This next week of July 2005 is an historic one for Thailand. As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) it will go before the U.N. Human Rights Committee for the first time to answer questions about how well the rights guaranteed under the Covenant are protected in Thailand. These include the most fundamental human rights to life, freedom from torture, freedom of expression and equality before the law, among others.
Protection of these rights depends upon institutions. Without institutions to protect rights, they are mere words on paper. The section of the Covenant that deals with this is article 2, which says that any state that signs up to the Covenant must introduce laws and institutions so that the rights it contains are respected and protected. The state must also give access to effective remedies for persons whose rights have been violated. This means being able to complain about a violation, have the complaint investigated, perpetrators punished, and compensation and rehabilitation given. Where this happens, the Covenant is being effected. Where it is not, being a party to the Covenant has no meaning.
What institutions are important for Thailand in making the rights under the Covenant a reality? In its second submission on Thailand to the Human Rights Committee, the Asian Legal Resource Centre, sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission, has paid special attention to the Department of Special Investigation, Department of Rights and Liberties Protection and Central Institute of Forensic Science.
DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Thailand does not have a specialised agency to receive complaints and launch investigations and prosecutions against police. The nearest equivalent is the Department of Special Investigation (DSI), which is under the Ministry of Justice. The DSI addresses ‘special cases’, commonly when victims or their supporters generate enough pressure through media publicity and other actions for the department to get involved. However, the DSI lacks transparency and works slowly. As a result it often further demoralises victims and their families when it should be doing the opposite. For instance, the wife of forcibly disappeared human rights lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit has expressed sceptisism over the ability of the DSI to resolve the case of her husband. She has said that up until recently the department hadn’t even contacted her. Similarly, the wife of slain environmentalist Charoen Wat-aksorn has expressed doubts about the DSI, and has had to lead a protest to get it to reopen its investigation into her husband’s murder. She says that the DSI has sat on the case for a year without result, and has excluded a great deal of evidence from its investigation.
Cases that should be transferred to the Department of Special Investigation, like the brutal torture case of Anek Yingnuek, are sometimes instead given to the National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC). As its name suggests, the NCCC is charged with addressing corruption, a job that it has not done very well, let alone cases of torture, extrajudicial killing or other gross abuses by the police. Moving such cases to a body that is not mandated or equipped to address them serves no other purpose than to stretch the time taken to reach inconclusive results.
No doubt the Department of Special Investigation needs more money, personnel and training to do its job. However, it also needs a change in administrative style and behaviour. It must be far more responsive to the needs of victims and their families. It must be able to operate autonomously and with greater initiative. The government must also put in place measures to penalise police officers that attempt to obstruct its work. And notwithstanding an improved performance from the DSI, Thailand desperately needs a fully independent body with the power to receive, investigate and prosecute complaints against police.
DEPARTMENT OF RIGHTS & LIBERTIES PROTECTION
The work of the Department of Rights and Liberties Protection, which oversees witness protection and victim compensation in Thailand, is jeopardised by its inability to intervene quickly in many cases where persons may need immediate security or assistance. In the recent gruesome torture case of Urai Srineh, for instance, police negotiators came to offer silence money while the victim was still recovering from his injuries in hospital. Not surprisingly, he was easily intimidated and, in need of money to pay hospital bills, took what was offered. To fulfil public expectations, the department needs to be strengthened considerably so that it can move fast and with assurance to protect such victims. While it is unable to do this all aspects of its work will be greatly undermined.
CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF FORENSIC SCIENCE
Of all these agencies, perhaps the Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS) faces the greatest challenges. The CIFS has been in operation for around two years. Prior to that, the police had unchecked power over the issuing of death certificates and conducting of post-mortems. The CIFS has an uphill task as much of its work brings it into direct conflict with the police. At present it requires permission from the police to join with them in investigations. For the most part, the police are disinclined to assist the institute, and are also quite prepared to launch counter-attacks on its credibility, as well as that of its staff and forensic science in general. Staff persons of the institute have been denied access to crime scenes in most parts of the country. In some areas police commanders have issued orders prohibiting personnel to have contact with the CIFS on threat of punishment. The institute’s deputy director has been sued by a group of police for suggesting that an apparent homicide could not possibly be a suicide as they have insisted.
The shortage of forensic professionals in Thailand is itself a serious concern. There are at present only about 60 forensic pathologists in the country, and five working at the CIFS. In most cases, general practitioners do post-mortems, against their will. Their lack of skills and enthusiasm for the task cause many serious rights violations to be improperly investigated.
Obstacles to the wider use of forensic science during criminal investigations in Thailand are also obstacles to the effecting of basic human rights. However, this doesn’t have to be the case. There are many opportunities for Thailand to obtain technical and financial assistance in forensic science from abroad. Since the Indian Ocean tsunami, highly equipped and professional international agencies have been involved in forensic work there. These agencies are in an excellent position to extend technical assistance to the CIFS and should be called upon to do so by all concerned parties. For its part, the government must play a far stronger role in protecting the institute from attacks and supporting it in its work, than pretending to act as a mediator between it and the police force. There is no question of mediation in this instance. The fledgling CIFS must have full government support to be a success.
The government and society of Thailand are different from nearby countries in a number of respects. Although democratic change there is still limited by old ways of thinking and doing, compared to its neighbours, Thailand is far advanced. Struggles to end the absolute monarchy and military dictatorship in Thailand succeeded with relatively little bloodshed. By contrast, in neighbouring Cambodia the monarchys resistance to change contributed to the tensions that caused the mass killings of the 1970s and total collapse of the society. In Burma too, the transfer of power from colonial rulers to an independent government was erratic and lacking in rational leadership, resulting in the continued dominance of the military and denial of a role for civil society there. Thailand, however, has negotiated significant change in recent decades without the same scale of upheaval or tragedy.
However, the legacy of Thailand’s militaristic and feudal past persists. As a result, there are serious conflicts between efforts to modernise institutions and the deeply entrenched habits of its military and police. The policing system of Thailand in particular has not undergone any meaningful or significant change. Public confidence in the police is very low. The average person in Thailand associates a police officer with corruption and violence. Murders, extrajudicial killings, torture and forced disappearances go uninvestigated and unaddressed either because the police do not care about them or because they are the perpetrators, or are in league with the perpetrators.
As the silence that has long existed around brutal and corrupt methods of law enforcement in Thailand is being broken, conflicts are growing. Reports of heinous torture and killings by police are at last being discussed publicly. Police power is no longer presumed. As the extent of corruption is laid bare, the entire criminal investigation system is being subjected to growing criticism and ridicule. Even some senior police officers admit that things are going badly wrong. The trend in legal reform is rightly towards removing powers from the police and giving them to semi-autonomous civilian agencies. However, the gap between attempts at reform and the realities of policing in Thailand is still very wide. Ultimately, this gap must be closed if the ICCPR is to have meaning. To close the gap, institutions with the power and mandate to protect human rights must be greatly strengthened.
