The dispute over whether to build the Krabi plant is ongoing despite protesters having announced victory when Premier Prayut Chan-o-cha acknowledged the need to revisit the project’s Environmental and Health Impact Assessment (EHIA).

However, the government’s EHIA improvement order is short on detail, sparking concern that dispute over the energy mega-project will inevitably erupt again in the near future.

Recent remarks made by Prayut indicate he remains convinced that Thailand needs the Krabi coal-fired plant. He even groused that if the government failed to ensure power stability, who would then be held responsible for any future disruption of supply?

The power stability mentioned by Prayut is indeed crucial to the national economy and the livelihoods of Thais.

However, the government is making a big mistake in clinging to an outdated energy source as the means to achieve that goal, at a time when the international community is already moving on to cleaner and sustainable fuels.

On January 1 last year, Thailand joined the rest of the world in implementing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the international community’s effort to secure a future for our next generations by the year 2030.

The SDGs take the form of pledges to ensure development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the societies, economies and environments on which future generations will depend.

Among the 17 SDGs, two stand out: the goal for affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all, and the goal for urgent actions to combat climate change and its impacts.

Thailand’s plan for new coal-fired power plants cannot fulfil those goals. Coal is not a renewable source and thus not sustainable. Meanwhile burning coal for power emits huge amounts of the greenhouse gases responsible for climate change. Greenpeace Thailand says that a plant on the scale of the one proposed for Krabi would generate up to 18 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually.

These simple facts conflict with at least two SDGs Thailand has signed up for.

Some may argue that the SDGs are not legally binding and should be interpreted separately by each country according to its needs. That unilateral approach has a dual downside, however. In choosing to go it alone and build the Krabi plant, Thailand would be shaking the foundation of the international deal for sustainable development while at the same time boosting emissions of greenhouse gas that jeopardise not just the future of Thai children but that of kids worldwide.

The government has other and more sustainable options. It should drop its exclusive focus on coal and seek alternative ways to ensure power stability that do not gamble with our future.

AMID the increasing decline of human rights in Thailand and international organisations taking a leading role in addressing concerns, questions have arisen about the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)’s efforts and ability to address such problems.

The current commissioners were appointed in late 2015 under the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), and there are concerns on whether the agency can fulfil its role to protect people’s rights.

And with the organisation’s new regulations being written to be in line with the new constitution, critics have spoken about the role the NHRC should be playing in society.

Sunai Phasuk, a senior researcher on Thailand for Human Rights Watch Asia (HRW), said human rights in Thailand were continuously deteriorating. The ruling junta, Sunai said, showed no concrete signs of wanting to prepare the country for a transition back to democratic rule, as it had promised.

“Basic rights such as freedom of expression are highly limited,” Sunai said. “HRW has no hope that the country is going in the direction planned in the ‘road map’. What we see now is the road map to tightening the power grip of the military regime.”

Although the rights commission was set up to deal with the country’s rights issues, the advocate said the current commission functions under harsh conditions.

Sunai believes that commissioners have very little experience in the field, and this has resulted in a weak agency.

But he noted that under the rule of the NCPO, the commission can hardly express its stance on human rights

Worse still, Sunai said, was the fact that the commission could be reduced to serve as a “mouthpiece” of the current regime.

“In a recent opinion gathering of the Constitution Drafting Commission [CDC] on the organic law of the NHRC, its chairman Meechai Ruchupan said very clearly that the commission should defend [the country] against international criticism regarding rights issues,” he said. “Instead of being a mechanism in the checks and balance system and holding rights violators accountable, the NHRC has to defend the crimes.”

Sunai proposed that the new organic law should adopt a new approach to overturn the current trend.

He said the recruitment of rights commissioners had to be changed. Civil society should be included in the selection process to ensure the right people were recruited to the commission rather than people being picked by officials whose knowledge was questionable.

The commission should also have the authority to take cases to court, he said.

“After finding cases of human rights violations, the NHRC should be able to present them to prosecutors. It would make the commission a lot more influential.”

Angkhana Neelapaijit, a long-time rights fighter and a commissioner at the current NHRC, also believes the body should be able to take cases to court.

