Barbarians work with barbarous allies

In a new Statement from ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights, Thailand’s so-called caretaker regime has been condemned for yet another flagrant abuse of international norms and human rights: the decision by the regime to hand-over three members of Myanmar opposition forces to the brutal military junta’s allies.

The world knows that the military-backed regime is an ally of its brothers-in-arms in Myanmar, but such a blatant abuse during an election campaign is surprising even for this bunch of clods. Sending these people back is at best a jail sentence but more likely a sentence to torture and death:

According to information APHR received from local civil society organizations, on 1 April, three members of a Myanmar opposition group crossed into Thailand to seek medical treatment. On their way to Mae Sot, the three men were stopped at a checkpoint and taken into custody by Thai immigration. Then, on the morning of April 4, the Thai authorities handed them over to the Myanmar junta -allied Border Guard Force (BGF), despite efforts from opposition groups to negotiate a release. Witnesses say that BGF troops shot at the men after the handover. According to media reports, at least one of the men was killed. The fates of the other two remain unclear.

This is Thailand’s military, Foreign Affairs, and administration demonstrating its barbarity as it support other right-wing military barbarians.

Drop political charges

Over the past few years, Amnesty International Thailand has moved considerably from being a yellow-hued organization to something that is actually interested and active on human right and political prisoners.

The Bangkok Post reports that AI Thailand has “joined other activists in handing a petition with the signatures of 8,517 people to caretaker Prime Minister [Gen] Prayut Chan-o-cha, urging police to withdraw accusations against all political activists.”

The organization “asked the caretaker government to uphold its commitments to international human rights standards, including the right to bail, freedom of expression and peaceful assembly…”. It also called on the government to drop all criminal proceedings against activists.

It is added that the “local group’s move followed a request by the Amnesty International Secretariat in London urging its members, activists and supporters to send a letter to the government to release and/or withdraw charges and excessive bail conditions against people targeted for ‘peacefully exercising their rights’.”

As in 2011, such changes require a change of government to one that is not so authoritarian

Two more brave women v ISOC

Teeranai Charuvastra has a useful report at The Nation on “civil rights activists Angkhana Neejapaijit and Anchana Heemmina” who have been “hounded by online trolls” for years because of their efforts to promote human rights, call out torture, demand state responses on enforced disappearances and more. Most of all, the trolls wanted to discredit “their call for transparency in southern border provinces.”

It was clear that the trolls’ accounts were “manufactured” to discredit:

… among the faceless social media accounts, one stuck out: a website called Pulony, which purportedly “tells the truth” about the Deep South. In reality, as the two women told the press recently, the site has engaged in smear campaigns against Angkhana and Anchana for years, casting them as paid agents, provocateurs and sympathisers of insurgents out to undermine the military’s peace-building efforts.

Interestingly, in a 2020 parliamentary debate, opposition MPs “were grilling the authorities for what they described as internal documents within the Internal Security Operation Command (Isoc) seeking funding for its propaganda campaigns. One of the investors was the Pulony website.”

Speaking at the Foreign Correspondent’s Club of Thailand, Anchana said:

“We are just two women who work for human rights…. Yet we watched a government agency ask the government to cover the cost of its attacks on us. That’s just wrong.”

Teeranai observes that “the IO targeting them was not run by any political groups or politicians seeking to win votes, but the state itself.”

Their response was to file “a lawsuit with the Civil Court in November 2020 seeking damages from Isoc. They named the quasi-military counter-insurgency agency as being at the heart of the disinformation warfare wielded by Pulony.”

Revealingly, the “website appeared to have stopped operating soon after the lawsuit was filed but remains accessible to this day.” What remains deals in conspiracy theories and global extreme right propaganda:

In one of its last entries, the website rehashed a common conspiracy theory claiming that human rights activists in the deep South, environmentalists, digital privacy advocates, and the news outlet Prachatai – where I work – are really part of the same network paid by George Soros and other external influences to sabotage Thailand.

