.png)
Joint Press Release: Civil society demands action on human rights in Thailand following UN review
BANGKOK, 10 November 2026 — The Thai government must translate recommendations received during its fourth Universal Periodic Review (UPR IV) into concrete action on persistent human rights violations and structural inequalities, civil society representatives said today, warning that celebrated reforms and renewed promises have yet to reach many affected communities.
The groups welcomed calls to protect peaceful expression, tackle transnational repression and advance mandatory human rights due diligence legislation for businesses. But no State clearly called for self-determination or an end to emergency rule in Patani. Praise for marriage equality and the ethnic groups law also risked overshadowing unresolved demands for legal gender recognition, recognition of Indigenous Peoples, and protection against dispossession and criminalisation.
Thailand received 297 recommendations from 106 Member States during its review on 9 November. The UPR is a UN process through which States examine another country’s human rights record and recommend changes.
In its initial response, Thailand reaffirmed pledges to advance anti-SLAPP and anti-discrimination legislation while continuing to defend Section 112 and leaving key concerns about prosecutions, impunity and forced returns inadequately addressed. The groups demanded reforms with clear deadlines, budgets and meaningful community participation, alongside immediate action to stop abuses and provide remedies.
Civil and Political Rights: Defending the right to dissent
Thailand received 31 recommendations concerning freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and human rights defenders. These included a recommendation from Sweden to amend Section 112 by removing mandatory minimum prison sentences and introducing measures to protect children and young people from criminal liability under this provision.
However, these freedoms remain restricted by laws and practices that leave people, including child and youth human rights defenders, at risk of prosecution for expressing their views.
“Amnesty International Thailand considers that, although the Thai authorities reaffirmed their commitment to advancing anti-SLAPP and anti-discrimination legislation as voluntary pledges, and expressed their intention to hold consultations on amendments to the Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act, they have not adequately addressed concerns about the prosecution of children and young people for exercising their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
At the same time, the authorities continue to maintain that Section 112 of the Criminal Code serves to protect public order and national security and is consistent with international principles.
While some progress towards protecting freedom of expression has begun, particularly through efforts to draft anti-SLAPP legislation, the fact that these human rights concerns and demands reached the international stage in Geneva owes much to civil society’s collective efforts. These include preparing and submitting reports, gathering evidence, and supporting civil society networks to bring their concerns and demands before the international community,” said Thanaporn Keeratisamit, Policy Officer at Amnesty International Thailand.
Recommendations on torture, enforced disappearances and arbitrary detention included Switzerland’s call for independent investigations and Austria’s call for accountability for commanders and a ban on amnesties under the anti-torture law. But Costa Rica alone explicitly addressed discrimination against Malayu Muslims in Thailand’s Southern Border Provinces. No State clearly called for self-determination or an end to emergency rule.
Thailand cited local Muslim representation and women’s skills programmes as signs of progress in Thailand’s Deep South without addressing demands for accountability and real political participation.
“The government must establish a civilian-led peace process, with women and youth sharing real decision-making power, and publish a timetable developed with our communities,” said Asmah Tanyongdaoh, Board Member of Manushya Foundation and Coordinator of the PATANI Working Group for Monitoring on International Mechanisms.
Among 19 recommendations on non-refoulement and deportation, the Netherlands raised the forced return of 40 Uyghur men in violation of Thailand’s anti-torture law. The United Kingdom called for stronger safeguards before removal within 12 months. Thailand’s reference to a seven-day appeal period left unclear whether judicial review would precede deportation.
“Ultimately, refugee protection is not simply about providing shelter to those fleeing persecution. It is about guaranteeing that no one is returned to face danger, and that no one is made unsafe simply because they sought safety in Thailand,” said Tanyakorn Thippayapokin, Asylum Access Thailand.
For the first time in Thailand’s UPR, four recommendations explicitly addressed transnational repression. The Netherlands, New Zealand, Belgium and Canada called for protection against cross-border persecution, an end to Thailand’s involvement and a comprehensive legal framework.
“This is a landmark moment, for the first time, UPR recommendations are being brought into discussions on transnational repression (TNR), opening critical pathways to strengthen protection for political refugees and human rights defenders forced into exile for resisting authoritarianism. In Thailand, which has recorded the highest number of TNR incidents globally, this is a crucial step towards dismantling cross-border structures of state violence, challenging impunity and ensuring that international human rights mechanisms serve the people targeted by repression rather than the states perpetrating it,” shared Emilie Palamy Pradichit, Founder and Executive Director of Manushya Foundation.
