COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERS REPORT OF THAILAND

The Human Rights Committee has considered the initial report of Thailand on how that State party implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Introducing the report, Sorajak Kasemsuvan, Vice Minister at the Thai Prime Minister’s Office, said human rights were not something alien to the people of Thailand. Respect for human dignity, commitment to justice, compassion and a sense of mutual obligation to fellow human beings, which together constituted core human rights principles, were among the sacred values of Thai society. Human rights protection was not something that could be taken for granted. It involved commitment and effective implementation, and could not be done through lip service, nor could it be implemented by imposing a hostile argument against each other.

In preliminary remarks, Christine Chanet, Chairperson of the Committee, said that even if not everything was perfect in Thailand, it was clear that it was moving along the right path, and the Committee had been very impressed. Thailand had faced up to the tsunami disaster in a very positive way, and had reacted by guaranteeing rights. However, there were some concerns, in particular with regards to rights under the state of emergency and for minorities. It was the first time at the Committee that members of the opposition had been present, the Chairperson noted, and this showed the openness of Thailand, and the good quality of the report and the answers given to the Committee only enhanced this impression.

Other Committee Experts raised questions on subjects pertaining to, among other things, if a state of emergency been declared and what was the extent of the application of the martial law; whether all rights guaranteed under Thai legislation were extended to all persons under its jurisdiction, including non-citizens, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers; what were the crimes for which the death penalty was mandatory; what was the treatment of terrorist suspects and drug addicts who had been taken into custody; information on the actual exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression by the Thai media; and why the present economic and social conditions were not congenial to full compliance by the State party with the requirements of the Covenant.

The Committee will issue its formal, written concluding observations and recommendations on the report of Thailand towards the end of its session which will conclude on 29 July 2005.

The delegation of Thailand was also made up of representatives of the Parliament, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Office of the Attorney-General, the Ministry of Justice, the Office of the Judiciary, the Office of the Council of State, the Ministry of Labour, the Royal Thai Police, the Ministry of Defence, the Supreme Command Headquarters, the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security, and the Southern Border Provinces Peace-Building Command.

Thailand is among the 154 States parties to the International Covenant and as such it is obligated to submit reports on its performance aimed at implementing the provisions of the treaty. It is also one of the 104 States parties to the Optional Protocol to the Covenant.

The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. this afternoon to meet with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour.

Report of Thailand

The initial report of Thailand (CCPR/C/THA/2004/1) deals with the legislative, administrative and judicial processes that serve to efficiently implement various provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Thailand became a party to the Covenant without making any reservations and is legally bound by it since 1997. Thailand has considered and found that under the present political, legal and governmental system, it can follow the Covenant without any obstacle.

However, Thailand has prepared an interpretative declaration covering five points on the right to self-determination to freely determined political status and to freely pursue economic, social and cultural development; the prohibition of capital punishment for crimes committed by persons under eighteen years of age; capital punishment and life imprisonment; the period of time to bring an arrested person to court; and on the prohibition of propaganda for war. The submission of these interpretative declarations shall enable Thailand to adjust the commitment under the Covenant to be compatible with Thai domestic laws, and there is thus no need for Thailand to revise its laws in order to fully follow the commitment.

Thailand has recognised the importance of educating its public officials about human rights. Governmental departments that have the right to use weapons educate their officials on basic human rights principles. To date, training programmes of various governmental departments have provided training on basic human rights principles. To educate the public on human rights issues, the Ministry of Education has organized educational campaigns on human rights for students at many levels. For the general public, the Legal Aid Office, which is an agency of the Office of the Attorney General, has disseminated the knowledge on law and human rights to the public all over the country both in the urban and rural areas since 1982 and the outcome has been very satisfactory.

