Country Situations > Thailand

Thailand: Visits & Communications

Correspondence from 2007

The record of correspondence for 2007 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, A/HRC/4/20/Add.1.

Thailand: Death Sentences of Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 2 males

Character of reply: No response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Thailand has failed to cooperate with the mandate that he has been given by the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights.

Urgent appeal dated 1 February 2006

I would like to draw the attention of your Government to information I have received regarding the imposition of the death sentence against Messrs. Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit, the two men found guilty of the rape and murder of Katherine Horton, a tourist from the United Kingdom, on 1 January 2006. My concern with this case is raised by the extraordinary speed with which the two suspects were tried, convicted and sentenced to death. It is my understanding that Ms. Horton’s body was found on 2 January 2006, and Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit were arrested on 7 or 8 January 2006. By 9 January 2006 they had reportedly confessed to the crime. On 13 January 2006, the two men were tried at Surat Thani. According to the information received, the two men confessed to the police, and limited themselves to confirming their statements to the police at trial. Reports state that DNA samples were taken and matched with DNA traces found on the victim’s body. On 18 January 2006, the Surat Thani court delivered the guilty verdicts and sentenced Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit to death.

Although the death penalty is not prohibited under international law, I would like to remind your Excellency’s Government that it must be regarded as an extreme exception to the fundamental right to life, and must as such be interpreted in the most restrictive manner. Therefore, it is crucial that all restrictions and fair trial standards pertaining to capital punishment contained in international human rights law are fully respected in proceedings relating to capital offences. This includes the presumption of innocence, right to a trial by an independent and impartial tribunal and the right to adequately prepare one’s defence. “In capital punishment cases, the obligation of States parties to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial set out in Article 14 of the [ICCPR] admits of no exception” (Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of the Human Rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10).

It is in the light of these guarantees with which international law surrounds the imposition of the death penalty that I would raise my concerns regarding the extraordinary speed with which capital punishment has been imposed in this case. The fact that Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit have confessed the crime does not render their right to adequately prepare their defense and to receive a full and fair trial redundant. The speed with which the death penalty was imposed is all the more alarming in the light of the statements allegedly made by the Prime Minister of your Excellency’s Government before the sentencing, calling on the death sentence to be imposed because of the damage the crime caused to Thailand’s image.

I understand that the judgment and sentence against Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit will be reviewed by an appeals court, and urge your Excellency’s Government to ensure that the adequacy of the first instance trial is closely scrutinized in the course of those appeals proceedings.

The Commission on Human Rights has consistently requested me and my predecessors as Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions to monitor the implementation of all standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment. Without in any way pre-judging the accuracy of the information I have received, I would respectfully request Your Excellency’s Government to provide me with the following information regarding the criminal proceedings against Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit:

a) did they confess to the rape and murder in the presence of a lawyer acting on their behalf?

b) how much time did the lawyers assigned to act on behalf of Wichai Somkhaoyai and Bualoi Posit have to prepare for the trial?

c) details concerning the DNA evidence.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all such cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on this case to the Commission, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations. In addition to an expeditious first reply, I would greatly appreciate being informed about the further developments in this case. I undertake to ensure that your Government’s response is accurately reflected in the report I will submit to the Commission on Human Rights for its consideration.

Correspondence from 2006

The record of correspondence for 2006 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1.

Correspondence from 2005

The record of correspondence for 2005 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2005/7/Add.1.

Country: Thailand

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal sent with Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on torture and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, 17 March 2004. Somchai Neelahphaijit, Chairman of the Muslim Lawyers Association and human rights defender has reportedly been missing since 11 March 2004. According to the information received, Somchai Neelahphaijit left his home in Bangkok on Thursday 11 March and has not been seen since. He was due to attend a meeting at 9pm on Friday 12 March at the Chalina Hotel in Bang Kapi district and was also due to appear in court for a case in Narathiwat province on 15 March. According to the information received, prior to his alleged disappearance, Somchai Neelahphaijit had received anonymous threatening phone calls, including one call from a senior member of the authorities informing him that he was on the top of the military blacklist. Fear were expressed for the safety of Somchai Neelahphaijit and in particular, concern has been expressed that he may have been targeted for his human rights work, including his involvement in petitioning 50,000 signatures nationwide to call for an end to martial law in Southern Thailand as well as his work to defend Muslim suspects against terrorist and treason charges.

