Thailand: Lawyers Council Launches Probe Into Fatal Torture Of Myanmar National
(BANGKOK, May 23, 2025)—The Lawyers Council of Thailand under the Royal Patronage formally established a working group of lawyers to investigate the torture and killing of Aung Ko Ko, a 37-year-old Myanmar national, Fortify Rights said today. The move follows a public complaint submitted by Fortify Rights detailing evidence of torture by Thai soldiers near the Thailand-Myanmar border.
'There is reason to be concerned about a high-level cover-up in this case, and the Lawyers Council may be the only hope for justice,' said Matthew Smith, Chief Executive Officer at Fortify Rights. 'This is a critical test of the rule of law in Thailand—whether it applies equally to all, regardless of rank, uniform, or nationality, when serious crimes are committed.'
On February 13, 2025, Fortify Rights filed a detailed complaint with the President of the Lawyers Council of Thailand, Wichien Chubthaisong, providing evidence that Thai soldiers fatally tortured Aung Ko Ko in Mae Sot District, Tak Province. At a public hearing at the Lawyers Council, attended by the media and members of the diplomatic community, Fortify Rights also raised concerns over the conviction of Sirachuch, a 24-year-old Myanmar national and eyewitness to the torture. He goes by one name and remains imprisoned in Thailand for the death of Aung Ko Ko.
On November 7, 2024, Fortify Rights Chief Executive Officer Matthew Smith provided in-person testimony about the fatal torture of Aung Ko Ko to Thailand's Department of Special Investigations (DSI) in Bangkok and filed a complaint based on evidence collected by Fortify Rights. DSI is a law enforcement agency under the Ministry of Justice that handles complex and high-profile crimes, including corruption and alleged human rights violations by state security forces. At that meeting, Fortify Rights provided DSI with the evidence it had gathered on the death of Aung Ko Ko, including a forthcoming report in the Thai language.
Regrettably, on February 18, 2025, DSI informed Fortify Rights in a letter that it would cease any investigation into the torture and death of Aung Ko Ko. DSI did not provide a detailed explanation of why it elected to effectively ignore this case. On May 8, 2025, Fortify Rights sent a follow-up letter to DSI seeking clarification and reconsideration of its decision not to investigate the fatal torture of Aung Ko Ko.
Last month, on April 8, the U.N. publicly released a joint communication from three U.N. Special Rapporteurs to the Thai government expressing grave concern over Aung Ko Ko's torture and death. The Special Rapporteurs — on Myanmar, extrajudicial executions, and torture — called on the Thai government to conduct an independent, impartial, and thorough investigation and emphasized the urgency of protecting Myanmar nationals at risk of violence by Thai security forces.
In their communication, the three U.N. Special Rapporteurs wrote that they 'are extremely concerned about the alleged arbitrary deprivation of liberty, torture and killing of Aung Ko Ko by Royal Thai Army soldiers.' They added:
We are also concerned that the investigation into Aung Ko Ko's torture and death does not appear to be thorough, effective or in line with international standards, and are concerned about possible violations of fair trial rights, leading to the ongoing lack of accountability for Royal Thai Army soldiers involved in his death.
On May 20, 2025, Fortify Rights received confirmation from the U.N. Special Rapporteurs that they had received a response from the Permanent Mission of Thailand in Geneva acknowledging receipt of the joint communication and confirming that it had been forwarded to relevant agencies in Thailand for their consideration in March 2025. However, at the time of writing, there has been no further update or response indicating any action or progress from the Thai government.
Death at the Thai-Myanmar Border, a 44-page report released by Fortify Rights on November 14, 2024, includes multiple eyewitness testimonies explaining how, on January 12, 2024, four Thai soldiers detained Aung Ko Ko near a small wooden bridge located in the 70 Rai area. Eyewitnesses described how three of these soldiers severely beat Aung Ko Ko with a long wooden implement, causing injuries that killed him on the same day. Photographs and testimony collected by Fortify Rights show dark bruises on his entire back, forehead, around both cheekbones, and on his nose. Despite clear indications of torture and military involvement—also noted in police charge sheets and court testimonies documented by Fortify Rights—no Thai soldiers have been held accountable.
On May 21, 2025, Fortify Rights received confirmation from the Lawyers Council that its Human Rights Committee had officially appointed a working group of five lawyers on May 7 to investigate the case, gather evidence, and explore legal avenues for justice. The Lawyers Council did not mention providing legal assistance to Sirachuch, whose case is under appeal.
