On May 10, Thai activist Praphan Pipithnamporn was extradited from Malaysia to Thailand, arriving home to face charges of sedition in accordance with the draconian Section 116. This forcible repatriation by Malaysian authorities occurred despite Ms Praphan having already registered with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and subsequently being determined to be a "person of concern". Such actions by Malaysia must be considered nothing short of refoulement -- returning someone to a country where they are likely to be subject to persecution.
In a press conference just a few days later, Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad confirmed that the repatriation of Ms Praphan had taken place at the request of Thai authorities. Amazingly, far from acknowledging the extremely problematic and fundamentally unjust nature of such action, Prime Minister Mahathir instead defended his government's actions as those of a "good neighbour". Such a response by the prime minister, whose own political party publicly committed to ratifying the 1951 Refugee Convention just over a year ago, represents a disturbing approach that is at absolute odds with the most fundamental elements of international refugee law.
In addition, such action demonstrates a complete disregard for international human rights law. Instead of respecting the principles of human dignity and safety, decisions were made solely as a result of a desire to please Thailand -- a country with which Malaysia shares a long history of strong business, trade, defence and military ties. The decision to forcibly repatriate Ms Praphan flies directly in the face of the promise made to the Malaysian population to uphold and respect the rights of refugees.
Sadly, Malaysia is not the only villain in the region when it comes to utilising "friendly extradition" practices to circumvent international norms and legal obligations. Several times over the past few years, extradition procedures have been exploited both within and outside Asean as a way to return refugees back to their countries of origin. By forcing refugees to return to the countries from which they've fled, governments are able to send a message to all persons within their borders that any actions against the ruling elite will not be tolerated and that there is no place to hide. By instituting campaigns of fear, repression and disproportionate justice, governments are able to suppress dissenting voices and further consolidate their grip on power.
On Feb 8, 2018, Thailand was again involved in the extradition process of a refugee who had escaped persecution. This time however Thailand donned the "good neighbour" hat, assisting the totalitarian Hun Sen regime with the return of infamous political activist Sam Sokha. Better known in the media as the "shoe-thrower" for propelling her shoe at a Cambodian People's Party billboard in 2017, Sam Sokha was found guilty of incitement and insult and subsequently sentenced to a two-year prison-term.
A final noteworthy example where extradition was used as a subterfuge to forcibly return a refugee was the high-profile case of Hakeem al-Araibi. Arrested as a result of an erroneous Interpol Red Notice and subsequently held in prison on a Bahraini extradition request, Araibi spent nearly three months fighting for his freedom. In comparison to the cases against Ms Praphan and Sam Sokha, Araibi's case was almost farcical. Sentenced in absentia to 10 years in a Bahraini prison on charges of arson, at the time of his arrest in Bangkok, Araibi was a recognised refugee who had a right to permanently reside in Australia.
Despite his refugee status and despite irrefutable evidence proving his innocence -- including television footage that showed him playing a live football match during the time of the alleged crime -- Thailand appeared determined to let the extradition proceedings run their course. In fact, had it not been for the avalanche of international media attention, Araibi would have undoubtedly been deported to Bahrain where he would have faced prison, torture, and possibly death.
The use of extradition by countries across Asia should not and must not override the internationally recognised principle of non-refoulement. Refugee status afforded by the UNHCR or by a sovereign government must be recognised and respected. The granting of refugee status does not come lightly and it represents an independent determination that an individual is unable to return home due to a genuine fear of persecution from state or non-state actors.
As countries that have taken notable steps towards increasing protection spaces for refugees, it is imperative the Thailand and Malaysia do not undermine this progress. Only with authentic legislative and policy reform across all sections of government, including by rebuffing extradition requests that are clearly politically motivated, will both countries genuinely be able to provide safety to individuals within their borders.
Evan Jones is the Programme Coordinator at the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network (APRRN) based in Bangkok.
