Junta’s human rights position questioned at UN

Representatives from various government agencies were grilled in Geneva at the 119th session of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
 In Bangkok, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha said he had heard initial reports that the delegation faced some difficulties explaining human rights practices in Thailand, including in relation to the death penalty. 
“Some may question why the death penalty still exists in our country. On the other hand, some Thais also question why some [wrongdoings] are not punishable by death. There is really a fine line in defining legal violations,” he said.
Prayut added that the UN review process proceeded in a “reasonable and academic” way.
Led by the permanent secretary of the Justice Ministry Charnchao Chaiyanukij, the military regime’s delegation gave verbal reports on the country’s human rights situation and responded to questions from UN members. 
The questions focused on many issues relating to the junta’s operation since it took power in 2014. 
The UN Human Rights Committee questioned the restriction on freedom of expression, rights to assemble, the trials of civilians in military court, the enforcement of special powers under Article 44 of the interim charter, the new constitution, and the lese majeste law. 
They also asked about the progress of the investigation and prosecution following the disappearance of prominent Muslim lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit and Karen activist Pholachi “Billy” Rakchongcharoen.
In the first session on Monday, Charnchao acted as moderator, asking Thai officials to answer questions that related to their agencies. Many spent 10 to 15 minutes reading prepared answers. 
Representatives from the Royal Thai Police, Labour Ministry, National Security Council, Foreign Ministry, Social Development and Human Security Ministry, the junta National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) and Defence Ministry, explained the legal justification for human rights restrictions and law enforcement to limit civil and political rights. 
For a leader to have special power to limit people’s rights is not rare in Thai history, said Colonel Rungsarit Nakmung of the NCPO. Thai constitutions in the past – such as the 1959, 1972, 1976, 1977 and 1991 charters enforced after military coups – also gave such powers to the leaders, he said. Thailand needed such law to maintain order during the transitional period, he said. 
Article 44 was mostly used for the effectiveness of the administration, he said, adding that only a few orders had been issued under this article to limit people’s rights.
In Bangkok, Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai said he was not worried about the Kingdom’s rights image although the junta has maintained and practised extrajudicial power. 
However, Sunai Phasuk, senior researcher on Thailand in Human Rights Watch's Asia division, said in a panel that while the junta makes promises to the international community in response to concerns, those pledges yield very little in practice.
He cited the use of the Military Court to try civilians as an example. While the junta announced that this practice would cease, in reality many cases remained in the Military Court and were not transferred to the normal courts of justice, Sunai said.