The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is writing to you in response to a press release issued by the Public Relations Department of Thailand dated 23 July 2007 in which it is stated that during a courtesy call to the interim prime minister, General Surayud Chulanont, you offered to send a team of around one hundred European Union observers to monitor the upcoming general election that is scheduled to follow the August 19 referendum. The report also stated that you had “expressed confidence in the Thai interim government’s determination toward the transparent political reforms [sic]”.
The AHRC does not agree with this reported assessment of the work of the interim government, and nor with your apparent notion that the sending of observers may somehow help to put Thailand back on the path of democratisation.
Since last September 19 the armed forces have consolidated control over key institutions of state in Thailand. The vast increases in military budget and re-emergence of the Internal Security Operations Command are causes for grave concern that have not attracted public discussion commensurate with their importance. As you are aware, the administration is now preparing for a referendum in which a Yes vote is all but a foregone conclusion, as the country has been saturated by government propaganda while reports have it that even persons preparing materials to the effect that “it is legal to vote No in the referendum” have had their premises raided and have been threatened with legal action once the law governing the plebiscite comes into effect. Over one hundred executives of the former civilian regime have been denied their electoral rights for the coming five years by a tribunal of doubtful legality via a decision passed in accordance with a declaration of the military coup group. Meanwhile, political party activities remain circumscribed.
An observer mission would have no effect on any of this. Merely monitoring the movement of ballots and ballot boxes and the participation of voters come election day will do nothing to contribute to useful discussion about the damage caused to democratic institutions in Thailand by this coup. On the contrary, your involvement in the election would, as has already been pointed out by a prominent journalist, be excellent ammunition for the interim government to use against its political targets. Presumably this is not your intention. Under any circumstances, we fail to see how the presence of European observers would contribute towards your stated objective of “advancing co-operation on a more modern agenda including good governance, justice and home affairs issues [and] human rights” in Thailand at this time.
Instead of offering tacit support for the renewal of elite military-bureaucratic government of the sort that dominated Thailand two decades ago, the European Union should be much more outspoken against the growing militarisation of the country and corresponding havoc being wreaked to institutions for the rule of law there. The superior courts, which prior to the coup may perhaps have emerged as a viable third arm of state, have since been utterly degraded. The very notion of legality has itself been pushed back by decades, to say nothing of constitutionalism. However, despite being globally recognised for its adherence to these values, the European Union has failed to take a strong and uncompromising position against these setbacks, apart from the voicing of some early cautious concerns. This is disappointing.
The European Union’s response to the military government in Thailand has been in marked contrast to the stern treatment of that in neighbouring Burma. Why? The reasoning may be that the junta in Thailand is far less onerous and will apparently be short-lived when compared to its counterpart to the west. If so, it is spurious reasoning. In fact, a stronger position taken concerning the military takeover in Thailand could have yielded more results than that taken with regards to the obstinate generals in Burma. And there is much more to be said for a firm position being taken with regards to Thailand, as whereas the military regime in Burma is simply the latest extension of many decades of overt authoritarian rule, government in Thailand had in the 1990s progressed well beyond the point to which it has now been returned thanks to last year’s coup: something gained and then lost should be at least of equal concern to that which has never been gained at all.
Thus we kindly request that you reconsider your proposal to send observers to Thailand, and instead concentrate on how you might instead use European experts to study and analyse the true situation in the country, in order that you engage in more informed and vigorous discussions with the authorities and civil society on how to prevent further damage to rule of law institutions and constitutionalism there, more in keeping with your stated mandate and less inclined towards political niceties with a government that is trying to turn the political clock back much further than to just one year ago.
Yours sincerely
Basil Fernando
Executive Director
Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong
Cc: José Manuel Barroso, President, European Commission
