| ALT Trafficking-Prominent Case Report |
 |
 |
 |
| Thursday, 01 September 2011 00:00 |
|
The network of anti-trafficking agencies and organizations in Thailand has no system to obtain current updates on significant labor trafficking cases. HRDF Monitors has been observing court hearings, meeting with victims and witnesses, and obtaining updates from the DSI, police, prosecutors, judges, government officials, and victim advocates. The ALT produces a monthly update and analysis report, including recommendations for efficient enforcement, distributed to government agencies, embassies, and Thai and international anti-trafficking organizations. The report will be delivered monthly with details and up-to-date information on significant trafficking cases to the counter-trafficking partners. The first report contains 10 prominent human trafficking cases. The ALT aims to increase the likelihood of effective prosecution while to assure such cases do not fade from public awareness. If you wish you to be added in our mail list, kindly contact Ms. Siwanoot Soitong at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
1. Prapasnavee Service Provider: the Anti Human Trafficking Division (AHTD), Region 5 Year: 2006 Background In July 2003, Prapasnavee Fishing Boats No. 1-6 together with 128 crew members on board left Thailand from Samutsakorn on a scheduled journey of 30 months to Indonesian territorial waters near Wanam Island. After 2 years when the fishing concession granted by the Indonesian government expired, the Prapasnavee 1 to 6 had to leave the Indonesian coast. However even after months of negotiation with the Indonesian government, the owners of the boats could not renew the fishing concession. While the negotiations, the fishing boats had to wait out in the sea for several months. The crew had to live on leftover food stock. Gradually the crew members started falling sick. 2 of them died and their bodies were buried on Wanam Island. Fifteen days after the death of the 2 persons, all 6 boats started their journey back to Thailand. After filling up on fuel, on 3rd June 2006, the fishing boats resumed their journey to Thailand. During the journey more crew members became sick and on an average 3 people died each day. In response the Captain ordered the rest of the crew members to dump the dead bodies into the ocean. From the facts, the deaths were caused because the employers did not provide adequate food and medicines to the crew for several months during which the Prapasnavee boats were waiting for renewal of concession from the Indonesian government. The boats also had to continuously hide from the Indonesian authorities since otherwise they were liable to be arrested. The crew members were clearly abandoned by their employers. The Prapasnavee fishing boats arrived at Samutsakorn province in Thailand on 1st July 2006, almost three years after they had left the province. 39 crew members had died during the journey and 1 crew member died in the hospital at Samutsakorn. All surviving crew members on arriving in Thailand had to be admitted to the hospital because of their poor health. The employers were supposed to pay the balance of the wages after the shipping boats returned to Thailand. Once the fishing boats returned the employers scheduled a date for the payment of the wages. However the employers did not keep their promise and did not pay the balance wages due to the crew members. Prosecution i) Labor case; On 1st March 2007, 62 surviving crew members consisting of 16 Thais, 2 from Laos, 44 persons of Mon ethnicity from Burma, with the aid of lawyers from the Human Rights and Development Foundation (HRDF) and the Lawyer Council of Thailand (LCT) filed a case against the owners of Prapasnavee fishing boats at the Central Labor Court in Samutsakorn. In their suit, the surviving crew members claimed a total amount of 15,894,610 Baht that included unpaid wages, special payment against the money earned from the fishing catch as promised by the employers, wages for working on holidays, severance payment with respect to termination of employment and other damage compensations payable under labor protection law. The trial lasted a period of one year and on 17th September 2008. The Central Labor Court (Samutsakorn) delivered its judgment. The Court ordered the 5 employers and owners of Prapasnavee 1-6, Mr. Suthiphong Phongsathaporn and others, to pay a sum of 3,831,000 Baht to the 38 crew members against unpaid wages and compensation as result of unfair termination of employment and breach of labor protection law. The Court also ordered that such compensation should be paid together with interest at the rate of 15 % per annum since the time of submission of lawsuit till the time all money was paid. The Court also ordered the employers to make payment within 30 days. After that the employers appealed the judgment to the Supreme Court of the question of law; “The 10th Ministerial Regulation (B.E. 2541) issued under Labor Protection Act B.E. 2541, a fishing vessel which had been outside Thai territorial waters for more than 1 year period was not protected by the labor protection law.” The labor case is pending in the Supreme Court proceeding. ii) Criminal case; The case is currently under the investigation of the Anti Human Trafficking Division (AHTD), Region 5. iii) Civil case; In accordance with Section 35, the Anti Trafficking in Persons Act 2008, the victims has the right to compensation for damages through the Public Prosecutor who shall submit the compensation request to the Criminal Court.
2. Ranyapaew Service Provider: Public Prosecutor/ Fight against Child Exploitation Foundation (FACE) Year: 2006 Background On 14 September 2006, the government agencies and civil society organizations rescued 500 Burmese migrant workers, including men, women and children, from the Ranyapaew shrimp processing factory in Mahachai, Samutsakhon Province. This is one of the largest labor trafficking cases in Thailand before the Anti Trafficking Act B.E. 2551 (2008) was in force. While it received much publicity when first discovered, the Thai press has provided little follow-up information on this important case. The trafficked persons had been confined, threatened and forced to work 18 hours a day, from 24.00-18.00 hrs. The workers had to work without any break and holiday in the worst condition with the armed guards to control over the workers and high fence. They were physically abused. The work permits were taken. The monthly wages were deducted by the employer as the costs of broker fee, work permit, food and accommodation. The migrants received 300-500 baht ($8 - $13.50) per month. After being rescued, all the trafficked persons were put under the protection of the Kredtrakarn Shelter. Prosecution i) Labor case; The labor case has been settled in November 2007, in which the Company has paid a total amount of 3,600,020 baht to all the victims, including wages, overtime wages and damages based on the Labor Protection Act. The labor case was successful and the migrant workers were able to receive their unpaid wages and compensation. ii) Criminal case; The court sentenced three defendants which are the owner of the factories (mother, father and son) to 20 years imprisonment each. There is no fine, only 20-year imprisonment (which is the maximum penalty for this crime under the Thai criminal code). The charges are for the violations of the criminal code section 310, 312 bis, 312 ter (detain/imprisoned other and forced other people into slavery condition). The criminal case is currently under the Court of Appeals.