“I strongly agree that we should be able to do that,” she said. “There have been too many times when people have refrained from taking such action.

“Sometimes it’s about time and money – people just don’t want to waste it by filing a suit. Other times, people are afraid to clash with powerful people or with the state.”

Angkhana said the NHRC actually has the constitutional right to take cases to court but under the current organic law there were no clear clauses related to that.

“In the law currently in effect, there is no stipulations about who can be our lawyers or about how we should have a legal department within the commission,” Angkhana said. “So, despite the permission given [to the NHRC] by the 2007 charter, we don’t have a chance to exercise the power to take legal action on behalf of victims of a violation.”

In the current round of writing the new organic law to go with the new constitution, Angkhana said she had tried to raise this issue but most commission members did not support it and as a result it was not included in the draft law submitted to the CDC.

Nirun Pitakwatchara, a rights advocate and former commissioner at the agency, saw the matter differently. Nirun believes that the commission already has sufficient power, but the problem lies in practical application of that power and in a lack of awareness.

“According to the 1997 and 2007 charters, the commission has three main roles, which are scrutinising, reporting to authorities, and taking legal action,” Nirun said. “But |the failure comes because other organisations don’t understand our role and sometimes do not give us cooperation.”

Nirun also noted that the country has a national human rights plan that all government organisations are bound to. However, he said that very few people were aware of this plan and often people and state organisations neglected to take into consideration human rights when doing their job.

“So, everything comes down to poor implementation of the plan,” he said.

“We have plans, but then people do not follow them. So, the primary problem we have is people do not |get the rule of law and so sometimes enforce laws without consideration of human rights principles.”

Key points 

– Human rights remain a pressing issue in Thailand and has been deteriorating since the 2014 coup as violations, especially against freedom of expression, is rampant.

– The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) needs improvement in some area to ensure its ability to fulfil its task in protecting people’s rights.

– The commission should be made up of those who truly are experienced in the field.

– The commission should be able to exercise its power to take legal action against those violating human rights on behalf of the victims.

– The failure of the NHRC also lies in the poor understanding of human rights principles among the government and governmental organisations.

Some 27 Thai non-government groups and the Dawei Development Association (DDA), a communal rights group in Myanmar, issued statements yesterday urging the Thai and Myanmar governments, plus Thai companies to follow the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and international rights treaties.

The groups said rising investment by Thai companies in neighbouring states such as Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia had stirred growing concerns over a lack of accountability in regard to human rights and environmental impacts.

The organisations urged the Thai government to follow recommendations of a Cabinet resolution from May 16 last year, which established mechanisms to try to ensure that the private sector respects the fundamental rights of local communities.

“We call on the Thai government to comply with recommendations and set up such a mechanism, together with other measures to ensure full adherence to the three pillars of the [UN] guiding principles, and obligations of the government and Thai state agencies to protect and respect human rights and remedy human rights abuses in trans-boundary investment,” the statement read.

Many Thai investors have caused social and environmental damage to local areas, the statement read – at the Dawei Special Economic Zone in Myanmar; the Xayaburi Dam and the Hongsa coal-fired power plant in Laos; and sugar plantations in Koh Kong and Oddar Meanchey in Cambodia.

The Dawei network also issued a statement echoing similar sentiments and urging the Myanmar government to ensure that foreign companies follow Myanmar’s environmental laws and include public participation at every stage of projects.

Thant Zin, head of the DDA, said at least nine development projects with Thai investors had created serious consequences for local communities in Dawei district in Tanintharyi region.

“After implementing a market economy system in Myanmar, foreign investment has been increasing rapidly, as the government believes that it will lead to social and economic development,” Thant Zin said.

“However, these development projects instead lead to land-loss problems, impacts on livelihoods and environmental problems for the local people in the areas near these development projects.”

He said companies had to take responsibility for problems they caused, adding that both the Thai and Myanmar governments had to establish laws and regulations to control investors.

Thai National Human Rights Commissioner Tuenjai Deetes said she agreed with the suggestions to control investors through legislation.

