Bangkok's drug war ignores rights

Kavi Chongkittavorn, The Nation, Asia News Network, Bangkok

As the death toll of drug suspects continues to rise throughout Thailand, so does the country's dilemma in the international arena become more obvious. When the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) in Geneva starts its session on March 17, Thailand will be the target of the world's criticism.

In past years, its human-rights record has been debated by CHR members regarding inhumane treatment of foreign inmates and illegal migrants. That was a small matter.

This time debate will be for a different reason. The gangland- style executions -- popularly known as "bang-bang fever" -- of over 300 drug suspects over the past 17 days following the government's anti-drug campaign has rattled the international community, which had witnessed a steady improvement in respect for human rights and the rule of law in Thailand over the last decade.

Leading human-rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have expressed concern over the government's drug war. They say that extrajudicial police executions are a violation of human rights. There is also growing concern within the country that innocent people may have been killed, thereby depriving them of the opportunity to prove their innocence in court.

Lest Thais are caught by surprise, every human rights reports abroad has highlighted dubious killings here for years. The Thai National Commission on Human Rights, which is preparing its annual report, is recording these fatal incidents and seeking an explanation from the government. The commission fears that Thai society is becoming indifferent to the use of force.

Thailand is serving the last year of its three-year CHR membership. Previously the country had distinguished itself from other developing countries by a foreign policy of respect for human rights and by democracy as the pillar of its diplomacy. The government was hopeful it could bridge the different approaches to human rights of the West and the East.

Thailand joined the CHR in 2000 to promote human rights in the international environment -- not to defend its own human rights record as other countries have done. For a developing country this was a very ambitious task, but it was worth trying.

Gone obviously are the days of euphoria when the Thai government was proud of its human-rights record. A different mood prevails now. The government of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra will have to decide soon whether to reapply for CHR membership. One thing is certain: The Thai representatives to the United Nations in Geneva will have to answer international enquiries about its gross violation of human rights in the form of extrajudicial killings.

The standard answer will be that the police just performed their duty and killed suspected drug dealers in self-defense. Another answer will be that drug suspects killed each other to avoid mutual exposure. The government has admitted there were a dozen cases of so-called no-red-tape killing involving the plainclothes police shooting at blacklisted drug dealers.

Under Thaksin, the government is paying attention to the demands of the community, especially those related to the drug menace, but the campaign has been detrimental to individual and group rights. The government has failed to point out which person or group in authority is going to interpret those rights.

The carte-blanche order by Thaksin to all law-enforcers and the country's 77 governors to meet targets set by the anti-drug campaign can easily lead to gross violations of human rights.

Given the country's reputation now, some policy-makers strongly recommend that Thailand just let its CHR term lapse. As early as 2001 the government planned to pull out of the CHR but subsequently changed it mind. After all, it argued, Thailand has overexposed itself and made more enemies in the process by taking part in the CHR. It has been subjected to foreign pressure.

The latest was in the case of Libya, which was chosen as president of the CHR. The U.S., which has made a comeback at the CHR this year, did not wish to see Libya in that position and tried unsuccessfully to lobby other CHR members for another candidate country. Washington urged Bangkok to vote against Libya, but Bangkok did not comply.

Proponents of continued CHR membership reason that it would serve the country's interest. After all, Thailand is a democratic country with a more decent human-rights record than many other CHR members. It says the shoot-to-kill policy is a necessary measure to halt drug proliferation during the three-month campaign.

Policy-makers who back CHR membership view the move as pivotal for Thailand's reputation, for all it has been tarnished recently. The country needs international support and cannot live in isolation, even though from time to time the government likes to whip up nationalism.

It is ironic while the government is trying to accede to more international instruments of human rights, it has chosen to ignore the same fundamental rights at home.