Presentation of Report

SORAJAK KASEMSUVAN, Vice Minister at the Prime Minister’s Office, introducing the report, said human rights were not something alien to the people of Thailand. The very ideals, values and principles enshrined in the corpus of international human rights laws were embodied in social values and religious principles that Thai people of all backgrounds held dear. Respect for human dignity and commitment to justice, compassion and a sense of mutual obligation to fellow human beings, which together constituted core human rights principles, were among the sacred values of Thai society.

1997 was the year when the present Constitution, hailed as “the people’s Constitution”, was promulgated. This was a Constitution that provided and guaranteed the greatest range of freedoms, rights and liberties to the Thai people, making Thai society one of the freest in the region. 1997 was also the year the Covenant entered into force in Thailand, and thus the year where two important instruments safeguarding rights, freedoms, and liberties, one domestic and one international, came into force. But the eight years since that date had been years of economic hardship, and the Government’s priority during that time was to restore economic confidence and return the country to prosperity and stability.

Human rights protection was not something that could be taken for granted. It involved commitment and effective implementation, and could not be done through lip service, nor could it be implemented by imposing a hostile argument against each other. There were often adversary arguments and evidence between Governments and human rights defenders and advocates. As long as this persisted, human rights remained a highly politicised issue. Thailand believed that the question of human rights could be constructive and beneficial to its people only if all sides made efforts to understand each other and find common solutions. Thailand acknowledged that, as in many other countries, despite the very best intentions and policies, and with all the legal provisions and safeguards in place, human rights violations did still occur in practice. Each violation that was brought to the attention of the authorities was dealt with promptly to ensure justice under the due process of the law.

Questions by the Committee Experts

A series of questions were submitted by the Committee Experts in advance to the meeting and others were posed orally. Among the questions and issues raised were what action had been taken by the National Human Rights Commission since its establishment in the implementation of Covenant rights; had a state of emergency been declared and what was the extent of the application of the martial law; whether all rights guaranteed under Thai legislation were extended to all persons under its jurisdiction, including non-citizens, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers; what was the extent of domestic violence and what measures were taken to combat this problem; what were the crimes for which the death penalty was mandatory; what was the treatment of terrorist suspects and drug addicts who had been taken into custody; information on the actual exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression by the Thai media; and why the present economic and social conditions were not congenial to full compliance by the State party with the requirements of article 22 of the Covenant.

Constitutional and Legal Framework within which the Covenant is Implemented

Regarding the implementation of the provisions of the Covenant in Thai courts, the delegation said Thailand adhered to a dualist system, which meant that international treaties that Thailand had acceded to did not automatically become part of Thai law. Any treaty that required incorporation into Thai law first required Parliamentary scrutiny. There had already been incorporation of some provisions into Thai law, and some judgements had already been handed down in this context. No provision of the Covenant had been directly invoked by Thai courts. If it were found that existing law were insufficient to enact the provisions of the Covenant, the Government would make the necessary legislative changes.

Thailand attached importance to all human rights instruments. Currently Thailand was focusing on acceding to four human rights instruments: the Convention on Torture, the two Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Convention of 1949. Once the process for these instruments was complete, Thailand would consider becoming party to the first Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.



Derogations

The state of emergency within the articles of the Covenant was covered by the 1952 Administration in Emergency Situation Act, the delegation said. As of 15 July of this year, it had never been declared by Thailand. However, on 15 July, the Thai cabinet had approved the replacement of the 1952 Act by a new 2005 Administration in Emergency Act, which would be submitted to the Parliament upon resumption of the session in September. Also since that date, following a series of arson and bomb attacks, the Cabinet had decided to put the three southern provinces where these acts occurred under the state of emergency, and this had become law since Saturday, 16 July.

As far as the situation in the southern provinces was concerned, military personnel had been given power under the Marital Law Act of 1914 in order to deal with the unrest as well as to contribute to social development and resource management to win the hearts and minds of the local people in the area. There was no derogation of fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 4 of the Covenant. There had been no extension of the application of martial law since it was proclaimed in January 2004 in certain areas in southern parts. At present, Thailand did not have specific anti-terrorism laws, or specific anti-terrorism procedures.

