Thai Prime Minister Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha says he will lift martial law in the country, but replace with it a new order securing him sweeping powers.
Critics have expressed alarm at the move, with Human Rights Watch’s Asia director Brad Adams saying it marked the country’s “deepening descent into dictatorship.”
Martial law was imposed shortly before Thailand’s military seized power last May, ousting the democratically-elected government of Yingluck Shinawatra after months of sometimes violent street protests.
Since then, the ruling military junta which is called National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) has curbed civil liberties, muzzled the media and rounded up opponents.
Rights group Amnesty International says that since May, hundreds of people have been arbitrarily held and dozens brought before military courts for engaging in peaceful political gatherings or expression.
King’s permission sought
Prayuth announced the plan to implement the new security order following a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, saying the government was awaiting the permission of the King to proceed.
A statement from Thailand’s government said Article 44 of the interim constitution would be invoked “with an aim to deploy military officers in tasks related to maintenance of national order.”
Article 44 states, in wide-ranging terms, that when the head of the military junta believes it is necessary in the name of public harmony or to prevent the undermining of national security, then the leader has the power to act as deemed necessary.
Human Rights Watch said the arrangement would allow Prayuth “to issue orders without administrative, legislative, or judicial oversight or accountability.”
“Thailand’s friends abroad should not be fooled by this obvious sleight of hand by the junta leader to replace martial law with a constitutional provision that effectively provides unlimited and unaccountable powers,” Adams said in a statement.
Sunai Phasuk, Human Rights Watch’s senior researcher on Thailand, said the move would see Prayuth “become a strongman with ultimate power in his hands to wield as he wishes.”
“This is a dangerous indication that the junta is not going to keep its promise to restore democracy and respect for human rights in Thailand,” he said.
Rupert Abbott, deputy director for Asia Pacific at Amnesty International, said that lifting martial law would not improve human rights “if it is replaced with another repressive law.”
“Instead, Thailand should reinstate the rule of law and constitutional protections for human rights which the 2014 coup steamrolled over,” he said in a statement.
‘Absurd’ development
Thai political scholar and coup opponent Pavin Chachavalpongpun told CNN he found the move “absurd.”
“Everyone knows in Thailand they had to abolish the martial law because of international pressure,” he said.
“But Article 44 is a lot worse than the martial law because it gives total power to the NCPO.”
The move was also troubling as it appeared to be open-ended measure, he said.
The junta was “trying to reinvent itself, but the substance is still there,” he said. “It’s pouring the same wine into a new bottle.”
Under Article 44, said Sunai, “those opposing military rule will still be sent to military courts, which lack independence and fail to meet international standards on fair trial.”
Thailand’s military rulers have insisted that such restrictive measures are needed to maintain stability, following a decade of political conflict which has pitted a royalist middle-class Bangkok elite against Shinawatra’s supporters, mostly drawn from the urban working-class or the rural north.
But Pavin did not believe there was a sufficient threat to national security to justify the new order.
“The notion of national security has been exploited over and over,” he said.
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Embassy in Thailand said staff were yet to see the full details of the proposed security order.
While the U.S. would welcome the lifting of martial law, said the spokeswoman, it was important that any alternative ended the practice of trying civilians in military courts and subjecting them to detention without charge.
It was important that Thai citizens were allowed “to freely exercise their fundamental rights, including the rights of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly,” she said.