Government reply: Response dated 30 March 2004. The Royal Thai Government shares the concern over the disappearance of Mr. Neelphaijit. His Excellency Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra informs that all necessary measures are taken and those responsible for Mr. Neelphaijit.’s death will be brought to justice without exception and delay. Moreover, on 18 March 2004, an Independent Committee under the Chairman of the Director-General of the Department of Special Investigation, Ministry of Justice was established to ensure that full redress will be given to Mr. Neelaphaijit. Three sub-committees were also set up to assist the Committee: on information analysis, on forensic evidence and investigation. The Royal Thai Government stands ready to receive any information pertinent to this case.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur:The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply. He would appreciate receiving further information on the outcome of the investigation over the disapperance of Mr. Neelphajit.

Country: Thailand

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal, 1 April 2004. The Special Rapporteur wrote to the Government in relation to the renewal of its law enforcement operations aimed at cracking down on the country’s drug trade. The Special Rapporteur had already sent a communication in 2003 in relation with last year’s 10-month period of this crackdown during which a significant number of people had been killed for which there was no thorough and independent investigation into their deaths and into allegations of the involvement of security forces in a number of cases. According to the information received, the new 90-day crackdown, which reportedly started on 8 March 2004, is aiming at relapsed addicts, small-scale peddlers in Bangkok and other major cities, and wholesale traffickers along the border. Defence Minister Thammarak Isarangkura na Ayudhya reportedly stated that the operation would be tougher than last year. In view of the numerous reports of extrajudicial killings during the previous crackdown, fears were expressed about the use of excessive force resulting in extrajudicial killings in any renewed operations. The Special Rapporteur appealed to the Government to ensure that all allegations of extrajudicial executions be promptly, independently and thoroughly investigated. Besides, he appealed to the Government to ensure that law enforcement and security forces engaged in these operations carry out their duties in strict compliance with national and international human rights standards, and in particular that the strict limits on the use of lethal force, as stipulated under the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law-enforcement Officials, are followed rigorously and without exception.

Government reply: No response.

Country: Thailand

Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, 5 May 2004. According to the information received, more than 100 persons were killed by Thai security forces in the morning of 28 April 2004 in the provinces of Yala, Pattani and Songkla in Southern Thailand. Some 107 suspected assailants, the majority of which were between 15 and 20 years of age, and five security officers were killed after nine hours of violent clashes and exchange of fire. Approximately 15 persons were arrested. Thai police and military officials knew about the attack and that they were also aware about the fact that the assailants would be poorly armed, only carrying machetes. It is unclear whether all the dead were armed or involved with the alleged assailants, or if any unarmed civilian were killed, particularly when security forces stormed into the Kruesie Mosque in Pattani. While the deaths of some police officers make it clear that, in at least some cases, Thai security forces had the right to use force in self defense, they must nevertheless abide by the U.N. Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Besidestimely and transparent investigations must be conducted into these incidents to prevent an atmosphere of impunity.

Government reply: Response dated 6 May 2004. The Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has provided the following information regarding the 28 April 2004 incident: at 5h30 groups of militants numbering more than 200, launched coordinated attacks at 11 locations, mainly police and military bases and checkpoints in Yala, Pattani and Songkla provinces. In the ensuing clashes with security forces, 106 of the perpetrators were killed and 9 others arrested. As for the government security forces, 5 were killed and 22 wounded. The attackers were armed militant groups comprising well-trained youth. It is also believed that the intent of the recent attack was to seize weapons from government security force and to instigate instability in the wake of previous incidents in the three southern provinces. It is believed that the perpetrators were incited to resort to violence by indoctrination, drugs and money. According to the Government, the death toll is indeed unfortunate. But given the scale and intensity of these attacks, the Government had to take drastic measures to preserve public safety. The decision taken by security personnel was in the context of previous incidents and escalating violence which have already claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians, both Buddhists and Muslims, in the three southern provinces. Specifically, with regard to the incident at Kresae Mosque which resulted in to the death of 32 of the attackers, it should be pointed out that the government security forces had exercised restraint and tried to resolve the situation peacefully. However, security forces were compelled to take drastic actions as militants opened fire to avoid further violence. The latest attacks have no connection whatsoever with international terrorism. They are not in any way related to sectarian and religious conflicts.The incidents in the three southern provinces are being engineered by those groups with vested interest in instigating instability and undermining the Government’s authority for the purpose of furthering their own political and other objectives.

