Human Rights Watch Doesn’t Get Thailand
Human Rights Watch’s newly released “World Report 2012” serves up more bad news about the state of human rights in Thailand.
The issues highlighted in the report–violence in the South, extra-judicial killings, impunity for state officials, censorship, lese majeste prosecutions, and treatment of migrants and refugees–are long-standing problems that have reflected poorly on Thailand’s commitment to human rights for years, when not decades. For this reason it was puzzling to see Human Rights Watch place so little emphasis on the root causes of Thailand’s awful human rights record and so much emphasis on the current government’s failure to rectify each of these problems, presumably in the four and half months between the day it was sworn in and the end of 2011.
Human Rights Watch has a history of endeavoring to provide a “balanced account” of events in Thailand by drawing equivalencies between the actions of every party to any given dispute. Up to a point, our support for the values Human Rights Watch purports to promote leads us to welcome the organization’s concern for the appearance of “balance,” in that it makes it harder for opponents of democracy to dismiss criticism as part of a conspiracy inspired or bankrolled by the former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
However, the fact remains that Human Rights Watch’s equivalencies are demonstrably false equivalencies, and that its attempt to apportion blame equally undermines its commitment to objectivity and “balance.”
Who Is The Real Mugabe of Thailand?
In 2010, the government of Abhisit Vejjajiva murdered more people than even the dictatorship of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe
In light of the smear campaign being eagerly pursued by the Thai media (at the behest of their masters in the Democrat Party and Army, naturally) against Trade Commissioner Nalinee Taveesin, it seems appropriate to remind everyone of some of the basic facts. Lost in the euphoria of their own spin cycle, the Bangkok Post and The Nation have done their best to make a story out of Nalinee’s alleged connection to Zimbabwe, while failing to see any irony in the accused war criminal Mark Abhisit feigning indignation over the human rights credentials of Yingluck Shinawatra’s cabinet.
Even if we forgot the fact that Nalinee was appointed way back in August, or that the alleged blacklist in the US goes all the way back to 2008, the ridiculous attempt to make an issue out of this non-story is a measurement of the party’s ideological bankruptcy.
In the end, it doesn’t really matter: the appointment of the trade commissioner is in no way illegal, nor Nalinee has not broken any Thai law or failed to fulfill any requirement under the Constitution to perform her job, full stop. One would think that any party that openly calls for a coup to subvert the democratic process in Thailand and restore a military dictatorship would actually have more in common, not less, with the old man in Harare.
But what’s really remarkable about the allusion to Zimbabwe is that the Abhisit government actually emulated so many of his tactics to hold onto power. Of course, there is no moral relativism here, and there is absolutely nothing I would ever argue in defense of the odious regime of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Back in July 2010, I wrote a blog article that specifically compared the methodology of Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe and the former government, focusing specifically on a book by Phillip Barclay. I continue to stand by everything I wrote. In light of the recent exchanges, as well as the announcement by the ICC that several Army Generals in Kenya will stand trial for the post-election violence, I am republishing the article in full below:
Thailand, Zimbabwe, and the Algorithm
Last week I was in Kenya, advocating on behalf of a client in a UN trial, when I had the chance to meet with a number of leading African human rights specialists. Among others, I met with the well-known human rights lawyer Evans Monari, Member of the Council of Law Society of Kenya, who drew some interesting parallels between the April-May Bangkok massacres and the post-electoral violence in Nairobi of 2007-2008.
Overall I was impressed by the high level of interest in these matters on behalf of Africa’s thought leaders, as many of them are deeply experienced in both the scourge of military dictatorship and violence, but also fluent in post-conflict human rights, international law, and peace and reconciliation processes.
Offhand comparison between African and Asian experiences with democracy and military rule is not a fruitful pursuit: the two regions are fundamentally different in terms of development, culture, society, economy, size, and geopolitical advantage. What is worth looking into, however, is a comparative examination of the processes underway which drive many of these political events and often produce similar outcomes.
