This year's World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index ranked Thailand 64th out of 113 countries, much lower than one would expect given the country's high human development. Though Thailand actually improved in rank from last year, it still needs to implement key legislation based on multiple international treaties it has ratified, including in the areas of labour rights, torture and disappearances, and racial discrimination. Without stronger rule of law, the social contract between the state and Thai citizens cannot be guaranteed.
Under the rule of law, Thai governments must be accountable, with laws that are clear, fair, stable and publicised. The state must protect fundamental rights, including property and the security of persons. Moreover, the processes for enacting, administering and enforcing laws must be more accessible, efficient and fairer to all. Finally, justice must be delivered by competent, ethical and independent agencies which are of sufficient number, representative and adequately resourced, to ensure checks and balances.
Of the eight Asean countries ranked, Thailand is excelled by Singapore, ranked ninth in the world, Malaysia, ranked 56th, and Indonesia, at 61st. Thailand is ranked alongside Vietnam and the Philippines. It easily beats Myanmar, ranked 98th, and Cambodia, ranked 112th. Brunei and Laos were not ranked, with surveying the latter being problematic due to unchecked authoritarianism.
On the eight components of the index, Thailand scored highest for order and security, specifically the absence of civil conflict and of crime. This is not surprising given the establishment of a military dictatorship in May 2014 with the stated aim of reducing civil conflict, equipped with dictatorial tools including rule by diktat (Section 44), attitude re-adjustment camps and a military granted full police powers.
Thailand's next highest score is in civil justice, where it ranks highly for a lack of both discrimination and corruption in the system, and under absence of corruption, where there is little perceived injustice in the judiciary. This confirms the findings of Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, where Thailand's judiciary also ranks highly. Thailand ranks highly for one element of open government, specifically complaint mechanisms. This perhaps recognises the opening of local branches of the Damrongtham Centre, a mechanism for independent arbitration and settlement of grievances involving the state.
However, Thailand has extremely low scores in several index components, the lowest overall component being criminal justice, where it scores poorly for effective investigations; the effectiveness of its correctional system, which has one of the highest internment rates in the world, mainly for minor drug-related offenses; the presence of discrimination, likely due to Thailand's treatment of its ethnic minorities; and a lack of due process in the legal system. Thailand also experiences unreasonable delays in its legal processes, exemplified by the National Anti-Corruption Commission having a backlog of thousands of cases.
Nonetheless, Thailand's lowest score on an indicator is actually in the category of fundamental rights, particularly the right to privacy. This is due to the government's serious violations, including its initiation of legal cases regarding Facebook postings, cyber warfare against its own citizens and routine military visits to the homes of human rights defenders, intellectuals or lawyers, as well as student activists and their families.
Also under fundamental rights, the right to life and security and that of due process of law score low. In the first case, this is likely a reflection of Thailand's lack of implementation of domestic legislation to counter disappearances and torture, despite ratifying the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Thailand has over 80 well-documented cases of outstanding torture and enforced disappearances from the past 15 years, particularly involving the Thai Malay, mountain peoples such as the Lahu and Karen, and the Thai Lao ethnic communities. Remarkably, the country's legal system recently ruled that the enforced disappearance of an individual required a body in order to initiate a lawsuit. And, while the government has committed to a bill on torture and enforced disappearances, progress is glacial.
Interestingly, under fundamental rights, labour rights score highly. This is likely a reflection of the government's ongoing attempts to minimise the grey economy and better regulate migrant workers, especially as regards illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. Still, although Thailand entered into an agreement this year with the International Labour Organisation to promote decent work conditions in the fishing industry via a trilateral project, the legal and regulatory framework is moving at a snail's pace.
One safeguard of the rule of law is civil oversight. Embarrassingly, Thailand's National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was downgraded this year to a "B" due to political bias and unacceptably slow processes. The NHRC is now in the same grade as Myanmar, a full grade below the NHRCs of Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines.
One "A" grade NHRC that Thailand should aspire to emulate is that of Denmark, the leading country in the Rule of Law Index. A full institute-level organisation, the Danish Institute for Human Rights has a representative council of 51 people. In addition to representatives of the bureaucracy and ministries, as well as political parties, the council members include representatives from adult education, anti-poverty and anti-racism campaigns, children, the disabled, industry, migrants and refugees, rights lawyers, senior citizens, trade unions, women and LGBT rights defenders, and NGOs such as Amnesty International and the Red Cross. The benefits of a large commission are the ability to process cases faster via dedicated sub-committees and broader expert coverage of issues.
In Thailand, the rule of law is enjoyed more by those few with power than by the majority. Remedial action to institutionalise the universal principles of rule of law, including accountability, equitability, accessibility, and neutrality, requires faster progress on the criminalisation of torture and disappearances and domestic legislation to counter racial discrimination. Additionally, more human and financial resources must be dedicated to a revitalised National Anti-Corruption Commission. Ultimately, all citizens profit from greater rule of law. Rule of law is imperative for a creative, business-friendly and digital economy, whereas authoritarianism, being arbitrary, ultimately undermines national economic development.
John Draper is director, Social Survey Centre, College of Local Administration, Khon Kaen University. Peerasit Kamnuansilpa Phd is founder and former dean of the College of Local Administration, Khon Kaen University.