What exactly is a human right? The most obvious way to answer that question may be to point toward the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Signed in 1948 and ratified by 48 out of 58 member countries of the UN at the time, the declaration affirms several rights an individual must be afforded as a human being, such as the right to life, opinions and expression, or the right to not be subjected to arbitrary imprisonment or torture.
Some people may dismiss the question as a matter of common sense. Of course a person should have the right to live or take charge of their own safety, nor should they be subjected to cruel or inhumane treatment -- even in the form of punishment -- or secreted away to remote, unreachable locations without cause or consent.
It should have come as good news, then, when earlier last week, government spokesperson Maj Gen Sansern Kaewkamnerd made a rather unexpected announcement to the Thai press. After some deliberation, the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) has made human rights a national agenda going forward, as part of the regime's vision of a Thailand 4.0, as well as to dispel the common conception that un-elected governments don't play well with human rights organizations.
Starting next year and running until 2019, government agencies across the board are expected to create initiatives that help promote human rights with their own employees as well as citizens at large. The government also promises to improve upon current databases, as well as certain laws, to make them more appropriate, according to the major general. Evaluations will be made towards the end of the year to gauge the plan's effectiveness, partly by measuring the fluctuations in figures relating to prostitution and illegal labour.
It's certainly intriguing - perhaps even laughable to the more cynical among us - to hear of such hopeful promises from the regime, especially since he government's human-rights record remains spotty, be it with civilian activists, journalists or even those within its own ranks. More than once, the leaders of the military regime seem to have their own definitions of what is and isn't a violation of human rights, which doesn't inspire the highest confidence in this newfound resolve for the issue.
Just a day after the announcement by the NLA, Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha seemingly threatened media outlets with the dreaded Computer Crimes Act, warning against those who "twist the facts, write what is not true or incite hatred", a measure reportedly proposed by the King Prajadhipok's Institute to bring about "order in society".
This isn't a measure to threaten the media that "play by the rules", says the PM, "but to monitor online media and netizens" who often hide behind the anonymity afforded to them by the internet. The PM also urges other government agencies, committees and offices to more actively use the law against those who would spread information that affects their work.
Of course, what the regime deems "twisting the facts" and "inciting hatred" often suspiciously seems to be critical of their actions, as is so often reported in various news outlets. Surely, this is in breach of the UDHR's Article 19, which guarantees the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
Meanwhile, reports surfaced earlier this month of several community leaders of southern rubber farmers who were detained in a military camp. The leaders were set to stage a protest in Bangkok to express outrage at the plummeting prices for rubber, but were apprehended by soldiers on Nov 11 before being released the next day on the condition they promise not to stage protests. Wouldn't that be a violation of Articles 9 and 20, which protect an individual's rights against arbitrary detention and the right to peaceful demonstrations?
Or even cases within the regime's own house -- such as the recent death of 18-year-old Pakapong Tanyakan, a first-year cadet at the Armed Forces Academies Preparatory School. After suspicious cause-of-death reports by academy doctors, the cadet's parents secretly smuggled away his corpse to conduct their own autopsy, only to discover many of the cadets organs -- including his heart, brain, stomach and bladder -- to be missing, along with traces of severe internal bruising and broken ribs and collarbones. While the ultimate cause of death is yet to be determined, Pakapong's death raises the old issue of violence within the army's ranks. The boy's journal, discovered and reported on by the media, details accounts of physical violence, with a particular encounter severe enough to necessitate resuscitation for Pakapong. While it may or may not be related to his death, Pakapong's death -- and the dismissive attitude shown by many high-level officials -- doesn't speak highly of the army's respect for Articles 3 and 5, which ensure a person's right to personal security and freedom from cruelty and physical torture.
While an official acknowledgement by the government of the pressing need for human-rights improvement seems like a positive, the regime has a long hill to climb if it wants this latest proclamation to be anything more than an empty gesture.
Kanin Srimaneekulroj is a feature writer for the Life section of The Bangkok Post.
