In the huge marble halls of the Hluttaw, the officers exchange greetings with other members of parliament. Some do a bit of last-minute work on one of the computers in the library.

Before the session starts at 10am, MPs take their seats in the chamber. The military representatives sit together in one of the four blocks of chairs positioned in a half moon shape around the single elevated seat of the Speaker. The seating arrangement provides a visual expression of the constitutional provision requiring 25 percent of the Hluttaw to be appointed members of the military.

All military MPs are hand-picked for the job by the Commander-in-Chief of the Defence Forces, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing. “We, army representatives, are all directly and personally selected by the Commander-in-Chief,” said a deputy commander in the army who is one of the military representatives in the Amyotha Hluttaw, or upper house.

The selection procedure is laid down in the constitution, which has been widely criticised for giving too much power to the military. Article 119 of the constitution stipulates a five-year term for members of parliament, but many military MPs serve shorter terms.

“They change, there is no fixed term for military MPs,” said an international development worker who takes a close interest in the workings of parliament. “If they get a promotion or if they are transferred, another just takes their place,” he said.

The deputy commander said he was selected to be an MP because of his long service in the army and broad experience. Sitting in the library of the Amyotha Hluttaw while other MPs chatted quietly in the background, he seemed at ease in the parliament. For more than two years he has been attending parliamentary sessions under the orders of his superiors.

The military members of parliament interviewed for this report said they found their parliamentary role interesting but acknowledged that it involved challenges.

“It is very interesting and very difficult,” the deputy commander said. “Especially drafting bills is difficult, because all people will be affected by the laws. We have to be very careful, the present and the future time is very delicate,” he said, as two military MPs seated beside him nodded in agreement.

During the last two years, some elected MPs have accused the military representatives of a lack of interest in the parliamentary proceedings. But recently, they now say, the representatives of the Tatmadaw have taken on a more active role during the sessions.

Some elected MPs speak positively about the increased engagement of their military colleagues.

“I think now they are ordered to put up proposals,” U Win Htein, who represents Meikthila for the National League for Democracy, said on the sidelines of a parliamentary session on 17th October.

“The Speaker gives them a chance and every day now one of them asks a question, mostly concerned with health and education; I think they really care about that,” U Win Htein said.

But an MP for the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party said the military representatives had been ordered to be more active during sessions to improve perceptions about their participation in the parliament.

“They are more active now but it is just for show, because they were criticised for not being active,” said the USDP representative, a former army officer.

With 25 percent of the seats, the military is a powerful bloc in parliament. When the military votes, it is often under orders. Military representatives in the Amyotha Hluttaw said they can decide for themselves about minor matters, but for issues of importance to the military they are told how to vote by superiors.

“We protect the constitution. We think in connection with the people, we choose what is most effective for the people,” said the deputy commander.

Protecting the charter is a task laid down for the military in the 2008 Constitution, drafted by a panel appointed by the previous military government. The allocation of a quarter of the seats in the parliament to the military gives its MPs an effective veto over constitutional amendments because they need the approval of 75 percent of the Hluttaw.

Military MPs said they have a “leader” in the Hluttaw to ensure they vote according to the Tatmadaw’s wishes. “In the Amyotha Hluttaw it is Brigadier-General Kyaw Oo Lwin, in the Pyithu Hluttaw [lower house] and the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw [Union Parliament] another person has this responsibility,” said the deputy commander.

“It is not just an order, we have a meeting and discuss the vote and why we should choose this,” said a Major who is an MP in the Amyotha Hluttaw.

Brig-Gen Kyaw Oo Lwin functions as what is known in other parliaments around the world as a “whip”, whose roles include ensuring attendance and voting in debates according to the party line.

Because of their freedom to vote freely on issues not related to national security or of specific interest to the Tatmadaw, the military MPs have not always voted as a bloc. Their independence on some issues is reflected in a voting record which shows they have approved proposals put forward by the NLD and, interestingly, have voted against proposals introduced by the government.

The ruling USDP is headed by former general Thura U Shwe Mann, who succeeded President U Thein Sein, also a general rule during military rule, in the party’s top job. Many members of the USDP and its representatives in the parliament are former military officers. This created the expectation that the USDP and the military would be on the same side in parliamentary votes, but this has not always been the case.

“The USDP and the military MPs are not always on the same side,” said the USDP representative who is a former major. “Now we are free, free to vote. This is different from the military MPs. U Shwe Mann permits us to vote as we like,” the USDP MP said. Differences were evident in a vote in 2012 on the impeachment of members of the Constitutional Tribunal, which has the power to rule on interpretations of the constitution.

The case began when President U Thein Sein asked the Constitutional Tribunal to define the powers of parliamentary committees and other bodies. In their interpretation of the constitution, the nine members of the tribunal decided that the committees were not Union-level bodies, thus placing them at a lower level than the president and the Union parliament. Elected MPs said the ruling would limit their legislative powers and voted to impeach the tribunal’s members.

Military representatives voted against impeachment, but elected MPs, including many from the USDP, voted in favour. Notably, Thura U Shwe Mann supported the motion and it was approved by the required two-thirds majority.

The deputy commander and his military colleagues accept that most of the decisions they make in parliament will be under orders. They also accept that their parliamentary term is subject to the discretion of their superiors.

“We are soldiers and don’t decide our future for ourselves,” the deputy commander said. “It is the decision of the army, not mine,” he said. “But if it was my choice, I would still be in the army.”