Criticism follows travel ban lifting

Scholars and human rights activists say the junta’s decision to lift the ban on some political activists leaving the country does not respond to the needed assurance that people’s rights and liberty are protected, and also fails to fulfil the junta’s desire to “look good” in the eyes of other countries.
The government on Friday lifted the international travel ban imposed against some politicians and activists after the 2014 coup. This group, although not tried in court, cannot leave the country without court and National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) permission.
Human rights activists and scholars believe the junta’s decision to partially revoke the ban was motivated by the international community’s recent criticism of the human rights situation in Thailand.
After the UN’s Universal Periodic Review examination of Thailand’s human rights situation and the criticism levelled at Thailand by countries during the review, activists have said the junta seemed to care more about the international community’s comments about the Kingdom.
The national image was the reason the ban was lifted, said Sunai Phasuk, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch in Thailand.
However, Sunai said the move to lift the travel ban was just an attempt to resolve the problem at its end point, not at its roots. The government still has NCPO orders and laws banning political movements and the voicing of opinions deemed unacceptable, he said.
Sirote Klampaiboon, an independent political science scholar, said the move shed light on the junta’s attempt to burnish its image to comply with international standards. He said the government had tried to demonstrate to other countries that the junta was easing tensions and not violating human rights.
However, the government has focused on the wrong issue, Sirote said. The international community’s major concerns, he added, are Section 44 of the interim charter which gives sweeping power to Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha; NCPO order 13/2559 that allows the authorities to arrest people; the Referendum Act banning provocative debate on the charter draft; and trials of civilians in the military court. “The junta has not revoked or amended critical laws deemed to pose larger threats. These actually extensively allow the state to regulate people’s behaviours and infringe on human rights,” Sirote said.
Pheu Thai key member Chaturon Chaisang said although the junta had abrogated the travel ban, many measures still applied to the select group of activists and politicians. The ban on financial transactions that is applied against some of them is still in place, he said, adding that the threat of temporary detentions also remained.
He said the travel ban was just one measure used as a condition to bargain with politicians and activists. If any of those figures criticise the premier or NCPO officers, he said, they still would not be allowed to leave the country.
“Many activists, although on the list, could go abroad as long as they do not slam the junta,” he said.  
The travel ban is still in effect for those who face trial, which also affects ex-PM Yingluck Shinawatra and Watana Muangsook.