By Andrew Spooner.

Based on the information that’s been made public (see this post from 10/10/2010), and in the light that Amnesty’s press office have refused point blank to rebut the following conclusion, we can now safely assume that during his recent visit to Thailand to meet PM Abhisit, Amnesty International’s Secretary General made no attempt to visit any Red Shirt leader or prisoner or any activists connected to, or those imprisoned under Thailand’s draconian lese majeste or state of emergency laws.

The Secretary General’s actions appear to be in direct contravention of Amnesty’s own Statute which makes the organisation’s core values explicit  – the words in bold are key here.

Amnesty International forms a global community of human rights defenders based on the principles of international solidarity, effective action for the individual victim, global coverage, the universality and indivisibility of human rights, impartiality and independence, and democracy and mutual respect.

In the case of Thailand universality clearly does not apply – Amnesty is clearly giving the Thai regime the kind of special treatment it certainly does not afford the likes of Vietnam, Indonesia, Zimbabwe, Burma etc etc. As for impartiality, well, the Secretary General’s meeting only with government representatives and Amnesty’s Thai-based reaseacher Ben Zawacki’s choice of sources when making key decisions on the status of prisoners would reveal a complete lack of any sort of credible impartiality. And, finally, as for independence, Mr. Zawacki has previously stated he prefers secretive meetings with the government in the refined confines of one of PM Abhisit’s comfy offices rather than staging any kind of meaningful campaign.

So why have Amnesty abandoned their core values so readily in Thailand?

It is, in short, hard to know. Several individuals, including myself, have queried Amnesty on this matter and all have been completely ignored. From the accounts I’ve heard of a recent meeting between Ben Zawacki and Amnesty’s Thailand branch, this policy of unaccountability seems to be something Mr Zawacki actually revels in as he allegedly openly stated that Amnesty should not be concerned with what ordinary members of the public think and should only worry about the media and the organisation’s own members concerns (good luck with that fundraising Ben).

Of course, Amnesty make much of their “statutory accountability” which states that they will

“hold national sections, structures and other bodies accountable.”

I challenge readers here to write to Amnesty International and put that “statutory accountability” to the test. Nobody I know of, and I’m referring to activists, academics and journalists, has had anything approaching meaningful accountability.

In Thailand, questions must be asked about Amnesty’s abandonment of their core values. They appear to be unaccountable, lacking independence, linked too closely to both the regime and the extremist rightwing PAD, in breach of their own statutes and seemingly refuse to take any meaningful independent action. Their credibility is being destroyed, their judgement questionable and they are now quite clearly becoming part of the problem.

The repercussions of this don’t just impact on Thailand but the entire region, including Burma. SE Asia needs reliable, courageous human rights campaigners, not government stooges.

Key Amnesty email addresses are as follows –

benjamin.zawacki@amnesty.org – Amnesty’s International Secretariat’s Thai-based researcher.

secgen@amnesty.org – Mr. Salil Shetty – Amnesty’s Secretary General