PRESS RELEASE
ALRC-PL-003-2006

THAILAND: End police control of witness protection, new report urges

(Hong Kong, June 30, 2006) Thailand needs to strengthen laws and institutions to wrest control of witness protection from the police, the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) said in a special report released on Friday.

"Although the Witness Protection Office has been set up under the justice ministry, the police have de facto control of witness protection in Thailand," Basil Fernando, executive director of the Hong Kong-based regional rights group, said.  

"As the police in Thailand are the main perpetrators of human rights abuses, giving them effective control of witness protection totally defeats its purpose," Fernando said.

"It is perverse to expect someone who is seeking protection from police to also be protected by them. There needs to be an alternative," he said.

The 80-page report, "Protecting witnesses or perverting justice in Thailand", recommends that the Thai government greatly strengthen both the law on witness protection and Witness Protection Office, and urges international bodies and other governments to offer assistance.

It also calls for the greater involvement of legal and medical professionals in witness protection, and changes in courtroom and criminal procedures.

"There needs to be much greater discussion on witness protection among lawyers, judges, human rights defenders, victims, government officials, journalists and other concerned persons in Thailand," Fernando said.

"Fair trial, due process, the rule of law and fundamental human rights all depend upon effective protection of witnesses," he said.

"These are not new issues and it is about time that they received the attention that they deserve," Fernando added, noting that reform of the police and delimiting of their excessive powers had been on the national agenda since the 1980s.

"We hope that apart from the government of Thailand, groups including the Lawyers Council of Thailand and the National Human Rights Commission will pay serious attention to the issues raised in this study," he concluded.

The report includes discussion on witness protection and Thailand's obligations under international law, and domestic law and institutions.

It highlights seven cases, including those of the wife of disappeared human rights lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit and witnesses in the court case relating to his abduction, the Buddhist monk colleague of murdered environmentalist monk Phra Supoj Suwagano, three alleged torture victims, and the witnesses to the murder of a migrant worker.  

The document also contains the domestic laws on witness protection in Thailand and Hong Kong, forms used by the Witness Protection Office in Thailand and other reference documents.

The special report is published in the June edition of the ALRC's bimonthly publication, article 2, and is available on its website: www.article2.org.

It follows earlier reports on Thailand by the ALRC published in article 2, including the widely-received April 2005 'Rule of law versus rule of lords in Thailand', and the June 2003 'Extrajudicial killings of alleged drug dealers in Thailand', which are also available online.

The report is due to be published jointly in both Thai and English, with additional documentation, in the coming months.

A summary of the report's key recommendations and observations follows.


KEY OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM "PROTECTING WITNESSES OR PERVERTING JUSTICE IN THAILAND"

Without witness protection there can be no fight against impunity. A justice system depends upon evidence being collected and brought before the courts. If fear prevails, evidence cannot be collected and perpetrators cannot be prosecuted.  

In most cases against law enforcement officers in Asia, witnesses are afraid to appear in court. Where they do appear, they deny earlier testimonies or lie blatantly in a desperate attempt to escape retribution.

Protecting witnesses is a duty of the state. The state must find the people, money and means to do this.

Despite the establishment of a witness protection agency under the Ministry of Justice in Thailand, in practice, the police control most aspects of witness protection. As the police in Thailand are the main violators of human rights, the notion that they can be responsible for protecting victims is both unreasonable and contradictory.

The new Witness Protection Office needs to be strengthened and given far greater control over management of witness protection. If it is not, its purpose will be defeated, and the prospects of justice for victims of human rights abuses in Thailand greatly diminished. It is already in danger of becoming no more than a subsidiary agency to the police force and other more powerful parts of the bureaucracy. This must not be allowed to happen.

The government of Thailand, and in particular the Minister of Justice, must do much more to make the Witness Protection Office an effective agency.

International bodies, bilateral agencies and overseas missions should all be offering support for the office. Governments with established witness protection programmes could be providing technical and material assistance.

International and local human rights organisations, university departments, scientific and professional groups, members of parliament, the National Human Rights Commission and above all, the witnesses and victims themselves, should all contribute to much-needed discussion on witness protection in Thailand.

Key recommendations:
1. The Witness Protection Act must be better defined and written to include important definitions and issues that are at present excluded.  
2. Criminal defendants must also be entitled to protection in order to meet the objectives of the law and comply with Thailand's international obligations.
3. There should be more explicit criteria for offering and giving protection than exist at present.
4. The Witness Protection Office must be given explicit power over its mandate and the work of other agencies that relates to its role and purpose.  
5. The Witness Protection Office must be given more staff and resources.   
6. Witness Protection Officers must be given rigorous training.  
7. Legal and medical professionals should also be trained on witness protection.  
8. Courtrooms must be modified to protect witnesses, including by introducing separate waiting areas, using screens to conceal vulnerable witnesses or giving evidence via live link from a third location.  
9. More criminal procedures must be introduced to protect witnesses, including express penalties for intimidating witnesses and other acts that aim to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses.
10. The public be far better informed about witness protection through high-profile publicity.


# # #

About ALRC The Asian Legal Resource Centre holds general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at local and national levels throughout Asia.