Statement by International NGOs on Pro-Democracy Protests on November 17 and 25, 2020

Statement by International NGOs on Pro-Democracy Protests on November 17 and 25, 2020

We, the undersigned organizations, condemn the Thai police’s unnecessary and excessive use of force against peaceful protesters marching to the national parliament in Bangkok on November 17, 2020. We are concerned that authorities could employ similar measures when facing protesters who have declared they will march to the Siam Commercial Bank headquarters on November 25.

On November 17, police set out barriers and barbed wire to prevent a peaceful march organized by pro-democracy movements from reaching the parliament. Protesters planned to protest outside the parliament as members of parliament and senators debated seven different proposals for constitutional amendments, including an amendment proposed by the lawyers’ non-governmental organization iLAW (Internet Law Reform Dialogue), which was supported by the People’s Movement and its allies. Police refused to let protesters through the barriers, and when the demonstrators acted to breach those barriers, police crowd control units used water cannons laced with purple dye and an apparent teargas chemical, as well as teargas grenades and pepper spray grenades, to forcibly disperse thousands of demonstrators, including students, some of whom are children. Water cannons were first used at approximately 2:25 pm and police continued their efforts to disperse protesters, with constant use of water cannons, teargas and pepper spray into the evening.

 Police also failed to prevent violence between pro-democracy protesters and royalist “yellow shirts” near the Kiak Kai intersection, near the parliament. Initially, riot police separated the two groups. However, video posted on social media later showed police officers informing the royalist protesters that they would withdraw and seconds later they vacated their position between the two groups. During the ensuing skirmishes, both sides were filmed throwing rocks and wielding clubs. Live broadcasts included sounds that appeared to be gunfire.

 The Erawan Medical Centre reported that there were at least 55 protesters injured, mostly from inhaling teargas. It also reported that there were six protesters who suffered gunshot wounds. The injured included children: a kindergartener and elementary school students.

Although some pro-democracy protesters engaged in violent conduct in responding to royalist protesters, we emphasize that the overwhelming number of protesters were entirely peaceful. Furthermore, we wish to emphasize that while specific participants of an assembly who engage in violence are subject to a response that is lawful, strictly necessary and proportionate, they also retain all other human rights including the right to life, to security of person and to freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

 International human rights law, as expressed in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Thailand acceded to in 1996, protects the rights to freedom of expression (article 19) and peaceful assembly (article 21). But Thai authorities have routinely enforced censorship and stifled public assemblies, meetings, and discussions about human rights, political reforms, and the monarchy’s role in society.

 In General Comment 37, which sets out the content Thailand’s legal obligations in guaranteeing the right of peaceful assembly, the United Nations Human Rights Committee—the body responsible for interpreting and applying the ICCPR—made clear that there is a presumption in favor of considering assemblies to be peaceful. Isolated acts of violence by individuals should not be attributed to others, to the organizers, or to the assembly as such. While the right of peaceful assembly may in certain cases be limited, the onus is for the State to justify any restrictions, which must pass the tests of legality, legitimacy, and necessity and proportionality.

 The Committee emphasized that “assemblies with a political message should enjoy a heightened level of accommodation and protection.” The Committee further highlighted the responsibility of governments to actively facilitate the enjoyment of the right to peaceful assembly, including by securing protest locations and protecting protesters “against possible abuse by non-State actors, such as interference or violence by other members of the public, counter-demonstrators and private security providers.” The Committee stressed that governments should, to the extent possible, allow protests within the “sight and sound” of their target audience or symbolic sites.

 The Committee also said that law enforcement officials involved in policing assemblies “must respect and ensure the exercise of fundamental rights of organizers and participants.” Authorities should take on the basic approach of seeking to facilitate peaceful assemblies. Pursuant to Thailand’s obligations under articles 6, as interpreted by the Committee in General Comment 36 and Under the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and other international human rights standards, law enforcement may only use force when strictly necessary and to the extent required to achieve a legitimate policing objective.