3. Anoma Service Provider: Samutsakorn Provincial Public Prosecutor Year: 2008 Background The Burmese migrants were forced to work since October 2003 in Anoma shrimp processing factory in Samutsakhon Province. 206 migrants, including 48 women and 25 children were rescued in March 2008. The victims were confined and forced to work for under minimum wage without any days off. The factory had a high fence allowed no escape with 6 CCTV located around the factory. The workers were forced worked from 2.00-21.00 hrs with only a meal break. They received 50-100 Baht per week after broker fee and housing cost deduction. 200 Baht would be deducted extra in case of illness. There was only one main entrance in the factory with no window. Other entrances were locked and chained. 20-30 workers had to stay together in a tiny room. After rescue, the migrants were separated into 2 groups; legal and illegal entry. 206 migrants who did not possess work permits were identified as human trafficking victims as they were forced to work and had no freedom to leave the workplace. Prosecution i) Labor case; The 54 trafficked persons were joint plaintiffs together with the public prosecutor filed a labor case to the Central Labor Court. The negotiation was successfully done under a compromise agreement. The factory owner paid 500,000 Baht to the migrants. ii) Criminal case; The police completed their investigation in August 2008 and submitted the case to the Office of Attorney-General (OAG), filing 20 civil and criminal charges against the factory owner and its manager. The police tried to collect more evidences to lead to the Burmese procurers. The OAG submitted the case to the Criminal Court in September 2008. The preliminary court hearing was conducted in October 2008. Court hearings were resumed in February 2009. Later in November 2009, the Criminal Court convicted and sentenced the two defendants as traffickers. One of the defendants, pled guilty to some of the charges. He was sentenced to five years in prison and faced one million baht fine (approximately $30,000). The second defendant, who denied all charges, received a sentence of eight years in prison and two million baht fine ($60,000). In July 2011, the Court of Appeals confirmed the judgment.
4. Maesot Labor Trafficking Service provider: Labor Law Clinic (LLC) Year: 2010 Background HRDF-ALT lawyers provided legal advice to a 17-year-old girl trafficking victim, whose case came into light by the Labor Law Clinic (LLC). She worked as a housemaid in a grocery shop owned by a Karen-Thai in Tambon Tha Sai Luad, Mae Sot and earned 500 baht a month for three years. In August 2010, she changed her job to work another place with promised 1,000 Baht per month. After three months working, she had received any payment and her employer promised to pay all the wages, if she worked as a masseur with another promise of good payment and easy job. Eventually she was trafficked to a massage place. In February 2011, the ALT project brought the case to Tak Provincial Office of Social Development and Human Security (TPSDHS). A multi-disciplinary team meeting was organized by the TPSDHS including civil society organizations and government agencies. The meeting participants concluded the case fell under the legal definition of human trafficking. The ALT provided case details to the TPSDHS for the prosecution process. The case was transferred to the Anti Human Trafficking Division (AHTD) under the Royal Thai Police, Ministry of Interior. Prosecution i) Labor case; The victim has no identification card or work permit. The actual working evidence based on Mi-ae, an employer. The HRDR-ALT lawyers agreed to refer the case to the TPSDHS using the multi-disciplinary team mechanism to provide legal assistance. ii) Criminal case; The case is under investigation of Region 2, the Anti Human Trafficking Division (AHTD). In March 2011, an interrogation was done by the AHTD team including social worker, psychologist, police officer and public prosecutor. HRDF-ALT observed the interrogation and provided police with further information on the Burmese broker. In June 2011, LLC brought a trafficked person to lodge a complaint to the Rights and Liberties Protection Department in Maesot for compensation under the Damages for the Injured Person and Compensation and Expense for the Accused in Criminal Case Act, 2001. On 29 June 2011, the arrest-warrant has yet been issued due to waiting for the trafficked person to give her testimony to sketch the alleged offender‟s picture. iii) Civil case; In accordance with Section 35, the Anti Trafficking in Persons Act 2008, the victims has the right to compensation for damages through the Public Prosecutor who shall submit the compensation request to the Criminal Court. Victim Protection The multi-disciplinary team held a meeting in January 2011 to agree to have the trafficked person temporarily stayed at the civil organization‟s shelter. The victim will be provided assistance as appropriate on her health care.
5. Ukrainian Engineer Case Service Provider: Department of Special Investigation (DSI) Year: 2011 Background A 57-year-old Ukrainian engineer who reported that he was forced to work for 14 years at a Pathum Thani factory with no payment. On 11 Jan 2011, He was rescued from the Thai-owned oxygen equipment factory located at the Rangsit industrial complex. The case came to light by a Burmese worker who left the factory. He sent a letter included contact information to the engineer‟s family in Ukraine last November. The family members contacted Interpol and local police who then contacted the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior Affairs which informed the embassy in Bangkok. The Ukrainian engineering started working in April 1996 as a specialist in oxygen equipment installation for a company which was the agent for a Ukrainian supplier. After suffering burns in an accident in July 1996 and being unable to return home, he was verbally offered a work agreement by a Thai factory owner which included a 30,000 baht monthly salary, plus a car and other expenses, including medical expenses. Afterward, without his consent, the owner planned to build a new oxygen factory and he would have to maintain two oxygen systems. He said he only received a full salary for the first three months. By the end of 1998 he made a demand on his employer for 600,000 baht in outstanding pay. In 1998 the owner stopped paying him and confiscated his passport. Hence he claimed that over the next 12 years he was only paid from ''time to time'', sometimes receiving 1,000 baht a week to buy food and nothing more. In addition, during a long period he did not have my passport and did not have money to even buy food. He was under 24-hour guard and only allowed to leave the premises to buy food from a stall near the factory. He claimed that the owner threatened to kill him and sometimes fired a handgun in the air to intimidate him. He was too afraid to attempt an escape as the guard would act on the owner's orders as he was considered crucial to the running of the factory. Prosecution i) Labor case; The Ukrainian engineer‟s original contract was for 30,000 Baht (US$1,000) a month plus expenses. He request for full compensation of about five million baht ($162,000). However he was eligible for up to two years' pay only regarding the Thai Labor Law and the Civil Code. The factory owner claimed the engineer's wage at 8,000 Baht ($267) a month, the owner offered 150,000 Baht ($4,850) to settle the case. The final negotiation ended at 300,000 Baht at the Labor Protection and Welfare Department‟s Pathum Thani office. ii) Criminal case; Pathum Thani Police charged the owner of Navanakorn Gas (2005) Co. Factory with hiring a foreign worker illegally and violating the labor law. On 27 January 2011, the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) mentioned that they had located and interviewed the Burmese man, who worked at the same factory and helped the Ukrainian engineer to escape from the factory. He reportedly told that the Ukrainian engineer was not intimidated, threatened or confined while working at the factory. The DSI has not conducted further investigation. There is no report of court process. iii) Civil case; There was no element which was concerned to the criminal case and the Ukrainian engineer gained the compensation from the negotiation. Thus there is no civil case. Victim Protection The Ukrainian engineer was under protection of the Ukrainian Embassy before the repatriation.
