Myanmar’s ex-UK ambassador on trial in UK for trespassing at diplomatic residence

Myanmar’s former ambassador to the United Kingdom, Kyaw Zwar Minn, appeared in a London court on Wednesday to face a trespass charge after refusing to vacate the diplomatic residence he has occupied since being removed from his post following Myanmar’s 2021 military coup.

Minn, 68, was locked out of Myanmar’s embassy in London several months after the February 2021 coup. He had publicly called for the release of Myanmar’s civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi and opposed the military takeover.

Although he was subsequently replaced by representatives of Myanmar’s military authorities, Minn continued to live at Myanmar House, the ambassador’s official residence in northwest London. He has been charged with trespassing between May 2021 and November 2024.

Minn has pleaded not guilty. His defence argues that the military authorities who took power in Myanmar were illegitimate and therefore did not have the legal authority to terminate his right to occupy the diplomatic property.

Ex-ambassador challenges military authorities’ right to remove him

Appearing before Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Minn listened as prosecutor Louise Oakley said Myanmar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs had formally recalled him after the coup and instructed him to surrender state-owned properties.

According to prosecutors, Minn was ordered to hand over Myanmar’s state properties by mid-April 2021. Britain’s Foreign Office also informed him that he was required to leave the ambassador’s residence, but he refused to do so.

Oakley argued that Minn had originally been permitted to live at Myanmar House because of his position as ambassador. Once that position was terminated, she said, his permission to remain at the property also ended.

“Having been granted permission to reside at Myanmar House as the ambassador, his refusal to vacate the diplomatic premises after he was removed from that position means that he is guilty of the offence of diplomatic trespass,” Oakley told the court.

Minn’s lawyer, David Perry, said his client’s defence was based on the argument that Myanmar’s post-coup government was illegitimate.

“The military authorities could not lawfully terminate his licence at the (diplomatic) address … and nor could they legitimately use the property,” Perry said.

Prosecutors reject legitimacy argument

Prosecutors maintained that Minn’s political position did not provide a legal defence against the trespass charge.

Oakley argued that his authority to occupy Myanmar House as ambassador had been formally withdrawn and that the legal permission attached to his diplomatic position had consequently ended.

She also acknowledged that Minn did not recognise Myanmar’s military-backed government but said that this was irrelevant to the trespass proceedings.

“This defendant may not recognise the outcome of the coup and the construction of the government in Myanmar – that, we submit, is irrelevant,” Oakley said.

The trial continues.

With inputs from agencies