“This is the model of sabotage that’s influenced by foreign money to devastate [Thailand’s] economy, politics and society, in order to seek interest on behalf of global politics,” the post said. “And some Thais who have no morals have agreed to be the tools of foreign powers to murder their own country.”

ISOC has gone Sgt Schulz and “denied any responsibility….[offering] I”an incredibly lame defence.”

I know nothing

Both Facebook and Twitter closed hundreds of accounts linked to the military.

But the regime’s people still have the judiciary in their pocket:

The verdict on Pulony was returned earlier this week, much to the disappointment of Angkhana and Anchana.

The court ruled that the plaintiff could not prove beyond reasonable doubt that Isoc was indeed operating the website, citing the lack of technical evidence like web traffic data – something Angkhana and Anchana said is near impossible for them to obtain.

Of course, this standard of evidence does not apply in lese majeste and computer crimes cases.

The two women are not deterred. “Anchana said the lawsuit already achieved its goal of raising public awareness about the existence of IOs and the attempts to hold them accountable, especially those engineered by state entities.”

Updated: Smash 112, free all political prisoners

Brave advocates for the end of Article 112 began protesting “in front of the Criminal Court on Ratchadapisek Road in conjunction with a hunger strike by two detained female activists who are neither eating nor drinking water with tonight (Jan. 21) being the third night but they have been taken to the Correctional Department’s hospital…”.

Calling themselves the Independent People’s Group, the protesters had these demands:

• Reform the judicial process taking into account human rights principles and freedom of expression and not interfere with litigation;
• Stop prosecuting people for exercising their freedom of expression, assembling and  voicing their political views:
• All political parties propose a policy to guarantee rights, liberties and political participation by cancelling Section 112, also known as the lese majeste law, and Section 116 of the Criminal Code.

Yesterday, members of Thalufah “peacefully stood in a row on a sidewalk outside the Bangkok Art & Culture Centre at Pathumwan intersection in protest of the sustained detainment of the 21 political detainees, nine of whom have been faced with the draconian lese majeste charges, better known as Section 112 of the Criminal Code, and others on sedition charges.” They planned a 112 hour protest calling for “Free Political Prisoners” and “Stop Violation of Human Rights”, among other demands.

These protesters are also calling “for the unconditional and immediate release of the 21 political detainees,” and supporting “Tantawan Tuatulanond and Orawan Pupong, currently held at the Central Women Correctional Institution.”

Now, “Tantawan and Orawan who have not only denied meals but drinking water provided at the prison have resolutely insisted that all the political detainees be freed, the country’s judicial systems be amended and the lese majeste law be abolished.”

Update: Prachatai updates on the protests, which have expanded beyond Bangkok, including Khon Kaen and Chiang Mai (scroll down the story about halfway for the update on protests).

Absurd 112 trials

We were surprised to see that the Bangkok Post wrote something on the situation of monarchy reform advocates. Perhaps it is because the report is about the Clooney Foundation for Justice, where the superstar connection might have been the trigger.

The Foundation issued a statement made the all too obvious point that the current military-monarchy regime “should dismiss the case against 22 protest leaders charged with insulting the monarchy, sedition and a range of public order offences…”. Of course it should!

To do so would mean Thailand would “adhere to its international human rights obligations…”.

The Foundation’s TrialWatch Expert Kevin Bell AM KC submitted “an amicus brief submitted to the Bangkok Criminal Court.”

Clipped from The Nation

TrialWatch monitors criminal trials globally against those who are most vulnerable, including journalists and opposition figures, and advocates for the rights of individuals who are unfairly imprisoned. Since late 2020, CFJ’s TrialWatch initiative has been monitoring and evaluating criminal proceedings against the protest leaders, who face between seven and 15 years in prison if convicted of all charges (in Thailand, if a defendant is being prosecuted for multiple offenses for the same conduct, the defendant is to be punished for the offense with the most severe punishment).