6. Samaesarn Case Case Number: อ. 1632/2554 Service Provider: Pathum Thani Shelter Year: 2011 Background In January 2011, 8 Burmese fishermen were rescued at Samaesarn, Chonburi Province by the Anti Human Trafficking Division (AHTD) Region 2. They were detained in a small cabin which was in a house at the shore and constructed by wood and zinc. Inside the cabin, there are separated rooms which each sized is 3x4 square meter. There is no window, no restroom and no electricity. The rooms were locked and covered by zinc. The detainees could not see outside. In addition to the detention, victims were physically abused and forced to work on the fishing boat. They had been working 5 months in the boat with no payment. After the rescue operation, the AHTD charged the Burmese broker for conspiring to commit a human trafficking, detain, confine and other illegal migration offences. In April 2011, the public prosecutor filed a human trafficking charge to the Criminal Court. Prosecution i) Labor Case; In May 2011, the Labor Inspector ordered to the owner of the factory to pay wages and other damages to the 15 trafficked persons. The total amount is 780,000 Baht ($26,000). ii) Criminal Case; The hearing was held in the Criminal Court. The case is under a responsibility of the Special Public Prosecutor Office, Region 9. On 11 April 2011, the Public Prosecutor submitted the human trafficking case to the Criminal Court. On 7 June 2011, the ALT-HDRF lawyer attended the Court hearing for pre-trial testimony. The TACDB lawyer submitted a request to the Court for being a joint plaintiff. The Criminal Court scheduled the next hearing on 6th to 8th December 2011 iii) Civil Case; In accordance with Section 35, the Anti Trafficking in Persons Act 2008, the victims has the right to compensation for damages through the Public Prosecutor who shall submit the compensation request to the Criminal Court Victim Protection The trafficked persons are under protection of Pathum Thani Shelter. Currently, there are 6 trafficked persons remain. Two trafficked victim are scheduled to be repatriated back to Burma.
7. Vietnamese Surrogate Mothers Case Service Provider: Alliance Anti Trafic (AAT) Year: 2011 Background On 23 February 2011, the Thai Immigration Police together with the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS) in collaboration with several humanitarian and non-governmental organizations rescued 15 Vietnamese surrogate mothers. Most of the victims aged 19 to 26. They were reportedly deceived with promises of good jobs in Bangkok. Their passports were taken immediately after they arrived in Thailand. The women were being held in three houses in the outskirts of Bangkok. The owners would take the sperm of some “famous people” and then implant them into the chosen surrogate mothers. Babies would then be sold to foreigners. Police seek an arrest warrant for the alleged leader of a Taiwanese gang that ran this operation. This issue was discussed at a meeting of the Medical Council's subpanel where the agenda was to determine if any doctors are involved. On 25 and 28 February 2011, the HRDF-ALT participated in meetings with the Public Health Ministry including the Department of Special Investigation (DSI), the Immigration Bureau, the Embassy of Vietnam, the Embassy of Taiwan, relevant hospitals and the Alliance Anti Trafic (AAT), member of the Anti-Trafficking Organizations Network. The immigration Police would bring a case against the Taiwanese gang. Prosecution against the hospital and doctors will be subject to the relevant laws. The Minister did not grant abortion permission to the two Vietnamese women in Thailand, despite the circumstances. In the meeting, the law enforcement officers were assigned by the minister to speed up with advance testimony process within seven days due to the Thai government does not want abortion to take place in Thailand and additionally, birthing in Thailand may create complex legal issues such as nationality and legal support to the new born. Prosecution i) Labor case; Due to a surrogate mother is illegal employment in Thailand, the victims are not entitled to wages ii) Criminal case; The case is under the investigation of the Immigration Bureau. On 12 March 2011, in response to a request from the Alliance Anti Trafic (AAT), HRDF-ALT provided legal advice and preparation for the victims‟ interrogation with the interpreter from the Embassy of Vietnam at the government shelter, “Ban Kredtrakarn.” The advance testimony was held in the Nonthaburi Provincial Court. The Medical Council haven‟t been received the decision, about the doctors who concerned, from its ethics subcommittee. iii) Civil case; In accordance with Section 35, the Anti Trafficking in Persons Act 2008, the victims has the right to compensation for damages through the Public Prosecutor who shall submit the compensation request to the Criminal Court. Victim Protection On 30 May 2011, the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS), the Alliance of Anti Trafic in collaboration with the Embassy of Vietnam repatriated 10 Vietnamese women, including their babies to Vietnam. Remarks: the Cabinet passed the draft legislation protecting children born via the medical reproductive technology. The law was still pending for the House‟s consideration and until it is put into effect, the issue of surrogate pregnancies will come under the Medical Council's jurisdiction. Regulations say that surrogate pregnancies are only allowed when a couple's eggs and sperm are owned, when the woman carrying the baby is not paid for the pregnancy and is related to one of the parents
8. Din Daeng Garment Factory Case No. : อส. 22/2554 Service Provider: Pathumthani Shelter and Public Prosecutor of Special Public Prosecutor Office Region 4 September 2011 Year: 2011 Background In April 2011, the Anti Human Trafficking Division (AHTD) Region 1 raided on the garment factory in the Din Daeng area of Bangkok and rescued more than 60 Burmese migrants who were kept in prison-like conditions and were forced to work. They were being kept in a four-storey building and were prohibited from leaving and making phone calls. They had to work from 8am to midnight, after which they were detained in a locked room, where the workers were crowded inside. On average they worked16 hours a day and only received THB200 ($US7) a month. The Chinese couple, the owners of the garment factory, claimed that they kept the workers locked up because they had hired Burmese workers legally before and they had run away. The factory owner said the wages were low because they were deducting the Bt15, 000 that each worker owed them for becoming eligible for work. The AHTD charged a Chinese couple with labor violence and human trafficking offences. Prosecution i) Labor case; In May 2011, the Labor Inspector ordered to the factory owners to pay wages and other damages to the 15 trafficked persons, totaling the amount of THB 780,000 baht($26,000). ii) Criminal case; The court hearings were held in the Criminal Court. The case is under responsibility of the Public Prosecutor of Special Public Prosecutor Office Region 4. On 18 May 2011, the AHTD requested the victims to give their testimony to sketch the picture of the other alleged offender whom found by the AHTD that he related to the offences. In June 2011, the Public Prosecutor filed a case against the Chinese couple and others 3 Burmese brokers with the offence of entering, leaving, or residing in the Kingdom without permission, the offence of working in the Kingdom without permission, offence of trafficking person by the commission of person as from three person upwards, offence of providing a place for illegal migrant by the commission of person, offence of employing illegal migrant by the commission of person and offence of detaining or confining other person by the commission of person. In July 2011, the pre-trial testimony was held in the Criminal Court. iii) Civil case; In accordance with Section 35, the Anti Trafficking in Persons Act 2008, the victims has the right to compensation for damages through the Public Prosecutor who shall submit the compensation request to the Criminal Court. Victim Protection 15 trafficked persons were identified as trafficking victim. Of which 9 females were sent to the Kredtrakarn Shelter and 6 males were sent to the Pathumthani Shelter. In addition the male-victims, whom are under the protection of the Pathumthani Shelter, have got a job and work outside the shelter.
