A Thai court found British labor activist, Andy Hall, guilty of defaming a fruit canning company, and gave him a suspended prison sentence in a case that has raised serious concerns among human rights workers and free speech advocates. He was found guilty of criminal defamation against Natural Fruit Company Ltd. in connection with a 2013 report he researched for the Finnish consumer organization Finnwatch that alleged labour abuses at the company’s facilities. [https://thoolen.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/defamation-charges-against-hall-will-chill-labor-rights-in-thailand-says-human-rights-watch/]
The case raises questions about Thailand’s punitive criminal defamation laws and the ease of being condemned for violating the Computer Crimes Act because the information was posted on the internet. Hall was given a suspended sentence of three years with a probationary period of two years, and a fine of 150,000 baht ($4,300). He said he will appeal the ruling. He was allowed to go free after his fine was paid. Two civil suits by the company against him are pending, as is an appeal against his acquittal on a previous criminal defamation charge.
“I don’t feel any shame, I don’t feel any regret. But I feel it is an injustice, what’s happened here today,” Hall said. “I respect the decision of the court, but I feel real injustice, not for me, it’s not about me, this case was never about me, it was never about Andy Hall doing research about migrant workers. It was about a human rights activist doing research for the public interest.”
Sonja Vartiala, executive director of Finnwatch, said her organization was “shocked by today’s verdict.” “The report was authored and published by Finnwatch; we take full responsibility for it,” Vartiala said. “Andy has been made a scapegoat in order to stifle other voices that speak out legitimately in support of migrant worker rights.” “This is a sad day for freedom of expression in Thailand,” … “We fear that many other human rights defenders and victims of company abuse will be scared to silence by this ruling.”
Finnwatch was not sued, nor was the Al Jazeera news network, to whom Hall gave an interview that was the basis for part of the cases against him.
Virat Piyapornpaiboon, the owner of Natural Fruit, said justice was done. “I think that it’s not important whether he goes to jail or not, but what’s important is whether or not what he said was true,” Virat said. “This is proof that no matter who you are, if you are not just and you make up stories and cause damage to others, you must be punished.“
A regional update on Asia is based on a submission to United Nations’ Human Rights Council by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (15 February) and a report of the Regional Consultation of Citizens’ Voices held in Kathmandu (25/26 February) held under the aegis of South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR).
The Asian Legal Resource Centre directs the attention of the Human Rights Council to the critical situation of human rights defenders in China, Bangladesh, and Thailand, who are facing dire threats to their person and profession: Read the rest of this entry »
I have not referred to this excellent initiative for a while. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) continues it visual reporting, Now already episode 106!: Read the rest of this entry »
Anneliese Mcauliffein Al Jazeera on 6 December 2015 reported that two Chinese human rights defenders recognised as UN refugees were forcibly deported from Thailand to China last month and have appeared on Chinese state-run television and confessed to human-trafficking offenses. CCTV reported that Jiang Yefei was arrested for “assisting others to illegally cross the national border”, and Dong Guangping was charged with using a trafficking network to flee China while awaiting trial on sedition charges. It was the first time the two men were seen since being taken from a detention centre in the Thai capital Bangkok in November and deported to China.
On 26 May 2015, at the 2015 Oslo Freedom Forum, Thai journalist Pravit Rojanaphruk describes his fight for democracy in his home country following the May 2014 military coup. Talking about his own arrest, Rojanaphruk denounces the limitations to the right to assembly, expression and movement in Thailand, as well as the regime’s efforts to build the illusion of a happy Thailand. Rojanaphruk concludes his presentation by reminding us that tolerance and dialogue are essential if Thailand is to become a democracy again.
reports that on 11 February 2015, land rights defender Mr Chai Bunthonglek was shot and killed at his home in Chaiburi District, Thailand, by an unknown man. Reportedly, the perpetrator fired six bullets at the human rights defender.
[Chai Bunthonglek was a member of the Southern Peasants’ Federation of Thailand – SPFT, a network formed in 2008 to campaign for the right to agricultural land. Chai Bunthonglek is the fourth member of SPFT who has been killed. On 19 November 2012, Ms Montha Chukaew and Ms Pranee Boonrat were shot by unknown individuals near the village of Khlong Sai Pattana in Surat Thani Province. In 2010, Ms Somporn Pattaphum was also shot dead in the area.]