Of course, the spinelessness of the Bangkok Post editorial policies means it only summarizes the most important bits of the statement. Here it is in full:

… The charges are based on the prosecution’s allegation that while giving speeches at a protest the defendants lied about the Thai King’s expenditures and his frequent travel to and from Germany, including during the COVID lockdowns and allegedly in violation of quarantine rules.

As documented by TrialWatch monitors who have attended the trial, the prosecution has not presented evidence that the defendants’ statements were false and the court has refused to order institutions like the Crown Property Bureau, the Royal Office, and Thai Airways to provide financial and travel records, despite the defense’s repeated requests. This has undercut the defense’s ability to prove the statements were true. As one defendant noted at a recent hearing, without access to information to prove the truth of their comments “it is as if the defendant’s side is chained with one hand to the boxing ring, preventing them from punching and fighting with the other side.” If the court does not dismiss the case, it should at least allow the defense access to the materials it needs to both mount a defense and to challenge the prosecution’s evidence and arguments, today’s amicus brief said.

… “In violation of international principles, the court has tied the accused’s hands by obstructing their attempts to obtain documents that would prove the truth of their statements about the King. The absurdity of this situation is highlighted by the fact that the defendants are charged with lying that the King was not in Thailand during certain periods at the same time as defense lawyers have been prevented from accessing routine travel records,” said TrialWatch Expert the Honourable Kevin Bell AM KC, who has fifteen years of judicial experience in the conduct of criminal trials, including as former Justice of the Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia.

Read the whole statement.

What rights?

Human Rights Watch has released its World Report 2023. Read the Thailand in 2022 report here. It begins ominously and predictably:

The government of Prime Minister Gen. Prayut Chan-ocha continued to restrict fundamental rights, particularly freedom of expression and assembly, and prosecuted human rights and democracy activists, community advocates, environmental defenders, and critics of the monarchy. Government promises to fulfill Thailand’s human rights obligations and end impunity for abuses remained largely unfulfilled.

On lese majeste:

In November 2020, Prime Minister Prayut ordered authorities to use all laws against democracy protesters, bringing back lèse-majesté (insulting the monarchy) prosecution under article 112 of the penal code after a three-year hiatus. Authorities have since charged at least 215 people under Article 112 in relation to various activities undertaken at democracy protests or comments made on social media. In addition, making critical or offensive comments about the monarchy is also a serious criminal offense under the Computer-Related Crime Act. Authorities have also charged some political activists with sedition under Article 116 of the penal code….

Judicial interpretation of lèse-majesté offenses seems to vary according to interpretations by different courts, making convictions arbitrary and sometimes going beyond what is stipulated in the law.

Malls and the status quo

Archinect is not in PPT’s usual reading list. But it is this week after we found “Architecture, Consumerism, and Human Rights: On ​‘Subverting the Narrative of Power Systems in Thailand’ with Shopping Malls.” The story and interview begins:

Thesis projects offer an exciting glimpse into the minds of emerging designers and their unique architectural perspectives as they navigate through their careers. This is the case for Syracuse University B.Arch graduates Pin Sangkaeo and her collaborative research partner Benson Joseph. Together they explore the practice of merit-making and how political tactics and consumerism have impacted Thailand’s social and political agendas through their thesis project, Temples of Consumerism.

According to Sangkaeo, the project “investigates the role of shopping malls as physical tools of maintaining the status quo, used by those who hold political powers in order to superimpose their ideologies on the collective citizens and perpetuate the systems.”

Reproduced from the linked article where it is placed with the permission of Pin Sangkaeo

Justice in Southeast Asia Lab

The Justice in Southeast Asia Lab (JSEALab) is part of a five-year initiative on Social Justice in Southeast Asia at the University of Wisconsin-Madison housed in the Center for Southeast Asian Studies and the Human Rights Program and funded by the Henry Luce Foundation.