In Zimbabwe in particular there are a number of processes and striking parallels between the current conduct of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Democrat Party, and the military, and events that were taking place under Mugabe’s early administration 7-9 years ago, before everything went off the rails. Early on in Mugabe’s rise, we observed 1) an outsourcing of political violence, 2) the creation of a repressive legalistic apparatus, and 3) an exhibition of a “terrorism algorithm” – an inverse relationship between the state’s level of democratic legitimacy and the need to taint opponents as terrorists.
Early on, from an organizational perspective, it was important for Mugabe to consolidate control over ZANU-PF and integrate key members of the military behind the scenes into the party apparatus, creating an exceptional status for the organization that elevated it above any other opposition party. Corruption in the party is widely met with impunity as a way to build discipline among the ranks, while the violence and intimidation is outsourced to a “non-official” entity.
Here was one of Mugabe’s key innovations that set Zimbabwe down a dangerous path. The recruitment of roving gangs of bandits, known as the “war veterans,” began in the late 1990s as an instrument to seize white-owned farms, but later transformed into a generalized armed wing of ZANU-PF, frequently showing up at opposition rallies to provoke violent confrontations, beating up protesters, election intimidation, and presenting a clear threat to anyone challenging the president. When opposition party MDC claimed electoral victory in 2008, the War Veterans announced that it was a “provocation against freedom fighters,” and unleashed a rampage of persecution to partially reverse the democratic choice of the majority. Often referred to as “Mugabe’s Shock Troops,” the War Veterans are a well-organized and abundantly funded militia, yet seemingly disassociated and non-officially tied to the ruling party.
In many respects, the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) in Thailand represents this same role as the War Veterans, acting as an extra-official armed wing on behalf of the Democrat Party. In numerous instances the organization has utilized violence, most notably in the extended forced occupation of the Government House, Suvarnabhumi and Phuket airports in 2008 (which was accompanied by numerous shootings captured on camera). The PAD leaders responsible for these crimes have never been addressed by the legal system – not one charge, prosecution, or jail sentence, or gesture of punishment, underscoring an arbitrary and exceptional status above the law. These types of systems of selective justice are very familiar to the War Veterans and their victims in Zimbabwe.
With ZANU-PF firmly under control and strengthened by the brute militia violence of the War Veterans, Mugabe set in place new legal mechanisms, including emergency powers, charged with managing repression campaigns in the name of national security. Established before independence, Zimbabwe’s Joint Operations Command (JOC) is the supreme organ to manage state security, and under Mugabe’s control, was transformed into a blunt weapon to manage the government’s repression campaigns. Mugabe and the JOC have become masterful in their abuse of treason legislation to jail the opposition supporters of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and contain the electoral popularity of Morgan Tsvangirai and others.
This process is succinctly outlined in Phillip Barclay’s new book on Mugabe’s Zimbabwe:
“The mass arrests, torture and killing on 11 March marked the beginning of a concerted effort through the winter months of 2007 to detain leading MDC members. Forty were arrested in early April, and charged with conducting a terrorist campaign. There was a string of molotov-cocktail attacks after 11 March on three police stations, a passenger train, and a supermarket. The MDC denied any involvement, stressed its non-violent credentials, and suggested that the government was carrying out the attacks itself as a pretext for a crackdown.”
Thailand has experienced a similar process during the political crisis with the emergence and dramatic influence of the Committee for Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES), and is believed to have conducted itself in a similar manner to the JOC in the run up to clamp down. Under the aegis of repeatedly extended emergency powers, CRES has jailed hundreds of protesters without charges, unilaterally censored thousands of websites and media sources, and is believed to have been behind a number of strategic decisions in the handling of the protests which led to mass loss of life.