 In General Comment 37, the Committee further noted the indiscriminate effects of less-lethal weapons with wide-area effects, such as teargas and water cannons. Hence, the Committee said that “when such weapons are used, all reasonable efforts should be made to limit risks, such as causing a stampede or harming bystanders.” The 2020 United Nations guidance on less-lethal weapons in law enforcement further states that “water cannons should only be used in situations of serious public disorder where there is a significant likelihood of loss of life, serious injury, or the widespread destruction of property.” In addition, water cannons should only be used after law enforcement personnel have given warning and sought to “identify and isolate any violent individuals separately from the main assembly.” Authorities should also “not target a jet of water at an individual or group of persons at short-range owing to the risk of causing permanent blindness or secondary injuries if persons are propelled energetically by the water jet.” On the use of teargas, international standards provide that it should only be employed when necessary to prevent further physical harm and should not be used to disperse nonviolent demonstrations.

 Given that children are participating in these protests, we also note that the Committee on the Rights of the Child emphasized in its comments on draft General Comment 37 that the State “has a positive duty to protect children’s rights and must at all times act with an awareness that children may be present at the assembly, and protect them from any harm that might be occasioned by law enforcement actions as well as harm caused by other participants in the assembly.”

 On November 18, the spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres “expressed concern about the [human rights] situation in Thailand … it’s disturbing to see the repeated use of less lethal weapons against peaceful protesters, including water cannons … it’s very important that the government of Thailand refrain from the use of force and ensures the full protection of all people in Thailand who are exercising a fundamental peaceful right to protest.”

 We call on the Thai government to respect, protect and fulfill the right of demonstrators to peacefully protest, in line with Thailand’s international obligations under the ICCPR and customary international law. Specifically, Thailand should:

  1. Permit the People’s Movement march to proceed on November 25 and allow for non-violent protesters, including those who are children, to peacefully protest in front of the Siam Commercial Bank headquarters.
  2. Protect the rights of protesters, including those who are children, in accordance with the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 37 on the Right of Peaceful Assembly.
  3. Facilitate the exercise of the right to peacefully assemble and refrain from dispersing assemblies by using weapons, including less-lethal weapons, against protesters in line with the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and UN and other guidance on less-lethal weapons.
  4. Protect protesters, including those who are children, from violence and interference by non-State actors, while also protecting the rights of counter-demonstrators.
  5. Take steps to ensure accountability for rights violations associated with the government’s crackdown on the protest movement and to ensure that those whose rights have been violated enjoy the right to an effective remedy, as guaranteed under ICCPR article 2(3).

 Signed by:

 Amnesty International

Article 19

ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights

Asia Democracy Network

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)

Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL)

CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation

Civil Rights Defenders

FIDH – International Federation for Human Rights

Fortify Rights 

Human Rights Watch

International Commission of Jurists

Manushya Foundation

Civil Society Call For An End To Intimidation And Harassment Tactics Against UMANY And Associated Individuals

Civil Society Call For An End To Intimidation And Harassment Tactics Against UMANY And Associated Individuals

We, the undersigned organisations and endorsers, strongly condemn the continued intimidation tactics and acts of harassment being perpetrated by the State and its agencies against Universiti Malaya Association of New Youth (UMANY) members and student activists linked to the group. We call on the relevant authorities, including Universiti Malaya (UM) and other entities, to stop investigating and questioning these student leaders, and uphold academic freedom and our constitutional right to freedom of expression and free speech.

UMANY is being investigated by both ​UM and the ​police over a ​statement it issued following the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s advice that all Members of Parliament should support Budget 2021. Since then, seven members of UMANY, its president and vice-president, as well as two other student leaders, have been called in for questioning. A former UMANY president was also ​detained overnight for recording a police officer attempting to search the house of an UMANY leader, and will be charged tomorrow under Section 188 of the Penal Code. Meanwhile, the Public Service Department (JPA) has asked for show-cause letters from six JPA-sponsored UMANY members over their purported involvement on the matter. UMANY’s statement has since been ​retracted​.

