Category Archives: martial law

First court hearing scheduled in a case filed Against a military official for alleged assault on two youth in Yala in 2009 : supreme administrative court

Cross Cultural Foundation​

For immediate release on 18 May 2015

Press Release

First court hearing scheduled in a case filed

Against a military official for alleged assault on two youth in Yala in 2009

The plaintiffs, the two injured parties from physical assault allegedly committed by a military official, are to give their oral and written statement to the Supreme Administrative Court on 19 May 2015 at 13.00. The first hearing of the case will take place in Room 4, 3rd floor of the office of the Supreme Administrative Court in a Black Case no. O1256/2555 between Mr. Mazaofi Kwaengboo, plaintiff no.1 and Adil Samae (under 20 years old), plaintiff no.2 represented by Mrs. Yiza Lamae v. Ministry of Defense, defendant no.1, Royal Thai Army, defendant no.2, Internal Security Operations Command Region (ISOC), defendant no.3 and the Office of the Prime Minister, defendant no.4.

The Supreme Administrative Court has given a copy of preliminary finding of the Judge-Rapporteur in charge of this case to the parties involved. The dispute is related to an alleged assault act committed by an administrative or state official who exercised his power according to the law. After the preliminary finding is completed by the Judge-Rapporteur, the court has designated the date for the first hearing as aforementioned during which time both parties are entitled to submit their statements and adduce evidence to support their statements.

Prior to the case being brought to the Administrative Court, the military official who has allegedly committed physical assault against the two plaintiffs had been indicted in a criminal suit with the Pattani Military Court on committing physical injuries to which case he pleaded guilty to the charge. The Military Court sentenced him to six months of imprisonment and a fine of 2,000 baht. Given his pleading to the charge, his imprisonment has been reduced by a half and suspended for two years. Though the incidence took place over six years ago in 2009, and the injured parties were then 14 and 20 years respectively, they and their relatives continue to demand justice to their case. They want to set precedent to claim the right to remedies for other people who are affected as well.

For more information, please contact;

Mr. Preeda Nakpew, attorney of the Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF),

Phone 089-6222474

Remarks:

When Army officer of TF no. 41 filed the complaint on CrCF and Director of CrCF in May 2014, the complaint referred to an open letter dated 2 May 2014 that CrCF issued related to the rearrested and ill treatment against Mr. Adil Samae on 27 April 2014. Mr. Adil later was released without charges.

Related topic:

https://voicefromthais.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%93%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%B5%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%87%E0%B9%81/

https://voicefromthais.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%93%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%B5%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%87%E0%B9%81/

25580519-092117.jpg

Advertisements

ILaw released translation on the head of the NCPO. no 3/2558

Dear colleagues
In the night of 1 April 2015, the Martial Law was lifted. However, the head of the junta had replaced it with an order of Head of the NCPO no. 3/2558 which issued under the provision of the section 44 of the 2014 Interim Constitution.

According to provision of the section 44, head of the NCPO had an authority to prevent or to act anything the it considered “necessary” and the order would effect in all branches of sovereign power, Legislative, Executive as well as Judiciary.

Below you will find the translation of the order of the head of the NCPO. no 3/2558 that was issued yesterday. Please note that this is not an official but it was translated by us.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Order Number 3/2558 (3/2015) of the Head of the NCPO on Maintaining Public Order and National Security.

As the lifting of martial law throughout the Kingdom has now been adopted, it is appropriate to install measures to deal with actions intended to undermine or destroy peace and national security, violate notifications or orders of the NCPO, or to commit offenses under the laws on firearms, ammunition, explosives, fireworks and artificial weapons which threaten the peace and security of the nation.

Therefore, the head of the NCPO sees it as necessary to prevent and suppress such actions swiftly and effectively so as not to affect law-abiding citizens and the well-being of the general public.

By virtue of Section 44 of the Interim Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand of 2014, the Head of the NCPO with the approval of the NCPO hereby issues the following order:

Article 1. This order shall come into force from the date of its publication in the Government Gazette.

Article 2. A “Peace Keeping Officer” refers to a military officer with the rank of Lieutenant, or Midshipman or Pilot Officer or above, appointed by the Head of the NCPO to act in accordance with this order.
An “Assistant Peace Keeping Officer” refers to a military officer of lower rank than a Lieutenant, or Midshipman or Pilot Officer appointed by the Head of the NCPO to act according to this order.