9. Songkhla Murder Case Service Provider: The Lawyer Council of Thailand September 2011 Year 2011 Background The Mirror Foundation filed a case of a former labor-trafficked person who received 90,000 Baht from the Anti Trafficking in Person Fund. He returned to a fishing boat in May 2011. He committed a murder. The boat captain was killed. The HRDF-ALT was requested to provide legal advice. On 26 May 2011, the HRDF-ALT lawyer and a case monitor conducted a fact-finding mission. The team met with the former trafficked victim at the Songkhla Provincial Prison. According the interview, the former trafficked person killed the boat captain because the captain denied giving him medicine for his hernia and rudely scolded at him. In addition, the accused claimed that he was forced to work. He also reported a physical abuse by the captain. Prosecution i) Criminal case; On 9 June 2011, the ALT-HRDF lawyers conducted a second fact-finding mission at the Songkhla Provincial Prison. The lawyers found that the accused was not a trafficked person as he was willing to work on a fishing boat. He also worked as a chief of fishermen who had the authority to distribute work and control the other fishermen. There was no evidence found to show that he was forced to work, detained or exploited. On 10 June 2011, the ALT-HRDF lawyers attended the Songkla Provicial Court hearing. However the hearing was postponed to 9 August 2011 due to the witness had not received a summons yet. Recommendation Given the fact that the accused was a trafficked person and received the assistance on food, shelter, medical treatment, physical and mental rehabilitation, education, and training from the government agencies and also received money from the Anti Trafficking in Person Fund since 2010. Nevertheless only a year after, he returned to a fishing boat, work in the worst condition, and committed crime. Therefore the relevant government agencies should reconsider the appropriate assistance to the trafficked person. The HRDF-ALT lawyers primarily agreed to prove that the accused committed an offence because he was impatient by being seriously maltreated with unjust cause. As a result of the mitigation, the HRDF-ALT will continue to monitor this case as its aspect of the efficiency on post-trafficked person protection process.
10. Suphanburi Case Service Provider: The Thai Allied Committee with Desegregated Burma Foundation (TACDB) Year: 2011 Background On 14 June 2011, Police rescued 52 illegal Burmese workers in Suphanburi province. Two Burmese and four Thai were arrested for illegally detaining the victims for ransom. The rescue operation was carried out by the Anti-Human Trafficking Division (AHTD) police following a complaint by a Burmese woman who filed a case through the Thai Allied Committee with Desegregated Burma Foundation (TACDB) that her daughter and her son-in-law entered to Thailand with a help of a Burmese broker who is one of the gang members. They were kidnapped and detained for a 36,000 baht ransom. The complainant had transferred 15,000 Baht to the gang's bank account. After the gang refused to free the two and demanded more money, she sought help from the foundation. An interrogation of the Burmese broker led the police to two houses in Samchuk district, Suphanburi where 50 other illegal Burmese were detained. The TACBD also contacted the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS)‟s Hot Line 1300 requesting a multi-disciplinary team to conduct the victims‟ identification. After 4 hours screening process, the MSDHS officials concluded that the 52 workers, including 13 children were not trafficked persons and charged them as illegal migrants. Protection The victim screening process took 4 hours, started from 5pm to 9pm on 14 June. It was only conducted by the MSDHS officials and 2 Burmese translators. When the HRDF-ALT lawyers arrived the 52 Burmese were sent to the AHTD in Bangkok for a prosecution. On 15 June 2011, the HRDF-ALT, the TACDB and the Lawyer Council of Thailand submitted 2 letters to the AHTD and the Bureau of Anti Trafficking in Women and Children (BATWC) to consider re-conduct the victim identification and ensure the rights of women and children are protected. On 22 June 2011, the multi-disciplinary team conducted the second victim identification. The team concluded that the 52 Burmese migrants, including 13 children were not trafficked persons. The 52 Burmese were charged as illegal migrants and sent to the Immigration Bureau‟s Detention Center. On 6 July 2011, the HRDF-ALT, the TACDB and the Lawyer Council of Thailand submitted letters to the Immigration Bureau requesting to visit the 52 Burmese. The lawyers‟ team gave the 52 Burmese the overview of the Thai court procedure, pre-trial testimony proceeding as well as labor rights. Prosecution i) Labor case; There is no prosecution as the migrants did not work yet ii) Criminal case; The 52 migrants were charged as illegal migrants and sent to the detention center. The migrants including 13 children are detained. They are now waiting for pre-trial. On 8 July, the pre-trial testimony was held in the Criminal Court which was conducted by the Public Prosecutor of Special Public Prosecutor Office, Region 7. Legal Opinion i) According to anti-human trafficking law and regulations, the victim identification process should be conducted by a multi-disciplinary team which consists of the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security, the Ministry of Labor, the Office of Attorney of General, the Royal Thai Police and related agencies. And in case of necessity for the benefit of fact clarification in relation to the trafficking in person and the security protection of a person, where there is a reasonable ground to believe that he is a trafficked person, the competent official may temporarily take such person into his custody(section 29 under the Anti Trafficking in Persons Act 2008). However the officials did not apply this law in the first victim identification. ii) Given the fact that all of these children are currently staying in the detention center may violate the rights of the child, the 13 children as the witness in judicial process, should be protected and provided a proper shelter for temporarily stay during the prosecution process. In accordance with Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 Article 12 (2) “For this purpose, the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings affecting the child, either directly, or through a representative or an appropriate body, in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law.” And Article 40 (4) under the Thai Constitutional B.E. 2550 “ …witness in a case have the right to be treated properly during the judicial process which includes the right not to testify against oneself.” As well as Article 40 (6) Children, youths, women, and disabled or handicapped persons have the right to proper protection during the judicial process…” Recommendation The 13 children should be released from the detention center. Related government agencies i.e. the Office of Social Development and Human Security, the Royal Thai Police, the Department of Rights and Liberties Protection shall provide a proper treatment to ensure rights of these children are protected.
