Bangkok: The inspector is preparing to send a letter to the relevant persons to clarify after the NHRC petitioned the court to revoke the prison regulations, specifically the procedure for allowing former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra to stay on the 14th floor of the Police General Hospital. The request challenges the validity of the Corrections Department’s procedures, citing potential human rights violations.
According to Thai News Agency, Pol. Lt. Col. Kirap Kritthiranon, Secretary-General of the Office of the Ombudsman, disclosed that a complaint was received from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) last Friday. The complaint was officially entered into the system by the Ombudsman’s Office this morning. It involves two key issues: seeking the Administrative Court’s intervention to revoke the 2020 Ministerial Regulation on the Transfer of Prisoners for Treatment Outside Prisons, and challenging the Department of Corrections for allowing Thaksin to receive treatment outside of prison. The NHRC contends that these actions contravene human rights standards, prompting the Ombudsman to investigate the facts and consult with relevant agencies, including the Department of Corrections and the Supreme Court.
The Ombudsman’s Office plans to conduct a preliminary review of the documents and request a report from the NHRC. This includes information from all relevant agencies, as the court had previously sentenced Thaksin, but the Department of Corrections allowed his transfer for medical treatment without court investigation, possibly conflicting with the court’s ruling. If needed, agencies may be invited to a joint meeting to provide further clarification.
Pol. Lt. Col. Kirap outlined the framework for the Ombudsman’s consideration before potentially involving the Administrative Court. Typically, the Ombudsman acts swiftly, issuing a letter within a week to request clarification from relevant agencies. However, these agencies are given 30 days to respond, with the possibility of extensions totaling up to 60 days. Clarifications may necessitate inviting decision-makers, though it may not extend to the Minister of Justice at this stage. Additionally, the Ombudsman will examine legal issues regarding court permission for prisoner transfers.
A new aspect of the complaint suggests court authority should be sought for prisoner transfers outside prison for treatment. If the Ombudsman determines amendments are necessary but the agencies fail to act, reliance on the Administrative Court’s authority may be required to amend or cancel regulations.
When asked about the possibility of revisiting the process for Thaksin, Pol. Lt. Col. Kirap stated that while the Ombudsman can investigate, legal processes govern the return to serving a sentence. The implications of canceling past actions for Thaksin and involved institutions depend on relevant rules and laws.
Pol. Lt. Col. Kirap noted that once agencies provide complete information, the Ombudsman’s Office will compile a summary of facts and laws for review. The Ombudsman will then advise on whether to cancel operations, the issue of external prisoner treatment, and potential lawsuits in the Administrative Court. If regulation amendments are necessary and agencies disagree, the Ombudsman may seek the Administrative Court’s intervention. However, thorough consideration of facts and laws is essential before any action.