The killing follows the recent incommunicado detention of Mr Pianrat Boonrit, the President of SPFT, on 3 February 2015. The human rights defender was released by the military on 5 February 2015, reportedly on condition that he would mediate between the army and the Premsub Community, and urge the community to leave the area. Allegedly, Pianrat Boonrit was threatened with seven days’ detention if he did not convince the community to leave the land. The human rights defender had been arrested and detained when he presented himself at the Vibhavadi Rangsit Military Camp, Surat Thani Province, in response to a summons to attend an “attitude adjustment camp” for three days.
Front Line Defenders strongly condemns the killing of Chai Bunthonglek, which it believes to be directly linked to his peaceful and legitimate work in the defence of land rights. Front Line Defenders is gravely concerned for the physical and psychological integrity and security of Pianrat Boonrit and other members of SPFT.
To shine a light on the courageous work of women human rights defenders (WHRDs) worldwide, the NGO Protection International announces the launch of a series of interviews with women who defend human rights across the globe, from December and continuing in 2015, each month will see a new portrait of a WHRD.
This month’s conversation is with Alejandra Ancheita, a leading human rights defender from Mexico and winner of the 2014 Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders. Alejandra is the founder and executive director of The Project of Economic, Cultural, and Social Rights. To read the interview and watch the (Vimeo) video that goes with it go to Protection International’s website (see link below).
Other outstanding women lined up in the months to come include Rehana Hashmi (Pakistan), Eva Bande (Indonesia), María Martín (Spain), Porntip Honchai (Thailand).
“I call on states to honour their obligation to protect human rights every day of the year. I call on people to hold their governments to account. And I call for special protections for the human rights defenders who courageously serve our collective cause,” UN Secretary-General stated in his message for Human Rights Day. There is so much to report on this day, that I decided to focus on stories from 4 Asian countries (China (Hong Kong), India, Thailand, Bangladesh) which give an impression (not more than that) of how Human Rights Day is reflected in the media.
The first article “Responsibility for the protection of human rights is in our hands” appeared in the South China Morning Post of Tuesday, 09 December, 2014
(Police stand inside the theatre in Bangkok where two student activists were arrested in connection with the showing of ‘The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Photo by Pattarachai Prechapanich)
If there was any evidence needed that symbols from films travel fast, the Bangkok Post reports that on Thursday 20 November three students outside two Bangkok theatres. They were released without charges, but in the meantime the discussion had already started. On Friday Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha of Thailand said he felt unthreatened by The Hunger Games’ three-fingered protest against totalitarian rule, but nonetheless warned people against using it. “I don’t know whether it is illegal or not but it could jeopardise their futures,” Gen Prayut told reporters at Government House. “I appreciate their courage but they should use their courage in the right ways”.
His comments came as the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in Southeast Asia criticised the authorities for a recent spate of instances in which people were led away for questioning after making the salute that has become a symbol of defiance for anti-coup protesters. The United Nations on Friday criticised the country’s military leaders for arresting students flashing the signature protest gesture from The Hunger Games while the film’s makers said they are concerned for the young activists. Director of The Hunger Games, Francis Lawrence, felt honoured that the film has become an inspiration but added: “My goal is not for kids to be out there doing things that are getting them arrested,” (in a Friday interview with Buzzfeed). “”In a sense, part of it is an honour that there (are) ideas in the movies that we’re making that (have) become so important to people that they are willing to risk something and use that symbol,” he continued. “But it’s so scary.”
“I didn’t want to punish [the students] so they were merely reprimanded, released and told not to do it again because it’s of no benefit to anyone,” Gen Prayut told reporters. The general also denied any role in Apex’s decision to pull the film from its Scala and Lido theatres.
Coup d’etat in Thailand or not, judicial harassment continues to rack the lives of human rights defenders. A Statement of 24 August by the Asian Human Rights Commission [AHRC] concerns Pornpen Khongkachonkiet, a human rights defender and director of the Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF), who received a warrant summoning her to report to the police station by 25 August 2014. The warrant is in relation to an investigation carried out pursuant to a legal complaint of libel and defamation filed against her by Army Task Force 41. The complaint accuses Pornpen Khongkachonkiet of causing damage to the reputation of the Army by disseminating an open letter about a case of torture. (The Army has claimed that the young man was not tortured, and so therefore the open letter constitutes libel and defamation.)
The judicial harassment of Pornpen Khongkachonkiet is part of a broader pattern of harassment and legal proceedings against human rights defenders in Thailand, such as the following 3 examples show: Read the rest of this entry »
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 