In terms of prosecutions against political opponents, Zimbabwe and Thailand are among the very few nations in the world to falsely charge their own citizens with terrorism for merely demanding the observation of their voting rights. It is a very significant development for these countries to pull the terrorism card – it sets their legal system apart from the rest of the developed world, illustrating clearly deficient rule of law, and resulting in a serious downgrade in relations with neighbors and allies.
And yet Thailand has no single Mugabe – no prime minister in history has been able to completely serve a full two terms in office, but it is rather a cabal of elites whose decisions have led Thailand down this path, exhibiting an all-too-familiar disdain for democratic institutions, social justice, and competitive elections. There is even speculation that Prime Minister Abhisit may be on the brink of resignation and the Democrat Party may dissolve, leaving a national unity government in place – but the elites behind the scenes are identical.
Zimbabwe is very far gone down the path of institutional destruction, but Thailand appears to only be beginning these steps. It’s not too late for the international community to stand firm on basic principles, and ask that Thailand fulfill its obligations under international law, release its political prisoners, investigate and hold accountable those responsible for the deaths of 90 people, and restore its institutional legitimacy through elections. If nothing changes, I fear that these similarities between Thailand and Zimbabwe will only deepen.
Statement: Threats of Military Coup in Thailand Are Unacceptable
The past week has seen a troubling escalation in the frequency with which a possible military coup is discussed in Thailand. Leaders of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) have called openly for the military to stage a coup. Military generals are quoted in news reports as setting conditions that the government must live by to avoid a coup. The Bangkok media is reporting results of polls that give the Establishment a running tally of the people’s willingness to accept another coup.
Each of these developments would be noteworthy in its own right, but today’s statements by a member of the opposition in parliament have ratcheted up the threat even further. In today’s issue of Matichon, Democrat Party member of parliament Thepthai Senpong, formerly Abhisit Vejjajiva’s personal spokesman, is reported as stating that it is for the government to decide whether a coup will take place, indicating that the administration can avoid a coup simply by staying away from reforming the lese majeste laws, amending the Ministry of Defense Administration Act, or changing the constitution. Even for Thailand, it is extraordinary to hear a member of parliament publicly threaten an elected government with a military coup, which most countries consider an act of treason, for pursuing reforms through a process governed by the constitution (a constitution written by and for the generals themselves, no less). Unfortunately such is the arrogance of Thailand’s so-called “Democrats.”
Five years ago similar threats of a coup were ignored by the international community; when the coup eventually took place, Thai civil society organizations and international NGOs were complacent when not openly supportive. We hope that foreign governments, civil society partners, and human rights groups operating in Thailand have learned the lessons of the 2006 coup, and urge them to unequivocally oppose a repeat of such illegal and anti-democratic acts.
–Robert Amsterdam, counsel to the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship
RA’s Thailand News Blast – Jan 15, 2012
A group of royals have appealed to Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to amend the lèse majesté law, noting an increase in the number of LM-related cases in recent years: ‘Most important of all, our group wants to draw attention to the fact that His Majesty himself has criticised the law.’ Frank La Rue, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion, has also said that he plans to pressure the Thai government to amend the law, and the independent Truth for Reconciliation Commission is calling for less severe punishments for insulting the monarchy. Dr. Tul Sitthisomwong, a Chulalongkorn University lecturer, and Leader of the Network of Citizen Volunteers Protecting the Land (aka the Multicolor Shirts), plans to pressure the National Human Rights Committee to reconsider their decision not to allow an ad hoc committee to study lèse majesté and the Computer Crime Act. According to Police Colonel Phayap Thongchuen, Tawin Pleansr testified on the ‘mind map’ (which supposedly charts the monarchy’s enemies) last week – the first person called upon to do so. All Thai coalition parties support the amendment of Article 291 to allow the constituent assembly to be elected, says their head co-ordinator.