Article 3. Peacekeeping Officers shall act swiftly to prevent and suppress acts which constitute the following offences:
(1) offenses against the King, the Queen, the Heir Apparent and the Regent under Sections 107 to 112 of the Penal Code.
(2) offenses against the security of the state under Sections 113 to 118 of the Penal Code.
(3) offenses under the laws on firearms, ammunition, explosives, fireworks and artificial weapons, only in respect of firearms, ammunition and explosives used in warfare.
(4) violations of announcements or orders of the NCPO or of the Head of the NCPO.

Article 4. In acting according to Article 3, Peacekeeping Officers have the following powers:
(1) To order any person to report to peacekeeping authorities, or to come to give a deposition, or hand over any document or evidence relating to the commission of an offense under Article 3.
(2) To arrest any person discovered committing an offense under Article 3, and to hand over that person to an investigating officer for further proceedings.
(3) To assist or support investigating officers in their duties or take part directly in investigations of offences under Article 3, in which case Peacekeeping Officers shall be deemed to be investigating officers as defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(4) To enter any residence or any place to carry out searches of the premises, including searches of persons or of vehicles, when there is sufficient reason to suspect that a person who has commited an offence under Article 3 is hiding on the premises, or has kept property or evidence relating to such an offence on the premises, and where a delay while applying for the issuance of a search warrant might risk the abscondance of the suspect or the removal or destruction of said property or evidence.
(5) To seize or freeze any assets discovered under (4).
(6) To carry out any other act as assigned by the National Council for Peace and Order.

Article 5. In circumstances where it is necessary to swiftly remedy a situation which threatens national security or public order, or to prevent the situation from getting worse, Peacekeeping Officers are empowered to issue orders prohibiting the propagation of any item of news or the sale or distribution of any book or publication or material likely to cause public alarm or which contains false information likely to cause public misunderstanding to the detriment of national security or public order.
When issuing such orders, Peacekeeping Officers may attach conditions or time frames for compliance to their orders.
In order to accomplish results in accordance with the first paragraph, the Chief of the NCPO may set conditions or guidelines regarding the issuance of such orders.

Article 6. For the purposes stipulated in Article 3, when there is some evidence to suspect that an individual may have committed an offense under Article 3, Peacekeeping Officers have the authority to summon that individual to report to them for questioning or to give a deposition, and while the questioning is uncompleted the individual may be detained for not more than seven days. However, detention must be carried out on premises other than police stations, detention facilities, or prisons, and the detainee is not to be treated as an accused person.
When there are sufficient grounds to bring charges against such an individual, either Peacekeeping Officers in their capacity as administrative officials or police officers are to proceed according to the law.

Article 7. Assistant Peacekeeping Officers are to perform duties as ordered or assigned to them by Peacekeeping Officers.

Article 8. In carrying out their duties under this order, Peacekeeping Officers and Assistant Peacekeeping Officers are to be considered as authorised officers under the Penal Code, and as administrative officers or police officers under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Article 9. Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with orders issued by a Peacekeeping Officer or Assistant Peacekeeping Officer under Article 4 (1) or Article 5 or Article 6 shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand baht, or both.

Article 10. Any person who resists or obstructs a Peacekeeping Officer or an Assistant Peacekeeping Officer in the performance of his duties under this order shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand baht, or both.

Article 11. In the case of an individual detained under Article 6, paragraph one for offenses under Article 3 (4), Peacekeeping Officers may allow the release of that individual, with or without conditions.
Conditions for release under the first paragraph may be for the purpose of securing compliance with Section 39 (2) to (5) of the Criminal Code, for prohibiting the individual concerned from leaving the Kingdom except with the permission of the Head of the NCPO or an authorized representative, or for prohibiting the individual from carrying out financial transactions.
Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with conditions of release shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand baht, or both.

Article 12. Political gatherings of five or more persons shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both, unless permission has been granted by the Head of the NCPO. or an authorized representative.
Anyone who commits an offence under paragraph one who voluntarily agrees to receive corrective training from Peacekeeping Officers for a period not exceeding seven days may be released with or without the conditions stipulated in Article 11 paragraph 2 at the discretion of Peacekeeping Officers. The case will then be considered closed according to Section 37 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as amended by the Criminal Code Amendment Act (No. 16), 1986.
Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with conditions of release shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both.

Article 13. Actions under this order are not subject to the laws on administrative procedures and the Law on the Establishment of the Administrative Court and the Administrative Procedures Code.

