Treatment of Burma Refugees Spotlighted Ahead of Thai Rights Review

Refugees who fled Burma wait for Thai authorities to conduct a census at Mae La refugee camp, near the Thailand-Burma border in Tak province, north of Bangkok, on July 21, 2014. (Photo: Reuters)

Seven international human rights groups on Wednesday urged the Thai government to better protect the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and victims of human trafficking in the Southeast Asian country, which has for years been dogged by criticism for its handling of these populations, including many Burmese.



     style="display:block"
     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"
     data-ad-slot="2755055637"
     data-ad-format="auto">

A joint statement from the organizations released in Bangkok on Wednesday said the Thai government “should commit to concrete actions to respect, protect, and promote the rights of asylum seekers, refugees, and survivors of human trafficking during its upcoming Universal Periodic Review [UPR] at the United Nations Human Rights Council.”

In May, Thailand will undergo its second Universal Periodic Review—a process in which the UN Human Rights Council reviews the human rights record of member states every four years. The seven groups also published a joint submission for the review on Wednesday, recommending several of these “concrete actions,” including signing the United Nations’ 1951 Refugee Convention, relating to the Status of Refugees and their rights and legal obligations of states.

Thailand’s non-signatory status is frequently cited as one reason that refugees, asylum seekers and human trafficking victims in the country are vulnerable to arbitrary arrest, extortion, torture and forced repatriations to countries where they have often fled persecution. It also lacks domestic legislation protecting the rights of these populations, Wednesday’s statement said, referring to more than 100,000 Burmese refugees who have lived in camps along the Thai-Burma border for more than two decades.



     style="display:block"
     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"
     data-ad-slot="4231788833"
     data-ad-format="auto">

“Since 2011, Thailand has effectively denied at least tens of thousands of camp-based asylum seekers and refugees from Myanmar access to asylum procedures,” the statement said.

Amy Smith, executive director of the Thailand-based human rights advocacy group Fortify Rights, said in the statement: “Thailand has an opportunity to demonstrate a commitment to human rights and improve its international reputation by ensuring asylum seekers and refugees have access to legal protections.”

“A key to minimizing the abuse, exploitation, and human trafficking of displaced populations in Thailand is recognition and protection,” she added.

Julia Mayerhofer, interim executive director of the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network, said in the statement that although the Thai government has made commitments to ending the immigration detention of children, the practice continues, another blight on the country’s human rights record.

“Children should not be detained, and we urge the Thai government to actively explore alternatives to detention in partnership with civil society,” Mayerhofer said.



     style="display:block"
     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"
     data-ad-slot="8801589231"
     data-ad-format="auto">

The rights groups also accused Thai authorities of implementing a “push-back” policy to asylum seekers who arrive by boats.

In 2015, the plight of asylum seekers from Burma’s Rohingya Muslim minority and economic migrants from Bangladesh gained international media attention after Thai authorities pushed them out to sea, putting them at risk of death.

The other five organizations signing on to the release were Asylum Access; the Human Rights Development Foundation; the Jesuit Refugee Service; the Migrant Working Group; and the People’s Empowerment Foundation.



     style="display:block"
     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"
     data-ad-slot="5708522030"
     data-ad-format="auto">

Malaysian police nab 2 Myanmar men in mass graves case

     style="display:block"

     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"

     data-ad-slot="6805308834"

     data-ad-format="auto">

Police team chief says suspects found during search for 6 other foreigners in relation to human trafficking camps along Thai border

By P Prem Kumar

KUALA LUMPUR – Malaysian police have detained two Myanmar nationals during a search for six other foreigners wanted in relation to mass graves of human trafficking victims found along the border with Thailand last year.

The chief of a special police team investigating the case told Anadolu Agency Wednesday that the two men, both in their 30s, were found at an immigration detention center as they had been deemed victims of human trafficking.

     style="display:inline-block;width:200px;height:200px"

     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"

     data-ad-slot="4793315632">

They were, however, named by other victims during a suspect identification process last week, Goh Kok Liang said by phone.

