6 replies to this topic

[Hedda]

There's a very informative and serious article linked below that traces the current status of Thailand's Human Rights Commission, whose seven new members are in the process of being re-appointed under the current Constitution.

According to the author, the process has been totally dominated by Thai judges who have five of the seven votes on the nominating panel, leading to the appointment of unqualified people with little experience or commitment to civil rights, as mandated by law, including 5 politicians, businessmen and/or cops with no credentials in the field of defending civil rights. In other words, according to the author, the Constitutional mandate to preserve and protect civil rights is being flaunted by a group of judges ignoring their legal mandate.

It's just another dreary example of how the military coup of 2006 has managed to maintain a sinister stranglehold on this country's democracy through the mechanisms of a Constitution which put so many hidden levers of power in the hands of unelected judges. In some respects, in handing the power of political appointments to the judiciary, it has substituted the rule of judges for the rule of politicians, politicizing the courts and corrupting the separation of powers in the process.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/04/23...cs_30101076.php

[Hedda]

I was glad to see a perceptive editorial in the Bangkok Post today by one of their regular senior commentators, Thongbai Thongpao, criticizing the selection of the new Human Rights Commission as "deeply flawed." One of the points raised is that one of the proposed members " has himself been accused of human rights abuses." Nothing like picking a fox to guard the chickens. It remains to be seen if Premier Opposite does anything to derail a process that's making a joke of the new Constitution's provisions on HRC appointments.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion...s-deeply-flawed

[Harold]

Nothing like picking a fox to guard the chickens. It remains to be seen if Premier Opposite does anything to derail a process that's making a joke of the new Constitution's provisions on HRC appointments.

The joke continues:

"The Senate Friday endorsed 7 nominees for the posts of national human rights commissioners. The seven nominees were endorsed with secret balloting. They are Amara Pongsapich, endorsed with 131 votes, Doctor Thaejing Siriphanit, endorsed with 128 votes, Wisa Benjamano, endorsed with 126 votes, Wanchai Srinualnud, endorsed with 126 votes, Paibul Warahapaitoon, endorsed with 123 votes, Nirand Pithakwatchara, endorsed with 109 votes and Parinya Sirisarakarn, endorsed with 76 votes."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingne...issioner-nomine

[Hedda]

...Parinya Sirisarakarn, endorsed with 76 votes

Memory serves that's the bare minimum vote required under the Senate's rules, which suggests there were lots of folks unhappy over the qualificatrions of some of these nominees. Once again, the penchant of the junta-sponsored Constitution of 2007 to entrust political appointments to the judicial branch, suggests that putting judges in charge of these appointments does not mean you have improved the system or the quality of the results.

Indeed, there's a serious downside to immersing the judiciary in such political functions, blurring the lines of the separation-of-powers which is so essential to the effective functioning of an independent judiciary. What does it profit a society to remove power from the hands of corrupt politicians when the process of transferring such powers to judges may compromise or even corrupt the judiciary in the process.

[B.I.G.]

The following is part of the statement issued by the Asian Human Rights Comission, based in Hong Kong, deploring the Thai senate's conformation of the seven new members of the Thai Human Rights Commission:

The Asian Human Rights Commission wishes to make explicit that the appointment of this commission and the manner in which it was appointed is a slap in the face of human rights defenders in Thailand and across Asia.

It is a statement of the contempt with which human rights are held among the authorities there. It is laughable that while the government of Thailand has been hosting a "human rights caravan" to travel around the country informing citizens of generic universal rights, it has allowed the appointment to the NHRC of the likes of Parinya Sirisarakarn, a man whose views on human rights, in as much as he has any at all, resemble those of Burma's military regime than those of a nascent human rights commissioner.

Whereas the AHRC had cordial relations with commissioners and staff of the former NHRC, it deems the new body a non-human rights organization and has no option other than to ostracize it in the global human rights community.

It again urges any among the seven commissioners who does not wish to participate in a human rights charade to resign immediately, out of respect for the principles that they are supposed to represent. It would also encourage any person resigning to again stand for the post when arrangements are made for election to the commission in a manner that permits widespread public awareness and debate, and complies with international standards."

http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/1193

[Gene]

Don't you wonder what Prime Minister Opposite is doing while all of this is going on ? As usual, he talks about human rights and the need to restoring transparency and the rule of law but he's nowhere to be found when it comes to doing something about it. All talk and no action.

[Hedda]

Another influential international NGO, Human Rights Watch, has added its name to groups deploring the recent appointments to the Thai National Human Rights Commission. What's especially disappointing about this huge step backward by Thailand is that no prominent Thais who claim to have a commitment to human rights to seem to care:

"An international human right group called Thursday the National Human Right Commission to resign as its selection process violated constitutional requirements and international standard. The seven new members approved by the Senate on May 1, 2009, in a closed session, include one who was a subject of a commission investigation and several with no experience in human rights. Several highly qualified candidates were rejected, said New York based Human Right Watch.

"Thailand is facing grave human rights challenges and needs a serious and committed commission to work on them," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

"Instead, inexperienced and unqualified people were placed on this commission in a way that clearly broke the rules. The best thing these members can do for human rights is to step down. . ."

The new commissioners did not come from a diverse range of social backgrounds, nor did any of them represent human rights groups, the Human Right Watch said in a statement.
More important, local human rights groups have protested that the new commissioners lack necessary first-hand experience in protecting and promoting human rights.

Vanchai, Parinya, Paibool, and Visa, in particular, have no experience at all and have no public record of demonstrating basic understanding of human rights. In 2007, Parinya was named in a commission investigation as responsible for causing environmental damage in Thailand's northeastern region, where he holds a license to extract salt.

Parinya's lack of commitment to promoting universal human rights was evident in an oral presentation to the Thai Senate in which he dismissed "Western criticisms of Burma" as "foreign interference" in domestic affairs. In that light, if made a commissioner, he stated that he would not welcome international intervention on human rights issues in Thailand."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/05/14...al_30102674.php