The Anti Labor Trafficking project (ALT) was established in May 2009 under the Human Rights and Development Foundation. The ALT works to combat human trafficking particular in labor exploitation. The project aims to promote the better understanding of national and local government officials responsible for implementation, investigation and prosecution of under the Anti-Trafficking Act, to maintain public attention on significant trafficking cases in Thailand, to provide expert legal representation to victims and to build understanding as well as awareness of the relevant laws to high-risk migrant worker populations and the migrant community including migrant advocacy organizations, anti-trafficking activists and at-risk migrant workers. The ALT is supported by American Center for International Labor Solidarity (Solidarity Center). Human Rights and Development Foundation (HRDF) 87 Suthisarnwinichai Rd., Samsennok, Huaykwang, Bangkok 10320, Anti Labor Trafficking Project Contact person Ms. Siwanoot Soitong ALT Project Coordinator
ANNEX I: Human Trafficking Cases News Ranyapaew In Thai shrimp industry, child labor and rights abuses persist 25.04.2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/25/business/worldbusiness/25iht-baht.4.5438244.html SAMUT SAKHON, Thailand — It is 7:30 p.m., and an excited chatter fills the room as Nampeung, 11, and her friends get their work checked before clearing their desks and heading home. But this is no scene from the end of a school day. Nampeung is from Myanmar and an ethnic Mon girl who has been working in a seafood factory in central Thailand for nearly three years. The desks are the metal tables where she spends six days a week shelling shrimp, and her work is measured by the kilogram. Of the 200 people working in a barnlike factory during an unannounced visit by Reuters, nearly half appeared to be in their early teens or younger - clear evidence of child labor in an industry worth $2 billion a year in exports. Half of Thailand's exported shrimp goes to the United States, where it ends up on the shelves of retail giants like Wal-Mart Stores and Costco, according to Poj Aramwattananont, president of the Thai Frozen Foods Association. Japan and Europe each account for 20 percent. Even though she can only dream of going to school, Nampeung is one of the lucky ones. She makes as much as 300 baht, or $9, a day - more than the province's minimum wage - and sees nothing wrong with children her age working. "The old people are so slow," she said with a broad smile, sitting demurely on the floor of the concrete hut next to the factory, which she shares with her mother, father and three siblings. Other factories in the coastal province of Samut Sakhon, 50 kilometers, or 30 miles, west of Bangkok, where 40 percent of all shrimp are processed, do not have such a contented work force. A police raid on a factory called Ranya Paew in September revealed conditions that were little short of medieval. Around 800 men, women and children from Myanmar were imprisoned behind walls 5 meters, or 16 feet, high and topped with razor wire in a compound patrolled by armed guards. The rescued workers told human rights monitors that they had to work 18 hours or more a day and were paid 400 baht a month, out of which they had to buy food - mainly rancid pork - from the factory's owner. Those who asked for a break had a metal rod shoved up their nostrils. Three women who asked to leave were paraded in front of the other workers, stripped naked and had their heads shaved. The Labor Rights Promotion Network, a nongovernmental organization that estimates there are 200,000 Burmese migrant workers in Samut Sakhon - of whom only 70,000 are legally registered - says that the Ranya Paew case is the worst it has seen. But this, the group says, is just the tip of a human trafficking iceberg of factories fed by people-smuggling rings and labor brokers that have the complicity, if not active involvement, of government officials and the provincial police. "For many migrants, work in Samut Sakhon is the chance for a better life, but for too many it leads to abuse," said Sompong Srakaew, president of the nongovernment organization. "Unscrupulous employers and brokers conspire to ensure migrant workers remain vulnerable to exploitation. This is only possible with the complicity of elements within the law enforcement authorities." Wal-Mart and Costco said that none of their shrimp had ever come from Ranya Paew and that strict ethical guidelines for suppliers, as well as audits of processing units in Thailand, ensured that they complied with food standards and labor regulations. One shipment from Ranya Paew a few years ago, however, did end up in the United States, according to a Western diplomat who has followed the case closely. Poj, the president of the Thai Frozen Foods Association, denied that children or trafficked people worked in the industry, saying factories were monitored carefully. "There are no more illegal workers in the Thai food industry, because the government registers all the workers properly," he said. "We never use child labor." But even Thailand's biggest agro-industrial company, Charoen Pokphand Foods, which produces its own shrimp from pond to package, is not untouched by allegations of trafficked labor. The company sells a range of shrimp products to the United States and Europe, including the "Thai Torpedo" and "Bangkok Firecracker." According to the Labor Rights Promotion Network, when the police and immigration officials raided a Charoen Pokphand factory in Samut Sakhon on April 5 and fired shots into the air, more than 100 Burmese migrants in the compound tried to escape by swimming a canal. Six workers who could not swim are thought to have drowned, the Labor Rights Promotion Network said, and the police rounded up and deported 90 others to Myanmar for being illegal migrants. Narong Kruakrai, the general manager of the plant, described the raid as a "regular visit" by the immigration police and said the factory never hired illegal workers. The labor rights group said the workers appeared to have been employed by a third-party broker. With smaller shrimp companies, overseas buyers have an even harder time conducting their own background checks, as much of the processing is outsourced to small operators. As a result, foreign companies rely more on the Thai Labor Ministry, which is responsible for ensuring that factories do not use illegal or child workers. But the ministry is short on staff, the Western diplomat said. "The Thai Ministry of Labor lacks the proper resources to conduct rigorous inspections of these factories," he said. Despite the discovery of abuses at Ranya Paew, the police in Samut Sakhon have allowed the plant to remain open. In the meantime, about 200 Burmese men were deported as illegal immigrants, and more than 60 women and children are in a Bangkok center for victims of trafficking.