We are disappointed that the State and its agencies, including the police, continues to arbitrarily stifle freedom of speech and expression in Malaysia, a ​rising trend that has become apparent since the change of government earlier this year. We wish to remind the Perikatan Nasional (PN) government that freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed for all Malaysians under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution, and should not be disproportionately restricted simply because said speech or expression challenges norms or presents critical or alternative views.

The right to express views and ideas freely, without fear of interference or persecution, is an essential part of democracy. Respectful debates and expressions help us examine and critically challenge conventional wisdoms and promote heterodox views. In doing so, we foster a more informative and critical society, one that is able to articulate their own views and alternative views, safely and openly.

We risk spiralling into an undemocratic state if our government continues to censor and restrict speech and expression without due process and at the expense of fundamental civil liberties of its peoples – as is the case with the UMANY investigations. ​Articulating an academic view based on the Federal Constitution, as was the case in this instance, should not warrant police action. Recording a police search of a student activist’s house also should not result in criminal sanction. The police, despite issuing a ​statement ​to clarify their actions in arresting the student activist in question, have ​failed to justify why ​taking videos or photographs of police investigations could affect the confidentiality of said investigations.

Furthermore, we do not want to foster an environment ​which undermines accountability and good governance and where people are prohibited from questioning or criticising the government over public affairs.

Academic scholarship, on the other hand, cannot flourish in an atmosphere of censorship and disproportionate restriction of speech and expression. An open and robust environment for sharing ideas freely is crucial for learning as it allows students to think critically, challenge and engage with different perspectives. Students must remain free to inquire, study and evaluate, and gain new maturity and understanding. The participation of students in intellectual debates concerning the state of affairs of the country, therefore, should be encouraged, not discouraged. Higher education institutions must ensure that they are moulding a thinking society and supporting the promotion of multiple views – not investigating such views.

To that end, we call on the following recommendations to be adopted at once:

  1. The police and UM must, without any delay, drop their respective investigations into UMANY, its members, former members and associated student leaders, over UMANY’s statement;
  2. JPA should uphold academic freedom and immediately withdraw the demand for show-cause letters from the JPA-sponsored UMANY members over their alleged involvement over the matter;
  3. The relevant authorities must pledge to protect UMANY members who are being ​harassed, cyberbullied or threatened online over their statement and ensure that those who are making such threats are dealt with in accordance with established international standards and practices, and;
  4. The PN government must ensure that freedom of expression and speech is upheld and protected at all times for all Malaysians by repealing repressive laws used to arbitrarily restrict these freedoms, in particular, the Sedition Act 1948 and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.

12 November 2020

Jointly issued by:
Amnesty International Malaysia
Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ)
Suara Rakyat Masyarakat (SUARAM)

Endorsed by the following civil society organisations:

  1. Agora Society
  2. Aliran
  3. ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR)
  4. Beyond Borders Malaysia
  5. Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC)
  6. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
  7. Community Women and Workers Network (CWWN)
  8. Demokrat UM
  9. EMPOWER Malaysia
  10. ENGAGE
  11. G25 Malaysia
  12. Gabungan Bertindak Malaysia (GBM)
  13. Gindol Initiative for Civil Society Borneo
  14. Greenpeace Malaysia
  15. Growing Emerging Leaders (GEL)
  16. In Between Cultura
  17. Jaringan Kampung Orang Asli Semenanjung Malaysia (JKOASM)
  18. Johor Yellow Flame (JYF)
  19. Justice for Sisters
  20. Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH)
  21. KLSCAH Youth
  22. LLG Cultural Development Centre Berhad
  23. Malaysia Muda
  24. Malaysian Medics International (MMI)
  25. Malaysian Students’ Global Alliance (MSGA)
  26. Malaysian Action for Justice and Unity Foundation (MAJU)
  27. National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE)
  28. North South Initiative (NSI)
  29. Oriental Hearts and Minds Study Institute (OHMSI)
  30. Our Journey
  31. Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)
  32. Pergerakan Tenaga Akademik Malaysia (GERAK)
  33. Persatuan Kesedaran dan Keadilan Iklim Malaysia – Klima ActionMalaysia KAMY
  34. Persatuan Komuniti Prihatin Selangor & KL (PRIHATIN)
  35. Persatuan Penduduk Galing Besar Kuantan
  36. Persatuan Prihatin Masyarakat Lipis
  37. Persatuan Promosi Hak Asasi Manusia (PROHAM)
  38. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor
  39. Pertubuhan SiraguGal
  40. Pertubuhan Solidariti Hijau Kuantan
  41. Pusat KOMAS
  42. Research for Social Advancement (REFSA)
  43. Sabah Environmental Protection Association (SEPA)
  1. Sabah Women’s Action-Resource Group (SAWO)
  2. Sarawak Association for Peoples’ Aspirations (SAPA)
  3. Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM)
  4. Sisters in Islam (SIS)
  5. Society for Equality, Respect And Trust for All Sabah (SERATA)
  6. Student Unity Front UKM
  7. Taiwan Alliance for Thai Democracy
  8. Tanah Dahai
  9. Tenaganita
  10. Teoh Beng Hock Trust for Democracy
  11. Thai Students in Europe for Liberal Democracy
  12. The Coalition for Clean and Fair Election (BERSIH 2.0)
  13. Tindak Malaysia
  14. UM Law Society
  15. Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO)
  16. Youth Era Malaysia

Endorsed by the following individuals:

  1. Yang Berhormat Wong Chen
  2. Dr. Vikkineshwaran Siva Subramaniam
  3. Ahmad Ghazali bin Abu Hassan
  4. Alan Tan
  5. Ambiga Sreenevasan
  6. Andrew Khoo
  7. Anson Liow
  8. Anwar Fazal
  9. Ari Saw
  10. Aw Swee Keng
  11. Azad Razack
  12. Beverly Joeman
  13. Caesar Loong
  14. Carlson Chew Yee Herng
  15. Chacko Vadaketh
  16. Chan Pei Wen
  17. Chan Suay Hwa
  18. Chang Hung Wai
  19. Cheah Khui Chen
  20. Cheong Chan Kiong
  21. Cherished Ng
  22. Chia Jia Xuan
  23. Chieng Xing Tien
  24. Chiew Chin Hang
  25. Chiew Choon Man
  26. Chin Kah Shen
  27. Chok Pit Yuen
  28. Chong Jia Jing
  1. Chong Zhao Xian
  2. Choo Kim Seng
  3. Chua
  4. Chuah Wen Jie
  5. Chwa See Kiap
  6. Daniel Chew
  7. Daniel Lim
  8. Dean Lau Sheng Ting
  9. Dennis Ignatius
  10. Edward Ignatius Victor
  11. Eng Teit Goy
  12. Eric Low
  13. Esther Kueh
  14. Faye Lee Chin
  15. Feisal Kamil
  16. Gan Jay Shen
  17. Gan Jia Seng
  18. Gan Xhi Yan
  19. Goh Ming Dao
  20. Goh Mun Yee
  21. Hiew Wen Tian
  22. Ho Chi Yang
  23. Ho Yock Lin
  24. Hoo Yi Zhi
  25. Ili Nadiah Dzulfakar
  26. Irene Xavier
  27. Ismail bin Ibrahim
  28. Jaffar Yusof
  29. James Bawi Thang Bik
  30. Jen Shaun Wong
  31. Joey Siu
  32. John Ku
  33. John Phoon
  34. Jonny Wong
  35. Joseph Hamzah Anwar
  36. Jules Rahman Ong
  37. Julien Chen Lip Syn
  38. Kamarul Zaman Abd Kadir
  39. Kaviarasan
  40. Kenn Yeap
  41. Khoo Kai Wen
  42. Koh Kar Weng
  43. Kuan Perk Siong
  44. Lam Yan Ci
  45. Lawrence Teen
  46. Lee Hao Jie
  1. Lee Soo Wei
  2. Lee Wei Jie
  3. Lee Xiang Sheng
  4. Lee Yong Xing
  5. Leong Wei Quan
  6. Liau Pin Chun
  7. Liew Liang Hong
  8. Liew Weng
  9. Lim Chaw Zen
  10. Lim Chin Chye
  11. Lim Chunwei
  12. Lim Jia Yi
  13. Lim Ru-Yi
  14. Lim Seng Keat
  15. Lim Teng Guan
  16. Lim Yu Dian
  17. Loh Xianda
  18. Mah Jun Hoong
  19. Mahes Balan
  20. Marina Mahathir
  21. Maryam Najwa Abd Rahman
  22. Mingshuen
  23. Monica Heng
  24. Muhammad Naqiuddin bin Nazri