“Thailand has committed to the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which obligates enterprises to respect human rights and prevent environmental damage in areas in which they operate,” Tuenjai said.

She said the Thai National Human Rights Commission had investigated cases involving Thai companies that had allegedly conducted improper operations in Dawei and violated the human rights of local people, as well as causing environmental problems related to the Heinda tin mine and a land dispute at the Dawei Special Economic Zone.

“We will conduct reports and seek solutions from relevant agencies and Thai companies on these issues soon,” she said.

Earlier this month, pictures of large amounts of garbage floating in the sea spread on social networks and sparked public concern about a chronic but often forgotten problem affecting Thai marine resources. Government authorities and the environmental group Greenpeace agree that both public and private measures must be implemented to counter this problem.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia campaign director Tara Buakamsri said the garbage problem was very serious and urged sustainable solutions that start at the individual level.

“I myself did not really realise how serious this problem was until I saw the picture of floating piles of garbage,” Tara said. “I understand that this is only a fragment of the garbage that ends up in the sea, as a study has found that one out of every 100 pieces of garbage will be washed into the sea.”

He said the recent discovery of piles of garbage floating off Chumphon and Prachuap Khiri Khan were just the tip of the iceberg, as a large amount of garbage in the sea was hidden from the view – below the water surface.

“It is obvious that most garbage in the sea comes from garbage on land, washed into rivers and ending up in the sea. We are all generating trash every day, so if we want to solve this problem, we have to fix it through our behaviour,” he said.

“One thing that we can do is to reduce the usage of single-use plastic, and recycle and reuse our garbage. These are not easy things to do, so the authorities should also come up with policies and regulations to help reduce the amount of garbage.”

State policies that could promote a reduction in the amount of garbage, he said, were surcharges for plastic bags at supermarkets and free garbage collection for households that recycle their waste.

“Plastic garbage is the most common trash in the sea and Thailand still does not have a strong policy to control the usage of plastic compared to other countries,” Tara said.

According to a study published in Science magazine, Thailand ranked sixth on a list of the largest producers of garbage that ends up in the sea in 2010, with a total of 1 million tonnes of plastic garbage per year.

The scale of rubbish from Thailand that ends up in the ocean is huge, considering findings two years ago by Ocean Conservancy that about 8 million tonnes of plastic trash end up in the seas around the world every year.

The study by Ocean Conservancy found that more than 150 million tonnes of plastic trash had ended up in the world’s oceans since 1950.

In terms of state policy, Natural Resources and Environment Ministry secretary-general Wijarn Simachaya said short-term solutions include a ministry ban on plastic bags and containers in some marine national parks.

The ministry plans longer-term measures to control the use of plastic in seaside provinces in the near future.

“We are looking at possible changes to laws, for instance the Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality Act – to control the use of plastic in seaside provinces via measures like collecting fees for plastic bags or extra taxes on goods that cause pollution,” Wijarn said.

“However, we still have not reached a conclusion and there will be more debate about this issue before we can impose a new policy.”

Tara said garbage in the sea was a problem the public should not ignore because plastic biodegrades very slowly, but will break into small pieces that include many toxins that fish will consume. And they will end up being eaten by human beings.

“Cleaning up the ocean is very hard and expensive work and we should focus on solving this problem by changing our behaviour,” he said.

Thongchai Saengprathum, secretary of the Khao Yai Foundation, said the |officials concerned should face legal action for |negligence during the February 11 incident.

The bear woke up aboard the helicopter while it was being flown into the national park in Prachin Buri. It had not been put inside a cage but was instead covered by a net and put on board. As the helicopter flew over forest land, the animal panicked and fell to its death.

The young bear, which weighed about 90 kilograms, had been found injured in November last year and officials took it for rehabilitation until it fully recovered.

Thongchai said the accident could have been avoided, as Khao Yai National Park had been a role model for other parks in its handling of rescued wild animals.

He said the park |officials made a wrong decision to fly the bear in a helicopter because other wild animals were earlier transported in trucks to be released back to nature.

Thongchai also said the plan to release the bear at Khao Laem, which is deep in the forest and far from the spot near the forest border where it was found and rescued, was flawed.

