Thailand Human Rights Defenders Report

1. Human Rights DefendersReportรายงานผู้พิทักษ์สิทธิมนุษยชน Under the framework of Indicators and Recommendations from the Special Representative’s report on the situation of human rights defenders in Thailand

2. Thailand Human Rights Defenders Report • Carried out by the Human Rights Defenders network of the People’s Empowerment Foundation: Disabled Peoples’ International Asia Pacific Region (DPI/AP), Disabled People network, Labour network, and Muslim ethnic minority network. • Written under the framework of Indications and Recommendations from the Special Representative’s report on the situation of human rights defenders • Presented by Ms. Saowalak Tongkuay, DPI/AP Ms. Kulnipa Panton, Rangsit and Nearby Area Trade Union Group

3. Outline of Presentation • An enabling environment for human rights defenders • Legislation • Levels of security for defenders • Collaboration with regional and international human rights mechanisms • Concluding Remarks

4. I. An enabling environment for human rights defenders I.1 Effectiveness of independent national human rights institutions • The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has noauthority and focus on HR Promotion. • There is no cooperation and collaboration with media and press. • Most of NHRC’s works are ad hoc and guided by public opinion.

5. I. 2 Systematic collaboration with public authorities • Working with authorities results in relationships of inequality; • - Labour activists are frequently controlled and ordered by officers. • Lack of participation from all stakeholders • - Persons with Disabilities /workers are excluded when authorities set up discussions on their issues. • - In the case of Southern Thailand, Muslim people work with some state offices, such as the Southern Border Provinces Administration Center, but not with the army. • No host and continuation, therefore no concrete solutions.

6. I.3 Systematic participation and consultation in decision-making and policymakingprocesses • No participatory process for stakeholders • - There is no accessibility for persons with disabilities to participate in any aspect of human rights promotion and protection • - Southern people have no role in decision/policymaking • Absence of rational and equitable participation • - Scholars, NGOs, and directly related organizations should be allowed equal amounts of participation

7. I.4 Enjoyment of rights and freedoms instrumental to the activities of defenders and Human rights education policies • Persons with disabilities are victims of partiality and public misperception. ( social stigma, label, stereotype, ) • Limited access to human rights knowledge and related Conventions and Declarations • Lack of awareness: people who are not involved have limited awareness of their rights • Persons with Disabilities have low access to education and opportunity • Southern people possess a slight knowledge of human rights • Even the human rights defenders themselves do not know of the Declaration on HRDs • Lack of Support from media in marginalized peoples’ issues • They show no real interest in the movement of rural people, workers, and workers with disabilities. Only superficial report.

8. I.4 Enjoyment of rights and freedoms instrumental to the activities of defenders and Human rights education policies • Create more systematic education that emphasizes the importance of rights - The Thai educational system is highly fragmented, not holistic - For persons with disabilities, infrastructure is needed. Ex. Burapha University • Introduce human rights education into the curriculum • - Increase peoples’ understanding of human rights • - Educate the Southern people about criminal law and their rights • - Also educate the state officers about human rights

9. I.5 Support to the activities of defenders • CSOs/CBOs have limited funds. Therefore, there is no budget for continuation. • Lack of support and budget allocation • No participation in the funding process with donors such as the Thai Health Promotion Foundation • No information about donors • CSOs/ CBOs have no experience in writing proposals. • No gov’t support for activities that lobby for new law/ policy - Support for public communication activities, not human rights protection - Support social welfare, rather than capacity building

10. I.5 Support for the activities of defenders Persons with Disabilities Most support is in the form of vocational training and welfare. Less effort is dedicated to supporting rights to funding opportunities and capacity building. Labour movement Grants are allocated to NGOs and academics. Projects and activities are designed by scholars, not by workers. The movement has no continuation and cannot expand. Southern Thailand Government budgets are mostly distributed through army and state security institutes. Human rights grants support activities of international/regional NGOs’but not those of local people.

