Thai bid for UN rights seat fails

[Pii Kate]

all votes cast for other than thailand were a vote "against" :-)

So the 70-80% votes were Against? Amazing how denial shows up here.

[ginjag]

"We hope the UN members did not link their decisions to the political situation in Thailand."

I should hope they did. What right does a country squashing all political dissent have on the Human Rights Council?

What about Bangladesh ???? they have less right------freedom of speech is far less than here. comment please. Or is it just a clan member rubbing salt in the wound again. Qatar ??? what rights do women have there--minorities also.

[whybother]

Well, it could have been worse. North Korea might have had a punt just to see how many votes they would get.

Would be interesting if they would have put Israel and Saudi Arabia.....

Saudi Arabia IS a member.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/CurrentMembers.aspx

[ginjag]

You know that saying, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"....insanity. Why isn't this regime taking the opportunity to change in order to earn that seat? It's a privilege, not a right. Bravo to the UN and their decision.

Have an idea the decision was not based on the PM now but in general over a period. Stains from the PTP would not have helped.

[ginjag]

Well, it could have been worse. North Korea might have had a punt just to see how many votes they would get.

Would be interesting if they would have put Israel and Saudi Arabia.....

Saudi Arabia IS a member.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/CurrentMembers.aspx

An awful lot of freedom of speech here---NOT...................so the posters that blame the PM for his gagging certain groups is ridiculous.

[Thailand]

Doesn't take a genius to work out why does it!

[Docno]

Let's all be clear that the UNHRC is also used by some countries as a means for stifling criticism of human rights abuses. It's a highly politicised body. Despite its commendable and lofty objectives, its roster includes such other bright lights as China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Cuba, and the Russian Federation. One's own human rights record does not seem to bar one from membership...

[Baerboxer]

"We hope the UN members did not link their decisions to the political situation in Thailand."

I should hope they did. What right does a country squashing all political dissent have on the Human Rights Council?

Ask Qatar or Cuba, they'll know.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Baerboxer

[Baerboxer]

Let's all be clear that the UNHRC is also used by some countries as a means for stifling criticism of human rights abuses. It's a highly politicised body. Despite its commendable and lofty objectives, its roster includes such other bright lights as China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Cuba, and the Russian Federation. One's own human rights record does not seem to bar one from membership...

India is a member for just that. They have huge amounts if illegal bonded labor, including children, forced prostitution, including children, deny HR to millions of lower classes but are allowed a voice on this committee. India is like Victorian Britain - all polite society on the outside and a cesspit under the surface.

Most of the committee are infringe and violate HR when it suits or turn a blind eye to what goes on in their own country.

[Baerboxer]

You know that saying, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"....insanity. Why isn't this regime taking the opportunity to change in order to earn that seat? It's a privilege, not a right. Bravo to the UN and their decision.

A privilege earned by such bastions of HR as Qatar, Cuba, Pakistan, KSA and Bangladesh.

What exactly did each of those countries do the "earn" this wonderful privilege?

If you believe they are so much better than Thailand, I'm sure you'd be welcome to enjoy their freedoms.

[Baerboxer]

all votes cast for other than thailand were a vote "against" :-)

So the 70-80% votes were Against? Amazing how denial shows up here.

A marvelous example of sophistry. Well done.

[Baerboxer]

all votes cast for other than thailand were a vote "against" :-)

Look up the meaning of sophistry :-)

Think about how many countries were standing. Was it more than 2?

[Popenerrow]

"We lost the competition but the support we obtained accounted for about 70-80 per cent of UN members, meaning many countries still trust and believe in us."

if they have 70-80% of votes, shouldn't they have won?

[Baerboxer]

Indonesia, a country with a worse human rights record than Thailand (remember East Timor?), won over Thailand. What a loss of face that was!!

Take that view and there wouldnt be anyone eligible.

Its not about past times its about the current.

Example is Indonesia has moved in the right direction since those times, of all the 5 options only Thailand has continued to get significantly worse.

Right decision.

What about Qatar's current record?

it's not testimony to the real "quality" of human rights in these other countries, but is is a clear vote on how FAR DOWN THE LIST Thailand is seen internationally in that respect

Just translate that vote as in "TH - the worst of the bad"

You think these votes are carried out on logic, and intelligent assessment of facts and for the good of the world then?

[Carrerakiss]

A spinmeister in action: they got 70-80% of the vote but didn't win.

