Thread: Thailand to tell UN why courts hand down death

Why does the UN harass Thailand over it's death penalty? The USA executes far more people every year than Thailand does. Texas alone far exceeds the 2 that Thailand last executed in 2010.
They should be more worried about the quality of the trials, that they are fair and objective, than worrying the penalty.

BobR, a simple Google Search will provide you with information that confirms the UN also criticises the US over the death penalty, calling for the US to abolish the practice.

A second search might reveal that the UN is not the US.

^ bobr i think you will find the un critisises all countries with the death penalty. What thailand looses in numbers it certainly makes up with the crule and unusial way in which it keeps people on death row, knowing that they can be execulted at any time with just a couple hours notice.

The us on the otherhand, particually texas, seems to havealmost a rabit entusasm to kill people, even when the conviction is demonstatably unsafe and members of the former jury are saying that too.

Sure they do, but it's irrational to expect a developing country to abolish something that one of the most developed countries in the World still does in quantity.

It's about priorities too, even the UN can only criticize so much, then they are tiresome. Making sure any form of punishment does not happen to innocent persons is far more important and real world relevant than complaining about what specific punishment those truly guilty of serious crimes get. In Thailand's case, the conditions in their prisons are far more of a threat to anyone here than the extremely remote chances of being executed.

It's also arguable whether or not the 2 hour notice is more or less humane than the count down we do at home.

One of the worlds developed contries...... I guess its how you define 'developed', if we look at the death penalty you will fine that the us is associating lits self wi a remarkable collection of contries that share many of the real attributes of the us like saudi arabia, pakistan, china, thailand, malysia.........

If the best argument for the un not hastling thailand over the death sentence is 'well america does it and they are 'developed'' then i would suggest you have a good think about what you are supporting.

The problem is that governments with death penaties tend to take their lack of respect for human life to other places than the execution room. You know places like the streets etc

Moo Ham got 10yrs for using a car as a wepon and diliberatly killing people , he did not get the death penalty and is still free , he has money and the poor do not so they would have been executed .

Originally Posted by BobR

Why does the UN harass Thailand over it's death penalty? The USA executes far more people every year than Thailand does. Texas alone far exceeds the 2 that Thailand last executed in 2010.
They should be more worried about the quality of the trials, that they are fair and objective, than worrying the penalty.

Agree.

UN is collection of all states, many of them dictatorships, and they all have a say. Does not work. Security council is much more sane - unless you get letting Indians and Pakistanis and everyone in.

Dump the death penalty, ex-senator urges - The Nation

Dump the death penalty, ex-senator urges

Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation on Sunday March 11, 2012 1:00 am

Philippine activist tells Thais capital punishment is medieval

Civilised society should abolish capital punishment because it is inhumane, essentially based on a medieval concept of retribution, and risks innocent people being put to death, according to Aquilino Pimentel, a former Philippine senator who played an key role in ending the death penalty in his country in 2006.

Visiting Bangkok at the invitation of Amnesty International Thailand and the Union for Civil Liberty,

the 79-year-old Pimentel urged Thais opposed to capital punishment to keep their "passion" burning, despite hearing that many Thais, including senior Buddhist monks, still support executions.

"A majority of Thais still do not support [abolition of the death penalty]," human rights lawyer Sarawut Prathumraj said. Sarawut told Pimentel that many Thais look back fondly to the 1960s and the era of dictator Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, who was known for summarily executing people accused of committing arson in public areas.

Thailand's Human Rights Master Plan for 2009 to 2013 states that the Kingdom aims to abolish capital punishment by the end of the period, but the goal seems far removed from reality, as there is no visible movement towards that end at present.

Pimentel met and addressed the Senate Committee on Justice and Human Rights, chaired by appointed Senator Somchai Sawaengkarn. Members of the committee exchanged differing views with Pimentel, with one member defending execution by lethal injection - the method practised in Thailand today - as "humane", and another saying that the death penalty was needed to rid society of its scourges.

Another member told Pimentel that it was not uncommon for some convicts who are sentenced to death to have their sentences commuted and to eventually walk free after a decade or so in prison.

Pimentel argued that the death penalty doesn't give condemned criminals the opportunity to reform themselves, while the risk of even one person being wrongly executed was too high for a civilised society to bear.

Pimentel said the notion of "an eye for an eye", also known as the Lex Talionis principle of Roman law, was medieval and not suited for modern society.

"If Lex Talionis were to be used to justify the imposition of the death penalty as an act of retribution, then in those cases of murder or rape, before the criminals are executed, they should first be subjected to the indignities or outright tortures that had been inflicted on the victims so that the criminals undergo the same level of pain as that suffered by the victims," he said.

The former Philippine senator also cited various works showing that the death penalty had no deterrent effect on criminality.

Somchai said after the meeting with Pimentel that the committee was interested in continuing to debate capital punishment, but added that "some people see the need for the death penalty to deal with those who are beyond [redemption]." He added that a compromise could eventually be struck, such as replacing the death penalty with long prison terms without parole, as is practised in the Philippines today.

Pimentel said that since the death penalty was abolished in his country, heinous crimes that would once have drawn a sentence of death were now punished by imprisonment for 20 to 40 years without parole. Some argue that long jail terms are an even worse punishment than death, he said.

One member of the Senate panel argued that it was better to kill a bird than keep it in a cage without letting it see the Sun, which was cruel and inhumane, like a long prison sentence. Pimentel said he couldn't answer on behalf of the bird, however.