Article 14. Peacekeeping Officers and Assistant Peacekeeping Officers who act in good faith in accordance with this order, without bias or undue severity shall be protected according to Article 17 of the Decree on Public Administration in Emergency Situations 2005, without prejudice to the rights of individuals to claim compensation from the government in accordance with the laws governing liability of officers.

Issued on April 1 of the year 2558 (2015).
Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha
Head of the National Council for Peace and Order.

Source: ilaw.or.th
freedom.ilaw.or.th

FORUM-ASIA expresses concern over the deteriorating human rights situation in a number of Asian countries

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development
http://www.forum-asia.org una@forum-asia.org

28th Regular Session of the UN Human Rights Council
Item 4: Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention (General Debate)

Oral Statement Delivered by Pornpen Khongkachonkiet on behalf of
Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)

Tuesday, 17 March 2015

Mr President, FORUM-ASIA expresses concern over the deteriorating human rights situation in a number of Asian countries.

We draw this Council’s attention to the increasing use of judicial measures to silence dissent, eliminate opposition and persecute human rights defenders. In Malaysia and Maldives, opposition leaders have been sentenced for long prison terms following trials that breach international fair trial and due process safeguards. Furthermore criticism of these trials have been severely suppressed. Over 50 supporters of opposition leader Mohamed Nasheed were arrested in Maldives while in Malaysia, the Sedition Act has been used to persecute critics of a judicial decision that upheld the conviction of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. The latest example is, Nurul Izzah Anwar, a Member of Parliament and Mr. Ibrahim’s daughter who was arrested on 16 March for sedition, even as this Council was in session. Since May 2014, more than 40 individuals have been arrested under the Sedition Act and the Penal Code in Malaysia for the exercise of their right to freedom of expression. Over 70 arrests have been made since May 2013.

Meanwhile in Thailand, at least 200 civilians have been prosecuted in military courts. In some cases, individuals have been sentenced to prison terms for only exercising their freedoms of assembly and expression. For example, on 16 March 2015, a human rights lawyer, Anon Nampa, and three activists were charged for violating bans on political gatherings of more than five individuals and will face prosecution in a military court.

On 23 February 2015, two theatre activists, Pornthip Mankhong and Patiwat Saraiyam, were sentenced in a criminal court to two and a half years in prison for lese majeste, a vague and broad provision of the Criminal Code, for allegedly insulting the monarchy in a play. Since the coup, at least 20 cases of lese majeste have been prosecuted in military courts.

We are also concerned about a number of restrictive draft laws currently pending at the National Legislative Assembly, including bills on Cyber Security and Public Assembly, if passed in their entirety, would add to the deterioration of the freedoms of expression and assembly in the country.

Lastly, we remain concerned at increasing reports and un-investigated allegations of arbitrary detention, torture and ill treatment in Thailand, especially of suspects detained under restrictive counter-insurgency and drug suppression policies.

Thank you Mr. President

25580317-153916.jpg

The Thai Military Junta must stop trial civilians in Military Court

For immediate release on 16 March 2015
Geneva, Switzerland
Cross-Cultural Foundation (CrCF) and Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR)
Press Release
The Thai Military Junta must stop trial civilians in Military Court

On 13 March 2015, the United Nations Human Rights Council was informed that Thailand currently adjudicating cases against civilians in military court. The civilians are being indicted with the military court simply because they have exercised the right to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association. The number of such cases has steadily shot up. According to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNOHCHR), there are at least 202 civilians being indicted with the military court in Thailand since last May.

This is the first time in 40 years that Thailand has chosen to try its civilians in the military court simply to stifle their dissenting voice and their fundamental right to freedom of expression.

In the response to an NGO statement at the UN Human Rights Council during its 28th Session from 2-27 March 2015 in Geneva, the Delegation of Thailand has exercised the right to reply in which it states that “On the use of the military court, only a limited number of cases of those who are accused of committing serious offences are submitted to the military court. These offences include those relating to possession of weapons and firearms, and murder. Defendants before the military court are entitled to the same set of rights accorded to those who appear before an ordinary court. This includes the right to legal counsel and the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.”

This was in fact a misstatement as far as the use of military court in Thailand is concerned. Since the May 2014 military coup, a number of activists have been arrested and charged simply for acting symbolically, i.e. holding banners, campaigning for election, eating sandwiches, flashing three fingers, etc. For example, on 14 February 2015, a human rights lawyer and three other activists were arrested and charged for violating the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Announcement no. 7 /2557 which bans political gathering of five persons and upwards. On 16 March 2015, the four alleged offenders are being brought to file custody at the military court and it is likely that they would be denied bail.