Prapasnavee Press Release 19.09.2008 Human Rights and Development Foundation Thailand: Central Labor Court (Samutsakorn) order „death-ship‟ owner to pay over 3 millions Baht compensation to 38 seafarers within 30 days. On 17 September 2008, the Central Labour Court of Samutsakorn, a province known for its fishery industry, ordered the owners of Prapasnavee Ship to pay 3,831,000 Baht compensation to 38 crew members within 30 days because of breach of labour protection law On 17th and 19th July 2003, Prapasnavee Fishing Boats No, 1-6 together with 128 crew members on board left Thailand from Samutsakorn, a suburb of Bangkok, on a scheduled journey of 30 months to Indonesian territorial waters near Wanam Island. After 2 years when the fishing concession granted by the Indonesian government expired, Prapasnavee 1-6 had to leave the Indonesian coast. They could enter the Indonesian harbor and Indonesian land only after the fishing concession was renewed. However even after months of negotiation with the Indonesian government the owners of the boats could not renew the fishing concession. While the negotiations over the renewal of the fishing concession were going on, the fishing boats had to wait out in the sea for several months. The crew members could not enter Indonesian land to buy food, medicines or to see the doctor. The crew had to live on left over food stock and had to eat fish without any flavor or seasoning. Gradually the crew members started falling sick. 2 of them died and their bodies were buried on Wanam Island. Fifteen days after the death of the 2 persons, all 6 boats started their journey back to Thailand. On the way back the boats had to stop for 10 days to fill up on fuel. During that time more crew members became ill with the same symptoms. Their bodies were beginning to swell and their eyes had become yellow; they were suffering from asthma, they could not eat and were drastically loosing their physical strength. After filling up on fuel, on 3rd June 2006, the fishing boats resumed their journey to Thailand. During the journey more crew members became sick and on an average 3 people died each day. In response the Captain ordered the rest of the crew members to dump the dead bodies into the ocean, though the body of a dead crew member should be kept in the freezer in order to bring it back to the deceased‟s family in Thailand. From the facts it was apparent that the deaths were caused because the employers did not provide adequate food and medicines to the crew for several months during which the Prapasnavee boats were waiting for renewal of concession from the Indonesian government. The boats also had to continuously hide from the Indonesian authorities since otherwise they were liable to be arrested. The crew members were clearly abandoned by their employers. Prapasnavee fishing boars 1-6 arrived at Samutsakorn province in Thailand on 1st July 2006, almost three years after they had left the province. 39 crew members had died during the journey and 1 crew member died in the hospital at Samutsakorn. All surviving crew members on arriving in Thailand had to be admitted to the hospital because of their poor health. The employers were supposed to pay the balance of the wages after the shipping boats returned to Thailand. Once the fishing boats returned the employers scheduled a date for the payment of the wages. However the employers did not keep their promise and did not pay the balance wages due to the crew members. On 4th July 2006, the crew members submitted a petition to Labor Protection Network (LPN). LPN requested the Lawyers Council of Thailand (LCT) and the Human Rights and Development Foundation (HRDF) to undertake a fact finding mission and provide the necessary legal assistance to the crew members. With legal assistance from HRDF and LCT, the crew members submitted a complaint to the Social Welfare and Labor Protection Office in Samutsakorn. However, the complaint was dismissed on the ground that as per the 10th Ministerial Regulation (B.E. 2541) issued under Labor Protection Act B.E. 2541, a fishing vessel which had been outside Thai territorial waters for more than 1 year period was not protected by the labor protection law. On 1st March 2007, 62 surviving crew members consisting of 16 Thais, 2 from Laos, 44 persons of Mon ethnicity from Burma, with the aid of lawyers from HRDF and LCT filed a case against the owners of Prapasnavee fishing boats at the Central Labor Court in Samutsakorn. In their suit the surviving crew members claimed a total amount of 15,894,610 Baht that included unpaid wages, special payment against the money earned from the fishing catch as promised by the employers, wages for working on holidays, severance payment with respect to termination of employment and other damage compensations payable under labor protection law. During the course of the trial, the Court dismissed lawsuit of 7 plaintiffs because the employers claimed that the plaintiffs were not their employees and the 7 plaintiffs could not prove their status as employees. Another 17 plaintiffs revoked their petition after they agreed on a settlement with the employers.The trial lasted a period of one year and on 17th September 2008, the Central Labor Court (Samutsakorn) delivered its judgment. The Court ordered the 5 employers and owners of Prapasnavee 1-6, Mr. Suthiphong Phongsathaporn and others, to pay a sum of 3,831,000 Baht to the 38 crew members against unpaid wages and compensation as result of unfair termination of employment and breach of labor protection law. The Court also ordered that such compensation should be paid together with interest at the rate of 15 % per annum since the time of submission of lawsuit till the time all money was paid. The Court also ordered the employers to make payment within 30 days. At the same time, there has been no progress with respect to the criminal investigation started by Samutsakorn police, although arrest warrants against 4 suspects named Chailek, Chaiyai, Peak and Sak (the Captains of the boat) has been issued since August 2007
Din Daeng Garment Factory Burmese allege slave labour 20.04.2011 The Bangkok Post http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/232721/burmese-allege-slave-labour Police yesterday helped more than 60 Burmese workers from a garment factory in Bangkok whose owners detained them and forced them to work 16 hours a day for paltry wages. Their raid came after one worker escaped from the factory operated by Chinese national Da Long Wu, 50, and his wife Namee Sae Lee, 26 - at Soi Tap Suwan on Asok-Din Daeng road. The victim, whose name was not revealed, lodged allegations of unfair treatment, saying staff at the crowded factory had to work indoors from 8am until midnight, with doors and windows locked firmly to prevent them leaving.Police said the complainant told them he was paid 200 baht a month instead of the 7,000 baht he had been promised. The officers arrested Mr Da and Ms Namee on suspicion of breaching the Labour Act. The suspects denied the allegation. Ms Namee said the workers had to work at a reduced salary initially to repay recruitment debts of 15,000 baht each. However, she admitted to detaining the workers inside the factory to prevent their escape. Previously, she told police, her factory followed legal requirements to register foreign workers, but many of them left without notice when they found themselves new jobs. In another development, the Stateless Watch for Research and Development Institute of Thailand (SWIT) said it had been contacted by Saman Sataweesook, who was born to Lao refugees in Ubon Ratchathani's Khong Chiam district, after he was arrested on April 16 on charges of illegal entry to Thailand. The institute's legal expert, Daruni Paisalpanitkul, argued police should not have arrested Mr Saman because he had the right to live in the country. Mr Saman, currently detained by the Immigration Bureau, had been previously arrested late last year by Klong Toey police on the same charge, but was later released after the institute clarified his status to the officers
60 Burmese freed in factory raid 20.04.2011 The Nation http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/04/20/national/60-Burmese-freed-in-factory-raid-30153473.html Police rescued 60 Burmese workers yesterday from a clothing factory in Bangkok's Din Daeng area and arrested a Chinese couple who allegedly ran the factory. The suspects - identified as Darong Wu, 50, and his wife Namee Li, 26 - were detained on suspicion of human-trafficking and labour-law violations. Police claim a worker had tipped them off. The worker said he was lured from Burma to work at the factory, adding that they were forced to work from 8am to midnight and then locked in. He said that he was only paid a monthly wage of Bt 6,000 - less than he was promised. Li said they kept the workers locked up because they had hired Burmese workers legally before and they had run away. She said the wages were low because they were deducting the Bt15,000 that each worker owed them for becoming eligible for work.
