Mar 7, 2014 | News, Publications, Reports
A new ICJ report criticizes the Thai Government’s failure to take the steps necessary to establish the fate and whereabouts of missing lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit, saying it illustrates the challenges of achieving justice in cases of serious human violations in Thailand.
In the report, Ten Years Without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand, the ICJ documents the tortuous legal history of the case.
It highlights several key problems, such as poor use of forensic evidence, failure to follow and develop leads, unduly restrictive interpretation of national and international law, and above all, a lack of political will to resolve a case that remains emblematic of the culture of impunity in Thailand.
“Over the past 10 years, this case has taken many unexpected turns, including the disappearance of a prime suspect, admissions of Somchai’s death from officials while the courts have rejected such a finding, and most recently, a statement from the Department of Special Investigations that it had lost, and then found, the case files,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
“The Royal Thai Government has not exhausted all potential areas of inquiry and it must continue this investigation. There is no statute of limitations on an enforced disappearance and Somchai’s case is not forgotten in Thailand or around the world.”
Somchai, a lawyer and human rights defender, was stopped at a Bangkok roadside on March 12, 2004 and pulled from his car by a group of men. He has not been seen since.
At the time, Somchai was defending clients from Thailand’s restive southern provinces who were accused of attacking a military base as part of the ongoing insurgency in the region. Somchai had alleged police tortured the Muslim suspects.
Ten years later, Somchai’s wife, Angkhana Neelapaijit, and her family are no closer to knowing the truth about what happened to him.
“Somchai’s enforced disappearance, and the failure of the Royal Thai government to provide accountability or even basic information about his fate are emblematic of the challenges of achieving justice in cases of serious human rights violations in Thailand,” said Zarifi. “Enforced disappearance is not only a serious human rights violation but also a crime under international law.”
Thailand signed, but has not yet ratified, the Convention Against Enforced Disappearance in January 2012. Pending the ratification, Thailand must desist from any acts that would defeat the objective and purpose of the convention, which places an obligation on State Parties to make enforced disappearance a criminal offence and treat family members of a ‘disappeared’ person as victims in their own right.
The ICJ has followed Somchai’s case closely and worked with Angkhana Neelapaijit since 2004.
“The Royal Thai government’s failure to shed any more light on the enforced disappearance of Somchai Neelapaijit, despite providing compensation for his family and finding him to be ‘disappeared’, contradicts multiple past declarations of its commitment to seeking justice, or at least truth, including by several former Prime Ministers, Attorneys General, and officials,” the report says.
“It also contradicts official commitments before the United Nations Human Rights Council in March 2008.”
The ICJ’s report calls on the Royal Thai government to prioritize and advance the investigation into Somchai’s disappearance in a manner that conforms to its international obligations. It also recommends that Thailand:
–Ratify the Convention Against Enforced Disappearance;
–Enact legislation that makes enforced disappearance a specific crime in Thai domestic law, together with penalties that recognize its extreme seriousness;
–Amend existing Thai law to conform to the Convention Against Enforced Disappearance, as well as the State’s obligations, including with respect to effective remedy and reparation, under the ICCPR and CAT;
–Provide Angkhana Neelapaijit and her family with effective remedy and full reparation, in particular knowledge and clarification of the facts leading to the enforced disappearance and the progress and results of the Department of Special Investigations, and;
–Address the recommendations the ICJ made to the DSI in its letter of February 4, 2014 with respect to its investigation.
CONTACT
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002, e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Craig Knowles, ICJ Media & Communications, (Bangkok), t:+66 819077653, e-mail: craig.knowles(a)icj.org
Download the full report in PDF:
Ten Years Without Truth- Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand – report – 2014
Thailand-Ten Years Without Truth-Publications-Reports-2014-THAI
Mar 4, 2014 | Agendas, Events
This side event to the 25th Human Rights Council session will take place on Friday, 7 March 2014, 12.00 – 14.00 pm, in Geneva, Palais des Nations, Room XXI.