“They were kept at the immigration detention center as illegal immigrants, only until they were named as prime suspects involved in the mass graves,” he said.

“They are not the traffickers but should have plenty of knowledge on the actual criminals. I cannot say more because we are yet to record a statement and this is a highly secretive case,” he added.

Police are still searching for the other six suspects, included among whom are Myanmar and Thai nationals.

     style="display:inline-block;width:200px;height:200px"

     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"

     data-ad-slot="9714539635">

“We are getting arrest warrants for the six suspects so that once we locate them, we can remand them,” Liang said.

“They are also involved in a small way in the human trafficking syndicate.”

In May last year, 159 gravesites – some holding more than one body – were found at 28 human trafficking camps in the northern Malaysian towns of Padang Besar and Wang Kelian near the Thai border.

The discovery came after more than 30 corpses were found in jungle camps in southern Thailand.

According to Malaysian authorities, the camps on the Malay side of the Thai border had become a safe haven to temporarily house the migrants – many of them Muslim Rohingya who have been fleeing Myanmar in droves since 2012 – while Thai authorities carried out their operation on the other side.

     style="display:inline-block;width:200px;height:200px"

     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"

     data-ad-slot="3668006039">

The crackdown by Thai authorities on the camps had also scared traffickers into abandoning their human cargo at sea.

Following a tri-nation conference on the crisis May 20, Indonesia and Malaysia announced they would take those they considered to be refugees – predominantly Rohingya – in for one year before the international community finds homes for them, while those classified as economic migrants – predominantly Bangladeshi – would be repatriated.

Since the discovery, Thai police have charged at least 88 people – including a general – with human trafficking while Malaysia detained 47 people – including four police officials – as of November.

     style="display:inline-block;width:200px;height:200px"

     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3556099351069683"

     data-ad-slot="8098205636">

Why Myanmar elections are important to Thailand

BANGKOK: — THE NOVEMBER 8 election is not only important for Myanmar but also for Thailand, as political changes in this neighbouring country have always had an impact on this part of the region.

This election is important and crucial because this is the first time in 25 years that Myanmar’s two major rival political parties – the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) and the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) – will contest against each other.

Electoral competition is good because it will give Myanmar people a choice when it comes to votes, unless history repeats itself and the NLD and its leader Aung San Suu Kyi are once again not handed power if they win.

Suu Kyi was not handed power in 1990 despite winning by a landslide, a move that is seen as a repercussion of the 1988 crackdown on an uprising, that eventually brought on economic difficulties and forced millions of people to leave and seek better lives overseas. Unfortunately though, most of these asylum seekers ended up in Thailand’s refugee camps as well as factories, construction sites, fishing trawlers and other places in the Kingdom.

The 2010 election, which the NLD was prohibited from, put President Thein Sein in power and made the military-backed USDP the ruling party. Thein Sein, however, has introduced many reforms and worked on developing the political system by allowing the NLD to participate in the 2012 by-election. Now, the much-loved Nobel laureate Suu Kyi has some space in the field of politics and is able to play a role. Myanmar is also relaxing some of its laws, and many dissidents are able to return home.

However, Thein Sein has either intentionally or unintentionally not completed his reform task and might just be leaving behind a lot of time bombs to explode after the polls. Myanmar’s 2008 Constitution still prohibits people who are married to a foreigner, like Suu Kyi, to lead the country, and the military will still maintain a 25-per-cent quota in parliament.

So, what happens if the NLD wins, but the USDP insists on allying with the military and other minor parties to form the government? There is a high possibility that the NLD will defeat the USDP, but it will still have less than half the total seats in parliament required to form a government – though the two sides may come up with a deal to solve this problem.

Then there’s the peace process. Thein Sein still hasn’t completed that job, as only eight out of the initially announced 15 armed ethnic groups agreed to sign the nationwide ceasefire agreement on October 15. This means armed conflict is still continuing in many areas, notably along the border with Thailand.