He said Asian black bears are social animals that need to stay with their packs. Flying the bear to a new location could also see it killed by local bears, Thongchai added.

The activist said officials were also careless in calculating the weight of the bear to give the correct dose of tranquilliser to prevent it from waking up during the operation. It should also have been put it a cage, he said.

In a statement issued yesterday, Mahidol University denounced the lecturers for “damaging the university’s reputation” by using its name in their original statement. “Such action is not academic freedom,” the university statement read. “We urge the issuers to stop immediately.”

Mahidol’s statement added that it always stood by the principle that everyone must respect the law.

The university’s reaction came after the IHRP late on Saturday night issued a statement calling for the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) to stop using absolute powers granted by Article 44 of the interim charter.

The article allows Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha, as NCPO head, to issue decrees that are not subject to any checks-or-balances measures, with more than 130 orders having been enacted since the NCPO took power in 2014.

“Using the article [to solve problems] is using dictatorial power against the rule of law, with a lack of checks and balances, and it is illegitimate,” the statement said. “Article 44 is used too often and without a sense of urgency. In many cases, the government and authorities are able to enforce [the same measures] by normal laws.”

The IHRP cited nine orders issued this month, including one establishing the controversial Dhammakaya Temple and surroundings areas as a “controlled area” during a search for former abbot Phra Dhammachayo.

The institute’s statement was released hours after a man hanged himself from a 100-metre-high radio antenna in an apparent protest against the ongoing siege at the controversial Dhammakaya Temple.

Before killing himself, the man called on the government to revoke the Article 44 order.

However, the IHRP’s former director and present adviser Gothom Arya told The Nation that the IHRP had not raised the issue of Article 44 related to any particular case.

“We cited those nine orders only to provide a picture of how often the NCPO has enacted this absolute power over the past couple of months,” said Gothom, who has a record of criticising the junta.

As an adviser, Gothom said he did not have knowledge of what actions the IHRP would take next, but added that a further statement was unlikely. The IHRP’s current director, Eakpant Pindavanija, said he could not comment on the matter.

Meanwhile, Mahidol’s statement was followed by online questions why the IHRP, which is an institute belonging to the university, should not be allowed to use Mahidol’s name when taking action.

“Don’t be indecisive,” said netizen activist Arthit Suruyawongkul on Facebook. “When they [the IHRP] make contributions, you [Mahidol University] claim them as yours. But when they don’t act by your accord, you simply cut them out, saying they falsely used your name.”

PRIME Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha expressed his condolences yesterday over the death of a 64-year-old man who hanged himself near Dhammakaya Temple. But the PM insisted that Article 44 needed to be used to maintain control at the temple – as the task was “beyond the power” of ordinary laws.

“I’m saddened by the death but the order is necessary to curb bad people who can’t be dealt with via normal laws. Many may see the order as not being effective. Or maybe that the NCPO (National Council for Peace and Order) is not trustworthy or unable to control the situation,” Prayut said.

His comments came after Anawat Thanacharernnut hung himself from a high-rise radio antenna in an apparent protest against the siege at the controversial temple.

Many expressed deep sorrow over the death of Anawat on Saturday. The man climbed up the tower and threatened to commit suicide if the order relating to the temple wasn’t revoked by 9pm.

Justice Minister Suwaphan Tanyuvardhana also sent his condolences to the family of Anawat.

“No one likes to see this tragic outcome. The government has done the most to avoid violence and a loss of lives so the Dhammakaya Temple should review its position and cooperate with authorities to ensure the justice process is working,” he said.

The ongoing siege at the temple in Pathum Thani stems from criminal embezzlement cases involving five suspects, three of whom have been prosecuted while two suspects remain at large, Suwaphan said. One of the two was Dhammachayo, the former abbot, who has been charged with receiving huge sums from the former head of Klongchan Credit Union Cooperative.

More than 50,000 credit union customers were among the victims of the financial crime, many of them former civil servants and salary earners who lost their life savings.

Suwaphan said the case had hurt the image of Thai savings institutions and financial cooperatives.