The panel, which includes family members of victims of enforced disappearance, will discuss unresolved cases of enforced disappearances in Southeast Asia, including human rights defenders Somchai Neelapaijit (Thailand) and Sombath Somphone (Laos).
The panel will also discuss the response of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), the regional human rights body composed of representatives from all ASEAN Member States, to these two cases and more generally to enforced disappearances of human rights defenders in the region.
Speakers:
Aileen Diez-Bacalso
Secretary General, Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD)
Angkhana Neelapaijit
Chairperson, Justice for Peace Foundation
Emerlynne Gil
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Southeast Asia
Chair/moderator:
Wilder Tayler
Secretary General, the International Commission of Jurists
The presentations by panelists will be followed by an open interaction with the audience. Copies of ICJ’s legal memorandum on the case of Sombath Somphone and the report Ten Years without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and enforced disappearances in Thailand will be available. Light refreshments will also be available immediately before the event.
Jan 31, 2014 | News
The Parliament of Nepal should reject the Ordinance on Truth, Reconciliation and Disappearances tabled this week and enact a new transitional justice mechanism that complies with international human rights law, the ICJ and HRW said today.
The Ordinance on Disappearances, Truth and Reconciliation Commission, signed by the President on 14 March, 2013, was declared unconstitutional and in violation of international human rights law by the Nepali Supreme Court on 2 January, 2014.
In a directive, the Supreme Court ordered the Ordinance be repealed or amended significantly to bring it in line with Nepal’s obligations under national and international law.
However, on 27 January, the Government reintroduced the Ordinance with no amendments in the meeting of the Legislative-Parliament – in direct contravention of the Supreme Court’s orders.
“Tabling a rejected version of the Ordinance after the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on transitional justice is contemptuous, and raises serious concerns over the government’s respect for the rule of law in Nepal,” said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia Director.
The Interim Constitution says clearly that the Supreme Court’s rulings are binding on the Government of Nepal. Article 116 of the Interim Constitution states that any order issued by the Supreme Court in the course of the hearing of a case shall be binding on the Government of Nepal and all its offices and courts.
The Supreme Court has previously held that any mechanism for transitional justice must conform with international standards, lead to accountability for serious human rights violations, and ensure victims their right to remedy and reparations, which includes the right to truth, justice, and guarantees of non-recurrence.
In its 2013 briefing paper, “Authority without Accountability,” the ICJ expressed concern over multiple provisions in the Ordinance, including amnesty provisions, which would entrench impunity for gross human rights violations in Nepal.
Any amnesty for gross human rights violations would add another layer to the complex web of immunities, documented in the report, that continue to shield those responsible for human rights abuse from accountability in Nepal.
“The Parliament of Nepal should strongly reject the tabled Ordinance and the government must expeditiously implement the Supreme Court’s directive,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia Director at Human Rights Watch. “The ordinance in its current form violates undertakings made as part of the peace agreement, and essentially strips victims of serious rights abuses of a proper chance at justice.”
The rights groups called on the government to implement the Supreme Court’s ruling, creating a new transitional justice law that, at a minimum:
- Establishes two separate transitional justice commissions: a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” and a “Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappeared Persons;”
- Criminalizes the act of enforced disappearance in accordance with the definition set out in the International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and ensures that it is punishable with penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime;
- Criminalizes other serious crimes, including crimes against humanity, and other crimes under international law, in a manner that is consistent with international law;
- Prohibits amnesties for gross human rights violations or crimes under international law;
- Does not contain a limitation period on the reporting of violations and ensures there are no time limits on the prosecutions of of serious crimes including enforced disappearance, other crimes under international law including, war crimes, and crimes against humanity;
- Ensures that the composition and structure of the Commissions complies with international standards. In particular, there should be a fair vetting system which aims to ensure the impartiality of the commission members and to ensure that no individuals against whom there are credible allegations they have committed human rights abuses are selected as Commissioners;
- Requires the necessary legal and institutional measures to be taken to enable and ensure the establishment, adequate resourcing and maintenance of effective victim and witness protection mechanisms; and
- Establishes and requires other necessary legal, administrative, institutional, or other arrangements for an effective reparation program.