The Thai Government also included in its reply a copy of the excerpt of the interview given on 28 April 2004 to the TV pool of Thailand by Mr. Sawat Sumulyasak, Grand Mufti and Chairman of the central Isalm committee of Thailand.

Letter dated 1s June 2004. The Minister of Foreign Affairs from the Royal Thai Government informed that an independent fact-finding commission on the Kresae Mosque to ensure fair and impartial investigation under the chairmanship of Mr. Suchinda Yongsunthorn, retired constitutional court judge. The 7 member commission (including Muslim representatives) will submit a report to the Government within one month. Moreover, representatives from 12 Muslim diplomatic and consular missions based in Thailand have visited the three provinces on 7-9 May 2004 to get first-hand information. The Thai Government does not have discriminating policy agaisnt Thai Muslims in the country.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur:The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its replies. He would appreciate receiving the conclusions of the independent fact-finding commission.

Country: Thailand

Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, sent with Special Rapporteur on on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion andexpression and the Special Rapporteur on torture, 29 October 2004. The SR received information concerning the deaths of 87 persons following actions taken by Thai security forces on 25 October 2004 in Takbai, in the province of Narathiwat. According to the allegations received, on the morning of 25 October 2004, during a clash between 2,000 Muslim protesters and security forces in Narathiwat province’s Takbai district, 9 people were killed by police officers. The protest occurred to demand the release of six detained Muslim security guards. Demonstrators allegedly threw stones at security forces and attempted to storm a police station. It is reported that police officers, after using water cannons and tear gas, fired among the protesters, killing six of them. Authorities claim that protesters were armed and that orders were given to fire in the air but failed to be respected. It is further alleged that three other protesters died during these events. The Special Rapporteurs have also received information concerning the death of 78 people in police custody. It is reported that 1,300 people were arrested following the above mentioned protest and put into military trucks to be transferred to detention centres. Among those, 78 prisoners died, most of them of suffocation or dehydration during transportation that allegedly lasted five hours.

Government reply: Response dated 4 November 2004. The Royal Thai Government regrets that errors and misjudgments were made regarding the unfortunate incident on 25 October. On 2 November 2004, an independent commission of investigation (including representatives of the Muslim community) was appointed by H.E Prime Ministre Thaksin Shinawatra and is headed by Mr. Pichet Soontornpipit. The Commission has been asked to report the result of the investigation to the Prime Minister within 30 days. The incident should be viewed on the context of increasing violence within the southern provinces since January 2004. The Royal Thai Government is committed to continue to resolve the problem in a peaceful manner and will do its utmost to prevent the recurrence of such events. As of 30 October 2004, 1,109 detainees have been released and 189 are still under investigation. The Government added that the incident on 25 October 2004 was not a metter involving religion and that Thailand has always been a peace-loving society.

Government reply: Response dated 18 January 2005: The Government transmitted a summary of the findings and recommendations of the Fact-finding commission in charge of investigating the 25 October 2004 incident. Among its findings the Commission established that: the number of weapons and the number of demonstrators who were armed were likely to be small; the measures taken by the authorities, which included the interception of incoming groups of people to prevent them from going to Tak Bai Police Station and the conduct of five to six rounds of negotiations with religious leaders and parents of the six detained members of the village security guard unit, were appropriate; the decision to use force to disperse the demonstrators was considered reasonable given the necessity dictated by the prevailing situation; however, the methods used were inappropriate, not being in conformity with established guidelines and international practice; since both the demonstrators and the officials suffered death and injury, it justice should be dispensed for all the parties concerned. As for allegations that demonstrators were shot at close range in the head, no indication has been found from post-mortems and forensic evidence that such shootings ever took place.