Ukrainian says he was held captive for 14 years 23.01.2011 The Bangkok Post http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/world/217653/ukrainian-says-he-was-held-captive-for-14-years A Ukrainian engineer who says he was held captive and forced to work at a Bangkok factory for 14 years will meet Department of Special Investigation officers tomorrow to detail his allegations. Anatoliy Vdovychenko, 57, was rescued from the Thai-owned oxygen equipment factory located at the Rangsit industrial complex on Jan 11 after Ukrainian consular staff confronted the owner and threatened to call police. Ukrainian consul Constantine Ivaschenko said they became involved in the case after a Burmese worker who had left the factory sent a letter to the engineer's family in Ukraine last November telling them of the engineer's fate. The letter also included three telephone contact numbers. Family members contacted Interpol and local police who then contacted the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior Affairs which informed the embassy in Bangkok. Consular staff phoned the numbers provided in the letter and found the Burmese man who told them where the factory was located. ''I thought I would be there forever,'' said Mr Vdovychenko, who is slender in appearance and seems emotionally unsettled by his ordeal. ''I thought I would die and nobody would know. My mind was closed and I was depressed. ''I stayed for many years in a small dirty room without pay. I worked hard for nothing, They didn't pay my salary and they forced me to work. ''They took my documents and I had to do everything free of charge. The owner didn't need a welder, painter, electrician or plumber. I had to do everything.'' His daughter Natalia, 34, who works for a corporate law firm in Odessa, said in a telephone interview they had been searching for their father for 15 years but the task was difficult. ''At first we had no chance to do anything as we knew he was in Thailand, but at the time there was no Ukrainian embassy there.'' She said it was a ''strange feeling'' talking to her father after 15 years. ''Of course we are waiting for him to come back, but it's a long time and things have changed. We are already adults now and everything has changed.'' Mr Ivaschenko said Mr Vdovychenko had been isolated for so long that the first time he met the engineer he had almost forgotten his mother tongue. Mr Vdovychenko, who is in the care of the Ukrainian embassy, has been granted special permission by the Immigration Department to stay in Thailand until the end of next month. His passport expired in 2006. In an affidavit submitted at Klong Luan police station, Mr Vdovychenko says he arrived in April 1996 as a specialist in oxygen equipment installation for Combitex Corporation Ltd which was the agent for a Ukrainian supplier, Kisenmash. After suffering burns in an accident in July 1996 and being unable to return home, he was verbally offered a work agreement by a Thai factory owner which included a 30,000 baht monthly salary, plus a car and other expenses, including medical expenses. Mr Vdovychenko said that without his consent, the owner planned to build a new oxygen factory and he would have to maintain two oxygen systems. He said he only received a full salary for the first three months. By the end of 1998 he made a demand on his employer for 600,000 baht in outstanding pay. After that, the owner stopped paying him and confiscated his passport when Mr Vdovychenko returned from a trip to Malaysia in 1998. Over the next 12 years, he says he was only paid from ''time to time'', sometimes receiving 1,000 baht a week to buy food and nothing more. ''During a long period I did not have my passport and I did not have money to even buy food,'' he says in the affidavit. Mr Vdovychenko told the Bangkok Post Sunday that he was under 24-hour guard and only allowed to leave the premises to buy food from a stall near the factory. He said on occasions the owner threatened to kill him and sometimes fired a handgun in the air to intimidate him. He said he was too afraid to attempt an escape as the guard would act on the owner's orders as he was considered crucial to the running of the factory. ''I was alone, I had no friends and no passport. If I left, who would believe me?'' he said. Mr Ivaschenko said that while Mr Vdovychenko was not ''chained like a dog'', ''he's not Rambo, he's not Superman, he's a specialist engineer''. Mr Vdovychenko said he survived with the help of Burmese migrant workers at the factory who brought him food and clothing. He had no television or radio, and the one Russian-language book he had was torn up by the factory owner. However, other workers were also recruited to keep him under surveillance. Paisith Sungkahapong, who heads the DSI's Foreign Affairs Division, said he would meet Mr Vdovychenko tomorrow to determine whether or not to proceed with a criminal case against the factory owner. ''I've never heard of a case like this. Fourteen years is a very long time,'' said Pol Lt Col Paisith. Mr Vdovychenko says he remains fearful of the factory owner but wants to be paid the money owing to him.
Ukrainian rejects offer to settle CONSUL QUESTIONS DSI CLAIMS OVER BURMESE WITNESS IN FACTORY PRISONER CASE 30.01.2011 The Bangkok Post http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/218901/ukrainian-rejects-offer-to-settle A Ukrainian engineer who claims he was forced to work for 14 years at a Pathum Thani factory for virtually no pay has rejected an offer of 150,000 baht to settle the case. Anatoliy Vdovychenko, 57, said he met the factory owner at the Labour Protection Welfare Department's Pathum Thani office on Friday, accompanied by a Ukrainian consul staff member. Police at Pathum Thani's Khlong Luang have charged the owner of Navanakorn Gas (2005) Co factory with hiring a foreign worker illegally and violating the labour law by not paying him wages. Mr Vdovychenko _ who is asking for full compensation of about five million baht _ said labour officials told him he was eligible only for up to two years' pay. He says his original contract was for 30,000 baht a month plus expenses. The factory owner, who says the engineer's wage was 8,000 baht a month, offered 150,000 baht on the spot to settle the case. ''He agreed to pay only 150,000 baht so I didn't accept it,'' Mr Vdovychenko said. He was released from the factory on Jan 11 after consular staff confronted the owner and threatened to call the police. They acted after a Burmese worker at the factory sent a letter to Mr Vdovychenko's family in the Ukraine telling them of the engineer's plight. The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) on Thursday said they had located and interviewed the Burmese man at his Samut Prakan home. They reportedly said the worker, who has left the factory, said Mr Vdovychenko was not intimidated, threatened or confined while working at the factory. However, the Bangkok Post Sunday interviewed the man, Ngwe Win, on three occasions last week during which he said he stood by the allegations that Mr Vdovychenko was held against his will and forced to work at the factory. ''They [the DSI officers] asked me many questions, but they didn't write it all down. They write little,'' said Ngwe Win. When asked directly if he had said that the engineer was not threatened and forced to work he replied: ''No, I don't talk like this.'' He said Mr Vdovychenko was allowed to leave the factory for short periods and sometimes he loaned him his bicycle to go to the local shops to buy food. Ngwe Win returned to Burma on Friday, saying he was afraid that his personal details would be passed on to the factory owner. ''I know he's [Mr Vdovychenko] afraid, I'm afraid too,'' he said. ''I told them [the DSI] already I'm afraid, they said, 'Don't worry, don't be afraid.''' Ukrainian consul Constantine Ivaschenko said he would submit Ngwe Win's letter to the DSI next week and ask to see a copy of the Burmese worker's statement, which was signed by Ngwe Win and made out in English. ''This letter does not correlate with this testimony. Either the letter is bad or this testimony is wrong,'' he said. ''If he sent the letter before, why should he tell [them] another thing?'' Mr Ivaschenko said if they did not receive a satisfactory answer, the consul would consider pursuing the case in the courts.