The government needed to enforce the law and bring all suspects to justice, the minister said, adding that the accused suspects should surrender and defend their innocence in court rather than resorting to other means.

Government Spokesman Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd said Prayut had also sent his condolences to the family of Annawat, but the government wanted all parties concerned, especially supporters of Dhammakaya Temple, to exercise caution to avoid further abuses of religion leading to misunderstanding.

Sansern also said authorities needed to enforce the law and suspects should enter the justice process instead trying to evade the authorities.

Prayut, in his capacity as head of the National Council for Peace and Order, issued an order removing Panom Sornsilp as director of the National Office of Buddhism while naming Pol Colonel Pongporn Bharmsaneh as the new chief and tasking him with tackling issues facing the faith.

To minimise impacts regarding the ongoing siege at the temple, Suwaphan said a panel of nine monks from Pathum Thani province would work with authorities to help to look after the well-being of Dhammakaya monks and ensure all monks at the temple had enough food since authorities had no intention of preventing the monks from taking alms from Buddhists.

Earlier yesterday, monks and other supporters inside the sprawling temple compound put up a big banner on a high-rise tower saying “We need food”.

Suwaphan said authorities would harshly deal with anyone obstructing the justice process and attempting to incite the public to protest and block officials from doing their duty.

Phra Sanidwong, communication director at Dhammakaya, said the government needed to exercise the rule of law in its handling of this controversial case while suggesting that Annawat, who hanged himself from the radio antenna near the temple’s compound, was not affiliated with the temple.

Results of an autopsy are expected in one to two weeks.

Rattanun, 31, Annawat’s son, yesterday went to the Police Hospital to pick up his father’s body but declined to talk to reporters. Annawat had lived at the KC Garden housing estate in Pathum Thani province. His former neighbour said he was an ex-civil servant and a religious person who often made merit.

The Department of Special Investigation has also sent condolences to Annawat’s family while saying officials had been cautious in exercising their power so as to prevent injuries and loss of life.

In a statement issued Sunday, Mahidol University denounced the lecturers for “damaging the university’s reputation” by using its name in their original statement. “Such action is not academic freedom,” the university statement read. “We urge the issuers to stop immediately.”

Mahidol’s statement added that it always stood by the principle that everyone must respect the law.

The university’s reaction came after the IHRP late on Saturday night issued a statement calling for the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) to stop using absolute powers granted by Article 44 of the interim charter.

The article allows Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha, as NCPO head, to issue decrees that are not subject to any checks-or-balances measures, with more than 130 orders having been enacted since the NCPO took power in 2014.

“Using the article [to solve problems] is using dictatorial power against the rule of law, with a lack of checks and balances, and it is illegitimate,” the statement said. “Article 44 is used too often and without a sense of urgency. In many cases, the government and authorities are able to enforce [the same measures] by normal laws.”

The IHRP cited nine orders issued this month, including one establishing the controversial Dhammakaya Temple and surroundings areas as a “controlled area”.

The institute’s statement was released hours after a man hanged himself from a 100-metre-high radio antenna in an apparent protest against the ongoing siege at the controversial Dhammakaya Temple.

Before killing himself, the man called on the government to revoke the Article 44 order.

However, the IHRP’s former director and present adviser Gothom Arya told The Nation that the IHRP had not raised the issue of Article 44 related to any particular case.

“We cited those nine orders only to provide a picture of how often the NCPO has enacted this absolute power over the past couple of months,” said Gothom, who has a record of criticising the junta.

As an adviser, Gothom said he did not have knowledge of what actions the IHRP would take next, but added that a further statement was unlikely.

The IHRP’s current director, Eakpant Pindavanija, said he could not comment on the matter.

Meanwhile, Mahidol’s statement was followed by online questions why the IHRP, which is an institute belonging to the university, should not be allowed to use Mahidol’s name when taking action.

“Don’t be indecisive,” said netizen activist Arthit Suruyawongkul on Facebook. “When they [the IHRP] make contributions, you [Mahidol University] claim them as yours. But when they don’t act by your accord, you simply cut them out, saying they falsely used your name.”