Army doesn't share commitment to anti-torture bill
Published: 24/06/2016 at 04:25 AM
Writer: JOHN DRAPER & PEERASIT KAMNUANSILPA
Newspaper section: News
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/1018637/army-doesnt-share-commitment-to-anti-torture-bill
The decision of the army's security body not to withdraw legal action against three human rights advocates for their report on torture in the Deep South has potentially reduced the government's stance against this kind of violent act to a form of lip service.
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha's cabinet earlier this month gave the green light to the Torture and Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Suppression Bill which, when it comes into effect, will criminalise torture -- a commitment that Thailand has made to the international community.
The cabinet decision contradicts in practice the stance of the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) Region 4 as the latter is still pressing criminal defamation charges against Somchai Homlaor, Pornpen Khongkachonkiet and Anchana Heemmina for their collection of data on torture by soldiers in this strife-torn region from 2014 to 2015. By maintaining the charges, the military is ignoring its own adoption of this most significant law and risking losing in its fight against the insurgency in the conflict-prone three southernmost provinces.
On May 17 this year, Isoc Region 4, responsible for national security operations in the southern border provinces, which accused the three human rights defenders who represent the Cross Cultural Foundation, Duay Jai Group, and the Pattani Human Rights Network of criminal defamation under the Penal Code and publicising false information online under the Computer Crime Act.
In their report, the three human rights defenders documented 54 cases in which soldiers allegedly tortured ethnic Malay Muslim insurgent suspects between 2014 and 2015. These allegations have been vigorously denied by the Thai security services, which is not a surprise.
Torture is a technique allegedly adopted by security officers at present in Thailand to extract information from detained suspects. It is, however, ineffective. After a long session of interrogation, tortured suspects tend to agree with anything the torturer forces upon them, resulting later in conflicting and unclear information. As well as being immoral, in the majority of the world's countries, torture is illegal. Isoc's denials contrast with what is, in fact, a creditable report.
There are a number of steps one can take to understand why the report's findings are credible.
The first evaluation is the credibility of those publicising the claims. In the case of this report, the authors are prominent human rights activists associated with well-known, local non-government organisations. These activists have little to gain and potentially much to lose from publicising the claims of torture.
Specifically, if charged and convicted of defamation and publicising the information online, they face a 100,000 baht fine or a maximum of seven years in prison. In addition, their patriotism has already been questioned by Isoc, which alleged their actions were damaging national security. This opens them up to personal abuse from ultra-nationalists. Thus, the steps taken by these individuals and their NGOs are at high risk to themselves, with few obvious benefits.
Another step is an assessment on whether there is a pattern of torture. For example, this report reveals that Thai Malay Muslims were allegedly the target of torture conducted by police at the Peace Protection Centre in the Southern Police Operation Centre, in Yala province. Torture methods appear consistent as interrogators applied mock executions, sleep deprivation and sensory deprivation to victims. Blunt objects, strangling and water torture were also used as these techniques leave no cuts. There were also threats against the families of the suspects, including rape.
Another standard for verifying the credibility of cases is medical evidence, as torture frequently leads to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In the case of the Deep South, between 2011 and 2013, Physicians for Human Rights, an organisation that uses science and medicine to document human rights violations, adapted a version of the Istanbul Protocol, the gold standard for assessing PTSD, to collection information. Alarmingly, 77% of torture allegations demonstrated severe emotional stress, 58% major depression and 40% full-blown PTSD.
A final way to assess the credibility of torture claims is the alleged victims testifying in court. This may be necessary as Isoc has dismissed the allegations as entirely fictitious because real names were not revealed in the report. However, because of potential threats to the complainants and their families, testifying is a step rarely taken by torture victims.
Remarkably, six of the 54 victims have agreed to waive their anonymity and thus risk potential harassment. Also, while the report's authors have refused to reveal the names of their sources to authorities, they have passed them to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The lessons of fascism have demonstrated that hatred of the internal ""Other"", in this case Thai Malay Muslims, can underpin torture. Moreover, torture is tactically counter-productive. It can exacerbate the insurgency by convincing the relatives of those tortured to join the radical groups fighting against their torturers. It can also increase the negative perception of the mainstream ethnic Malay population towards the army.
The Thai army should instead implement a strategy in line with advice by counter-insurgency experts, who recommend limiting the appeal of insurgents, so as to prevent them from recruiting, thereby marginalising their political aspirations.
For example, a societal and educational role for Pattani Malay is one of the demands militants have rallied around for decades. Undermining this by implementing a National Language Policy providing for a dual language Thai-Thai Malay education would confer a significant strategic advantage to the army.
This tactic would also engage insurgents and potential insurgents on a more appropriate battlefield -- their hearts and minds, at a fraction of the cost of 28 battle tanks that the army recently purchased as a favour to the Chinese for US$150 million (about 5.3 billion baht).
More importantly, the military regime must ensure that the Torture and Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Suppression bill has some teeth. Taking no action regarding the alleged torture risks seeing a greater role for more radical Islamist organisations, exemplified by the increasing use of the black Al-raya flag.
"