RA’s Thailand News Blast – Jan 11, 2012
Bhumjaithai Party MP Chai Chidchob doubts that the government will be able to complete their full 4-year term if they amend the constitution; such moves are always unpopular, he said, and underscored the significance of the King’s popularity. Pheu Thai MP Udondeth says that the proposed constitutional amendment of Article 291 (under which the constituent assembly would be elected, rather than government-appointed) will begin in early February and could take over a year. He also stated that any constitutent assembly should be elected; Sodsri, the election commissioner, agrees that the assembly must be impartial, as does Democrat Party spokesperson Chavanon, who added that the government must be clear about precisely which provision of the constitution law will be amended. Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva suggests that all provinces should be given two elected constituents instead of just one, as a means of preventing individual politicians from gaining undue influence. Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra says she will appoint a special committee to investigate the possibility of amending the constitution, and underscored the importance of listening to all arguments. The government has announced that it will spend 2 billion THB in compensating the families of victims of various political turmoils between 2006 and 2010; Thavorn Sienniem, deputy secretary general for the Democrats, has called for the compensation to extend also to victims of insurgencies in the south, and drug wars. General Prayuth Chan-ocha has been accused of allowing the Army to be used as a political tool by the establishment; however his representative however insists that the army does not take side in conflicts, and that their duty does not extend beyond keeping peace and order. Yingluck denies that her party installed CCTV in the press room at Pheu Thai’s headquarters; her spokesperson says that the CCTV currently in operation there is the responsibility of the building’s owner. Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm anticipates that Thaksin Shinawatra will receive a warm welcome when he returns to Thailand. Taxi drivers held a protest last week against the increase of the NGV (fuel) price. Chinese New Year is to be included as a public holiday in Thailand’s southern provinces.
RA’s Thailand News Blast – Dec 28, 2011
Despite some disappointments with the current government, a recent Bangkok poll indicates that Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is the most popular Thai politician. Former PM Thaksin Shinawatra has asked the members of his Pheu Thai party to refrain from revenging themselves on the opposition, after party spokesperson Prompong Nopparit threatened that PT would retaliate against any attempts by the Democrats to have their leaders removed. Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul says he would wager all of his money on the Democrats being unable to substantiate allegations made regarding Thaksin, Burma, natural gas and personal interests, as Chavanon insists that it would be illegal to issue a passport for Thaksin. Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva wants the Prime Minister to promise the public that lese majeste will not be amended. Pheu Thai MP Nuttawut Saikuea says that the party currently has no plans to amend the law at present, but urges the public to hear both sides of the argument, while Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm says that the party will strongly oppose any LM amendments. Sodsri Satayathun, the election commissioner, says that a public hearing should be held before any constitutional amendments are made. Defence Minister Yutthasak Sasiprapa wants the Ministry and the government to monitor internet usage to determine who is posting content related to LM. Yutthasak has promised that the army will take extra care to ensure the safety of the Thai people on New Year’s Eve. Prayuth Chano-cha, the army chief, has extended his good wishes to the Thai people for 2012, and vowed to protect the interests of Thailand and the monarchy, sending hundreds of military police to monitor volatile areas. He commented earlier that a recent survey of public response to the Ministry of Defence’s handling of the flood shows overall satisfaction.
Abhisit: Yesterday’s Criminal Is Not Tomorrow’s Leader
Since being overwhelmingly rejected by voters at the ballot box, removing him from a position of leadership that he was never elected to serve, former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has been quite busy.
Despite not holding any public office, he has badgered political prisoners, opposing the move of red shirts to a separate facility. He has spread groundless allegations and conspiracy theories over the tragic floods, defended the abuses of LM, threatened lawsuits against Ministers over the issue of Thaksin Shinawatra’s passport, and even suggested that Thailand should think about shutting down access to Facebook and YouTube. To his credit, he backtracked on the Facebook comments after even the staunchest conservatives in the country pointed out to him that this would be going a tad too far.
Letter to the Financial Times
Letter published in the Financial Times.
From Mr Robert R. Amsterdam.