If the United Nations Human Rights Council want to abolish capital punishment, they demand a vote on it at the UN.

How about waiting 20 years on death row like the guy in America the other week

...Because we're a barbaric feudal society that has to protect wealth and privelege even if it means murdering a few peasants to show who's in charge?

Originally Posted by BobR

Why does the UN harass Thailand over it's death penalty? The USA executes far more people every year than Thailand does. Texas alone far exceeds the 2 that Thailand last executed in 2010.
They should be more worried about the quality of the trials, that they are fair and objective, than worrying the penalty.

One has to understand why the UN exist and it's operational purpose.
Historically, it [and other like global bodies and associations] is a puppet for the selected few....you can guess whom the selected few are.

Originally Posted by Neverna

If the United Nations Human Rights Council want to abolish capital punishment, they demand a vote on it at the UN.

The UN and human rights.

Isn't that a term of contradiction?

However getting back to the op. Does anyone think that thailands explanation will go any further than a rather long and wordy version of 'farang no understand thai'

Originally Posted by hazz

However getting back to the op. Does anyone think that thailands explanation will go any further than a rather long and wordy version of 'farang no understand thai'

Farang = the U.N.?

Originally Posted by Lostandfound

...Because we're a barbaric feudal society that has to protect wealth and privelege even if it means murdering a few peasants to show who's in charge?

Yeah, that could be the most of it. I still say it's primarily the money though. A combo of the two probably, flip a coin to know which matters most to them. I think the idea is knowing how to behave properly. I talked with me Phuket pal and while any kind of trouble is to be avoided, if one has half a brain one will be 0k. Friends are most important among ex-pat's. I just wish it was 1970 again. Oh well, it is what it is and still beats the U.S. of A. Imo.

I was in a courtroom several years ago and watched a judge give a black guy 26 years. I didn't know what the guy had done. Maybe he deserved it. Probably about half of U.S. prisoners are in for non violent crimes. The judge was speaking somewhat hurriedly and the sentence just rolled off his lips without him even looking up from his papers. I guess he needed to hurry to get to his next sentencing. The black guy was in prison garb and cuffed, he didn't say a word and was just hurriedly led away. It wasn't until that time I realised how truly bararic the U.S. justice [sic.] is. I was taken aback by casualness of the system, the coldness of it.

Imo., the only way to beat the powers that be in regard to their wanting us to be in constant fear is to try and ignore them -and have some sense of course. I read that when a Thai law is passed that if not liked by the Thai people, they just ignore it and it soon is not enforced. I like that. The Thai's are a great people and their leaders -on the whole- are more careing of their people than are most other countys. Irrationality is where it's at so long as no one gets hurt. They need to realise this and quit taking money to hurt their people. It is my understanding that great influence and "face" are traditionally more important to Thai's than money. They need to get back to their roots or they will soon lose face amongst the Thai people in a big way.

I spent some time in Thailand with some mostly navy and some army guys. My friends were officers, but I liked hanging with their guards just as well or better. They were happy, friendly dudes mostly. An order is taken by Thai soldier's more seriously than I've seen in Western armies (Russia excepted. They are in Europe you know) . They put their lives on the line with zero hesitation if ordered to. The thing I did get from them though that you won't see in Western armies, is their independence when it comes to their treatment, i.e., it seemed -to me anyway- If a Thai thinks that he's being phuked with unfairly, thre's going to a problem. Officers don't like problems, so the soldiers and sailors get fair treatment. Maybe more than fair. Good for them and their spirit! Long live the irrational independence of the Thai people. I think I will be 0k there.

Originally Posted by Rural Surin

Originally Posted by hazz

However getting back to the op. Does anyone think that thailands explanation will go any further than a rather long and wordy version of 'farang no understand thai'

Farang = the U.N.?

Last time I checked most members of the UN were not thai, and therefore could not possibly understand the cultural importance of judicial and exjudical killings to thailand... or to be honest anything to do with thailand... which might explain why thailand keeps loosing its land dispute cases at the place

Originally Posted by Zampan0

I was in a courtroom several years ago and watched a judge give a black guy 26 years. I didn't know what the guy had done. Maybe he deserved it. Probably about half of U.S. prisoners are in for non violent crimes. The judge was speaking somewhat hurriedly and the sentence just rolled off his lips without him even looking up from his papers. I guess he needed to hurry to get to his next sentencing. The black guy was in prison garb and cuffed, he didn't say a word and was just hurriedly led away. It wasn't until that time I realised how truly bararic the U.S. justice [sic.] is. I was taken aback by casualness of the system, the coldness of it.

Towards the end of my short career as an attorney, I stood in a Victorville, California courtroom and watched a moron judge reaffirm a life sentence on a Black 34 year old male defendant for the horrible society endangering 3rd strike offense of buying a dime bag of cocaine from an undercover cop. The guys priors were a non-violent robbery at age 19 and a burglary sometime in his 20's Yes, the American judicial system has some real problems. Even the cop who had arrested the guy voluntarily came to Court and testified he was deeply troubled by this sentence and would live with a sense of remorse and regret for having arresting him if it were upheld.

This was one of my own final strikes before deciding I could no longer tolerate that career choice.

^I must admit that i don't have much knowledge of the details of the justice system in US. But aren't these judges appointed and reappointed though a local election? saying that isn't the guy in charge of the prosecutors similarly elected.

If this is the case it seems to be that its inevitable that judges and prosecutors would carry out their duties with an eye to its effect on the next election.