A seemingly forgotten legal necessity for Asean was announced at last weekend's annual summit in Singapore. The chairman for 2018, Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said that the long-delayed Asean extradition treaty was nearing completion. The announcement, made almost in passing at the busy heads-of-government meetings came as a welcome surprise. But it is crucial that the 10-nation group get the treaty right, and not fold to countries who want it to enforce political crimes.
Extradition is a difficult subject at the best of times. Almost all treaties are bilateral. Even then, it often takes many years to agree on terms. It is a major disappointment to hear Mr Lee state on one hand that the 10-country extradition pact is near completion, yet on the other to learn that the governments do not trust their people to see it. This is an issue where accountability is necessary and the public must get a say.
In rough terms, extradition occurs when Country A charges someone with a serious crime, and Country B arrests that person and forces him or her to return to Country A. There are many steps in between. These include defining what is actually a "serious crime". In addition, countries must decide what legal rights the accused person is given following arrest. Extradition by civilised countries must be ordered by a court, to ensure proper legal process.
Most important is just who is subject to extradition. Many countries -- including some Asean members although not Thailand -- almost always refuse to hand over their own citizens to another country. For well-known example, Russia fought tooth-and-nail to prevent the extradition of arms trafficker Viktor Bout from Thailand to America. Moscow already has stated firmly it will not allow court to extradite the 13 Russians formally indicted in the US for alleged tampering in the 2016 election of President Donald Trump.
The major sticking point, however, is when bad governments demand or refuse extradition in political cases. Two such cases have recently occurred in Thailand, with the government acting badly in both. In February, acting on the "request" of the blatantly anti-democratic Hun Sen government, the military regime deported a hapless woman who was convicted at a trial held in absentia of sedition. Her "crime" was that she threw a shoe of a photo of Prime Minister Hun Sen displayed on a billboard. She was immediately imprisoned in an obvious, cruel miscarriage of justice abetted by the military regime.
A second case arose last week, when immigration police arrested the Cambodian opposition leader Sam Serey. Unbelievably charged by the Hun Sen government as leader of a terrorist group, he is also the leader of a political movement, the KPNLF. Thailand helped to form to that organisation to oppose the Khmer Rouge -- ironically Hun Sen's former group. Sam Serey has since left for Denmark, in effect a lucky escape.
Many other current cases show why the public must examine and comment upon any attempt to bring in an Asean-wide extradition law. Lao Defence Minister and chief of the general staff Lt Gen Souvone Leuangbounmy said last week Laos will be tracking Thai political figures currently seeking refuge in the country. To this day, however, no country ever has extradited a Thai citizen charged with lese majeste or any other type of defamation.
Asean's legal system has developed more slowly than almost any other field. Clearly, the region would benefit by having an extradition treaty. Approved unanimously and upheld without favour by every member, it could solve many injustices. Applied unevenly, especially for crimes with political overtones, it could even undermine public trust in justice systems.