Thai Prime Minister’s Confession Underscores Urgent Need to Prevent Violence Against Protesters
The following press release from Amsterdam & Peroff LLP concerning the ICC application in Thailand was released early this morning in Bangkok. The release has been distributed via wire globally.
Thai Prime Minister’s Confession Underscores Urgent Need to Prevent Violence Against Protesters, Says Lawyer
This fact was first alleged in a Jan. 31 filing to the International Criminal Court (ICC) submitted on behalf of the Red Shirt pro-democracy movement, requesting an inquiry into alleged crimes against humanity committed during the military’s crackdown against protesters in April and May 2010, which resulted in approximately 91 deaths, thousands injured, and hundreds of controversial arrests. Abhisit’s citizenship is relevant as it is argued in the application as one of the possible bases for ICC jurisdiction, citing Article 12.2.b of the Rome Statute.
“For the past 24 days, the Prime Minister has refused to be honest regarding his UK citizenship, and instead has obfuscated with irrelevant excuses regarding student fees and visas,” said Robert Amsterdam, partner at Amsterdam & Peroff LLP, representing the Red Shirts. ”Prime Minister Abhisit must understand that this is no laughing matter, and no time to joke about which British football teams he supports when his government has failed to investigate, prosecute, or even sanction any officials responsible for these deaths.”
In the weeks following the Jan. 31 filing of the application before the ICC, spokespersons for the prime minister, Buranat Samutrak and Thepthai Senpong, repeatedly issued public denials, claiming that Abhisit did not hold British citizenship. Numerous defamatory statements attacking Mr. Amsterdam and Red Shirt leaders such as Jatuporn Prompan over the Abhisit’s citizenship status were also circulated in the media.
This abrupt reversal of the government’s position illustrates an important point, said Amsterdam. “If they can’t tell the truth about just one small fact, than how can any Thai person reasonably expect them to administer justice?”
Amsterdam also drew comparisons between this case and the violence used against demonstrators across the world, including recent protests in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, and Libya. ”This is in many ways a landmark case built upon strong evidence, representing an opportunity for the international community to show that dictators and authoritarian leaders will be held accountable for using violence against their own people. Given the abhorrent repressions and high death tolls in the current struggle for democracy across the Arab world, we need to send this message now more than ever.”
A special website has been set up to host videos and witness testimonies of the victims of violence against protesters in Thailand at http://www.thaiaccountability.org. A copy of the ICC application and accompanying materials is available on http://www.robertamsterdam.com/thailand.
SOURCE Amsterdam & Peroff LLP
Comments are closed.
“If they can’t tell the truth about just one small fact, than how can any Thai person reasonably expect them to administer justice?”
Have you ever considered Abhisit simply didn’t know whether he was British or not? I’m not so fast as to rule out he’s simply an incompetent fool who took an entire month to track down the details on his citizenship. Saying he’s simply a liar is complimenting him with a level of capacity I think is well beyond him.
Anyway, I suppose congratulations to Robert, the UDD and Thaksin. Looks like you’re going to pin a PM.
I’m still a bit disappointed, however. Take the current stand off with Cambodia for example – frankly, I think Abhisit may have completely lost any form of control over the Thai Army and thus I’m not blaming him directly for the situation. In the Bangkok murders, likewise, Abhisit may have been a willing accomplice, but I do not believe he was the top dog.
You’re right, Robert – he does lack leadership qualities. Putting him in an unbiased court is definitely a step in the right direction, but so long as the military leaders who are also responsible remain at large, Thai people are not safe. Though the pressure you’re applying might help to dissuade them from doing this again. So I can only say, keep it up!
The ICC exists for countries without legal systems, for genuine massacres, they have already said they would not consider your publicity stunt appeal. Stop wasting their time and resources.
@Howell – You are 100% right. Thailand’s legal system has abjectly fail to investigate or prosecute one single individual responsible for these killings among the military, and has instead instigated completely false terrorism cases against the protesters – who have now been released in acknowledgement that the cases were falsified.
This we certainly a genuine massacre, but don’t take my word for it:
http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2010/05/17/bangkok-this-is-a-massacre/
I am glad that you agree that an independent body like the ICC needs to take a look at the facts and evidence – if you are right that the authorities are innocent, you should have nothing to fear. But you’re not, and that’s why you are against it.
Howell,
There is hard proof available online that indicates the Thai courts are excessively corrupt and incapable of delivering an unbiased ruling. There is no doubting this, for the proof is there for all to see that they simply are corrupt. Thus your statement is completely ridiculous.
As for “genuine massacres” – I’d like to hear what you believe constitutes a massacre if not the slaughter of several dozen unarmed civilians. Stop wasting band width. Yes, innocent until proven guilty – by default, we “don’t know” who instigated the massacre. That’s what the court is for. But there is no doubting that this is a massacre – you just don’t like that word because it will make your political affiliation look bad because most people don’t need the court ruling to know who was holding the guns and giving the orders.
We all know Robert’s application is just as much a publicity stunt as it is a serious case, but so what? Did you even read the submission? It needs publicity, people need to know what happened.
And one judge offering his opinion to the BKK Post does not speak for the entire ICC. I’d like to know if Mr. Hans-Peter Kaul knows much about Thailand, also, and is aware the BKK Post is a compulsive lying propaganda network whose own manager admitted the organization was being forced by Abhisit to disseminated false information designed to make people hate other Thai people in favor of Abhisit.
Finnally, your gloating in Abhisits impunity is disgusting.