People in war-torn areas will have little or no chance to cast their ballots on November 8 due to security issues. It is still unclear when the remaining groups will agree to a truce so people in conflict-ridden areas have a chance to participate in politics.

Peace in Myanmar is really important for Thailand, as hundreds of thousands of people have been waiting in border camps for more than two decades. Previous Thai governments had sent many signals to Nay Pyi Taw, seeking to settle the problem with refugees, but there has been no sign of readiness.

Unless the new election brings political stability and peace to Myanmar, the ethnic groups will keep fighting, and people will keep leaving to seek asylum elsewhere. The Myanmar-Thai borders will never be clear and safe, while economic development, special economic zone, Asean connectivity and many other projects between the two countries will never become a reality.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com

Thailand Must End Its Own Rohingya Atrocity

Shop High-Quality Music Equipment from Monoprice at Walmart.com!

This article is part of “Southeast Asia: Refugees in Crisis,” an ongoing series by The Diplomat for summer and fall 2015 featuring exclusive articles from scholars and practitioners tackling Southeast Asia’s ongoing refugee crisis. All articles in the series can be found here.

In May 2015, gruesome mass graves were unearthed in southern Thailand, revealing scores of bodies belonging to mostly Rohingya refugees who had been victimized by human traffickers. The discovery placed Thailand under a global spotlight exactly at the time when the country was seeking to be upgraded by the United States in terms of its handling of human trafficking.

$5 DVD's at Second Spin Offer Ends Nov 13 or while supplies last

Seeking to distance itself from any guilt, the ruling regime charged at least 85 persons with complicity in the scandal, including Army General Manas Kongpaen. Thailand also agreed to offer humanitarian assistance to Rohingya refugees and convened a regional conference on Rohingya and Bangladeshi migrants, which indirectly blamed Myanmar. Though Myanmar bears primary responsibility for the Rohingya crisis, Thailand’s own deplorable treatment of the Rohingya must immediately come to an end. The fact remains: the line between security officials and human traffickers in Thailand has become increasingly blurred. And Thailand has yet to be held accountable.

The Rohingya are a Muslim people of southwestern Myanmar, though neither Myanmar state authorities nor most Burmese accept their right to legally exist as citizens. The Burmese military practiced ethnic cleansing of Rohingya in 1978, 1992, and 2012-2013. Rohingya have also suffered from violent attacks by Buddhist Burmese nationalists and suffer discrimination throughout Myanmar.

Waves of Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh. But by 2006, Bangladesh was overcrowded with refugees and many Rohingya decided to go to Malaysia instead. Doing so meant transiting through Thailand. Getting through Thai territory by land or water was difficult. First, human traffickers which brought most Rohingya through Thailand, were exploitative. Second, there were numerous health challenges. Third, Thailand’s military has been waging a heightened war against a Malay-Muslim insurgency in far southern Thailand, the very area Rohingya needed to transit to reach Malaysia. Given the insurgency, the mindset of many Thai security officials was hostile toward southern Thai Muslims. It was not difficult to extend that paranoia to the Rohingya, who Thai soldiers feared might join the revolt. Thus, Thai army and navy patrols routinely detained Rohingya refugees and either deported them back to Myanmar or — less frequently — helped their boats on to Malaysia.

Then Malaysia shifted its policy, refusing to register any new Rohingya. Those transiting through Thailand now found themselves stranded there, with others continuing to arrive. In 2008, Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej proposed sending all the Rohingya to a draconian immigration facility on a deserted Thai island. Though the idea was never implemented, the policies Thailand has used are not much better.

Thailand has never signed the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 protocol. As such, the country has no specific international legal responsibility to safeguard refugees or asylum seekers. Nevertheless, Thailand has signed other human rights agreements, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which arguably cover the rights of stateless Rohingya in Thailand. But a lack of enforcement has made these instruments ineffective. This has meant that Thailand has dealt with Rohingya as it sees fit.