The Commission found that the persons taken into custody were transported to Ingkayutthaboriharn Army Camp in a hurried and disorganised manner, which resulted in a large number of deaths in trucks at the rear end of the convoy. The Commission considers the commanding officers concerned to be badly lacking in judgment for having failed to supervise the transportation of persons in custody until its completion. The persons actually taken in custody and the injured were effectively taken care of in an appropriate manner. The Commander of the 5th Infantry Division who was ordered by the Fourth Army Area Commander to supervise the troops in dispersing the demonstrators and to be responsible for all tactical operations, failed to properly discharge and perform his duty assigned to him by his commander. The fourth Army Area Deputy Commander as well as the fourth Army Area Commander failed to properly discharge and perform their duty. However, these officials did not have the intention to cause deaths or injuries.

The commission provides practical recommendations for future actions as well as remedial measures for the victims of the incident and their relatives. It also recommends that the Government prosecute the accused in an expeditious, just and fair manner in accordance with the due process of law. At the same time, the Governemnt indicates that it has adopted a number of social and economic measures to ease the tension in the Southern provinces to enable the people to live with safety and dignity. The situation still remains somewhat a matter of great concern and government officials as well as innocent citizens still continue to be victims of daily assaults, bombing attempts and attacks by those with ill intention. Nevertheless, the Government remains fully committed to the rule of law and the promotion and protection of human rights for all.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur:The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its replies and has requested a copy of the report of the investigating Commission

Country: Thailand

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal, 18 November 2004. Montha Kuan, aged 27, and Sai Kuan, aged 35, two Cambodian citizens. They were reportedly convicted of drug possession and are at risk of imminent execution. According to the information received they were reportedly arrested on 7 October 1997 for drug possession and sentenced to death by the Lower Court on 3 April 2001. The death sentence was up-held by the Appeal Court on 6 May 2003, then by the Supreme Court on 13 August 2004. Montha Kuan and Sai Kuan are first time offenders.

The Special Rapporteur asked the Government to consider taking whatever steps might be available under the Thai legal system, including a request for the granting of a commutation of sentence by His Majesty the King, in order to review these sentences. Under Thai law the imposition of the death penalty is discretionary for the crimes of which these two persons stand convicted. While several of the other crimes in this category, such as arson or bombing which lead to deaths, clearly fall within the internationally recognized category of the most serious crimes for which the death penalty might be considered, the crime in question here would not appear to fall into such a category. The SR raised this issue considering that the Government of Thailand has explicitly recognized that the death penalty should only be imposed ‘for the most serious crimes and heinous offences’.

Government reply: No response.

Correspondence from 2004

The record of correspondence for 2004 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.1.

Urgent appeal

On 25 February 2003, the Special Rapporteur sent an urgent appeal to the Government of Thailand in connection with information received regarding reports of a significant number of deaths, allegedly amounting to more than 100, in connection with ongoing law enforcement operations by the Thai authorities aimed at cracking down on the country’s drug trade. Further reports alleged excessive use of force by law enforcement and security officials engaged in these operations, which reportedly resulted in extrajudicial executions.

Communication received

On 10 April 2003, the Government of Thailand responded to the Communication sent by the Special Rapporteur on 25 February 2003. The Government submitted that, in order to address the scourge of drugs in a comprehensive manner, it mounted a massive integrated strategic campaign since 1 February 2003, which comprised three main pillars: prevention, treatment and rehabilitation, and suppression. Thousands of drug dealers were arrested, hundreds of thousands of them turned themselves in to the authorities, while hundreds of thousands of addicts turned themselves in for rehabilitation. In its response, the Government indicated that the high number of arrests and deaths which occurred during the police operations is not surprising. Many deaths occurred as a result of drug dealers trying to avoid being traced by the police, by killing those who could have given evidence against them. The Government reported that only a small number of killings occurred as a result of acts of self-defense by the police, or actually involved police officers as suspects. In discharging their duties, law enforcement officers were instructed to strictly observe the provisions of the Criminal Code which authorizes the use of lethal force only for self- defence. The Government stated that every unnatural death which occurred during the police operations would be thoroughly investigated in accordance with the law, without exception. The Government further indicated that any person who believes that he or his relatives were wrongly accused of having been involved in narcotic trade or whose relatives were killed during drug-related operations can appeal to the Department of Rights and Liberties Protection and the Department of Special Investigation of the Ministry of Justice, which were established as a result of the bureaucratic reform in 2002. Finally, the Government reported that on 28 February 2003, the Prime Minister appointed two committees to monitor the implementation of the operations and to ensure protection for witnesses in drug-related murder cases and those who turned themselves in to the authorities. Since then, a number of cases involving government officials have been brought under close scrutiny; there has been an investigation of the system of justice and a number of police officers have been arrested on charges of extrajudicial killing.

