New Thai charter: Clauses related to protection of rights worry academics

[webfact]

'OVERLY BROAD' TERMS
Clauses related to protection of rights worry academics
Kasamakorn Chanwanpen,
Wiraj Sripong
The Nation

Concerns raised on 'overly broad' terms used in new charter

BANGKOK: -- International and Thai academia are worried about clauses related to rights protection in the draft charter, saying the terms are still vague, undefined or inconsistently used.

Some academics and representatives of non-profit organisations joining the roundtable on "Rights Protection in Thailand 2015 - Reflections on Book I Chapter 2 of the Draft Constitution" shared concerns over the limitations of rights due to the overly broad terms in the charter, which are prone to wide interpretation.

The event was hosted by the German-Southeast Asian Centre of Excellence for Public Policy and Good Governance, Faculty of Law at Thammasat University, Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies of Mahidol University, Hanns Seidel Foundation and Thai Committee for Refugees Foundation.

Gothom Arya from the institute, an expert in human rights, said Section 26, stating "The Thai people shall be citizens", was confusing. This involves the three terms used pervasively in the constitution - people, citizen and person - allowing it to be interpreted in a couple of ways. The constitution should be clear in distinguishing human rights and the rights of Thai citizens.

The section found most problematic was Section 27, which they felt was imposed unnecessarily and was discriminatory for stating that the duties a citizen should follow include upholding the nation, religions and the King, defending the country and protecting national benefits.

Many of these terms could be open to broad interpretation and would create confusion among the people. Worse, they could discriminate against certain people and prevent them from enjoying their rights.

Henning Glaser, director of the centre, said that, from a comparative and historical perspective, it should be acknowledged that the charter for the first time in Thai constitutionalism explicitly entitles everyone to human rights.

A new shaping of the concept of rights is discernible in the charter. The innovation lies in making duties inherent in the rights expressed in some provisions but most strikingly in Section 27(4), which stipulates that citizens shall "exercise political rights in good faith and for the benefit of the public" as one of their duties.

In this light, rights appear as reserved only for people compliant with a specific notion of a good

citizen.

Gothom, who holds the same opinion, said ethics and morals are imprinted in the draft charter as core values of society, a notion that is hard to define.

The problem does not lie in the constitution, but in its enforcement, said Veerawit Tianchainan, executive director of the Thai Committee for Refugees Foundation.

'Inconsistency' in draft

"Some promises mentioned in the draft constitution, such as Section 71 stating public participation in scrutinising the state's power, is a case in point," he said.

The inconsistency of the draft charter is another issue of great concern, according to the participants. Article 45 was cited as a prominent example of contradiction.

In the second part of Chapter 2 on human rights, the protections seem to cover all individuals regardless of their nationalities. Section 45, however, states, "Any person other than a

person of Thai nationality residing within the Kingdom shall enjoy economic, social and cultural rights as provided by virtue of law or as rendered by the state".

"Article 45 makes the other articles fall short of their objective. In this way, it can be interpreted that the provision covers only Thai nationals," he said.

"Rights protection should benefit all individuals, regardless of their background and origin," Gothom said.

Glaser proposed inserting certain rights into the human rights section, such as the right to a minimum wage or to workplace safety.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Clauses-related-to-protection-of-rights-worry-acad-30261356.html

-- The Nation 2015-06-01

[Srikcir]

“it should be acknowledged that the charter for the first time in Thai constitutionalism explicitly entitles everyone to human rights.”

NO IT DOES NOT

Article 3 states “The sovereign power belongs to the Thai people.”

Article 4 appears to apply to all nationalities but does not state all: “The human dignity, right, liberty and the equality of the people shall be protected.”

Article 5 has an opportunity to include all nationalities but fails: “The Thai people, irrespective of their origins, sexes or religions shall enjoy equal protection under this Constitution.”

So one does not need to interpret Article 45 to conclude that the provision covers only Thai nationals.

Of course this whole topic of rights and liberties guaranteed by a constitution is moot as the Thai people do not possess sole sovereign power. So long as the Thai military and various Independent Organizations have “extra-constitutionality” to neutralize the Thai people’s sovereignty, the Thai people will never have true protection of their rights and liberties.

[tbthailand]

“it should be acknowledged that the charter for the first time in Thai constitutionalism explicitly entitles everyone to human rights.”

NO IT DOES NOT

Article 3 states “The sovereign power belongs to the Thai people.”

Article 4 appears to apply to all nationalities but does not state all: “The human dignity, right, liberty and the equality of the people shall be protected.”

Article 5 has an opportunity to include all nationalities but fails: “The Thai people, irrespective of their origins, sexes or religions shall enjoy equal protection under this Constitution.”

So one does not need to interpret Article 45 to conclude that the provision covers only Thai nationals.

Of course this whole topic of rights and liberties guaranteed by a constitution is moot as the Thai people do not possess sole sovereign power. So long as the Thai military and various Independent Organizations have “extra-constitutionality” to neutralize the Thai people’s sovereignty, the Thai people will never have true protection of their rights and liberties.

Of course this whole topic of rights and liberties guaranteed by a constitution is moot as the Thai people do not possess sole sovereign power. So long as the Thai military and various Independent Organizations have “extra-constitutionality” to neutralize the Thai people’s sovereignty, the Thai people will never have true protection of their rights and liberties.

exactly....

And with the military firmly in charge and writing a constitution designed to keep them in control, this will not change in the near future...

[dominique355]

I have serious concerns about Art. 27, which makes it a duty of the citizens to uphold religions.

Today more and more people abandon religion and some openly call themselves atheists. Their rights must also be respected and upheld.

No one should be forced to follow a religion and its rules and sanctions. That is a very basic human right.