Turning a blind eye to any international obligations to respect refugee rights, the Thai military initiated a new “pushing out” policy in which Rohingya, after surviving the harrowing ordeal of reaching Thailand across the sea, were now held on a remote island for two days. Then boatloads of them were towed out to international waters, their engine would be cut, and they would be set adrift with little food or water. The policy — which saw hundreds of Rohingya bodies later wash up on Asian beaches — was meant to deter potential Rohingya refugees from coming to Thailand. The strategy was tasked out to Gen. Manas Kongpaen of the Thai military’s Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC). Manas himself had gained infamy for participating in the massacre of Thai Muslims at Krue-Se mosque in 2004, though a court later acquitted him of any wrongdoing.

Under the Abhisit government, the “push-back” program was suspended, and instead a program of deportation or the indefinite detention of Rohingya was implemented. Whilst not as immediately condemnable as the “push-back” program, it was only facilitated by the Thai police joining forces with human traffickers. Deportation back to Myanmar has only led to imprisonment by Myanmar authorities, escape back into Thailand, or, most commonly, the handing over of Rohingya to human traffickers who smuggle Rohingya to Malaysia. Since most Rohingya could not pay the traffickers, they were forced into human slavery to work off the debt. Such a policy financially benefited local Myanmar security officials and smugglers alike while providing a clandestine solution to the returning Rohingya deportees.

In 2013, a Reuters investigation revealed that Thai police had admitted an official Thai policy of removing Rohingya detainees using a similar alliance between Thai security forces and human traffickers. As the policy was official, it had to have been sanctioned by Thailand’s senior-most security officials on down. It commenced following the 2012-2013 Myanmar state atrocities against Rohingya, which had exacerbated the latest Rohingya exodus abroad, including to Thailand. The strategy amounted to this: Thai authorities sold Rohingya detainees to traffickers who spirited them through a series of savage jungle camps (involving regular beatings and rapes) close to Malaysia, where relatives of the Rohingya had to pay ransom for them. Those who could not be ransomed were sold as slaves, or they died. A related report revealed that the Thai Navy had beaten Rohingya boatpeople and sold them to traffickers.

This relationship between the authorities and the traffickers is officially sanctioned. In light of this, the May 2015 discovery of mass graves finds not only alleged collaboration between Thai security officials and traffickers but instead growing evidence that in several cases the soldiers and traffickers are one and the same. Thus, it appears that the trafficking of Rohingya, for certain Thai security officials, represents not only a way to rid Thailand of detainees considered a security threat but also a means of making profits from refugee misery connected to human smuggling and slavery.

While initial responses by Thailand to the 2015 Rohingya crisis appeared to be positive, Thai security policymakers must answer some probing questions. First, do the mass graves not represent the logical result of Thai security forces’ intentional policy of trafficking Rohingya? Second, how could the Thai state allow Gen. Manas Kongpaen, earlier implicated in the Krue Se massacre, to locally lead ISOC’s Rohingya policy from 2008 until 2015? Third, as the current defense minister is the same as in 2009 — Prawit Wongsuwan — why was he not earlier successful in stopping human rights violations by Thai security officials against Rohingya? Fourth, if such trafficking was an intentional Thai policy, to what extent is Thailand guilty of crimes against humanity?

With global attention focused on Myanmar’s horrendous mistreatment of Rohingya, Thailand’s own human rights violations against them — though occasionally surfacing in public — have persisted as a secret sideshow. That sideshow has perpetuated a brutal system of human trafficking and prevented the Rohingya — currently Southeast Asia’s most brutalized ethnic minority — from reaching political asylum abroad. It is high time for Thai policymakers, with sufficient support from international actors, to either allow Rohingya at least the temporary right to asylum or ethically assist in moving Rohingya on to third countries.

Refugees deserve right to choose when to return home

When I met Myanmar migrant workers and refugees during my recent visit to Thailand, many cried out: 'Don't forget us!"' said Aung San Suu Kyi as the world watched her deliver her acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize she was awarded 21 years ago.

Myanmarrefugees eagerly await the arrival of Aung San Suu Kyi atMaeLa refugeecampnearthe Thai-Myanmarborder in Tak’sThasongyang district earlier this month. Democratic reforms inside Myanmarhave sparked discussions of the return of refugees,someof whomhave been living incampsinside Thailand for decades.