Contact:
In Bangkok, Sam Zarifi: +66-857200723; or sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
In Kathmandu, Ben Schonveld +977-9804596661; : ben.schonveld(a)icj.org
Read also: ICJ releases new report on the struggle for justice in Nepal
The report Authority without accountability: the struggle for justice in Nepal can also be downloaded below:
Nepal-SUMMARY-Authority without Accountability-Publication-report summary-2012 (full text in pdf)
Nepal-FULL-Authority without accountability-publications-report-2012 (full text in pdf)
Dec 14, 2013 | News
The ICJ today urged the Lao PDR government to reverse its inaction in determining the fate of community activist Sombath Somphone, who was allegedly subjected to enforced disappearance a year ago.
In a legal memorandum on the one-year anniversary of Sombath’s enforced disappearance, the ICJ called on the Lao authorities to fulfill their country’s obligations under international law and carry out a thorough and impartial investigation into his whereabouts.
It also said the government must cooperate with regional and international human rights mechanisms, particularly the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) and the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances.
“It is deplorable that one year after Sombath Somphone was abducted after being stopped by traffic police, the public prosecutor has yet to institute formal
or criminal proceedings into his disappearance’’, said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific regional director.
“The government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic must immediately take effective measure to ensure animpartial and thorough investigation and bring justice to those responsible for crimes against Sombath Somphone,” he added.
Sixty-two-year old Sombath Somphone, Lao PDR’s most prominent community development advocate and a Ramon Magsaysay Award winner, was last seen on December 15, 2013, on a road in the capital Vientiane.
Closed circuit Television (CCTV) footage showed him being stopped at a police checkpoint, exiting his vehicle, getting into another vehicle with unidentified men and being driven away. He has not been seen since.
The Lao PDR government has denied any involvement in Sombath Somphone’s abduction. But reports released by police reveal a wholly inadequate investigation that lacks any credible explanation as to his fate or whereabouts.
In January this year, the ICJ called on the AICHR to play a proactive role in the case and to use the opportunity to address issues of enforced and involuntary disappearances in the region. To date, the AICHR has yet to take any meaningful action.
If the AICHR is to have any meaning, it must fulfill its mandate under Article 4, paragraph 1.11 of its Terms of Reference and develop a common position and strategy for tackling the widespread impunity of all acts of enforced disappearances in ASEAN, the legal memorandum said.
“An effective investigation, conducted in accordance with international standards, is essential in order that family members of Sombath Somphone and the public as a whole may discover the truth about his fate and whereabouts, and bring justice and reparation,’’ said Zarifi.
Background
Sombath Somphone is the founder and former director of the Participatory Development Training Center (PADETC), a non-governmental organization that supports holistic education and youth development as well as promoting eco-friendly technologies and micro-enterprises.
In October 2012, Sombath assisted the Lao government and non-governmental organizations convene an Asia-Europe People’s Forum (AEPF). The event was widely attended, drawing 948 participants from Lao PDR as well as other Asian countries.
It was the first time groups publicly criticized human rights abuses in Lao PDR, a Communist-run Southeast Asian country bordering Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar and China.
The legal memorandum also covers the right of a family member to the right to information in such cases of enforced disappearances pursuant to both international standards as well as domestic laws in Lao PDR.
Recommendations
The key recommendations in the legal memorandum include:
(a) The public prosecutor, to launch a credible, prompt, thorough, impartial and effective investigation into the fate and whereabouts of Sombath Somphone. In the event that the public prosecutor fails to do so, an independent and credible authority should be established to undertake prompt, thorough and impartial investigation, consistent with international standards, into the alleged enforced disappearance as well as allegations of arbitrary detention, torture or ill-treatment;
(b) In furtherance of this investigation, the investigating authority should immediately seek and accept assistance from foreign experts on analysis of forensic evidence; and
(c) The investigating authority should provide relevant material and conclusions from any investigation to Sombath Somphone’s wife, to the extent compatible with the prosecution of the case.