The Lab is a combination of intensive exchanges between faculty and graduate students and public events that aim to foster collaboration between academics and practitioners. The JSEALab reflects both the recognition that a growing number of MAs and PhDs in Southeast Asian Studies are choosing to pursue professional careers outside the university and that there is a need for academic work to be directly responsive to ongoing social justice crises in the region.

The JSEALab had a soft launch during the Fall 2021 semester with Justice in Translation, an online open-access translation series. Other activities will begin during the Spring 2022 semester, and then further additional activities will commence in the 2022-2023 academic year.

Upcoming events in Spring 2022 and links that can be followed and set to get updates on the JSEALab via [https://seasia.wisc.edu/sjsea-project/jsealab/], Twitter [https://twitter.com/jsealab], and Facebook [https://www.facebook.com/jsealab].

Further updated: Buffalo manure human rights

The Thai Enquirer reports that the military-backed regime, headed by a coup plotter as unelected prime minister has made the absurd claim that “Thailand is ready to commit to promoting and protecting human rights in the country and abroad…”.

This regime, constructed on the military murder of scores of protesters in 2010, on the bodies located and still missing of those forcibly disappeared, and which has detained and jailed thousands, made this outrageous claim “ahead of the UN’s upcoming Third Cycle Universal Periodic Review (UPR)…”.

Ratchada Thanadirek, the regime’s deputy spokeswoman lied: “The government is committed to working with the international community to voluntarily declare its commitments, consider feedback and listen to proposals…”.

How high?

Ratchada built a pile of stinking buffalo poo, saying the “current administration is working to revise its laws to match the international human rights instruments, including anti-torture law, laws against inhumane punishments, and laws that protect against enforced disappearance.”

These are all crimes that this regime has engaged in, regularly. It is a false claim, it is a gross untruth. It is made as it continues to lock up protesters and jail people under Article 112, a draconian law that “protects” the monarchy from criticism and scrutiny and permits the jailing of political dissidents.

As the article explains:

The statement comes at a time when the Thai government is being criticized at home and abroad for its arbitrary arrest and detention of pro-democracy protesters.

Over a dozen student protesters have been arrested and denied bail for leading street protests against the Prayut Chan-ocha administration and calling for reform of Thailand’s conservative institutions.

Films, art exhibitions, and even nationally recognized artists have been punished and/or censored by the government for speaking in support of the demonstrators or on political issues….

The Prayut administration has implemented a Covid-related state of emergency protocol that bans large-scale gatherings. This emergency act has been used to detain, arrest, and crack down on unarmed protesters.

Built on murders, lies, deceit, rigged laws and elections, and repression, this is a corrupt regime.

Update 1: For something far more realistic and factual, try the CIVICUS and the Asia Democracy Network (ADN) call for UN member states to raise serious concerns about Thailand’s civic freedoms.

Diplomats in training

Update 2: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been a useful tool for the regime. Populated by royalists, for decades it has polished royal posteriors, often with amazing contortions that make its people look like pretzels. The latest official contortionist is Nadhavathna Krishnamra, a Foreign Ministry representative speaking to the UN Human Rights Council.

Facing questions from Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland, among others, about those charged with lese majeste, including more than a dozen children, Nadhavathna defended lese majeste. It was asserted that the law “protects the monarch and therefore national security, and that royal insult cases were carefully handled.” Everyone knows this is buffalo manure. Nadhavathna trotted out more of the regime’s buffalo poo: “It reflects the culture and history of Thailand, where the monarchy is one of the main pillars of the nation, highly revered by the majority of Thai people…. Its existence is closely linked to safeguarding the key national institutions and national security.” Blah, blah, blah excrement.

Official human rights nonsense

Thanks to a reader for pointing out a recent op-ed by academic Mark S. Cogan at the Southeast Asia Globe.

“Thailand’s human rights narrative runs contrary to reality, even at the UN” has the following sub-header:

Despite cases of lèse-majesté piling up and pro-democracy protesters facing serious charges like sedition, Thailand’s third time through the Universal Periodic Review later this year will most likely be as inconsequential as previous UN human rights inspections.