Sir, Your newspaper’s editorial “Thai trouble” (December 18) argues that Thailand’s government “would be ill advised” to engineer the return of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. The editorial surmises: “If Mr Thaksin were to return, there is a serious risk that the bitter ideological divisions that have scarred Thai politics since his ousting in a 2006 coup would be reactivated.”
Those divisions have, in fact, never been deactivated. While the Thai people now have a government of their own choosing, the root cause of such divisions – the destruction of the rule of law – has yet to be addressed.
The generals who staged an illegal coup in 2006, interrupting 15 years of democratic rule, remain beyond the reach of the law, as do the civilian and military officials responsible for the deaths of more than 80 protesters in 2010. Dr Thaksin, however, remains in exile due to his refusal to serve an absurd sentence handed down by a court perceived as being in the pocket of his sworn enemies.
Contrary to the statement made in your editorial, Dr Thaksin was not convicted of “corruption”. Rather, his sentence was based on the court’s finding that he should not have allowed his wife to participate in an auction of public land while he served as prime minister. No foreign government has ever considered the sentence as anything other than politically motivated, hence Interpol’s decision never to issue a “Red Notice” for Dr Thaksin.
As stated in your paper’s editorial, Dr Thaksin is indeed “detested by the army and the conservative elite”. The editorial, however, did not explain why it should be up to “the army and the conservative elite” to decide on matters of policy and national reconciliation, considering that the Thai electorate overwhelmingly endorsed Dr Thaksin’s return in the July 2011 elections.
The international community’s willingness to accept the legitimacy of actions taken by the Thai establishment over the electorate’s wishes is a crucial reason why the country finds itself in the midst of a political crisis of this magnitude. Your paper’s exclusion of a democratically elected leader from his country demonstrates the utter failure to comprehend the fact that Thailand’s return to stability and peace is predicated on the restoration of democracy and the rule of law. “The army and the conservative elite” should no longer be permitted to treat a country of 70m people as their own fiefdom.
Robert R. Amsterdam, Counsel to Thaksin Shinawatra
RA’s Thailand News Blast – Dec 15, 2011
Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva says that the recent case of RPG rockets being fired into the Emerald Buddha Temple exemplifies the violent element of the Red Shirts, and considers how to prevent the spread of violent political protest. Red Shirt Arisman Pongruangrong’s second bail request will be heard on Monday. Noppadol Pattama, the legal adviser to former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, says that his client still wants a reconciliation, and outlines the key issues needed in order to succeed. Democrat Party spokesperson Chavanon wants Thaksin’s political role in Thailand to end, and says that Red Shirt demands are not democratic; he is also calling for the government to offer a definition of what it means by ‘political prisoners’. Abhisit has spoken out against Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung’s plan to dissolve the state’s anti-corruption department, particularly because it was set up through the people’s constitution. Chalerm Yubamrung says he will not interfere in the cases of the 16 democrats accused of attempted bombing. The Democrat spokesperson wants Chalerm to explain the Thai government policy on lese majeste (LM) law to the international community; Chalerm wants LM websites to be shut down immediately, and has indicated that the government will spent 400 million THB to achieve this. Read more
Reforming Lese Majeste in Thailand
Every day, more and more citizens of Thailand are awakening to the tragedy that is the modern-day enforcement of Article 112. As the arrests, convictions, and harsh sentences continue to come fast and furious, concern is mounting over the damage that this savagery is doing not just to its victims, but to the country and monarchy itself. Thailand has had enough of this dated law, and the outrageous manner in which it has been enforced.
Given that there is no longer any doubt that public opinion in Thailand is on the move, the country’s elected leaders should have the good sense to work towards reforms that are not only in the interest of justice, but are increasingly supported by their own constituents. This does not seem to be happening. Instead of defending the country, and the institution by standing up for what is right, the people’s honorable representatives continue to outdo one another in extremism and hysteria.