The harnessing of justice process and military justice to suppress the expression of opinions is a grave form of human rights violation and has continued incessantly. The military justice has been used by the military junta simply to avoid being discredited for not acting extra-judicially. But the military tribunal used for trying the civilians does not show any independence and impartiality as well as is not warranted for. Such use of military court indicates a clear purpose to suppress political activists including human rights lawyers. The procedure of the military court guarantees no right to fair trial for a civilian. This is definitely in breach of the international obligations to which Thailand are obliged to follow including those enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Individual from the Cross-Cultural Foundation (CrCF) and the Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR) are in geneva at the 28th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva from 16-18 March 2015. We demand that the Royal Thai Government and the NCPO revoke the NCPO Announcements no. 37/2557 and 38/2557 which expand jurisdiction of the military court over the trial of civilians on certain offences. Any orders and announcements which have been issued to stifle the freedom of expression and peaceful assembly must be immediately rescinded. In addition, the single-tiered military court used for trying civilians during the time Martial Law is imposed makes an appeal impossible. We believe that the normal Court of Justice is capable of handling cases and we believe such a court shall ensure the right to a fair trial rather than the military court.

For more information, please contact Pornpen Khongkachonkiet, Cross-Cultural Foundation (CrCF), +66-86-7093000
Yaowalak Anuphan, Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR) + 66-81-6283402

25580316-124953.jpg

แถลงการณ์ ด่วน ขอเรียกร้องให้รัฐบาลไทยและคสช. ยกเลิกการพิจารณาคดีพลเรือนในศาลไทยของไทย

เผยแพร่วันที่ 16 มีนาคม 2558
ณ กรุงเจนีวา ประเทศสวิสเซอร์แลนด์

มูลนิธิผสานวัฒนธรรมและศูนย์ทนายความเพื่อสิทธิมนุษยชน
แถลงการณ์
ขอเรียกร้องให้รัฐบาลไทยและคสช. ยกเลิกการพิจารณาคดีพลเรือนในศาลไทยของไทย

คณะกรรมการสิทธิมนุษยชนในคณะมนตรีสิทธิมนุษยชนแห่งสหประชาชาติ (Human Rights Council) เมื่อวันที่ 13 มีนาคม 2558 ได้รับข้อมูลว่าประเทศไทยใช้ศาลทหารสำหรับการดำเนินการกับพลเรือนในข้อหาเกี่ยวกับการแสดงออกทางความคิดเห็น การรวมกลุ่มและการชุมนุม โดยมีจำนวนคดีเพิ่มมากขึ้นอย่างต่อเนื่อง ทางสำนักงานข้าหลวงใหญ่ว่าด้วยสิทธิมนุษยชนได้บันทึกข้อเท็จจริงว่ามีพลเรือนอย่างน้อย 202 คนถูกดำเนินคดีในศาลทหารตั้งแต่เดือนพฤษภาคม 2557

นับเป็นครั้งแรกในรอบ 40 ปีที่ประเทศไทยเลือกที่จะใช้ศาลทหารดำเนินคดีต่อพลเรือนเพื่อการปราบปรามประชาชนที่เห็นต่างจากรัฐและใช้สิทธิเสรีภาพขั้นพื้นฐานในการแสดงออก

โดยแถลงการณ์จากองค์กรพัฒนาเอกชนแห่งหนึ่งแถลงที่คณะมนตรีสิทธิมนุษยชนแห่งสหประชาชาติ (Human Rights Council) ในการประชุมครั้งที่ 28 ระหว่างวันที่ 2-27 มีนาคม 2558 ณ กรุงเจนีวา ทางคณะผู้แทนประเทศไทยแห่งองค์การสหประชาชาติประจำ ณ นครเจนีวาใช้สิทธิในการตอบกลับโดยระบุว่า “การใช้ศาลทหารนั้น เราใช้ในเฉพาะคดีที่มีข้อหาร้ายแรงเท่านั้น ข้อหาความผิดรวมถึงครอบครองอาวุธและคดีฆาตกรรม จำเลยพลเรือนในคดีศาลทหารได้รับสิทธิในกระบวนการยุติธรรมเหมือนกับในศาลพลเรือนรวมทั้งสิทธิที่จะมีทนายความและได้รับการสันนิษฐานไว้ก่อนว่าเป็นผู้บริสุทธิ์”