99.Muhammad Rafique Bin Rashid Ali

  1. Nabilah Aryssa binti Mohamad Askandar
  2. Nathaniel Tan
  3. Ng Hao Yi
  4. Ng Leanne
  5. Ng Teng Yi
  6. Ng Xiang Yi
  7. Nurul Syahirah
  8. Paul S
  9. Pram
  10. Raymond Chin
  11. Raymond Lee
  12. Serina Lim
  13. Shaun Tan
  14. Sharon Ng She Nee
  15. Siah Kwong Liang
  16. Siti Kasim
  17. SM Muthu
  18. Soon Nyok Lian
  19. Swee Huat Eng
  20. Tan Cheng Siong
  21. Tan Chia Ee
  1. Tan Jia Shen
  2. Tan Li Ying
  3. Tan Teck Hoe
  4. Tan Wen Hui
  5. Teh Sin Joe
  6. Teo Swee Tengo
  7. Terry
  8. Thilaga
  9. Ting Teck Khoon
  10. Ting Zhao Hong
  11. Too Xing Ji
  12. Tyler Lim
  13. Yee Shan
  14. Wong Chang Fu
  15. Wong Chin Huat
  16. Wang Chun Rui
  17. Wong Yan Ke
  18. Wong Yan Zhi
  19. Wong Yew Lee
  20. Yap Mei Shya
  21. Yew Jun Huo
  22. Yong Ke-Qin
  23. Yu Ren Chung
  24. Zu Peng
  25. 吴汉坤
Call to Action on Parliamentarians at Risk

Call to Action on Parliamentarians at Risk

September 2020

In a recent report, APHR documented threats and harassment against opposition MPs in Southeast Asia, notably the Philippines, Thailand and Malaysia, with reprisals coming in the form of judicial harassment, arbitrary stripping them of their MP status, surveillance and harassment, and campaigns of disinformation. This document explains the report’s key findings, and what measures MPs can take to help protect the human rights of their parliamentary colleagues.

DOWNLOAD IN ENGLISH

Thailand’s emergency decree ‘an excuse’ to end pro-democracy protests, MPs say

Thailand’s emergency decree ‘an excuse’ to end pro-democracy protests, MPs say

JAKARTA – Southeast Asian lawmakers today heavily criticized the Thai government’s decision to introduce a new emergency decree that severely restricts peaceful assembly and expression, and grants the authorities powers to crackdown on all protesters. They called for it to be immediately rescinded, and for the authorities to immediately and unconditionally release all detained peaceful pro-democracy activists and protesters.

What’s happening now in Thailand is an outright blatant abuse of emergency powers to crack down on fundamental freedoms and shield those in power from any form of legitimate criticisms,” said Charles Santiago, Malaysian MP and Chair of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).

