Jan 29, 2015 | News
Three recent decisions by the Bangkok Military Tribunal affirming its jurisdiction over civilians violate international law and represent another serious setback for human rights in Thailand, the ICJ said today.
“International standards are clear – military tribunals are not competent to prosecute civilians,” said Wilder Tayler, ICJ’s Secretary General. “Military tribunals are not independent from the executive and the lack of an appeal removes any possibility of a remedy against the judgments of the Tribunal.”
The first case concerns a political activist, Sirapop Korn-arut, who was charged with violating an order of Thailand’s ruling military junta, the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), to report to the military for allegedly violating Thailand’s highly restrictive lese majeste law. The second case concerns the prosecution of an anti-military coup activist, Sombath Boonngam-anong, accused of violating NCPO orders and instigating rebellion in June 2014. In the third, a Thammasat University law lecturer, Worajet Pakeerat, is charged with violating a NCPO summons to report to the military.
All three had challenged the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to prosecute civilians.
In three separate rulings, delivered on 22, 23 and 26 January 2015, the Tribunal rejected the defendants’ challenges to its jurisdiction.
“These decisions set a worrying precedent for all civilians currently facing prosecution before military tribunals in Thailand. All cases of civilians facing charges before military tribunals must be transferred to civilian courts immediately if Thailand is to comply with its international obligations,” said Tayler.
According to observers, at least 100 civilians have faced prosecution in military tribunals since the military coup. The Royal Thai Government has not yet released the official number.
While the ICJ observed Professor Worajet’s hearing on 26 January, written decisions have not yet been made publically available in these cases.
Background
Under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Thailand is a state party, everyone has the right to a “fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.”
The imposition of Martial Law and the State’s suspension of some of its obligations under the ICCPR, including the right to appeal guaranteed by Article 14(5) for cases heard by military tribunals, does not affect the applicability of this provision.
Article 61 of the Thai Act for the Organization of the Military Court prevents any appeal from the decision of military tribunals so long as Thailand remains under Martial Law, which has been in force nationwide since 22 May 2014.
The Principles Governing the Administration of Justice through Military Tribunals sets out principles that apply to state use of military tribunals.
Principle 5 states “Military courts should, in principle, have no jurisdiction to try civilians. In all circumstances, the State shall ensure that civilians accused of a criminal offence of any nature are tried by civilian courts.”
Further, Principle 2 clarifies that even in times of crisis military tribunals must “apply standards and procedures internationally recognized as guarantees of a fair trial.”
Jan 18, 2015 | News
The ICJ condemned the execution in Indonesia of six persons convicted of drug trafficking offences. Other rights groups issued similar denunciations.
Jan 13, 2015 | News, Uncategorized
The ICJ today condemned the arrest and investigation of prominent human rights lawyer and co-founder of Lawyers for Liberty, Eric Paulsen, under the archaic 1948 Sedition Act.
Dec 13, 2014 | News
The ICJ condemned decision of the People’s Supreme Court on 12 December 2014 affirming the unfair convictions of human rights defenders Bui Thi Minh Hang, Nguyen Van Minh and Nguyen Thi Thuy Quynh respectively to three, two-and-a half and two years imprisonment.
Dec 11, 2014 | News, Publications, Reports
Two years after prominent Laotian activist Sombath Somphone was last seen at a police checkpoint, the Laotian government must do more to investigate his suspected enforced disappearance, said the ICJ in a new report released today.
In the report, Missed Opportunities: Recommendations for Investigating the Disappearance of Sombath Somphone, which was co-authored by Michael Taylor QPM, a leading international investigator, the ICJ noted that despite the passage of two years since Sombath Somphone’s apparent enforced disappearance on December 15, 2012, very little information about the progress of investigation has been released to the public or his family.
“The fact that the Lao PDR government’s last report on the progress of the investigation was released over 18 months ago raises serious concerns as to whether the Laotian authorities are in fact carrying out an effective investigation into this case as they are required to do under international law,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
“It is not enough for the Laotian government simply to assert it is investigating this case. International law obliges Lao PDR authorities to conduct an investigation that is credible and effective, along the lines suggested in ICJ’s report.”
Among other recommendations, the ICJ’s report suggests a range of investigative steps that should be addressed by the authorities of Laos PDR including establishing a relationship with Sombath Somphone’s family, carrying out a proper technical assessment of the Closed circuit Television (CCTV) footage of his abduction, analyzing relevant cell phone information from telephone cells and towers, and mandating an independent expert body to review the results of the investigation to date and make recommendations.
