There’s an interesting and revealing report at the Bangkok Post. Interesting and significant for the admissions made and revealing of the admission on the limits of human rights. The report draws on a U.N. Human Rights Council report (clicking downloads a large PDF) and the associated Thai government response.
The UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression report is here. (PPT will spend some time on this document over the next few days as it includes information on nearly 60 lese majeste/computer crimes cases, including cases against 11 foreign nationals.)
The Thai government’s response is here.
The admissions made:
Thailand has conceded to issues raised by a UN special rapporteur as alleged malpractice regarding freedom of expression and migrant labour, and to the fatal harassment of human rights defenders.
The admission is in a document included in 108 pages of communications involving special rapporteurs of the United Nations recently made available ahead of the 23rd session of the UN Human Rights Council.
This admission appears to PPT to be a significant advance as an admission could, with the right political will, lead to some policy changes.
The limits:
On page 24, there is a short reply dated Dec 26, 2012 from the Thai government to UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression Frank La Rue to questions about cases in Thailand.
Thailand replied that the 2007 Constitution of Thailand contains the clause: The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated.
No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action, the official reply from Thailand said.
It is the reply that sets out the “reasons” for limiting freedom of speech related to the monarchy that draws a line in the sand.
While admitting that Article 112 was:
largely applied in a manner and with a frequency which raises some concerns. The severity of the punishments received, the absence of exemptions on constitutional or legal grounds, and the force it exerts over the judicial system adds to the chilling effect on free speech…,
the state defends all of this in the name of protecting a”special” monarchy. It is done with a quasi-religious zeal and rhetoric.
PPT plans more posts on these related reports.
There’s an interesting and revealing report at the Bangkok Post. Interesting and significant for the admissions made and revealing of the admission on the limits of human rights. The report draws on a U.N. Human Rights Council report (clicking downloads a large PDF) and the associated Thai government response.
The UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression report is here. (PPT will spend some time on this document over the next few days as it includes information on nearly 60 lese majeste/computer crimes cases, including cases against 11 foreign nationals.)
The Thai government’s response is here.
The admissions made:
Thailand has conceded to issues raised by a UN special rapporteur as alleged malpractice regarding freedom of expression and migrant labour, and to the fatal harassment of human rights defenders.
The admission is in a document included in 108 pages of communications involving special rapporteurs of the United Nations recently made available ahead of the 23rd session of the UN Human Rights Council.
This admission appears to PPT to be a significant advance as an admission could, with the right political will, lead to some policy changes.
The limits:
On page 24, there is a short reply dated Dec 26, 2012 from the Thai government to UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression Frank La Rue to questions about cases in Thailand.
Thailand replied that the 2007 Constitution of Thailand contains the clause: The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated.
No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action, the official reply from Thailand said.
It is the reply that sets out the “reasons” for limiting freedom of speech related to the monarchy that draws a line in the sand.
While admitting that Article 112 was:
largely applied in a manner and with a frequency which raises some concerns. The severity of the punishments received, the absence of exemptions on constitutional or legal grounds, and the force it exerts over the judicial system adds to the chilling effect on free speech…,
the state defends all of this in the name of protecting a”special” monarchy. It is done with a quasi-religious zeal and rhetoric.
PPT plans more posts on these related reports.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..