Non-Discrimination and Gender Equality; Rights of Persons Belonging to Minorities

The Constitution of Thailand stated unequivocally, the delegation said, that the spirit and intent of the Constitution was to protect the human dignity, including the rights and liberty of all people irrespective of their nationality. Only a few rights were reserved exclusively under Thai law to Thai nationals, such as the right to vote and the right to hold immovable properties. Civil rights were accorded to all, were they Thai or non-Thai nationals. The Government also attached importance to revising existing regulations or to initiate new administrative measures to more effectively ensure better protection and promotion of fundamental human rights for all people living in Thailand without discrimination.

Respect for women’s equal rights and dignity was well reflected in Thai legislation, policy and practices. The Constitution clearly stipulated that men and women should enjoy equal rights. Unjust discrimination and treatment against women were therefore prohibited. There were incidents of physical and sexual abuse against women in Thai society even though Government and non-governmental organizations had continuously conducted prevention campaigns and other measures to solve the problem. The Penal Code stipulated that physical assault, within or outside the family, was a criminal offence, but in Thai society it was considered a family matter, and not normally subject to outside intervention, thus reported incidents were only a small fraction of actual occurrences.

Right to Life; Prevention of Torture

The Penal Code prescribed the death penalty as the sole punishment for aggravated murder offences such as regicide, patricide, matricide, premeditated murder, or robbery causing death to another person. Although the law stipulated that these should be punished by death, the court could exercise its discretion to reduce this to life imprisonment or imprisonment for a definite time. Drug-related offences punishable by death included production, import or export for the sale of deadly drugs.

A person who was detained unlawfully by law enforcement officers could seek judicial remedies by filing a complaint before the Court of Justice. Other violations of human rights were criminal offences and were also subject to liabilities. The victim could pursue criminal prosecution against the person violating his or her rights, and could also file a civil action for damages. Thailand recognised the importance of gathering statistics on these cases and would shortly adopt a measure to collect statistics on cases concerning mistreatment by law enforcement officers, and believed that this would greatly enhance the protection of human rights in the country.

Right of Liberty and Security of Persons; Treatment of Detainees; Independence of the Judiciary; Right to a Fair Trial

Shackling of prisoners was still absolutely imperative until the Department of Corrections could improve the prison conditions, the delegation said. The Government realised the seriousness of this problem, and would expeditiously take measures to improve it. There was no use of flogging. Terrorist suspects and drug addicts in police custody were subject to all constitutional guarantees accorded to persons in similar situations.

Regarding steps undertaken by the State party to investigate allegations of threats to and attacks on non-governmental human rights organizations and human rights defenders, the delegation said an injured individual could submit complaints in such matters via many channels, and the relevant authorities would proceed to investigate the complaints. If there were grounds to suspect criminal wrongdoing, there would be an investigation according to the Criminal Procedure Code.

Response to Oral Questions

Committee Members then asked questions and made comments on various issues, including the issue of invoking the provisions of the Covenant before the domestic courts; the issue of the sentencing to death of those under 18 as there was a theoretical possibility of this; that it would have been useful to have a provision that would give relevance to paragraph 2 of the Covenant; prohibitions under emergency provisions preventing people from leaving the country; the remaining discrimination against women, in particular in the context of grounds for divorce; what was meant by a large quantity of drugs with regard to the death penalty; and issues related to the high numbers of deaths in police custody, in particular of suspected drug offenders. Committee Members also commented favourably on the quality of the report.

Responding to these questions and others, the delegation said interpreting the relevant provisions on the imprisonment of minors, Thai courts could take account of the Covenant in providing the ruling. Under the Criminal Procedure Code, a person taken into custody for investigation or interrogation could not be detained for more than 48 hours except in cases of force majeure or exceptional circumstances, and only upon application to the Ministry of Justice. Any terrorist found on Thai soil would be arrested and tried according to the Thai Criminal Code. Any request for extradition could only be approved if the person concerned agreed to be extradited.