คำแถลงดังกล่าวเป็นการอ้างอิงการใช้ศาลทหารที่ไม่ตรงกับสภาพปัญหาและข้อเท็จจริงในปัจจุบัน โดยนับแต่มีการรัฐประหาร มีการจับกุมนักกิจกรรมที่แสดงออกทางสัญลักษณ์ เช่น การถือป้ายกระดาษ การรณรงค์เพืื่อให้มีการเลือกตั้ง การกินแซนวิช การชูสามนิ้ว เป็นต้น เมื่อวันที่ 14 กุมภาพันธุ์ 2558 มีทนายความนักสิทธิมนุษยชนและนักกิจกรรมทางสังคม 4 คน ถูกจับกุมและตั้งข้อหาว่าฝ่าฝืนประกาศคสช. ฉบับที่ 7 /2557 ห้ามชุมนุมทางการเมืองเกิน 5 คน ในวันที่ 16 มีนาคมนี้ พนักงานสอบสวนที่ส่งสำนวนพร้อมพลเรือนทั้งสี่คนไปยังอัยการศาลทหารเพื่อสั่งฟ้อง โดยมีการคาดการณ์ว่าพลเรือนทั้งสี่อาจจะไม่ได้รับการประกันตัว

การใช้กลไกยุติธรรมและศาลทหารต่อพลเรือนที่แสดงออกทางความคิดเห็นเป็นการละเมิดสิทธิมนุษยชนอย่างต่อเนื่องและมีแนวโน้มว่า รัฐบาลปัจจุบันจัดตั้งโดยฝ่ายทหารคณะรัฐประหารจะใช้กลไกศาลทหารและกระบวนการยุติธรรมดังกล่าวต่อเนื่องและติดต่อกันเพื่อหลีกเลี่ยงการถูกกล่าวหาว่ากระทำการนอกกฎหมาย หากแต่กลไกยุติธรรมในปกติโดยเฉพาะการใช้ศาลทหารพิจารณาคดีต่อพลเรือนไม่มีความเป็นอิสระและเป็นกลาง ไม่มีความจำเป็น เห็นได้อย่างชัดเจนว่ามุ่งประโยชน์เพื่อโต้ตอบโจมตีต่อนักกิจกรรมทางการเมืองรวมทั้งทนายความสิทธิมนุษยชน การพิจารณาคดีในศาลทหารเป็นการละเมิดสิทธิในการได้รับการพิจารณาคดีที่เป็นธรรม ซึ่งขัดกับพันธกรณีที่ประเทศไทยมีต่ออนุสัญญาว่าด้วยสิทธิพลเรือนและสิทธิทางการเมือง

ตัวแทนมูลนิธิผสานวัฒนธรรมและศูนย์ทนายความเพื่อสิทธิมนุษยชนที่ขณะนี้เดินทางมาร่วมเวทีคณะมนตรีสิทธิมนุษยชนแห่งสหประชาชาติ (Human Rights Council) ณ กรุงเจนีวารระหว่างวันที่ 16-18 มีนาคม 2558 ด้วยนั้น ขอเรียกร้องให้รัฐบาลไทยและคสช. ประกาศยกเลิกประกาศคสช. 37/2557 และ 38 /2557 ที่ประกาศให้ศาลทหารมีอำนาจพิจารณาพลเรือนในข้อหาความผิดบางประเภทโดยทันที รวมทั้งประกาศที่จำกัดเสรีภาพในการแสดงออกและการชุมนุมโดยสงบทั้งหมด อีกทั้งการพิจารณาคดีในศาลทหารในเวลาที่ประกาศกฎอัยการศึกทำให้ไม่สามารถอุทธรณ์หรือฎีกา โดยเราเชื่อว่าศาลพลเรือนปกติในสถานการณ์ปัจจุบันสามารถใช้พิจารณาอรรถคดีต่างๆได้ และเชื่อมั่นว่าในการได้รับการพิจารณาคดีที่เป็นธรรมกว่าการพิจารณาคดีในศาลทหาร

ติดต่อข้อมูล พรเพ็ญ คงขจรเกียรติ มูลนิธิผสานวัฒนธรรม + 66-86-7093000
เยาวลักษ์ อนุพันธุ์ ศูนย์ทนายความเพื่อสิทธิมนุษยชน + 66-81-6283402

25580316-103235.jpg

25580316-103333.jpg