The right to be free from torture is non-derogable under international law, meaning that it cannot be suspended or limited under any circumstances. Thailand's domestic law—including the Thai Constitution, the Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act, the Criminal Code, and the Criminal Procedure Code—also guarantees the right to life and protection from extrajudicial killings as well as protection from torture and arbitrary arrest.
'As a sitting member of the U.N. Human Rights Council, Thailand has the opportunity and obligation to uphold the highest human rights standards,' said Matthew Smith. 'Despite having anti-torture legislation on its books for more than two years now, Thailand is denying justice to Aung Ko Ko and his family. We're hopeful the authorities will change course and ensure justice, accountability, and the rule of law.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
7 hours ago
- RNZ News
Six-year-old girl among Myanmar group arrested for killing retired general
Protesters at Parliament last year against Myanmar's military which seized power of the country in a 2021 coup. Now a child is among a group arrested for a high profile assassination. Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver By Reuters Myanmar's military has arrested a 6-year-old child as part of a group it labelled "terrorists" for the daytime killing of a retired military officer and diplomat last month, a junta-run newspaper has reported. Cho Htun Aung, 68, a retired brigadier general who also served as an ambassador, was shot dead in Myanmar's commercial capital of Yangon on 22 May, in one of the highest profile assassinations in a country in the throes of a widening civil war. Myanmar has been in turmoil since the military seized power in a February 2021 coup, overthrowing an elected government led by Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi and triggering widespread protests. The junta's violent crackdown on dissent sparked an unprecedented nationwide uprising. A collection of established ethnic armies and new armed groups have wrested away swathes of territory from the well-armed military, and guerrilla-style fighting has erupted even in urban areas like Yangon. "A total of 16 offenders - 13 males and three females - were arrested," the Global New Light of Myanmar newspaper reported. In an accompanying graphic, the newspaper carried the image of the 6-year-old child, identified as the daughter of the alleged assassin. Her face was blurred in an online version of the newspaper seen by Reuters, but visible in other social media posts made by junta authorities. A junta spokesman did not respond to calls seeking comment. Golden Valley Warriors, an anti-junta insurgent group, said they killed the retired general because of his continued support for military operations, including attacks on civilians, according to a 22 May statement. The junta claims the group is backed by the National Unity Government - a shadow government comprising remnants of Suu Kyu's ousted administration that is battling the military - and paid an assassin some 200,000 Myanmar Kyat (NZD$157) for a killing, the state newspaper reported. NUG spokesperson Nay Phone Latt denied the shadow government had made any such payments. "It is not true that we are paying people to kill other people," he told Reuters. Since the coup, Myanmar's junta has arrested over 29,000 people, including more than 6000 women and 600 children, according to the Assistance Association of Political Prisoners, an activist group. Fatalities among civilians and pro-democracy activists verified by AAPP during this period amount to more than 6700, including 1646 women and 825 children. Myanmar's junta has said it does not target civilians and its operations are in response to attacks by "terrorists" for maintaining peace and stability in the country. - Reuters
Scoop
4 days ago
- Scoop
Take Action On Myanmar Labor Rights Abuses; ILO Governing Body To Consider Measures Against Military Junta
Bangkok, 2 June 2025 The International Labour Organization (ILO) should act to prevent the Myanmar military junta's systematic abuse of workers' rights and widespread use of forced labor, including forced military conscription, Fortify Rights said today. The International Labour Conference (ILC), which sets international labor standards and the policies of the ILO, will gather for its annual meeting today in Geneva, Switzerland. Ahead of the meeting, Fortify Rights wrote to ILO Director-General Gilbert Houngbo recommending measures, including referring the Myanmar situation to the International Criminal Court, targeted sanctions, and supporting exiled trade unions and other human rights defenders. 'The Myanmar military junta has overseen a systematic denial of fundamental labor rights,' said Patrick Phongsathorn, Senior Advocate at Fortify Rights. 