Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul, currently serving a 13-year sentence for lese majeste, has written to Amnesty International pleading for assistance. His full letter, and some reflections on the broader context, are available at Andrew Spooner’s website. A key extract from the letter reads:
So we now hope that Amnesty International, an organisation that is widely respected because of its outstanding human rights work and which has a huge global network, including in Thailand, would be able to help us out.
So far, we have never been contacted by or received any attention from Amnesty International in Thailand at all. We are deeply sad about this but we still hope that one day, Amnesty International, might start to pay attention to us.
At the moment, Thailand has a democratically elected government and its policy is to create reconciliation in Thailand, a country that has been deeply divided since the 2006 coup. Many organizations in Thailand and overseas have been working together to create reconciliation as soon as possible.
We, therefore, hope that Amnesty International will be part of this reconciliation process in Thailand by doing everything it can to ensure that the basic rights of incarcerated political prisoners meet international standards. We will be very happy if Amnesty International does this.
That first paragraph sounds so sarcastic!
He says: “… right to be treated with respect and dignity as prisoners of conscience and political prisoners, which are guaranteed by international laws”
What is he referring to? What does international law say about prisoners of conscience and political prisoners?
Among the 55 prisoners he refers to, are there any that committed or incited acts of violence? He says: “All of them have been prosecuted because they exercised their civil and political rights to demand democracy as citizens of their country“. I don’t like the way he keeps saying ‘reconciliation’ – to me that sounds like giving rioters and thugs (many/most of whom have not been charged) clean slates – he should be focusing on the abominable treatment of LM prisoners.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Fantastic! I hope there’s a response…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Andrew,
The image used in your article is my photo, and this is a copyright violation by asiancorrspondent.com and you.
It has been my policy all along that i let my photos be used for free in non-profit websites and publications, but expect payment in profit oriented websites and publications. I expect though from both to be asked for permission (which i usually grant, and especially in this case of Thanthawut, a prisoner for whose plight i have particular sympathy). I also demand proper attribution of my images.
You have neither asked for permission, paid me, or credited the image. Sort this out, please.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
This is an important letter to AI, and I hope both the Thailand chapter and the international office respond. I am sharing the posting on my facebook page to spread the message, and suggest that others do the same.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
OK, sorted it with out with asiancorrespondent.com – no problems anymore.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
1. Was Uncle SMS considered a Prisoner of Conscience (POC) or political prisoner by AI?
NO.
This is a fact. Anybody can check with AI.
Apparently, no AI rep ever visited him or other victims of 112 because AI do not recognise them as POC or political prisoners.
The only victim of 112 that AI recognised is the famous critic Sulak Sivaraksa who was charged under Thaksin government. This is the only case that AI always riased for many years as evidence of AI attention to the 112 problem.
2. In a recent statement, AI criticise the Yingluck government for rejecting the call to amend Article 112 law. For many years that many people had called the Democrat government for the amendment of the law, and the Democrat government rejected, AI was silent throughout those years.
This is not to defend the Yingluck government, but to question the impartiality of AI.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I have never been impressed with Amnesty International. Too many lawyers. They would be more honest to rename themselves Retribution International.
As for their behaviour in Thailand, it comes as no surprise that they have joined the side of the big battalions. I hope Thanthawut’s letter shames them into taking a good look at themselves, especially at their connections to Thailand’s corrupt legal/judicial system.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Nick
Apologies – these things happen as I’m sure you know and there was certainly no intent to “steal” your photos or “breach” your copyright.
The only point of posting the letter was to highlight an important matter relating to human rights – nothing more, nothing less.
Please rest assured that nobody connected to this story had any intention to “steal” your work and the main focus was to smuggle this letter out, get it to the UK and then get it to Amnesty and published. Furthermore, Thanthawut – someone for whom I have a huge amount of respect – has also shown great personal courage in signing the letter on behalf of all the prisoners.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
andrew,
no problem, we got it sorted anyhow
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
OK, it has been over three weeks. Any response yet from Amnesty International?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Arthurson: They might still be scratching their heads wondering which international laws applying to prisoners of conscience and political prisoners they’re supposed to be referencing. They might also be trying to ascertain what proportion of the 55 prisoners were accused/convicted of rioting and thuggery. AI doesn’t support prisoners who espouse violence.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Given AI’s vast experience of dealing with political prisoners and its experience in Thailand, wouldn’t you consider that they would know about international law and which prisoners of conscience should be in their arena? After all, most of these prisoners have been in jail for more than 2 years, so surely the AI office in Bangkok is not that incompetent? Perhaps they are. That they haven’t visited them may be the reason, and that seemed one of the points of the letter.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Ralph, I’ll refer you to comment #1, doubtless they know about international law hence they’re still scratching their heads re: “… right to be treated with respect and dignity as prisoners of conscience and political prisoners, which are guaranteed by international laws“. Third time now, 26 red thumbs, but people only seem to want to obfuscate. Are you saying AI should have visited all of the 55? Why?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0