CONTACT:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002, e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Craig Knowles, ICJ Media & Communications, (Bangkok), t:+66 819077653, e-mail: craig.knowles(a)icj.org
Lao-Legal Memorandum-annex on the case of Sombath Somphone-advocay-2013 (download in pdf)
Aug 30, 2013 | News
On the 30th annual International Day of the Disappeared, the ICJ urged the Nepali Government to act immediately to disclose the fate and whereabouts of “disappeared” persons and to provide accountability for the perpetrators of these gross violations of human rights.
The systematic practice of enforced disappearance during Nepal’s 1996-2006 armed conflict was among the worst anywhere in the world, the ICJ says.
The fate and whereabouts of more than 1,300 possible victims of enforced disappearance are still unknown.
To date, not one individual suspected of criminal responsibility for serious human rights violations or crimes under international law committed during the conflict has been brought to justice.
“The Government must meet its human rights obligations”, said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia Director. “Ending impunity, ensuring accountability, and strengthening the rule of law are essential for a durable transition from armed conflict to sustainable peace in Nepal”.
On 21 November 2006, the Government of Nepal and Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), committing to investigate and reveal the fate of those killed or disappeared during the armed conflict within 60 days.
Both parties promised they would “not protect impunity” and vowed to safeguard the rights of families of the “disappeared.”
Almost seven years later, the promises made in the CPA have still not been fulfilled, the ICJ says.
Instead, the Government has actively protected and even promoted those suspected of committing human rights violations.
On 14 March 2013, Nepal’s President promulgated an Ordinance to establish a Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons, Truth and Reconciliation to investigate human rights violations committed during the armed conflict.
However, the establishment of the commission was temporarily halted after the Supreme Court issued a stay order in April following legal challenges.
The proposed commission is not in compliance with international law and standards on commissions of inquiry to effectively discharge Nepal’s duty to provide remedy and reparation to victims in a number of respects.
First, the process of the appointment of the Chairperson of the Commission does not ensure independence and impartiality.
Second, the Commission has wide discretion to recommend amnesty for crimes under international law, including enforced disappearance, to those who repent.
When combined with the fact that the crime of enforced disappearance is not yet a distinct offence punishable under the law of Nepal, there are grounds for real concern that impunity for the hundreds of enforced disappearances carried out during the course of the conflict will continue.
“The framework for the Commission set out in the Ordinance was the result of a bargain between the political parties”, Schonveld added. “The Commission seems designed to enable those suspected of criminal responsibility to avoid accountability for human rights violations and crimes under international law committed over the course of Nepal’s decade-long conflict”.
The ICJ urges the Government of Nepal to:
1. Withdraw the Ordinance, or establish a mechanism for its review and amendment, which includes inclusive consultation with victims of conflict related human rights abuses and representatives of civil society, with the aim of ensuring that the Commission established is consistent with international law and standards;
2. Promptly accede to the UN International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance;
3. Ensure that enforced disappearance, as defined under the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, is included as a distinct offence and is punishable by penalties that are proportionate with its gravity criminalized under domestic law;
4. Respect court orders calling on the police to investigate human rights violations and crimes under international law and, if there is sufficient admissible evidence, prosecute those suspected of criminal responsibility in trials that meet international due process standards;
5. Ensure that victims of enforced disappearance, other human rights violations and crimes under international law have access to effective remedies and receive adequate reparation, including appropriate compensation, restitution, rehabilitation and measures of satisfaction;
Contact:
Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director, (Kathmandu); t: 977 9804596661; email: ben.schonveld(at)icj.org
NOTES:
Enforced disappearance occurs when a person is arrested, detained or abducted by an agent of the State and then officials refuse to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or conceal the fate or whereabouts of the “disappeared” person.
These acts remove an individual from the protection of the law, leaving the individual at the mercy of his or her captors.
Enforced disappearance violates many rights of the victims and their families alike, which are guaranteed under the under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Nepal, as a State Party, is obliged to respect.
The UN General Assembly has described enforced disappearances ‘an offence to human dignity’ and a grave and flagrant violation of international human rights law.
