In this submission, Manushya Foundation, Power by The Keyboard, Khmer Democratic Rescue Foundation (KDRF), and the Thai CSOs Coalition for the UPR examine Thailand’s persistent failure to prevent and respond to transnational repression, including violations of the principle of non-refoulement, in light of recommendations accepted during the third UPR cycle (2021), highlighting critical protection gaps, systemic inaction, and the consolidation of Thailand as a regional hub for cross-border repression targeting human rights defenders, activists, and exiled dissidents.

​

During the third UPR cycle, Thailand received recommendations on human rights defenders, torture and ill-treatment, freedom of expression, enforced disappearances, and refugees and asylum seekers, most of which it supported. However, implementation remains largely lacking. No recommendations addressed the protection of individuals targeted by transnational repression or the prevention of such practices. On refugees and asylum seekers, Thailand supported recommendations to consider ratifying the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol (51.16), halt returns of refugees to situations of risk (52.78), strengthen legal protections (52.79), and ensure access to healthcare in detention (52.70). At the same time, it noted recommendations to ratify and implement the Refugee Convention (52.14, 52.15) and to expand socio-economic rights, including access to work (52.80).

​

Limited progress includes the ratification of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance in 2024 and the enactment of the Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act in 2023. However, concerns persist regarding the independence, timeliness, and effectiveness of its implementation, particularly in cases involving transnational repression and risks of refoulement.

 

Thailand is frequently portrayed as a safe haven for human rights defenders (HRDs) fleeing persecution across Southeast Asia. In reality, it functions as a space of legal limbo and heightened vulnerability, where individuals remain exposed to transnational repression, defined, in line with OHCHR, as “acts conducted or directed by a State, or its proxies, to deter, silence, or punish dissent expressed from outside its territory”. In the absence of a formal asylum framework, HRDs are routinely treated as irregular migrants, leaving them at constant risk of arrest, immigration detention, and deportation, including in violation of the principle of non-refoulement. At the same time, mounting evidence indicates that Thailand has become a regional hub for transnational repression, facilitated by porous borders and patterns of cross-border cooperation among neighboring States. Thai authorities have enabled or acquiesced in acts of surveillance, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, targeted killings, and forced returns of dissidents and refugees, including through informal intergovernmental arrangements commonly referred to as “swap mart” practices.

 

This pattern is reflected in recent findings by Freedom House, identifying Thailand as the top host country globally for recorded incidents of transnational repression.

 

Thailand does not recognize transnational repression in law or practice, and therefore fails to prevent and respond to it. Its geographic position, sharing borders with countries that generate significant numbers of political exiles, combined with authoritarian consolidation in Cambodia, China, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam, and entrenched impunity, has enabled transnational repression to proliferate across the region. These risks are compounded by a lack of asylum and protection framework, as Thailand is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, leaving those at risk without formal legal protection. At the same time, the rapid expansion of digital surveillance and cross-border cyber-harassment ecosystems has further facilitated transnational repression, allowing abuses to extend beyond physical borders.

 

Against this backdrop, this submission examines the structural drivers, lived realities, and systemic failures that enable transnational repression in Thailand, and sets out recommendations for reform. It is structured as follows:

• Section 2 examines Thailand’s legal and policy framework, identifying the root causes enabling transnational repression;

• Section 3 analyses Thailand’s role as a regional hub, centring lived experiences;

• Section 4 highlights protection gaps and systemic failures in addressing transnational repression;

• Section 5 sets out recommendations to advance the implementation of UPR commitments and address the violations identified above.