Thai Government Proposals To Restrict Civil Society Demand A Response – Including From Business

Over the past few years, more than 60 countries including India, Kenya, and Egypt among others, have enacted laws restricting freedom of assembly and civil society access to funding. Laws limiting or suppressing civil society’s operating space in Southeast Asia are not new either. 

In the Philippines, policies and laws have been increasingly used against civil society organisations (CSOs). For example, a 2018 memorandum gave the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) unchecked discretion to identify CSOs considered to be ‘at risk’, on the basis of information provided by government agencies. The memorandum also mandated authorities to compel disclosure of information from CSOs without a court order.

In Cambodia in 2015, when protests against the government on land grabbing intensified, garnering international media attention, the government enacted restrictive laws to prevent civil society activities and imposed mandatory registration on all domestic and international associations and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). This worrying trend has continued with civil society groups and other organisations being diminished or suppressed.

 

Thailand’s “Draft Act on the Operations of Not-for-Profit Organizations”

Thailand is now considering similar legislation restricting civil society. Earlier this year, the Thai Cabinet, claiming a need for transparency among NGOs, tabled the “Draft Act on the Operations of Not-for-Profit Organizations”. The draft’s vague and broad definitions could require mandatory registration for groups as varied as academic institutions, community groups, sports associations, art galleries and ad hoc disaster relief collectives and could lead to potential criminal prosecution, curtailing freedom of association and other fundamental rights.

If passed, authorities would be arbiters of what might be deemed offensive and have control over civil society activities, including monitoring of human rights abuses, migrant worker advocacy, democratisation initiatives, and more. It would allow criminalisation of individuals who might be critical of the government with little scope to legally challenge government decisions.

Section 6 of the Draft Act imposes restrictions on foreign funding and allows authorities broad discretion to determine which activities may be implemented with funds from international sources.

It also contains provisions to subject CSO offices and members to invasive surveillance and searches without judicial oversight including inspections of organisations’ offices, accessing data, and making copies of electronic communications such as private emails without prior notice or a court warrant.

 

Threats to Human Rights Organisations and Grassroots Community Groups

Thailand’s Draft Act has been criticised by UN Special Rapporteurs for not sufficiently recognising the positive role of NGOs, and their contributions to addressing and resolving challenges important to society. The UN experts expressed concern that the Draft Act does not comply with States’ obligations to “create and maintain a safe and enabling environment in which civil society and human rights defenders can operate free from hinderance and insecurity” (Human Rights Council’s resolution 27/31).

Thailand has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which affirms the right to freedom of association with others. Civil society groups must be able to freely exercise rights to association and expression, in activities such as advocacy for human rights, good governance and the conduct of public affairs, communication with international organisations, disseminating information, and submitting proposals for policy and legislative reform.

Expanding arbitrary controls over civil society groups seriously hampers their operations, prompts self-censorship, and curtails whistle-blowing on corruption. Such laws have devastating impacts on those supporting minority communities and marginalised groups, as well as work to advance corporate social responsibility and accountability. It also puts at risk those who conduct research, expose abuses, and empower vulnerable groups, including women, youth, migrant workers, stateless persons, and others.

 

Role of Civil Society in Migrant Worker Rights

In our work at IHRB to advance migrant workers’ rights, we’ve seen how NGOs and community-based organisations in Thailand reach out to populations vulnerable to forced labour and human trafficking, such as undocumented migrant workers who fear law enforcement officials. Migrant workers typically approach NGOs and others for assistance as they are not fluent in Thai. Many NGOs play an important role in access to justice for migrants by reporting labour abuses and crimes into official government mechanisms and providing legal assistance, translation, and representation to migrant workers, particularly women, experiencing human rights and labour rights abuses.

Migrants already face severe limits in their rights to organise to protect themselves because of discriminatory restrictions on their rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining. Thai Civil society groups have facilitated setting up many registered and unregistered migrant worker organisations, legal aid and other services which represent migrants in the workplace and in social, political, and cultural spaces.

Civil society groups were critical proponents of efforts to end exploitation of migrant workers on Thai fishing boats and seafood factories. They have worked tirelessly to improve working conditions and take action against employers who use deceptive, coercive and exploitative conditions across other sectors.

If enacted, the proposed law would pose serious threats to the functioning of Thailand’s vibrant civil society and have damaging impacts on donors and international NGOs working to address human trafficking and labour rights in Thailand. 

Over 40 civil society partners from Thailand and around the world, including IHRB, recently signed a joint letter to the U.S. Department of State expressing concerns about developments in Thailand. We urged the State Department and the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (TIP Office) to call on the Thai government to withdraw the draft Act and help ensure any future laws and regulations pertaining to NGOs strictly adhere to international human rights law and standards.

 

The business case for broadening civic space, respecting the rule of law, and supporting freedom of expression, is clear as is the need for collective action to defend human rights defenders.

 

We joined this call because civil society around the world plays such a vital role in the business and human rights ecosystem, including efforts to protect migrant worker rights. What should businesses themselves be considering in this context given developments threatening the work of CSOs in Thailand and elsewhere?

While relationships between civil society and business aren’t always easy, increasingly dialogue is more constructive. More business leaders recognise how crucial CSOs can be in helping shape and implement human rights due diligence strategies, policies, and procedures. Businesses benefit from CSO partnerships by gaining credibility and objectivity, expertise and reach. CSOs have knowledge and know-how in their direct and ground level operations. They are critically positioned with access to networks in governments, grassroots and community-based groups and can reach programme beneficiaries. They also bring sector knowledge, both in technical areas and in business models for identifying adverse human rights impacts and environmental harms.

Businesses have benefited from productive and sustainable relationships with CSOs, such as in IHRB’s Leadership Group for Responsible Recruitment where dialogue and action relating to migrant workers is the focus.

The business case for broadening civic space, respecting the rule of law, and supporting freedom of expression, is clear as is the need for collective action to defend human rights defenders. Responsible business cannot thrive in closed societies where cronyism and corruption prosper unchallenged. Tools such as those from The Business & Human Rights Resource Centre provide guidance for companies on appropriate actions in defending civic freedoms. 

Responsible businesses should join others in speaking up when governments suppress civil society. They can help make the case that economic and social development will be hindered when civic freedoms are threatened. A company’s leverage is an intangible but powerful asset. Businesses should use and build leverage with others in situations where they can contribute to shaping positive responses by governments.

Ultimately, the risks of inaction when confronted with threats to civil society may be more difficult to mitigate over the long-term than taking a stand for human rights and civic space in all societies.