Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2019, publiée 109ème session CIT (2021)

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Thaïlande (Ratification: 1969)

Autre commentaire sur C105

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to section 112 of the Criminal Code under which whoever defames, insults or threatens the king, the queen, the heir apparent or the regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to 15 years, as well as sections 14 and 15 of the Computer Crimes Act of 2007 that prohibit the use of a computer to commit an offence under the provisions of the Criminal Code concerning national security (including section 112 of the Criminal Code), with a possible sanction of five years’ imprisonment. The Committee noted that under the Penitentiary Act BE 2479 (1936), penalties of imprisonment involve an obligation to perform prison labour. The Committee observed that in its 2017 Concluding observations the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) was concerned that criticism and dissension regarding the royal family is punishable with a sentence of three to 15 years’ imprisonment, about reports of a sharp increase in the number of people detained and prosecuted for the crime of lèse-majesté since the military coup and about extreme sentencing practices, which resulted in dozens of years of imprisonment in some cases (CCPR/C/THA/CO/2, paragraph 37). The HRC was also concerned about reports of the severe and arbitrary restrictions imposed on the right to freedom of opinion and expression in the state party’s legislation, including in the Criminal Code and the Computer Crimes Act. The HRC further expressed concern about criminal proceedings, especially criminal defamation charges, brought against human rights defenders, activists, journalists and other individuals under the above-mentioned legislation, and about reports of the suppression of debate and campaigning, and criminal charges against individuals during the run-up to the constitutional referendum in 2016. The Committee noted with deep concern that the penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour, contained in the Penitentiary Act of 1936, were retained under the 2017 amendments to the same Act. The Committee therefore urged the Government to take all necessary measures, in both law and practice, to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views or views opposed to the established system.

The Committee notes the explanation provided by the Government in its report that the lèse-majesté offence, which relates to the security of the Kingdom under section 112 of the Criminal Code, is intended to protect the king, the queen, the heir apparent and the regent from defamation, insults or threats in the same way as defamation law for citizen. These provisions maintain stability and order without any intention to impede freedom of expression. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the provisions under section 112 of the Criminal Code and sections 14 and 15 of the Computer Crimes Act shall be considered as a criminal offence only if they are constituted by the following elements namely: (i) an offender has committed an act defaming, insulting or threatening; (ii) the act is committed against the king, the queen, the heir apparent or the regent; and (iii) the act is intentional. The Government further refers to the amendments made in 2017 to sections 14 and 15 of the Computer Crime Act of 2007. According to these amendments, section 14 makes it an offence to dishonestly or fraudulently convey a distorted or fake or false data through the computer system which may cause damage to the people, or to the national security, public safety, national economic security or infrastructure, or an offence relating to terrorism, or data involving obscene materials that the general public may have access. This offence shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding five years or a fine. According to section 15, any service provider who cooperates or consents to the offences committed under section 14 shall be liable to the same penalty. The Government states that if the service provider complies with the notification issued by the Minister prescribing the suspension on dissemination of that particular data and removal of that data from the computer system, they shall not be liable to any punishment.

The Committee finally notes the Government’s information that the Corrections Act BE 2560 (2017) which repeals the Penitentiary Act of 1936, does not have any provision that imposes compulsory labour for prison sentences. According to the Government’s report, the Department of Corrections has measures to ensure that prisoners can choose to work voluntarily. However, the Committee notes that section 48 of the Corrections Act of 2017 requires prisoners to comply with the orders of prison officials to work in certain prison functions relevant to the prisoner’s physical and mental aptitude, gender and status as well as the desire to improve inmates’ behaviour and the security and specific characteristics of a prison.

The Committee recalls that restriction on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, have a bearing on the application of the Convention if such restrictions are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory prison labour. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that legal guarantees of the rights to freedom of thought and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, as well as freedom from arbitrary arrest, constitute an important safeguard against the imposition of compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views, or as a means of political coercion or education (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 302). The Committee therefore once again urges the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, may be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views opposed to the established system, both in law and in practice. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that section 112 of the Criminal Code is amended, by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to acts of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing or replacing sanctions involving compulsory labour with other kinds of sanctions (e.g. fines) in order to ensure that no form of compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on persons who, without using or advocating violence, express certain political views or oppositions to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 14 and 15 of the Computer Crimes Act 2007, including court decisions issued under these sections, indicating in particular the facts that gave rise to the convictions and the sanctions applied.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.