The Government was concerned about the delay of the implementation of the National Human Rights Action Plan, but it was currently being reviewed as the governmental structure had changed since its inception. The role of the newly established Department of Special Investigations in the Ministry of Justice was mostly to cover white-collar crime and economic crime. Most persons on death row were not executed. The average length of time before reaching the exhaustion of all appellate procedures against the death penalty was about two years for the Court of Appeal and two years for the Supreme Court.

Freedom of Movement; Expulsion of Aliens

Since the 1970s, Thailand had been a country of first asylum for hundred of thousands of persons fleeing their homelands, and had had to bear burdens on its economy, natural resources and human resources, the delegation said. Temporary shelters had been provided for persons in genuine need of protection, and much had been done to relieve the plight of these unfortunate displaced persons. There was increasing concern that there were cases of abuse of this hospitality by Myanmar persons and asylum seekers, and Thailand wished to ascertain that they abode by their obligations to the host country and fully respected Thai laws.

It was estimated that there were currently around two million economic migrants from Myanmar who had entered Thailand illegally. However, it was recognised that these illegal immigrants had migrated in search for better opportunities. Since there was a local demand for migrant workers in some business sectors, the Government had adopted a pragmatic attitude and practical approach in addressing the problem of illegal migrant workers from neighbouring countries.

Freedom of Opinion and Expression

The right to freedom of expression of the media, the delegation said, was guaranteed by the 1997 Constitution, in line with the Covenant. It was forbidden for the authority to order a closure of a publishing house, a radio station, or a television station in deprivation of the rights provided thereof. Censorship of news and articles before their publication or broadcasting was also prohibited. Employees of any media undertaken enjoyed the freedom to present news and express their opinions insofar as they were not in breach of the Constitution. Apart from these constitutional provisions, there was no legislation in Thailand that could affect, curtail, or restrict the freedom of expression enjoyed by the media.

Thailand was certain that the standard of press freedom enjoyed in the country was higher than that enjoyed by many neighbouring countries. While the Thai press enjoyed high standards of freedom, the only thing the Government could do if it found any news report or article to be inaccurate or distorting was to publicly clarify the Government version of the matter in the hope that the press would be kind enough to publish it.

Freedom of Association

The Government had been promoting freedom of association in both public and private sectors through legal instruments and public policies. Existing laws had a small number of issues that could not be consistent with ILO Conventions 87 and 98, and some of the reasons for these restrictions were due to the political situation in 1991 when Thailand did not have an elected Government. The current Government was in the process of taking steps with a view to further promoting the right to freedom of association.

Protection of Children

The Ministry of Labour had issued orders to its representatives in every province to closely monitory any abuse of child labour, the delegation said. Both Thai and foreign child workers were entitled to equal protection under the Labour Protection Law, under which the minimum age for hiring children as workers was 15 years. It also forbade employers, directors, managers or inspectors from sexually harassing employees, especially child workers, who were further not allowed to work in places where their safety and health might be at risk.

Right to Take Part in Public Affairs

The Constitution of 1997 extended the right to take part in public affairs to a broader spectrum of society, the delegation said. Thai nationals residing overseas were entitled to vote in Parliamentary elections. The Election Commission had undertaken measures to ensure fair and legitimate elections. Any person who violated election laws would be prosecuted and punished by either imprisonment or fines.

In practice, the Election Commission had decided on a number of occasions that the election of the members of the House of Representatives, senators or members of local Government were not in accordance with provisions, and had not approved the result of these elections, with the consequence that new elections had to be conducted and the elected candidate found guilty of wrongdoing had to pay for the expense of the unapproved elections.