Thailand is due to have its human rights record examined in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in n November. This is Thailand’s third UPR. Cogan states that:

Back in February, in preparation for this upcoming human rights review, Thailand’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Don Pramudwinai gave remarks during the 46th Session of the Human Rights Council, noting that Thailand would “recommit to our common core values in the promotion and protection of human rights”.

He adds that Don’s perspective has little to do with human rights as practiced in the country. In fact:

[p]ublic statements on Thailand’s human rights contributions often boast about the kingdom’s accomplishments…. But these … often mask Thailand’s true record on the ground – a record stained by draconian measures to cripple individual freedom of expression, curb press freedom, and silence regime critics.

Don’s “remarks” were meant “to ensure that the narrative on human rights was crystal clear to the UN – there were no human rights challenges in Thailand…”.

He and other Thai diplomats have almost Pavlovian retorts to any challenges, pointing to the “perceived failure to understand what it means to be Thai, [a] … lack of familiarity with the situation on the ground, or the more nationalistic refrain that highlights Thailand’s unique status as a country in Southeast Asia that has not been colonised.”

Cogan recounts a meeting between Don and three UN officials after the 2014 coup where he went to great lengths “trying to ensure that the trio also understood Thai culture and tradition, the Foreign Minister paused and remarked: “Actually, in summary, Thailand has one of the best human rights records in all of Southeast Asia.” He then “corrected himself and said: ‘No, no, no, Thailand has the best human rights record in Asia’.”

Not even Don believes such nonsense.

Lese majeste is of especial concern. Cogan notes that:

… for its second cycle UPR in 2016, the Thai government compared its lèse majesté law (Article 112) as comparable to libel law for commoners, adding that it is “not aimed at curbing people’s rights to freedom of expression or academic freedom” and it was implemented in “accordance with due legal process and those convicted are entitled to receive royal pardon”.

It is troubling to PPT that several human rights protectors and the media in Thailand now regularly refer to lese majeste as “royal defamation,” which seems to accept the authoritarians’ narrative. We say, call it by its name.

Lese majeste has seen hundreds locked up, including for Article 112 convictions that don’t even fit the law. As Cogan reminds us, “… Prawet Praphanukul, a human rights lawyer, [was]… locked up in prison after being held at the 11th Army Circle base in Bangkok…”. He spent 16 months in prison on lese majeste and sedition charges and when he was finally sentenced, the lese majeste charge was simply not mentioned, probably because, at that time, the erratic king was trying to minimize political damage.

Famously, Prawet bravely rejected the royalist courts. When he appeared in court in 2017 he stunned the court by stating: “Thai courts do not have the legitimacy to try the case. Therefore, I declare that I do not accept the judicial process in the case.” Prawet added that he would not participate in the case nor grant authority to any lawyer to represent him.

Clipped from Prachatai

More recently, Cogan reports, various UN experts were deeply alarmed over the harsh sentence of Anchan Preelerd, a 60-year old former Thai civil servant. She was given a 43-year sentence. In fact, she was sentenced to a mammoth 87 years in prison, with the sentence reduced because she finally agreed to plead guilty because she had already spent three years in prison pending her trial.

Yet the puppet-like Ministry of Foreign Affairs is straight-faced when it declares the lese majeste law is not “aimed at curbing people’s rights to freedom of expression nor the exercise of academic freedom or debate about the monarchy as an institution.” It “went on to suggest once again that the law exists to “protect the dignity of royal families in a similar way a libel law does for any Thai citizen.” That’s buffalo manure, and every single Thai knows this.

Cogan concludes: “Thailand’s third time through the Universal Periodic Review, because of its predetermined narrative about its own human rights record, will most likely be as inconsequential as its previous UPR.” Sadly, he’s right. In the years since the 2014 coup, Thailand’s human rights situation has deteriorated into a dark age.