'International Labour Conference member states and organizations must take concrete action against these abuses, including by referring the Myanmar junta to the International Criminal Court and supporting Myanmar's exiled trade unions and workers' organizations.' Later today, the ILC is set to discuss measures aimed at securing the Myanmar military junta's compliance with recommendations made by an ILO Commission of Inquiry (ILO CoI). In its report, issued August 4, 2023, the ILO CoI found that measures imposed by the Myanmar military junta have had 'a disastrous impact on the exercise of basic civil liberties,' and contravened ILO conventions on workers' rights and forced labor, to which Myanmar is a state party. In its report, the ILO CoI stated that trade unionists have been: Killed, arbitrarily arrested, subjected to sham trials, convicted, detained, abused and tortured, threatened, intimidated, subjected to surveillance, forced into exile, deprived of their basic civil liberties and oppressed at the workplace due to their trade union membership and activities. Women trade union leaders, the ILO CoI reported, have been subjected to 'particularly violent treatment,' including sexual violence. The ILO CoI also concluded that the Myanmar military junta continued its 'systematic and widespread' use of forced labor, both in the context of military operations including as porters and human shields, and in the construction and maintenance of military camps, installations, and infrastructure. Since the Myanmar military coup d'état in February 2021, Fortify Rights has documented extensive evidence of widespread and systematic human rights violations by the military junta and its operatives that amount to crimes against humanity, as well as violations committed in the conduct of armed conflict that amount to war crimes. In particular, Fortify Rights has documented the Myanmar junta military's use of civilians as human shields and forced porters–grave breaches of international humanitarian law that may amount to war crimes. A recent Fortify Rights investigation found that Rohingya armed groups were collaborating with the Myanmar military junta to abduct Rohingya refugees from refugee camps in Bangladesh and forcing them into military service. According to an internal memo by a humanitarian coordination group operating in Bangladesh, seen by Fortify Rights, Rohingya armed groups in Bangladesh forcibly recruited approximately 1,700 Rohingya refugees from March to May 2024 alone. During today's meeting, the ILC will consider measures under Article 33 of the ILO Constitution to secure the Myanmar junta's compliance with the ILO CoI's recommendations. This is only the third time in its history that the ILC will consider Article 33 measures–once previously in the case of Myanmar, and once in the case of Belarus. Given the grave findings of its own inquiry, the International Labour Conference should adopt the strongest possible measures against the Myanmar military junta, Fortify Rights said today. In its letter to the ILO Director-General, Fortify Rights recommended that ILO member states impose targeted sanctions on Myanmar's military leaders and capabilities and suspend the nation from preferential trade agreements. The letter also called on ILO member states to maintain the suspension of all junta representatives from the ILC and fully engage the National Unity Government of Myanmar. Fortify Rights also urged support for Myanmar's exiled trade unions and workers' organization including through respect for the principle of non-refoulement to ensure the protection of exiled labor rights activists and other human rights defenders. Finally, Fortify Rights called on ILO member states to refer the situation in Myanmar to the International Criminal Court's Chief Prosecutor under Article 14 of the Rome Statute 'The Myanmar military will continue to wantonly disregard international law, including labor rights, if there continue to be zero consequences for its abusive actions,' said Patrick Phongsathorn. 'Given that its own Commission of Inquiry has confirmed massive violations of labor rights and atrocities committed against labor activists, ILO member states gathering today must now commit to imposing the strongest possible measures to end the junta's crimes.'
RNZ News
6 days ago
- RNZ News
Babies for sale: New Zealanders commissioning illegal surrogacy in Thailand
By Jeremy Wilkinson, Open Justice multimedia journalist of Oranga Tamariki has identified a trend where Kiwis are travelling to Thailand to commission illegal surrogacy arrangements. Photo: NZME / Paul Slater New Zealanders are travelling overseas to illegally commission surrogate babies from Thai women, and bringing them back home to adopt them despite opposition from Oranga Tamariki. It's a practice the agency has labelled a "concerning trend" and it said there had been five cases where surrogate parents have flouted international law to have children in recent years. In one of those cases a gay man paid a Thai fertility clinic worker to subvert the country's strict surrogacy laws, which prohibits foreigners from commissioning children from surrogate mothers. The man paid a "significant" sum of money, according to a Family Court ruling, to find a surrogate and then his sperm was used to fertilise a donor's egg. Once back in New Zealand, the man applied to the Family Court to adopt his son so he could be legally recognised as his father. Under the current legislation, which was written in 1955, every parent of a child born by surrogacy, whether the practice is illegal in the country of birth or not, must effectively adopt their own child even if they have a genetic link to them. This is because when the law was written more than 70 years ago lawmakers didn't foresee the advances in fertility medicine such as in vitro fertilisation. That legislation is currently before a select committee after the Improving Arrangements for Surrogacy Bill was first tabled before Parliament in 2022. The proposed law would effectively create a mechanism that accounts for these changes in science, technology and culture and mean that parents, lawyers and judges won't need to rely on a piece of legislation that was never intended to