Rights of Minorities

The Constitution of Thailand had provisions on the religious and cultural rights of minority groups, the delegation said. Those who originally lived in Thailand and had not received Thai nationality for being left out of the census were eligible for Thai nationality provided that they could fulfil specific qualifications. Those who received Thai nationality and legal migrant status enjoyed the right to freedom of movement. Those who did not have nationality or status were in principle permitted to travel within their dwelling province, however, exceptions for some reasons could be made for their children.

In general, only Thai nationals were entitled to land ownership. The Government attached importance to revising existing regulations or to initiating new administrative measures to ensure more effectively better protection and promotion of fundamental human rights for all people living in Thailand including members of the hill tribes.

Dissemination of Information Relating to the Covenant

All public agencies with officers who could use weapons legally had to provide educational training on human rights issues for every agent in the office, the delegation said. Today most Government agencies had widely and continuously organized basic training on human rights issues. Education provided during these training sessions promoted protection of human rights in the work place according to international agreements. Other materials included human rights clauses in the Constitution, remedies for damage caused by human rights violations, and legal proceedings with respect to human rights cases.

Response to Oral Questions

Committee Members then asked questions and made comments on further issues, among which were further questions on the state of emergency and whether a copy of the actual decree passed could be made available to the Committee; what were the rights of legal migrants and to what extent their right to participate in public affairs was restricted; re-settlement and rehabilitation for the highlander people; issues related to Government training on human rights and whether there was any way of monitoring whether it had been taken seriously and implemented fully; reported limitations on restrictions on freedom of assembly for certain religious groups; the extent of detention for interrogation without access to the outside world under any circumstances; and efforts made by the Government regarding non-registration, which, in particular, Committee Members commended.

The delegation from Thailand answered these questions and others briefly, saying that in cases of police brutality, the perpetrators were prosecuted on the grounds of their acts, and not in the context of corruption; regarding displaced persons Thailand had been working closely with international agencies to find durable solutions; the Government attached importance to the problem of human trafficking and considered birth registration an effective tool against this; and police authorities had been instructed to remain lenient with migrant workers who had lost their identity documents, in particular in the context of the tsunami event of December 2004. An official translation of the text of the State of Emergency Decree would also be provided to the Committee. The delegation also pointed out the need for the support of the international community in various areas in order for Thailand to implement policies aimed at improving the situation of human rights, in particular for poor people.

Preliminary Remarks

CHRISTINE CHANET, Committee Chairperson, said the impressive Thai delegation had been up to the exercise and had needed all members of the delegation for their skills and competence. It was the first time at the Committee that members of the opposition had been present, and this showed the openness of Thailand, and the good quality of the report and the answers given to the Committee only enhanced this impression. This would be stressed in the final observations of the Committee. Thailand had faced up to the tsunami disaster in a very positive way, and had reacted by guaranteeing rights.

Even if not everything was perfect in Thailand, it was clear that it was moving along the right path, and the Committee had been very impressed. Training in particular for the police had shown the importance Thailand put on it. The changes in the law on drug addicts had also shown progress. However, there were some concerns. The dualist system in Thailand, as in such systems the guaranteeing of fundamental rights was not always clear, for example in the case of the ability to make an appeal in the case of violation of the rights guaranteed in the Covenant. Laws appeared to be in agreement with the Covenant, but not in the particular case of legal appeal.

The state of emergency had been of particular interest to Committee Members, as it appeared that the right to appeal was not guaranteed in that situation. Further, the extent of detention in situations of emergency did not appear to be clear, and there was a need to elaborate further. Provisions regarding impunity also required clarification. Article 4 of the Covenant also appeared to be violated in some respects. Regarding the right to life, much had been said regarding executions which had taken place in the context of the war against drugs, and also the disappearances of human rights defenders, and these required further follow-up. Another bad point was the matter of the death row conditions in which people were shackled. The issue of minorities was also complicated by the number of displaced persons who had entered Thailand, and registration was essential in this context. Minorities should have more rights, as they often found themselves in conditions of discrimination, in particular the highlanders.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CT05008E