"They meant: 'don't forget our plight, don't forget to do what you can to help us, don't forget we also belong to your world,"' she explained.

The timing could not have been better _ today is World Refugee Day.

Today, let us not forget them. Instead, let us remember why people left Myanmar. Let us listen to their voices as rhetoric about positive changes in Myanmar threatens to drown them out.

A refugee is anyone who has fled his or her country because of conflict and oppression to look for a refuge. The United Nations' definition aside, refugees are not just those registered in camps.

Refugees from Myanmar are all those who had to abandon their homeland to flee civil war, human rights abuses, oppression, forced displacement and discrimination.

They now live in camps on the border and in temporary hiding spots in the jungle, displaced from their homes.

Myanmar is changing and change has brought with it talk of refugees returning. However, one should pause for a moment and seriously consider whether the reasons these people fled their country have disappeared? Can they finally find a safe refuge in their homeland?

Ceasefires have been signed with some ethnic minorities, but most of the agreements are still at an early stage of negotiations and have not been implemented on the ground yet. And Myanmar's history shows that ceasefires can be broken and reforms can be reversed.

Even in those states where fighting has stopped, the areas which refugees would return to remain dangerously marked by landmines, as the Karen Human Rights Group documents in their recent report, "Uncertain Grounds".

Human rights abuses continue and are being exacerbated as the country opens up to investment.

Large-scale mining, logging and other development projects are resulting in greater militarisation, widespread land confiscation, environmental degradation, further displacement of population and the dwindling of cultivable land.

The Karen Human Rights Group has also reported the ongoing use of forced labour by security forces.

Until development in Myanmar can take place without displacing locals and causing other human rights abuses, those who are displaced will continue to seek security and stability in neighbouring countries like Thailand.

These ongoing human rights abuses have a serious impact on a community's ability to pursue livelihoods and harms the chances of a safe return for refugees.

Taking these factors into consideration, one wonders why the repatriation of refugees back to Myanmar has suddenly become such a pressing issue.

Myanmar's government has called for refugees and exiles to return. For the government, their return would be evidence that Myanmar has changed and will help boost its image both in the region and the world.

Returning refugees would also be an important source of cheap labour in resource-rich areas the government expects to turn into special economic zones, with one such zone planned in conflict-ridden Karen state.

The EU's decision to scale down funding for NGOs working at the border could also be indirectly contributing to a push for early repatriation.

It is imperative these actors recognise that premature repatriation will strain the fragile ceasefires in Myanmar.

Successful repatriation must be voluntary, with the full understanding and consent of refugees.

If I ask any refugee "Do you want to go home?", most will answer "Yes". After all, none of them chose to be a refugee.

However, if I ask "When would you like to go home?" the answer will be more nuanced.

Consultations to determine refugees' wishes can be easily manipulated. It is therefore crucial that they are undertaken in a genuine manner, allowing refugees to freely express themselves.

Before they go home, trust must be actively rebuilt. Military camps must be withdrawn from villages if people are to go back without fear. Landmines must be removed. Human rights violations must stop.

Education and health services must be made accessible and certificates attained in camps related to education, health, and various livelihoods must be recognised by the government.

Oppressive laws must be repealed, land rights must be guaranteed, citizen identity cards must be granted and official discrimination must stop.

Housing issues must be solved, otherwise repatriation will be transformed into forced relocation.

Hasty repatriation might serve donors' and the Myanmar government's short-term interests, but it will lay the ground for further, deeper instability that would make refugees even more vulnerable.

Myanmar's government hasn't turned rhetoric into concrete actions to prepare for the return of refugees. On World Refugee Day, let us not forget that refugees have a voice. They had no choice in leaving Myanmar, but they deserve the freedom to choose how and when to go home.

Khin Ohmar is the Coordinator of Burma Partnership, a regional civil society network promoting democracy and human rights.

Source : http://www.bangkokpost.com