The following is based on a communication written by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts to the Government of Thailand on 8 January 2024. The communication remained confidential for 60 days before being made public, giving the Government time to reply. The Government acknowledged receipt of the communication on 9 January 2024 and responded on 22 April 2024. Regrettably, the Government did not address the questions and concerns expressed in the communication.
This is a shorter version of the original communication.
BACKGROUND
Topic: Ms. Anna Annanon, a young woman human rights defender, who has been subject to surveillance and harassment in Thailand, because of her activism.
Since 2020, Ms. Anna Annanon has been advocating for the right to education and children’s rights, individually and with a group named Bad Student. Since 2023, Ms. Annanon has been part of UNICEF young people advisory board in a Violence Against Children Group. She is also part of a children and youth assembly organized by the Department of Children and Youth, Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS). Furthermore, this year she participated in international high-level events in relation to 25th anniversary of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, and the 75th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.
ALLEGATIONS
On 15 April 2022 at 11:21am, Ms. Annanon and other two student activists were about to have lunch in a restaurant on Ratchadamnoen road in Bangkok, when [redacted] and officers from the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS) and the Ministry of Education asked them to leave. As a royal motorcade was about to take place and a protest against the monarchy was planned later that day, Ms. Annanon was told that she would commit illegal actions by participating in the protests and was in need of protection due to being a minor. The officers further claimed that they were authorized to intervene under the Child Protection Act B.E.2546 (section 30), which states the following: “For the benefit of implementation in pursuance of this Act, a competent official according to chapters 3 and 4, shall have the authority and duties as follows: […] 2) To question a child when there is reason to suspect that the child is in need of welfare assistance or safety protection. If necessary, in order that welfare assistance and protection of safety may be better provided or arranged, the child may be brought to the office of the competent official to obtain information about the child and his family, including any person the child is living with. In this regard, such action must be taken without undue delay, but, in any case, the child may not be detained for more than 12 hours. When such a period of time has elapsed, the provisions under clause (6) shall apply.”
Since Ms. Annanon had no intention to participate in the protest, she refused to leave. She was then removed from the restaurant by four female police officers who lifted her into a Royal Thai Police van. The arrest was observed by officers from the MSDHS and the Ministry of Education. In the police van, Ms. Annanon was told that she had been arrested under the Child Protection Act, and that she would be taken to the MSDHS’s office.
In the police van, Ms. Annanon was accompanied by officers from MSDHS and the Ministry of Education. Once they reached the aforementioned office, the authorities decided to transfer her to the Narcotic Suppression Bureau citing that they could not conduct an inquiry in the MSDHS’s office due to the protests taking place in front of the building.
At around 1.00 p.m. on the same day, Ms. Annanon reached the Narcotic Suppression Bureau and an officer from the Ministry of Education contacted Ms. Annanon’s parents about the arrest. The officers from MSDHS and the Ministry of Education conducted an inquiry in the presence of Ms. Annanon’s parents and concluded that she did not pose a risk of committing illegal actions and did not need protection.
Around 7.00 p.m., as the police report was completed, Ms. Annanon was allowed to go back home with her parents. No charges were pressed against her.
On the same day, 15 April 2022, Ms. Annanon filed a complaint with the police officers at Chanasongkram Police Station alleging that she had been arrested arbitrarily. Nevertheless, the case was closed without further investigation.
On 18 April 2022, Ms. Annanon and civil society organisations working on children’s rights submitted a complaint regarding the 15 April incident to MSDHS, calling for measures to ensure the protection of children’s rights. One year later, on 21 March 2023, Ms. Annanon was informed by the Ministry that they could not find the complaint and that she should follow up with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRCT). Ms. Annanon resubmitted the complaint in March 2023 and received a formal reply from the Ministry on 6 September 2023, stating that the Ministry had issued guidelines for competent officials in treating children in accordance with the recommendations made by the NHRCT but could not proceed further regarding the competent official’s arrest of Ms. Annanon as there was no conclusion by the court whether the act was unlawful or not.
Following the April incident, Ms. Annanon has been allegedly subject to surveillance and harassment. In early May 2022, the authorities called Ms. Annanon’s parents and grandparents multiple times to inquire about her activities or any participation in public gatherings or protests. On 10 May 2022, Ms. Annanon was followed by a police officer to her residence. On 12 May, Ms. Annanon advocated with the then-Minister of Education, Trinuch Thienthong, at the Ministry of Education about education and children’s rights and was followed by women police officers from the Metropolitan Police Bureau inside of the premises. On 14 and 15 May, a police officer was waiting for her at her residence and accompanied her until her intended destination.
In November 2022, as her legal guardian, Ms. Annanon’s father filed a criminal case against [redacted] from Chanasonhkram police station at Bangkok South Criminal Court, Thailand, alleging that [redacted] had violated Section 310 (illegal detention), 318 (takes away a minor over fifteen but not yet eighteen), and 393 (insult) of Thailand’s Criminal Code following the April incident. Nevertheless, the court dismissed the complaint citing that there was a lack of evidence to prove that [redacted] had a direct command over the instruction to arrest Ms. Annanon at the office of MSDHS and Narcotics Suppression Bureau. On 12 September 2023, Mr. Annanon appealed the case to the Court of Appeal. The case is still under consideration.
On 9 August 2023, Ms. Annanon was officially informed by the NHRCT that her case was selected by the Commissioners to be officially investigated and the NHRCT found that the operation which was collectively led by police officers from the Chanasongkram police station, Metropolitan Police, and competent officers from MSDHS and the Ministry of Education was not in compliance with the Child Protection Act B.E.2546 (2003), the Ministerial Regulations Specifies Childs at Risk of Wrongdoing B.E.2549 (2006), and the Regulation of the National Child Protection Committee on Methods for Protecting the Welfare of Childs at Risk of Wrongdoing B.E.2553 (2010). The NHRCT further concluded that the operation was conducted in a disproportionate and arbitrary manner, resulting in a violation of Ms. Annanon’s rights to personal integrity and associated rights under section 28 of Thailand’s Constitution Law and article 37 (b) of The Convention on the Rights of the Child. However, Ms. Annanon had never been informed either of her right to participate in the investigation process conducted by the NHRCT or her right to effective and adequate remedies from any government agency. On 9 September 2023, Ms. Annanon submitted a document to the Bangkok Governor and the President of the Child Protection Committee of Bangkok to investigate on the 15 April 2022 incident. Up to this date, no response has been provided.
CONCERNS
We are concerned by the apparent state surveillance that the child human rights defender Ms. Annanon has been facing since April 2022. Should these allegations be confirmed, the surveillance and harassment of a child human rights defender under the age of eighteen at the time of the allegations for exercising her right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, would be incompatible with international human rights law, specifically, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in its articles 19, 21 and 22, the Convention on the Rights of Child in its articles 13, 15 and 16, and the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in its articles 1, 2 and 5.
We are concerned that the above allegations may constitute acts of intimidation and retaliation for her legitimate work as a child human rights defender.
