Calls mount to protect the NHRC
The proposal to merge the National Human Rights Commission with the parliamentary Ombudsman has raised the ire of many sectors of society, even critics of the NHRC. Those who have not been happy with the NHRC feel there are many flaws in its operations. But merger putting the 11-member Ombudsman and the Human Rights Protection Office under one roof is not the way out.
Ombudsman Siracha Vongsarayankura is open to the idea and is ready to work with the rights agency. The NHRC, however, is fighting to maintain its identity and its mandate.
Last week it sent a protest letter to Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, the chairman of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO).
It has also made its feelings known to the Constitution Drafting Committee, the National Legislative Assembly and the National Reform Council.
The merger plan comes at a bad time for the NHRC. Two months ago, the International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions announced the NHRC’s ranking was to be downgraded to “B”, unless it improves its performance within one year as required under the Paris Principles.
If that happens, the NHRC’s standing in the international community will suffer, as will its access to the UN Human Rights Council.
The ICC Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) has raised serious concerns about the NHRC before. It made particular note of the selection process for commissioners, saying the composition of the selection committee seemed to have “a very small number of public institutions, with no clear representation, or a requirement for consultation with key stakeholder groups or civil society”.
The SCA also questioned the commissioners’ functional immunity and independence, especially the possibility external parties could influence the agency’s independence by initiating, or by threatening to initiate, legal proceedings against a member. It has suggested legislation covering the NHRC include a clear and unequivocal provision to protect members from legal liability for acts undertaken in good faith. Timeliness is another issue of concern. It took the commission three years to complete a report on the 2010 crackdown on red-shirt demonstrators in which more than 90 people were killed and hundreds injured, the ICC report said.
In the situation of a coup d’etat or a state of emergency, the commission is expected to operate with a heightened level of vigilance and independence.
It should ensure respect for human rights, democratic principles and the strengthening of the rule of law in all circumstances, it said.
Rights commissioner Niran Pitakwatchara concedes the NHRC has problems. They include bureaucratic red-tape, poor coordination with others and understaffing. But he maintains it has been impartial during the political upheavals of recent times.
Despite its shortcomings, local and international activists insist the merger is not acceptable.
The Assembly of the Poor said the spirit of the NHRC is essential to the protection of human rights, especially those of the poor.
Sriprapha Petchramesree, a former representative of the Asean Inter-Governmental Commission on Human Rights, said those pushing for the merger lacked knowledge and sense.
“An ombudsman deals with disputes between the state and the people, but the national human rights institution has a broad-based mandate on promotion and protection. Its tasks include looking at abuses and violations derived from expediting or negligence of official duties,” said Ms Sriprapha.
Unionist Jittra Cotshadet, while attacking the commission for being too little and too slow in addressing people’s grievances, said what is needed is reform.
“Our big concern is the rights commission’s composition, independence and transparency. Members need to be free from rigid regulation or control by the military, politicians, or bureaucracy,” Ms Jittra said.
She called for the CDC to work on organic laws that ensure a greater say for the people. There should be mechanisms for people to impeach or replace any partisan members of independent organisations, she said.
Human Rights Watch’s Brad Adams said the CDC failed to understand the two agencies had different mandates. He was concerned the move would affect Thailand’s standing in the international community.
“Instead of making an already weak human-rights agency even weaker, the CDC should be looking for ways to ensure a broad-based, effective and independent membership,” he said.