Vietnamese surrogate mothers to return home 01.03.2011 The Bangkok Post http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/health/224002/vietnamese-surrogate-mothers-to-return-home The Vietnamese women hired as surrogate mothers in Thailand will be repatriated this week and their unborn babies will eventually be taken care of by the Vietnamese government. Public Health Minister Jurin Laksanavisit said the authorities were preparing to take legal action against a Taiwanese company on charges of human trafficking and illegal detention. The questioning of the Vietnamese women was completed yesterday and their evidence would help in the investigation, he said. Mr Jurin joined Thai officials from many agencies at a meeting yesterday to discuss how to proceed after a raid last week on the alleged illegal surrogacy firm Baby 101, run by a Taiwanese man in Bangkok, and the arrest of 15 Vietnamese women. Present at the meeting were staff from the Public Health Ministry, the Social Development and Human Security Ministry, the Foreign Affairs Ministry, the Vietnamese embassy in Thailand, the Immigration Bureau, the Department of Special Investigation, the Medical Council and the Royal Thai College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The meeting decided legal action would be taken against the medical premises and doctors involved in the artificial insemination of the women. The legal action would be based on the 1982 Medical Profession Act and the 1998 Medical Premises Act. Mr Jurin did not name any specific medical premises but said the Medical Council would discuss the issue and transfer the matter to its ethics subcommittee on March 10. The minister said the pregnant Vietnamese women who had originally intended to seek abortions had changed their minds and decided to continue with their pregnancies. "All the women will return to Vietnam this week .. The babies to be born to the Vietnamese surrogate mothers will be under the care of the Vietnamese government," he said. A Department of Special Investigation representative told the meeting the Taiwanese operator had been arrested in Taiwan. He entered Thailand in 2008 and resumed business here in 2009. Accounts from the Vietnamese women indicate the Taiwanese firm had offices in Thailand and Cambodia and insemination took place in Thailand. Meanwhile, representatives from a group fighting human trafficking yesterday urged authorities to block the company's website - http://www.baby-1001.com/eng/about.htm - as it remained accessible. The Vietnamese government blocked the company's site but it was still accessible in Thailand, the Anti-human Trafficking Network said. The website provides a registration form for clients who want to use the company's surrogacy service as well as applications for women who want to become a surrogate mother. The DSI said last week it would ask the Information and Communication Technology Ministry to block the website because advertising for surrogate mothers through the internet was against the law.
ANNEX II: ANNEX II: The Anti Human Trafficking Division The Anti Human Trafficking Division (AHTD) is a police task force specialized in suppressing human trafficking. The AHTD consists of 9 regions as follows: Region 1 consists of 9 provinces in the Central part of Thailand: Chainaj, Nonthaburi, Pathumthani,Ayutthaya, Lopburi, Samutprakarn, Saraburi, Singburi, Angthong Region 2 consists of 8 provinces in the Eastern part of Thailand: Chantaburi, Chacheongsao, Chonburi, Trad, Nakornayok, Pracheenburi, Rayong, Srakaew Region 3 consists of 8 provinces in the upper Northeastern part of Thailand: Chaiyabhum, Nakornrachasrima, Burirum, Yasothorn, Srisaket, Surin, Aumnajjaroen, Ubonratchathani Region 4 consists of 11 provinces in the lower Northestern part of Thailand:Kalasin, Khonkaen, Nakhonpanom, Mahasarakarm, Mukdahard, Soi-Ed, Loei, Sakonnakorn, Nongkai, Nongbualumphu, Udonthani Region 5 consists of 8 provinces in the Northern part of Thailand: Chiangrai, Chiangmai, Nan, Payao, Prae, Maehongson. Lumpang, Lumpoon Region 6 consists of 9 provinces in the upper Central part of Thailand: Kumpangpetch, Tak, Nakhonsawan, Pichit. Phitsanulok, Petchaboon. Sukhothai, Utharadit, Uthaithani Region 7 consists of 8 provinces in the Western part of Thailand: Kanchanaburi, Nakhonpathom, Prachubkitikhan, Petchburi, Rachaburi, Samutsongkram, Samutsakorn, Suphanburi Region 8 consists of 7 provinces in the upper Southern part of Thailand: Krabi, Chumporn, Nakornsrithammarat, Phang-nga, Phuket, Ranong. Suratthani Region 9 consists of 4 provinces in the lower Southern part of Thailand: Songkhla, Satun, Trang, Phattralung The Deep-South Police Operation Task Force consists of 3 provinces: Yala, Pattani, Narathiwat
ANNEX III: Relevant laws The Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act B.E. 2551 (2008) Alien Work Act B.E. 2551 (2008) Anti-Money Laundering Act No. 2 (2008) Measures in Prevention and Suppression of Trafficking in Women and Children Act BE 2540 (1997) Child Protection Act BE 2546 (2003) The Criminal Procedure Code Amendment Act (No. 20) BE 2542 (1999) Immigration Act BE 2522 (1979) Money Laundering Control Act BE 2542 (1999) Labor Protection Act 1998 Constitution of Thailand 1998 Prevention and Suppression of Prostitution Act BE 2539 (1996) Penal Code Amendment Act (No. 14) BE 2540 (1997) Witness Protection Act BE 2546 (2003) Source: UNIAP http://www.no-trafficking.org/resources_laws_thailand.html
|
