Anchana Heemmina
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2017-080-003
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2017
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 15.870032
Longitude: 100.992541
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Thailand
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- 04 August 2016
- Type of record
- Named individual
- Gender
- Female
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
of Duay Jai Group; The above-mentioned persons had published a report in February 2016 entitled “Fifty-four cases of torture and ill-treatment in the Deep South documented in 2014-2015” funded in part by the United Nations Voluntary Fund.
- Type of rights defended
- Civil/political rights
- Was the victim a civil servant, member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
recipients of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture; The above-mentioned persons had published a report in February 2016 entitled “Fifty-four cases of torture and ill-treatment in the Deep South documented in 2014-2015” funded in part by the United Nations Voluntary Fund.
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Voluntary fund / torture victims
- Dates of engagement
- February 2016
- Type of attempted engagement
- Submission of information to UN
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- since October 2016; 11 February 2016; June 2016; 1 July 2017
- Reprisal information
They were consequently accused of publishing false information on torture and ill-treatment committed by military officials. The spokesperson of the Royal Thai Army in the region issued a public statement on 11 February 2016 accusing the organization of bias and of using outdated information to seek funding.
object of a legal complaint filed by the Royal Thai Army operating in the Southern Border Provinces.
+see follow-up 2018
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Defamation / Defamation campaign
- Online harassment
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- Both state and non-state actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Government response dates
- 5 August 2016
- Government response content
Government replied that the allegations of torture documented in the report were unfounded. It further stated that the complaint against the three human rights defenders is still under investigation by the police, before it is sent to the prosecutor’s office to decide whether to file the case for further court proceedings.
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 3
- In which SG report was this case followed up on? 0
- 2018
- Follow up information provided in SG report 0
51.The 2017 report of the Secretary-General (see A/HRC/36/31, para. 57 and Annex, paras.78-79) noted that, in June 2016, grant recipients of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, Ms. Porpen Khongkachonkiet and Mr. Somchai Homla-or of Cross-CulturalFoundation and Ms. Anchana Heemmina of Duay Jai Group, were subject to a legal complaint filed by the Royal Thai Army operating in the Southern Border Provinces for publishing a report in February 2016 entitled “Fifty-four cases of torture and ill-treatment in the Deep South documented in 2014-2015,” funded in part by the Voluntary Fund. They were consequently accused of publicizing false information on torture and ill-treatment committed by military officials.The spokesperson of the Royal Thai Army in the region issued a public statement on 11 February 2016 accusing the organization of bias and of using outdated information to seek funding. 52.It is reported that the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) Region 4 filed a lawsuit against them for defamation and publication of false information on the internet.On 1 July 2017, plainclothes men believed to be military personnel visited Ms. Hemmina and warned her not to post comments about human rights violations on social media.Further to advocacy efforts related to the allegations, in November 2017, the ISOC 4 withdrew the defamation charges against Ms. Porpen Khongkachonkiet, Mr. Somchai Homla-or, and Ms.Anchana Heemmina.The charges were dropped by the Pattani Provincial Prosecutor.53.On 13 September 2017 four special procedures mandate holders noted that Ms.Angkhana Neelapaijit, Ms. Porpen Khongkachonkiet and Ms. Anchana Heemmina, among others, were also reportedly subject to an online smear campaign, accusing them of bias and misinformation, and associating their human rights advocacy with the promotion of insurgency and separatist movements (THA 6/2017). Ms. Angkhana Neelapaijit is a Commissioner of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand.Beginning in October 2016, the online blog “Conditions in South Thailand” regularly published content discrediting the work of Ms. Khongkachonkiet and Ms. Heemmina. Death threats were also posted online against Ms. Khongkachonkiet.
- Followup Trends 0
- Significant positive and negative developments
- Did the government respond? 0
- No
- Was this case followed up by a UN body? 0
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- In which SG report was this case followed up on? 1
- 2019
- Follow up information provided in SG report 1
- The 2017 (A/HRC/36/31, para. 57 and Annex I, paras. 80–81) and 2018 (A/HRC/39/41, Annex II paras. 51–53) reports of the Secretary-General noted that grant recipients of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture were subject to a legal complaint filed by the Royal Thai Army, dismissed in October 2017, for publishing a report on cases of torture and ill-treatment by military in the Southern Border Provinces. They were also harassed online. In September 2018, following the presentation of the 2018 report of the Secretary-General to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/39/41), it was reported that Ms. Anghkhana Neelapaijit and other defenders were subjected to smearing on social media. For example, a photo of Ms. Neelapaijit was circulated and she was accused of manipulating the truth.
- Followup Trends 1
- Deterioration/further reprisals
- Did the government respond? 1
- No
- In which SG report was this case followed up on? 2
- 2020
- Follow up information provided in SG report 2
-
The 2017 (A/HRC/36/31, para. 57 and Annex I, paras. 80–81), 2018 (A/HRC/39/41, Annex II paras. 51–53) and 2019 (A/HRC/42/30, Annex II, para. 101) reports of the Secretary-General drew attention to intimidation and an online smear campaign against human rights defenders, including individual recipients of a grant of the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, notably Ms. Angkhana Neelapaijit, Ms. Pornpen Khongkachonkiet and Ms. Anchana Heemmina (THA 6/2017). 82
-
In the reporting period, the cyber harassment of political activists and defenders reporting alleged human rights violations in the Southern Border Provinces who continue to cooperate with the UN continued, with photos of Ms. Neelapaijit, Ms. Khongkachonkeit and Ms. Heeminah surfacing online with disparaging comments. Given their visibility, it is reported that these and other women defenders in particular faced online attacks and their human rights reporting and advocacy were discredited. Information was received that they were targeted for questioning the militarization and use of ill-treatment and torture by State forces, and accused of sympathizing with armed groups.
-
Further, it was brought to the attention of OHCHR that, during a 25 February 2020 public debate in the Thai Parliament covered by the media, a Member of Parliament presented multiple pieces of evidence from 2017 to 2019 that the online harassment against human rights defenders was organized and funded by a civilian security agency reportedly controlled by the military.
-
On 23 July 2020, the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report. The Government stated that both cases filed by Ms. Angkhana Neelapaijit are still under investigation, and that the Royal Thai Police has been regularly monitoring social media to check for any online harassment against her. Since 2018, no further online content directly attacking Ms. Neelapaijit has been found. According to the records of the Department of Special Investigation, Ms. Khongkachonkiet and Ms. Heemmina decided not to file criminal charges, but the relevant government agencies have accepted their request to help them identify possible online perpetrators. Meanwhile, the Government is currently revising domestic legislation in order to give better protection to human rights defenders.
-
Regarding allegations that the online harassment against human rights defenders was organized and funded by a civilian security agency reportedly controlled by the military, the Government confirmed that on 27 February 2020, the Spokesperson of the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) had responded to the allegation, arguing that the allocated budget was not used for activities aimed at harassing individuals with opposing views, but for activities aimed at promoting better understanding and addressing misperception among the general public, regarding the work of relevant agencies, access to justice and human rights issues in the Southern Border Provinces.
-
- Followup Trends 2
- Stayed same
- Did the government respond? 2
- Yes