11. II. Legislation • Compliance of legislation relevant to the activities of defenders and the Declaration No compliance because directly related groups are excluded from the process of lawmaking. Laws are drafted by state actors, academics and NGOs. Suggestions Give special attention to every step of lawmaking. - from public hearings and representatives selections to the implementation of recommendations from hearings An appropriate drafting process should go as follows: - Organize open and general public hearings - Appoint the drafting committee to comprise of all stakeholders - Arrange the referendum

12. Persons with Disabilities • There is no penalty for not complying with the law, therefore it is not put into practice. • Person with disabilities are discriminated when they apply for jobs. Regardless of the law, employers do not want to hire persons with disabilities because of misunderstanding on accessibilities and disability dimension. • No protection against disabilities caused by work accidents • No provision of an enabling environment and facilities for working persons with disabilities • Several laws are instrumental to the violation, rather than the protection of rights For instance, in the case of the Thai Criminal Procedure Code, the Law of Evidence should be reviewed and modified. Since this law states, social stigma that persons with disabilities cannot be witnesses in criminal procedures, the law discriminates against persons with disabilites.

13. Labour Movement • Excellent laws and regulations, but no application; For example, the Labour Protection Law and Trade Union Act • Workers’ rights are frequently violated by state officers. • Long and costly judicial process are disadvantageous to the workers.

14. Southern Thailand The following laws and regulations are widely used as tools to violate the human rights of people in Southern Thailand. 1. Penal Procedure Code 2. Martial Law (adopted in certain areas) 3. Emergency Decree 4. Internal Security Law (soon to be enacted) State actors always claim that these laws are indispensable and instrumental to their operation and its effectiveness. However, it is clearly shown that in many cases these “authoritative and nationalist” laws have encouraged violence in Southern Thailand.

15. III. Levels of security of defenders • Persons with Disabilities • considered as second-class citizens; no provisions of an enabling environmentin the workplace • no respect for their human dignity from state officers and society • - discriminated and oppressed • Labour Movement • labour leaders are laid off, defamed, threatened, attacked at night, or forbidden to enter the factory • At the provincial level, their life is threatened by local mafia without any arrest • once injured and disabled from a work accident, the employer takes no responsibility; the worker is on his/her own, no career stability, • compromise offered and convinced to abandon the movement

16. III. Levels of security of defenders • Southern Thailand • operate in the conflicting situation where violence is widespread • arrested, kidnapped and murdered, or detained under laws that violate human rights • faced with mistrust and misunderstanding in communities; operations are difficult • - once confrontation occurs, defenders are forced to choose between compromising or continuing to operate in danger • - meetings subject to search and surveillance, causing fear and reluctance among participants. Sometimes defenders must relocate meeting places and bear increasing costs.

17. IV. Collaboration with regional and international human rights mechanisms National Level • Insignificant collaboration • Problems • No representatives from labour/persons with disabilities networks in the sub-committee appointed by NHRC; only NGOs, academics, and specialists • NHRC is not sincere and unwilling to invite stakeholders to discussions. • NHRC does not respond to invitations or demands.

18. IV. Collaboration with regional and international human rights mechanisms Regional and International Levels • Persons with disabilities • meet with a representative of the regional UN High Commissioner for Human Rights • worked with ESCAP, Social  Development Division • Development practitioner organization related to disabilities only. • Labour Movement • - worked with ILO but intermittently, no continuation and progress • Southern Thailand • - UN supports government, not civil society • - UN team takes southern people for granted. Ex. Meeting with UN team at Forum-Asia • - Southern people have no acquaintance with UN policies and mechanisms

19. V. Concluding Remarks • In regard to the recommendations on Thailand from the Special Representative’s report, we do not see any adoption by the Thai government. • One remark, the Recommendations to the Government (g) …assures a just balance between respect for the right to peaceful protest and the maintenance of public order • Authorities cannot guarantee such balance because of internal political reasons. • There is laxity and even negligence, especially in the Suvannabhum airport takeover.