Correspondence from 2003

The record of correspondence for 2003 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2003/Add.1.

Urgent appeals

On 23 August 2002, the Special Rapporteur jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture, sent an urgent appeal to the Government of Thailand relating to Aung Kyaw Soe, Thien Lwin and Wunna, members of the Democratic Party for a New Society (DPNS), Aung San Nyunt, aged 35, Zaw Weik, aged 44, and Nan Nay Chi (f) aged 26, members of the National League for Democracy- Liberated Area (NDL LA), Thien Lwin, Htet Khaing (f), Khin Moe Way (f) and Mem Thet San, members of the All Burma Student’s Democratic Front (ABSDF), Mi Li Tanyar Mon (f) and Nai Mon Kyai Hlaing, members of Mon Youth Progressive Organization (MYPO), Aung Htoo, member of the People’s Democratic Front (PDF), Naw Kha Yu (f), member of the Karen National Union (KNU) and 20 adults and children attending a Baptist Church. They are said to be pro-democracy activists of Myanmar that took refuge from persecution by the military government of Myanmar. It is alleged that they were at risk of torture and possibly execution if they remained in their country. All of them were reportedly charged with illegal entry and arrested on 20 August 2002 by the police. According to the information received, they are currently held in Sankhlaburi town, Kanchanaburi province, on the border with Myanmar. It is alleged that the government of Thailand has announced their imminent and forcible repatriation to Myanmar. Fears were expressed that they may be at risk of execution, torture or other forms of ill-treatment if they are handed over to the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) troops.

Communications sent

On 11 November 2002, the Special Rapporteur jointly with the Special Rapporteur on human rights of migrants sent a letter of allegation relating to the following case:

According to the information received, on 5 February 2002, police announced that 20 bodies of members of the Karen ethnic minority were found in Tak province, near the Thai-Myanmar border. It is reported that the bodies were found blindfolded with their wrists tied and their throats cut and with marks of beatings and stab wounds. The bodies were allegedly located in what is believed to be a drug and human trafficking route between the two countries. Local villagers are reported to have often found dead bodies of Karen migrants in this area, but the large number of corpses and the brutal manner of their killing was allegedly unusual. It is reported that an investigation has been launched by the police. However, according to the information received, no progress has been made in finding those responsible for the murders.

Communication received

On 28 Novermber 2002, the Government of Thailand replied to an urgent appeal sent on 23 August 2002 by the Special Rapporteur jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture, and the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants relating to the arrest and possible deportation of 34 Myanmar nationals. According to the Government, the arrest of the mentioned Myanmar nationals was made as a rendition of law enforcement measures. The Government added that those who are entitled to the right to stay in Thailand are requested to observe Thai laws and regulations, including the prohibition that they refrain from conducting activities against the Government of neighboring countries. Any failure to observe such regulation shall result in nullification of such rights. The Government reassured the Special Rapporteurs that no human rights violation was committed in the process of deportation. Indeed, it was witnessed by police officers from the Sangklaburi district and military officers in the area, as required by the rules of procedure in the matter. The destination of the deportation was also verified as a safe area. It was also subsequently reported that all the deportees were safe.

Correspondence from 1983-2002

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has been corresponding with Governments regarding alleged violations since the mandate was established over two decades ago. While the Project on Extrajudicial Executions is making efforts to provide easily browsed versions of as many years as possible, much of the earlier correspondence is available only in the PDF versions of reports from 1983 to the present.