Yes. It's also interesting how the number of votes per country is reported. Out of the competing countries It seems Thailand came ......last. But it's pretty well hidden.

I'm not sure what criteria is used when voting, I'm sure quid pro quo's and any number of political issues come into play. Perhaps the vote shows how isolated Thailand is in the international community?

[ginjag]

Doesn't take a genius to work out why does it!

Super post , tell us what ??? you give us your genius answer, because all TVF is wondering how you get on the list . It is not for human rights etc is it???

Look at the member countries. Is there a genius out there ??

[ebonykap]

I was looking at a list of members in a previous thread, but didn't see the land of "oz" included.

Anybody know?

[ginjag]

I was looking at a list of members in a previous thread, but didn't see the land of "oz" included.

Anybody know?

My idea that Thailand was included before was the number of trips Yingluck made to other countries during her 2 and a 1/2 years OUT of office.

[rickirs]

"We lost the competition but the support we obtained accounted for about 70-80 per cent of UN members ...."

This must be called "Junta math." Thailand placed dead last with only 15.5% of the total vote of 877 and failed to even make the cut. If failure is success, the administration has a bright future.

[jayboy]

Indonesia, a country with a worse human rights record than Thailand (remember East Timor?), won over Thailand. What a loss of face that was!!

Indonesia certainly had a dreadful record under Suharto, and it is hardly Sweden like even now.However unlike Thailand the position is improving.More particularly there is much more respect given to the democratic process and elections on a one person one vote basis are successfully held and respected.In Indonesia the ordinary people are not patronised and often held in contempt by the middle classes and the elite.Indonesia has every right to be on the UN HR committee and Thailand was deservedly rejected.

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

A spinmeister in action: they got 70-80% of the vote but didn't win.

Yes. It's also interesting how the number of votes per country is reported. Out of the competing countries It seems Thailand came ......last. But it's pretty well hidden.

I'm not sure what criteria is used when voting, I'm sure quid pro quo's and any number of political issues come into play. Perhaps the vote shows how isolated Thailand is in the international community?

Thailand got 136 votes out of a total 877 votes or about 15.5% of the total vote. This means that all countries present in the UN General Assembly were able to vote for one or more of the nominated countries; it was not one country-one vote. I think what Thailand got was the majority vote for being LEAST desirable for membership.

[Thailand]

Doesn't take a genius to work out why does it!

Super post , tell us what ??? you give us your genius answer, because all TVF is wondering how you get on the list . It is not for human rights etc is it???

Look at the member countries. Is there a genius out there ??

Sorry, a little too sophisticated for you?

Did you note I use one question mark after a question?

[Living in a cartoon]

I am stunned that they got more than one vote.

[Alwyn]

why would anybody expect the UNHRC to accept a country with a dictator at the helm that is under martial law (and all that goes with it, no freedom of speech etc)?

[In Search of Space]

So 70 - 80 % of countries supported Thailands bid! but presumably did not vote for them

[whybother]

"We lost the competition but the support we obtained accounted for about 70-80 per cent of UN members ...."

This must be called "Junta math." Thailand placed dead last with only 15.5% of the total vote of 877 and failed to even make the cut. If failure is success, the administration has a bright future.

877 votes from 192 countries?

[whybother]

why would anybody expect the UNHRC to accept a country with a dictator at the helm that is under martial law (and all that goes with it, no freedom of speech etc)?

Have you seen some of the other countries on the committee?

[maidee]

thailand and human right ?

well start to give farangs the same rights as all those wifes in western countries... freedom to live & work without hastle

[EnglishJohn]

"We hope the UN members did not link their decisions to the political situation in Thailand."

I should hope they did. What right does a country squashing all political dissent have on the Human Rights Council?

It's pretty obvious the junta are more concerned about terrorism than dissent. Give a monkey an M79, stoke him up with a bit of rhetoric (and 1,000 baht) and we've all seen the result.

The current situation is for the human rights of decent people who deserve to be able to walk the streets without fear of getting shot or blown up.

[Alwyn]

why would anybody expect the UNHRC to accept a country with a dictator at the helm that is under martial law (and all that goes with it, no freedom of speech etc)?

Have you seen some of the other countries on the committee?

I have indeed, sad to say but it just goes to show what the World thinks of Thailand at this moment in time. When countries like China sit as on of the 5 main countries, Saudi is included and Russia get voted in things are bad...