Home / News / Urgent Appeals / THAILAND: Threats to family follow continued denial of justice in Somchai Neelaphaijit case

THAILAND: Threats to family follow continued denial of justice in Somchai Neelaphaijit case

February 2, 2011

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

 Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-005-2011

 

 

 2 February 2011

 [RE: AHRC-UAC-064-2009: Threats to human rights defender and family in Bangkok]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
THAILAND: Threats to family follow continued denial of justice in Somchai Neelaphaijit case

ISSUES: Enforced disappearances & abductions, human rights defenders, impunity, threats & intimidation, victims' assistance and protection
---------------------------------------------------------------------

AHRC 2010 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT: THAILAND

THE INTERNAL SECURITY STATE DIGS IN

http://www.humanrights.asia/resources/hrreport/2010/

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Dear friends,

The thwarting of justice continues in the case of disappeared human rights lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit. Having postponed reading of the verdict in the appeal case concerning the conviction of one policeman from last year, the criminal court has again ordered a further postponement on technical grounds. Meanwhile, the family of the victim is again facing threats in connection with the case. Despite reporting the threats to the authorities, at time of writing they had received no assistance, and the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is gravely concerned for their safety.

CASE UPDATE :

 On 21 January 2011 at the Criminal Court on Ratchadaphisek Road in Bangkok, representatives of all parties involved in the criminal proceedings in the case of the 12 March 2004 forcible disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit gathered to hear the verdict of the Appeal Court. However, for technical reasons the verdict was not read for a second time, and instead a new date for reading the verdict was set for February 7. Yet, it appears unlikely that the verdict will also be read on that date, and the Appeal Court's ruling may not become known until much later in the year. Details of the further postponements in the case and consequences are contained in a new statement by the AHRC: AHRC-STM-020-2011

 The AHRC is particularly concerned about the further delays in the case because they coincide with renewed threats to Somchai's wife, Angkhana Neelaphaijit, and her family. The CCTV outside the front of the Neelaphaijit house has been broken for an extended period. The Department of Special Investigation (DSI), Ministry of Justice has taken responsibility for the family's security, but has taken no action to fix it.

Before the first scheduled reading of the appeal verdict back in September 2010, a large bone which appeared to come from a cow or other animal of similar size was left in front of the Neelaphaijit house. The bone was too big for a dog to carry or to have been left somehow by accident. Angkhana reported the presence of the bone to the DSI. Then, between 18 and 20 January 2011 she received approximately 20 phone calls daily in which the caller did not identify himself or otherwise speak and then hung up. When she attempted to trace the calls, she was unable to do so. She reported these phone calls to the police and the DSI on 22 January 2011; however, at time of writing no action had been taken in response.

These are classic methods of intimidation in Thailand, and are clearly directed at threatening Angkhana and her children at a time that the case is back in the courts and attracting public attention. Therefore, the AHRC is urging all concerned persons and agencies to intervene on their behalf and to keep the case high in the public attention.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION :

On 12 March 2011, it will be seven years since a group of police abducted Somchai Neelaphaijit from a busy Bangkok street. From the beginning, the attempt to hold the perpetrators of his disappearance responsible has been marred by inefficiency and injustice. The Asian Human Rights Commission has repeatedly called on responsible parties within the government to protect Angkhana and the other members of the Neelaphaijit family and to ensure that the verdict of the Appeal Court is read as soon as is legally possible; however, all indications are that the case will continue to be characterized by inaction and obscurity.

Full information on the case of the disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit and the actions of the Asian Human Rights Commission and our partners can be found on the Somchai campaign webpage, which has been moved to a new address: http://www.humanrights.asia/campaigns/somchai-neelaphaijit

SUGGESTED ACTION :

Please write letters to the authorities listed below, urging them to investigate the intimidation and threats on the Neelaphaijit family and to ensure justice in the case of the disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit.

Please be informed that the AHRC is writing separate letters to the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, the Special Rapporteurs on the independence of judges and lawyers and on human rights defenders, and to the regional human rights office for Southeast Asia concerning the case.

