The violent clash between the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and the pro-government United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) in the early hours of Sept 2, which resulted in the death of one person and more than 40 injured, reflects sadly on the future of Thai politics. It is also a reflection of the government's failure to ensure the safety of its citizens.
Although this incident started after the UDD crowd had marched near the PAD's camp-out in the premises of Government House, the UDD should not be the only group condemned, as this was a case of violence coming from both sides.
Video pictures of protesters, armed and unarmed, being beaten unconscious are reminiscent of footage of the massacre on Oct 6, 1976 when student activists were lynched by right-wing militia mobs. This time, video clips showing anti-government protesters armed with sticks and metal rods beating supporters of the UDD, including women, outside the United Nations building show that this was not only an attack by the UDD alone, as the PAD has claimed.
Looking at this situation through the lens of human rights, it is clear that both sides are liable to be condemned for violations - ranging from the "right to life" to the "right [against being] subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment".
Those rights are protected under the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Thailand ratified in 1996. The covenant highlights the states, individuals and communities responsible for promoting and observing those rights - which implies that the PAD and UDD also are responsible for upholding these rights.
Yesterday, civil society organisations (CSOs) began issuing statements in response to the situation. Looking at the general trend of these statements, it is quite alarming that they castigate only a particular group. While the clash quite clearly involved both sides, many organisations chose to condemn only the pro-government faction.
Throughout Thai history, the state is believed to have a monopoly on violence. Given that understanding, rarely have non-state groups been seen as perpetrators of violence. Most civic groups, however, view the pro-government UDD group as having a personality identical with the government. This was partly due to the media's linking the UDD with the government, although it has yet to be proven concretely whether this truly carries weight.
Many CSOs have overlooked the fact that the PAD has been instigating violence directly and verbally, and have failed to see that the PAD has used the argument of the right to freedom of expression to camouflage its actions. The rights of PAD's political enemies have never been respected on the PAD's stage.
These CSOs also overlook the occupation of the NBT by the PAD's armed guards and the closure of two southern airports - which have been used as tools to pressure the prime minister to resign - as a breach of the right to peaceful assembly. They view these actions as an act of civil disobedience, although ironically the fathers of the said principle, like Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr, never did violate the rights of others while exercising civil disobedience.
From the viewpoint of many civic organisations PM Samak Sundaravej, whom they see as a nominee of ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra, is their ultimate enemy. Therefore they are willing to do everything to put an end to the so-called Thaksin regime.
They are making a mistake. They have failed to look at the methods the PAD has used and to question whether the methodology is justified. We must note that the PAD's method of using force to occupy television stations and airports is the first of its kind. The occupation of airports is a direct violation of the rights of thousands of passengers affected by the blockade. We must also take into account that the demonstrations of the PAD have created a bad precedent for future rights to assembly in the people's movement.
In the past, demonstrations never turned violent, apart from those that had been ended by an unjust onslaught from government forces. If the civil society groups are willing to rip away their principles and remain silent on the violations of the PAD, they should be ready to face all the consequences. Most importantly, by not condemning the PAD along with the UDD, and by not calling on the government to exercise its obligation to conduct an impartial investigation to ensure that perpetrators of the violence from both sides are dealt with according to the law, this could mean that civic groups are condoning, if not directly supporting, a culture of impunity in the country.
Thailand's numerous records of impunity have remained unsolved. The cases of death and disappearance, from Oct 14, 1973, Oct 6, 1976, the Black May incident, the war on drugs, to the Tak Bai incident, have yet to be solved. We just have to hope that in the years from now, members of the CSOs will not be recognised as a factor which allowed the perpetrators of the Black Tuesday incident to walk free without being held to account.
This, although a preventable tragedy, will haunt the Thai civil society organisations for years to come.
This article first appeared in Bangkok Post, 5 September 2008
Source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/050908_News/05Sep2008_news21.php
Although this incident started after the UDD crowd had marched near the PAD's camp-out in the premises of Government House, the UDD should not be the only group condemned, as this was a case of violence coming from both sides.
Video pictures of protesters, armed and unarmed, being beaten unconscious are reminiscent of footage of the massacre on Oct 6, 1976 when student activists were lynched by right-wing militia mobs. This time, video clips showing anti-government protesters armed with sticks and metal rods beating supporters of the UDD, including women, outside the United Nations building show that this was not only an attack by the UDD alone, as the PAD has claimed.
Looking at this situation through the lens of human rights, it is clear that both sides are liable to be condemned for violations - ranging from the "right to life" to the "right [against being] subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment".
Those rights are protected under the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Thailand ratified in 1996. The covenant highlights the states, individuals and communities responsible for promoting and observing those rights - which implies that the PAD and UDD also are responsible for upholding these rights.
Yesterday, civil society organisations (CSOs) began issuing statements in response to the situation. Looking at the general trend of these statements, it is quite alarming that they castigate only a particular group. While the clash quite clearly involved both sides, many organisations chose to condemn only the pro-government faction.
Throughout Thai history, the state is believed to have a monopoly on violence. Given that understanding, rarely have non-state groups been seen as perpetrators of violence. Most civic groups, however, view the pro-government UDD group as having a personality identical with the government. This was partly due to the media's linking the UDD with the government, although it has yet to be proven concretely whether this truly carries weight.
Many CSOs have overlooked the fact that the PAD has been instigating violence directly and verbally, and have failed to see that the PAD has used the argument of the right to freedom of expression to camouflage its actions. The rights of PAD's political enemies have never been respected on the PAD's stage.
These CSOs also overlook the occupation of the NBT by the PAD's armed guards and the closure of two southern airports - which have been used as tools to pressure the prime minister to resign - as a breach of the right to peaceful assembly. They view these actions as an act of civil disobedience, although ironically the fathers of the said principle, like Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr, never did violate the rights of others while exercising civil disobedience.
From the viewpoint of many civic organisations PM Samak Sundaravej, whom they see as a nominee of ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra, is their ultimate enemy. Therefore they are willing to do everything to put an end to the so-called Thaksin regime.
They are making a mistake. They have failed to look at the methods the PAD has used and to question whether the methodology is justified. We must note that the PAD's method of using force to occupy television stations and airports is the first of its kind. The occupation of airports is a direct violation of the rights of thousands of passengers affected by the blockade. We must also take into account that the demonstrations of the PAD have created a bad precedent for future rights to assembly in the people's movement.
In the past, demonstrations never turned violent, apart from those that had been ended by an unjust onslaught from government forces. If the civil society groups are willing to rip away their principles and remain silent on the violations of the PAD, they should be ready to face all the consequences. Most importantly, by not condemning the PAD along with the UDD, and by not calling on the government to exercise its obligation to conduct an impartial investigation to ensure that perpetrators of the violence from both sides are dealt with according to the law, this could mean that civic groups are condoning, if not directly supporting, a culture of impunity in the country.
Thailand's numerous records of impunity have remained unsolved. The cases of death and disappearance, from Oct 14, 1973, Oct 6, 1976, the Black May incident, the war on drugs, to the Tak Bai incident, have yet to be solved. We just have to hope that in the years from now, members of the CSOs will not be recognised as a factor which allowed the perpetrators of the Black Tuesday incident to walk free without being held to account.
This, although a preventable tragedy, will haunt the Thai civil society organisations for years to come.
This article first appeared in Bangkok Post, 5 September 2008
Source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/050908_News/05Sep2008_news21.php
No comments:
Post a Comment