account for surrogacy. However, it's unlikely to change things for people who commission surrogacy arrangements in countries where it's illegal. They will still come under scrutiny from the courts when they attempt to bring their children back into New Zealand. It's a practice that Oranga Tamariki says is occurring more frequently, at least in Thailand, and there's a possibility New Zealanders desperate to have children will look further abroad to other countries as well. In the case of the gay man who paid a Thai surrogate, which made its way through the Family Court last year, Judge Belinda Pidwell noted that the law around surrogacy was complex and there was no statute in New Zealand to provide clarity. "A number of illegal steps or breaches of laws occurred in the creation of [the child]. However, he has now been born, and as a result, has the right to grow and thrive, to have a nationality, and the right to know and be cared for by his parent," her ruling reads. "The irregularities in his creation, or the sins of his father, should not be visited upon him." However, Oranga Tamariki objected to the adoption being granted by the courts, despite finding that the father was the only real parental option for the child and that, barring the illegal way in which the baby was created, he was an otherwise suitable parent. Lawyers for the agency tabled a report from a senior adviser in its Intercountry Adoption Team, which identified a "concerning trend where New Zealanders have engaged in surrogacy around involving Thai surrogates, despite the illegality". "The concern is if children born of illegal surrogacy arrangements are allowed entry into New Zealand, and their parentage is then endorsed by an adoption order, that could be seen as an endorsement of unlawful actions," the report read. Oranga Tamariki says the release of its report could cause diplomacy issues, but didn't give the courts any evidence about why. Photo: NZME / Supplied Oranga Tamariki refused to release the full report to NZME under the Official Information Act, and then opposed its release through the Family Court claiming that it could impact New Zealand's diplomatic relations with other countries. However, it didn't provide any evidence about that specific impact. Judge Pidwell recently released the full report to NZME, which outlines how there has been an increased demand for women to become surrogates, and this demand has caused an increase in the number of women being trafficked from countries where the practice has been banned. The report found that between 2015 and 2020 the agency wasn't aware of any evidence New Zealanders had been involved in these situations, but from 2020 it had encountered five cases where a commercial surrogacy arrangement had been commissioned by Kiwis involving Thai surrogates. Three of these cases have involved the transfer of the surrogate across international borders for the purpose of an embryo transfer. In the other two cases, the mothers were transferred to another country to give birth. "Not only do these emerging trends demonstrate New Zealanders are breaching and demonstrating disregard to Thailand's domestic laws, but there are also significant concerns about the risks these practices pose for the safety and wellbeing of surrogates and the children born via the arrangements," the report reads. "Whilst we have noticed these examples of illegal practices have occurred in Thailand, we are mindful to the possibility of surrogacies being commissioned in other countries where it is illegal and would place similar scrutiny on New Zealanders engaging in illegal surrogacy arrangements in any jurisdiction." In New Zealand there is currently no legal pathway for a surrogate child to obtain residency except via an exemption from the ministers of immigration or internal affairs, or through the antiquated Adoption Act. Oranga Tamariki receives referrals from commissioning parents, private lawyers or requests from the Family Court to complete reports under the Adoption Act, which assesses their suitability to adopt. Since international surrogacy was outlawed in Thailand in 2015, Oranga Tamariki as well as the Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Immigration New Zealand and the Department of Internal Affairs have all published advice for New Zealanders about the law change. Those agencies held a meeting in January 2024 to discuss the trend where New Zealand was flouting these rules. Then in May, Oranga Tamariki effected a policy to refuse to provide pre-court adoptive applicant assessments for people who commission surrogacy in a country where it is illegal. NZME asked Oranga Tamariki questions about whether it had liaised with the Thai Government about its concerns, about other countries where New Zealanders were commissioning illegal surrogacy and about its submissions to the new bill. New Zealand First MP and Children's Minister Karen Chhour says she hasn't received advice from Oranga Tamariki about the report. Photo: NZME / Mark Mitchell In an emailed statement the agency did not respond to those questions, instead noting that following an inter-agency meeting in 2024 Oranga Tamariki put in a formal policy to not support an immigration exemption for anyone commissioning an illegal surrogacy. "As outlined, we do not undertake any pre-court assessments of adoptive applicants who commission an international surrogacy in a country where it is illegal but will undertake such an assessment if we are required to do so by the court once an adoption application is received," the