The thousands that have taken to the streets in Bangkok, and nationwide, have done so peacefully, and are fully entitled to raise concerns about the current state of democracy in Thailand,” he added.

The emergency order, which came into force in the early hours of 15 October, is a major threat to human rights in the country. It bans gatherings of five persons or more, and broadly prohibits the publication of news and information “which may instigate fear amongst the people” or that “affect national security or peace and order”. Under the decree the authorities could also arrest and detain people without charge for up to 30 days on grounds as vague as “supporting” or “concealing information” about the protests. During the announcement of the measure, authorities cited the need to “maintain peace and order” and that protesters had “instigated chaos and public unrest”.

Since its imposition, dozens of protesters, including three pro-democracy leaders, were reportedly arrested for their participation in the 14 October rally, which was part of a series of pro-democracy rallies held nationwide in recent months. These have largely been youth-led, and called for major changes to Thailand’s political order, including the dissolution of Parliament, the enactment of a new Constitution and reforms to the monarchy. Since the protest movement began, scores of individuals have faced illegal assembly charges, including those under an earlier COVID-19 emergency decree that authorities have routinely extended, despite the number of confirmed coronavirus cases being minimal nationwide.

Authorities must release the name of all those who have been arrested and ensure that they are given access to lawyers, their families and medical assistance if injured, APHR said.

We call on our fellow parliamentarians in Thailand to immediately exercise their oversight powers, by providing prompt and independent review of the necessity for the use of emergency powers and ensuring that people’s fundamental rights are protected,” added Santiago.

Regional MPs urge Thai authorities to respect freedom of speech and assembly

Regional MPs urge Thai authorities to respect freedom of speech and assembly

JAKARTA – Regional lawmakers today called on Thai authorities to immediately and unconditionally drop charges against human rights lawyer Anon Nampa and student activist Panupong Chadnok, and to ensure that all those participating in peaceful protests can do so without fear of reprisals. 

Peacefully voicing your opinion in public is not a crime. Those participating in peaceful protests should not do so at the cost of their liberty,” said Charles Santiago, Member of Parliament (MP) in Malaysia and chairperson of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR). 

“The Thai authorities should know by now that their repeated attempts at silencing calls for greater democracy are not only illegal but also counterproductive. Thai youth in particular are hungry for change, and the authorities’ threats will merely strengthen their determination. Instead, Thai leaders might find that listening to those willing to peacefully discuss Thailand’s future will in fact be of greater benefit to the country,” Santiago said. 

On 7 August police officers arrested Anon Nampa and Panupong Chadnok, and the pair were later charged under a number of criminal offences including sedition, assembly, intending to cause violence, and violating the ban on public gatherings. If found guilty they could face years in prison. The two were released on bail the following day on the condition that they do not engage in the alleged offences for which they were arrested. 

The charges relate to their involvement in the peaceful pro-democracy “Free Youth” rally held in Bangkok on 18 July. At the event Anon Nampa called for a public debate on the role of the monarchy within Thai politics. According to news reports another 31 activists risk possible arrest, raising fears of a wider crackdown. 

The peaceful student pro-democracy movement, which started before the COVID-19 pandemic and has resumed nationwide in recent weeks, calls for an end to the harassment of political activists, the dissolution of parliament and revision of the Constitution. On the evening of 10 August, thousands joined an anti-government demonstration at Bangkok’s Thammasat University.  

Following a post-elections fact-finding mission last year, APHR found that the only avenue to restoring democracy in Thailand is to amend the current Constitution to ensure that all government representatives are democratically elected, for the separation of powers to be guaranteed, and for civilian oversight of the military to be restored within a properly functioning system of checks and balances. APHR also found that democracy activists and human rights defenders remain at risk in Thailand, and urged authorities to ensure that they can work in a safe and enabling environment free from fear of harassment, threats, surveillance, and physical attacks.