The Lao PDR government has denied any involvement in Sombath Somphone’s abduction.
But reports released by police reveal a wholly inadequate investigation that has not come any closer to a credible explanation as to his fate or whereabouts.
“The ICJ hopes that this report will assist the Laotian authorities to identify potential leads in the case so that the truth as to the whereabouts and fate of Sombath Somphone can finally be established and those who are responsible for criminal conduct and violations of his rights can be brought to justice,” said Zarifi.
“One of the conclusions of the ICJ’s review of the publicly available material regarding this case is that this case remains ‘eminently solvable’ if proper investigative methodology is followed.”
Key recommendations in the report include:
- Formulate a sensitive family liaison strategy that ensures that their right to be regularly provided with information about the progress and results of the investigation are respected in a manner that also ensures the effectiveness of the investigation.
- Implement a CCTV strategy that ensures the capture and systematic analysis of all relevant material and the submission of material to accredited independent and expert laboratories that will provide the best opportunity for enhancement of critical detail.
- Seek the assistance of appropriate agencies in other countries in the forensic examination and analysis of crime scenes, vehicles, phone and CCTV data, and any physical or other evidence.
- Ensure an independent comprehensive review of the scope, methodology and results of the investigation to date is carried out by a competent, independent and relevantly expert body. Such a body should have the authority to request and receive all relevant information, question individuals and make recommendations. All officials and experts who have been involved in the investigation to date should cooperate and provide information to the independent body carrying out the review.
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002, e-mail: sam.zarif(a)icj.org
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ International Legal Adviser, (Bangkok), t:+66 944701345, e-mail: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Background:
Sombath Somphone, Lao PDR’s most prominent community development advocate and a Ramon Magsaysay Award winner, was last seen on December 15, 2012, on a road in the capital Vientiane.
Closed circuit Television footage showed him being stopped at a police checkpoint, exiting his vehicle, and after his vehicle was driven away by an unidentified man, getting into another vehicle with unidentified men and being driven away. He has not been seen since.
As a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR and Convention Against Torture and Other, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), the Government of Lao PDR has the duty to carry out independent, impartial and effective investigations into cases of alleged enforced disappearance.
Download the report in PDF:
Lao-Somphone disappearance-Publications-report-2014-ENG (full report in English, PDF)
Lao-Somphone disappearance-Publications-report-2014-LAO (full report in Laotian, PDF)
Read also:
Lao PDR: government must tackle enforced disappearance case
ICJ submission on the Universal Periodic Review of Lao
Nov 27, 2014 | News
The ICJ today strongly condemned the decision by Prime Minister Najib Razak to retain and even strengthen the country’s 1948 Sedition Act despite having made a commitment in 2012 to repeal the Act.
The ICJ has repeatedly expressed its concern that the Sedition Act has been used to stifle and criminalize the exercise of freedom of expression and to silence human rights defenders, lawyers, political activists, among others.
The ICJ considers the Act as it stands to be incompatible with international human rights standards and to be made still more repugnant by the politically loaded manner in which it is typically applied.
In early September, the ICJ denounced the use of sedition against two members of the legal profession, Dr. Azmi Sharom (photo) and N. Surendran for commenting on questions of law and public policy.
On 20 September 2014, Edmund Bon a prominent human rights and constitutional lawyer, was questioned by the police regarding comments made in a based on the decision of a Malaysian Federal Court.
On 30 September 2014, Dr. Abdul Aziz Bari, a law professor at the University of Selangor, was summoned for a police interview over comments made about the selection process of the new Chief Minister by the Sultan of Selangor.
Background:
The 1948 Sedition Act, originally enacted by the British colonial government and amended several times over the years, criminalizes speech and publications considered to have “seditious tendencies”.
The term “seditious tendencies” is ambiguously defined to mean any kind of speech or publication that causes “hatred or contempt, or excite disaffection” against any ruler or the government or promotes “ill will and hostility between the different races or classes”.
The law also considers “seditious” any speech or publication that questions the special privileges of the Malay people, as provided in the Constitution.
Furthermore, sedition is a strict liability offence in Malaysia, which means that the intention of a person allegedly making seditious statements is irrelevant.
For instance, a person making a statement may not have the intent to cause “hatred or contempt” towards the government, but may nonetheless be held liable for sedition if authorities believe that the person in fact incited such feelings.
The ICJ considers that the Act, by its very terms, contemplates restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression that are grossly overbroad and inconsistent with basic rule of law and human rights principles.
