Thailand's human rights records will be put
under the microscope by its peers in Geneva at the UN Human Rights
Council in October.The report on Thailand - posted on the website of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) - is divided into three parts. It includes a 20-page national report prepared by the Thai government, an 11-page UNHCHR report and an 11-page report put together by the council based on submissions from 27 stakeholders including Thailand's National Human Rights Commission, as well as Thai and foreign NGOs.
Vitit Muntabhorn, a Chulalongkorn University law professor, said at a
seminar yesterday that the UPR was a soft process designed for friendly
interactive dialogue, not one aimed at naming, shaming or instituting
sanctions.
Reports to be presented, including those written by the government,
are non-partisan compilations. The UPR is, therefore, a constructive
peer review as all UN members' human rights situations will be discussed
by other colleagues, he said.He said he hoped the government would be prepared to take advice and make some meaningful pledges in certain areas, such as revoking the emergency decree and other legal reforms.
Although discussions will be taking place under the helm of a new government, it is required to show some good-faith gestures aimed at improving human rights in the country, he said.
The Thai public should be ready to engage in the process to set a good example for other nations, said speakers at the seminar, which was organised by the People's Empowerment Foundation.
The UNHCHR report mentioned discrimination, especially among women and girls, and different races and religion.
Torture and extrajudicial killings remain prevalent while special laws have worsened the problem of impunity for certain people, the UN report said.
The government in its report said that it would improve the public welfare system to reduce socio-economic disparities and improve people's well-being. But this requires systemic and structural reform on political, economic and social fronts.
The report also focussed more on the southern insurgency than the political conflict with the red shirt movement.
The national report simply said the recent political conflict, which could lead to violence, needs to be addressed based on the principles of democracy, rule of law and reconciliation so that all groups feel that they are being fairly treated.
The national report said the government had provided remedies to people affected by the protests and the subsequent crackdown last year.
The three reports also referred to the independent fact-finding Commission for Reconciliation (TRC) and the NHRC that are still investigating last year's violence.
Strikingly, though, the national report fails to discuss the controversial application of certain laws, such as Article 112, which covers lese majeste offences. The NGO report devoted only a little more to the subject, a paragraph on freedom of expression and the plight of human rights defenders in Thailand.
Kwanravee Wangudom, of the People's Information Centre of the April-May 2010 Incidents, said the TRC and the NHRC had made only a feeble attempt to enhance reconciliation.
Only restoration of justice and adequate remedies for the victims of last year's crackdown could heal the country's wounds, said Ms Kwanravee, who also called for the basic right to bail for all red shirt detainees.
Chaiyan Rachagool, of Payap University, said the government report was self-serving and useless.
David Streckfuss, an article 112 critic, has suggested that the UPR discuss recommendations made by the Enlightened Jurists Group from Thammasat University to consider problems in the use of the lese majeste law.
Post a Comment