To support this appeal, please click here:

 SAMPLE LETTER :

Dear _________,

THAILAND: Threats to family and continued deferral of justice in the case of Somchai Neelaphaijit

Victims: Angkhana Neelaphaijit, chairperson of the Working Group on Justice for Peace, wife of disappeared human rights lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit, and family
Dates of incidents: Mid-September 2010 and 18-20 January 2011
Place of incident: Soi Isaraphap 11, Isaraphap Road, Thonburi, Bangkok


I am writing to express my deep concern about ongoing intimidation of Angkhana Neelaphaijit and other members of the Neelaphaijit family in Bangkok that is apparently connected to the planned reading of the verdict of the appeal in the case of disappeared lawyer, husband of Angkhana, Somchai Neelaphaijit (black case no.1952/2547; red case no. 48/2549). The continued delays in the reading of the verdict are of concern not only because they constitute a grave deferral of justice but also because so long as the case drags on in court so too do the threats against the family continue.

Briefly, I am informed that before the first scheduled reading of the verdict in September 2010, a large bone which appeared to come from a cow or other animal of similar size was left in front of the Neelaphaijit family house. The bone was too big for a dog to carry or to have been left somehow by accident. Angkhana reported the presence of the bone to the Department of Special Investigation, Ministry of Justice, which has responsibility for her security. Not only has the DSI apparently taken no action, in addition I have been informed that it has not repaired the CCTV outside the front of the Neelaphaijit house, which has been broken for an extended period.

Then, prior to the second scheduled reading of the verdict, between 18 and 20 January 2011, Angkhana received approximately 20 phone calls daily in which the caller did not identify himself or otherwise speak and then hung up. When she attempted to trace the call, she was unable to do so. She reported these phone calls to the police and to the DSI on 22 January 2011, but again no action was taken.

These blatant attempts to intimidate Angkhana and the other members of the Neelaphaijit family coincide with the repeated postponement in the hearing of the appeal court in the cases related to his disappearance in 2004. The third scheduled attempt to read the verdict is set for 7 February 2011. I am gravely concerned about the safety of Angkhana and other members of the Neelaphaijit family as this date approaches, especially as it may be that the court again postpones the reading of the verdict on convenient technical grounds.

Accordingly, I urge that a special investigation be made into the threats against Angkhana and family without delay. Furthermore, Angkhana, her family and the witnesses and relatives of victims in all cases where complaints have been lodged against the police should be provided protection under the Witness Protection Act BE 2546 (2003).

I take this opportunity to add that it is an indictment on the government of Thailand and the state of human rights in that country that even though Angkhana is a well-known human rights defender and a person in the public eye, she and her family are still exposed to these types of blatant attempts to intimidate and silence her. The extent to which this sort of behaviour can occur in high-profile cases indicates how much more people who have no connections, people who are not known outside their localities, can be threatened and if necessary, targeted for attacks, killing and disappearances. It also shows how weak the witness protection system remains in Thailand, and how little security anyone in the country has after making complaints against public authorities.

Lastly, I join in calls for the case of disappeared lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit to be once and for all resolved. At a minimum, the reading of the Appeal Court verdict must not be delayed again. Although nearly seven years have passed and the authorities in Thailand might have expected that his case would be forgotten, it has not: it remains an international embarrassment for Thailand and will continue to remain one until the police responsible for his abduction and killing are brought to justice, instead of being allowed to continue serving as so-called officers of the law.

I look forward to your prompt action.

Yours sincerely,

----

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Abhisit Vejjajiva
Prime Minister
c/o Government House
Pitsanulok Road, Dusit District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Fax: +66 2 288 4000 ext. 4025
Tel: +66 2 288 4000

2. Mr. Chaowarat Chanweerakul
Minister of Interior
Office of the Ministry of Interior
Atsadang Road, Ratchabophit
Pranakorn, Bangkok 10200
THAILAND
Fax: +66 2 226 4371/ 222 8866
Tel: +66 2 224 6320/ 6341
E-mail: om@moi.go.th

3. Mr. Peeraphan Saleeratwipak
Minister of Justice
Office of the Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Justice Building
22nd Floor Software Park Building,
Chaeng Wattana Road
Pakkred, Nonthaburi 11120
THAILAND
Fax: +662 502 6699/ 6734 / 6884
Tel: +662 502 6776/ 8223
E-mail: om@moj.go.th 

4. Mr. Kasit Piromya
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Office of the Minister of Foreign Affair
443 Sri Ayudhya Road
Bangkok 10400
THAILAND
Fax: +662 643 5318
Tel: +662 643 5333
E-mail: om@mof.go.th

Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

 

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
AHRC-UAU-005-2011
Countries :
Campaigns :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.