Land, Environmental Rights and Corporate Accountability
On business and human rights, Palestine called for due diligence legislation developed with affected communities, while Ecuador urged legally binding measures.
Nattaporn Artharn from the Isan Democracy Movement responded, “Companies must identify and prevent human rights and environmental harm. When damage occurs, people must be able to obtain justice, compensation and environmental restoration.”
Corporate accountability cannot be separated from the state’s responsibility for dispossession and criminalisation in the name of environmental protection. The Marshall Islands was the only state to explicitly link land and resource rights with forest laws, calling for the protection of ethnic groups and Indigenous Peoples. The groups welcomed this recommendation, but called for convictions of forest communities to be reviewed and the land rights of those criminalised for protecting and cultivating their ancestral territories restored.
Nittaya Muangklang of the Sab Wai Villagers and Board Member at Manushya Foundation said, “When our farmland became part of Sai Thong National Park, the government called it forest protection. Instead, we were labelled as “criminals”, accused of trespassing on our own land, which our families had tilled for decades.”
Only four recommendations explicitly mentioned Indigenous Peoples, including Ecuador’s call for legal recognition and Denmark’s call to guarantee Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). Meanwhile, several States praised the Protection and Promotion of the Way of Life of Ethnic Groups Act B.E. 2568 (2025), despite its failure to legally recognise Indigenous Peoples or guarantee FPIC.
“International frameworks and obligations remain important mechanisms for protecting our rights and allowing us to raise our demands with the international community. But if we continue to be referred to merely as an ‘ethnic group’, we have very little power to make any demands. We can only accept the situation as it is. Even the identity and recognition that we have long been calling for are still not accepted by the State. Instead, the State continues to impose the label of "ethnic group" on us,” said Katima Leejah of the Indigenous Women’s Network of Thailand (IWNT) and Board Member at Manushya Foundation.
Equality and bodily autonomy
Access to safe abortion and reproductive healthcare was raised by Mexico, which urged Thailand to guarantee equitable access to health services, including sexual and reproductive health, for all migrants, refugees and displaced persons, regardless of their migration status. Iceland called for full decriminalisation of abortion, while South Africa urged expanded access to abortion services.
However, limited information about available services, refusals without referrals, stigma and additional requirements, including partner or parental consent and forced contraception, continue to prevent people from accessing care.
“No one wants to become pregnant just to test whether they can access abortion services, and no one wants to undergo an illegal abortion or face dangerous risks,” said Chonthita Kraisrikul of Tamtang Foundation.
Despite praise from Thailand and several UN Member States for marriage equality, which entered into force in 2025, wider barriers persist. Seven recommendations addressed SOGIESC rights, but Thailand still lacks legal gender recognition legislation, leaving transgender, intersex, non-binary and other gender-diverse people facing daily discrimination.
“Marriage equality should not be used as the sole measure of the rights of LGBTQ+ people in Thailand, because not everyone wants to get married. People have different ways of life and face different limitations. Many are still made fun of through official documents, many are denied employment opportunities, and many still do not have full rights to make decisions about their own bodies,” said Suttitep Santham of Young Pride Foundation.
Beyond the Review
The groups reiterate their call on the Thai government to translate UPR IV recommendations into concrete reforms consistent with its human rights obligations, with transparent implementation and meaningful participation of affected communities.
Human rights cannot be measured by state promises, but by people's power to exercise their rights, access justice and challenge systems of oppression. The review is over, but the struggle for accountability continues.
Issuing Organisations
Manushya Foundation, Amnesty International Thailand, Asylum Access Thailand, Tamtang Foundation, Isan Democracy Movement, the PATANI Working Group for Monitoring on International Mechanisms, Indigenous Women’s Network in Thailand (IWNT), MovED (People’s Movement to End Discrimination), Young Pride Foundation and the Thai CSOs Coalition for the UPR and UN Mechanisms
Press contact
Jo Badong
Communications & Campaigns Manager, Manushya Foundation
jo@manushyafoundation.org | +66 81 863 7526
