enduring various hardships and mental stress due to the multifaceted oppression of the terrorist military group, it is a period where one must alleviate such stress by communicating with them kindly,” the letter stated. “Therefore, Daw Kyi Pyar is sternly warned to refrain from such impolite communication in the future and to interact with staff in a gentle and kind manner.”

The timing, coinciding with the defection of resistance fighter Bo Nagar to the Myanmar military, only fueled internal criticism. Some claimed online that the NUG was eager to bury the case and move on.

The complainants have since posted redacted documents online, and several resistance-aligned organizations have suspended their cooperation with the NUG. The CDM Medical Network said that it would suspend ties, and the University Admissions Guidance Committee, under the NUG’s Education Ministry, said it halted all processing of university admissions. Telekyanmar, a telemedicine service, warned that it would exit the NUG Ministry of Health and transition to independent operations if a resolution is not reached within seven days.

Under pressure, the NUG held a press conference on February 21.

The two-hour-long conference was messy. Zaw Wai Soe opened with a 15-minute-long speech about the case being a litmus test for the revolution, followed by Ja Htoi Pan reading word-for-word the NUG’s seven-page NUG report on the case, which took an additional 15 minutes. Naw Susanna Hla Hla Soe was seen driving while answering questions, and other ministers only answered enquiries when Zaw Wai Soe called upon them.

While answering questions, Zaw Wai Soe made a heartfelt confession during the conference that he felt ashamed to talk about salaries with NUG staff, as the staff in the department were working on a monthly salary of just “50,000.” He didn’t specify which currency, but it’s most likely that he was referring to the Myanmar kyat. (50,000 kyat is currently worth around $12.50.)

“Our ministers whether on the ground or other places, do they own cars? Do they have their own apartments?” he said. “Ask any NUG ministers. So, a salary is a distant thing. We are doing a revolution…. Our phone screens are cracked. Our computers are cracked. We are doing the revolution in these circumstances.”

In its report, the NUG confirmed that Kyi Pyar had used harsh language, permitted nepotism by hiring her husband and nephews, and that her husband violated the Protection from Sexual Harassment, Exploitation and Abuse (PSHEA) policy in a non-physical way. No evidence of corruption or embezzlement was uncovered.

The NUG issued a severe warning to Kyi Pyar, removed her husband and nephews from their posts, and reprimanded four complainants for breaching confidentiality. It also proposed six reforms: clearer administrative guidelines, balanced workloads, an anti-nepotism policy, separation of home and office, regular audits, and the use of official bank accounts for transparency. Zaw Wai Soe mentioned that more actions will be taken if necessary and that the NUG will make more statements concerning the case.

After the press conference, as mentioned, Kyi Pyar submitted her resignation on grounds of health. One local media outlet, The Ayeyarwaddy Times, reported that families close to Kyi Pyar said she was receiving treatment for the final stage of cancer.

Accountability or Damage Control?

After the press conference, the Facebook page dropped “Kyi Pyar” from its name but remained online in order to preserve all the documents uploaded. Meanwhile, those groups that said they would stop working with the NUG have resumed their cooperation. For NUG supporters, this was an open-and-shut case, but critics felt the decision was lacking proper accountability.

Speculation persists that the complaints were a coordinated smear campaign, possibly involving junta interference or third-party agendas.

If true, this implies a seasoned politician was easily manipulated. However, the documented confidentiality breaches suggest something simpler. Individuals with genuine grievances bypassed institutional channels, believing public pressure would be more reliable than internal processes – a belief that was ultimately validated.

Critically, the “conspiracy” narrative does not dispute the NUG’s findings. The investigation confirmed verbal abuse, nepotism, and PSHEA violations.

Stepping back to examine the NUG’s handling, several issues stand out. The investigation, expected to conclude within a month, stretched to three. That was understandable if more time was needed, yet the prolonged silence from the probe team was a clear sign of weakness.

The two official statements never proposed suspending Kyi Pyar, let alone dismissing her.

The first (internal) NUG statement merely reprimanded her for impoliteness. The second, official report confirmed nepotism but excused her harsh verbal conduct as a product of “revolutionary stress,” deemed strict adherence to labor rights impractical “due to the nature of work in the current revolutionary period,” and justified family hires by citing “security risks” that required “loyal and personally trustworthy” individuals.

Four of the complainants who were still serving the PMO received warnings for breaching probe confidentiality, and the statement blamed media reporting for “causing obstacles to the federal democratic revolution” and harming unity among CDM staff and allies. It did, however, note that time was required for a fair process and promised to implement the lessons learned.

With the husband and nephews removed and Kyi Pyar resigning voluntarily on health grounds, what meaningful punishment can the NUG now impose? The case was not handled well, and issuing warnings to whistleblowers only deepened concerns. Actions that could be seen as abuse or improper are written off as unavoidable, signaling that “this is the new normal.” Even criticizing the NUG’s systems in general draws accusations of “trying to harm the revolution”.

The NUG’s proposed reforms – adopting an anti-nepotism policy, ending the use of personal bank accounts, and conducting regular audits – are welcome if seriously implemented. Yet they inevitably raised the question of why they were not implemented before.

To play devil’s advocate, the pro-NUG view has some merit. With the military junta preparing to convene a new parliament later this month, disunity among resistance forces serves its interests well. The junta is no doubt the true enemy. But being “a little better than the junta,” accepting complaints and issuing mild punishments, cannot be the standard. The NUG is not meant to be the lesser evil. It must be accountable, transparent, and just. If not now, when? If a little bit better is good enough, many asked, then what are we fighting for?