spokesperson said. "Oranga Tamariki has contributed along with other agencies to the review of surrogacy that has been led by the Ministry of Justice. "Through the course of that work, discussions were held about the issue of illegal surrogacy actions." A spokesperson for the Minister for Children, Karen Chhour, confirmed her office had not received any reports or advice from Oranga Tamariki about the illegal surrogacy its staff had identified. The Thai Embassy in Wellington did not respond to questions about whether it had seen the report, and was concerned by it. Domestic surrogacy, where someone volunteers to carry a baby for someone else, is legal in New Zealand, as long as no money changes hands. However, there's also no legal pathway to enforce this arrangement meaning that if the birth mother wants to keep the child, she can. If in vitro fertilisation needs to be done to get a surrogate pregnant then it has to be approved by the Ethics on Human Assisted Reproductive Technology committee (ECART). Oranga Tamariki will also assess the intended parents for their suitability. According to official information released by Oranga Tamariki there were 89 domestic surrogacy adoptions in New Zealand between 2020 and 2024, and over the same period there were 69 from international surrogacy arrangements. Barrister Margaret Casey, KC, says not much will change under proposed new legislation when it comes to illegal surrogacy. Photo: NZME / Supplied Margaret Casey, KC, is one of three legal experts who assist with surrogacy arrangements in New Zealand and told NZME under the new proposed surrogacy law, people would no longer have to adopt their own genetic children, rather it would become a parenting order. "The courts will still be juggling the same kinds of issues, it will just be through a different lens," she said. "Illegal surrogacies will still come before the court, and the court will still look at the background and make a decision about whether or not when you balance it all out it can make a parentage order." In terms of illegal surrogacy, Casey said not much would change under the new legislation, and there were already checks and balances in place that served to disincentivise people deliberately pursuing illegal arrangements. "You may not get to live where you want or with your child for a long time, you may have to give detailed evidence at a court hearing, be subject of further reports from Oranga Tamariki ... you will live in this state of uncertainty and probably panic for a long period of time," she said. In all five cases in recent years where New Zealanders have commissioned babies in Thailand, the New Zealanders who had paid a surrogate claimed that they didn't know it was illegal, despite clear advice from agencies in New Zealand to the contrary. Casey said this was likely born from optimism, rather than wilful blindness. "People are paying too much attention to the process of creating the baby and not concentrating on whether they can bring the child home and how long it will take, and is there anything I'm doing that will be a problem," she said. "Do your research and ask questions. If you don't do that and rely on an agency whose business is reproductive optimism, then you might not look as deeply as you should." Associate Minister for Justice Nicole McKee said the Improving Arrangements for Surrogacy Bill won't prevent people from seeking illegal surrogacies abroad. "It will expressly enable the Family Court to scrutinise these arrangements. The court will be able to consider whether it is in the surrogate-born child's best interests for the intended parents to become the child's legal parents," she said in a statement. Another expert in New Zealand surrogacy law is Jennifer Wademan, who agreed that in her experience there's nothing Machiavellian in parents seeking out illegal surrogacy. "I've never come across a case where someone has had the knowledge that it is illegal and still gone ahead. We simply point them in a direction where people can do it legally," she said. Wademan said she primarily gets two kinds of clients; those who work with her from the start, and those who only come to her once they realise their baby's foreign birth certificate won't get them through the border in New Zealand. "By the time these families are turning to international surrogacies they've been through hell and back and their desire to have a child is so great, it's optimism rather than deliberate avoidance of research," Wademan said. "I think for many it's putting the blinkers on. As human beings we can all understand that." As for Oranga Tamariki identifying cases of this happening, Wademan said that while the numbers might appear small, a spike of five is quite significant in the world of international surrogacy. "It's enough for me to go, hmm, I don't like that," she said. In terms of the proposed law change, Wademan doesn't see it changing much in the way of illegal surrogacy, but for domestic parents she predicts it will change the landscape altogether for an area of law that is particularly ad hoc. "Every day we get a new challenge," she said, "We're having to be innovative about legislative process about science and culture because our legislation doesn't provide for it. "The international landscape will always be more complex because we're dealing with another country's laws that we have no control over. "At the end of the day, these are overwhelmingly New Zealanders who just want to be parents so badly." -This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .
