Kouprey head-butting the UK on its human rights records

Re: Civilian deaths probed [Thai human rights groups investigate the killings of Cambodians by Thai soldiers]

Anonymous said...

I don't know people here seem to condemn the US because the US don't take part in solving Cambodia-Thai conflict. How about United Kingdom? UK is a very silent one: never said a word.

Opinion by Kouprey

Well, yes the UK's human rights record isn't something to boast about either. Many UK nationals who married Cambodian citizens in Cambodia and tried to bring their spouses over to join them in the UK can testify to the nightmare and humiliation of the visa application process. Khmer nationals are often required to attend the entry clearance interview in Bangkok, and more likely than not only to hear their application is rejected on the flimsiest of pretexts.

This would be followed by a year or more of separation endured by the married couple while the appeal awaits hearing, eventually only for the judge to overrule the Home Office's decision in favour of the couple without - in some cases - going through any proper hearing process. The judge having browsed the arguments put forth by both parties in his office prior to turning up at the hearing chamber would simply signal to the solicitors that the appeal is granted, leaving the anxious appellant momentarily stunned before regaining enough self-composure to say 'Thank-you, Your Honour!'.

Of course, at least the UK's justice system allows this kind of appeal and outcome eventually and after a great deal of stress endured and financial expenses paid towards all the costs of a legal paperwork.

This may not amount to human rights violation in any brutal sense, but a form of outright discrimination that is nonetheless just as painful and unjust to the victims.

Perhaps, one of the UK's most shameful records on human rights in recent memory had been the mistreatment of Vietnamese refugees quarantined on the former British territory of Hong Kong in the eighties and beyond. The refugees had been forced to remain in this cage-like concentration camp (where rape and suicide were daily horrors for inmates) because London had been determined to deter further waves of Vietnamese 'boat-people' from seeking refuge on its territory. I believe most of the refugees on the islands of Hong Kong (who had been lucky enough to have lived through their ordeals) had eventually been repatriated to Vietnam. And that's where their dream of a better life ended.

The UK is a loyal ally of the US. It has made some contribution in the context of third world development as well as peace-keeping. In relations to Cambodian-Thai conflict, London would prefer the role of a silent bystander for a number of reasons. However, the Thais have always been indebted to the British historically, and members of the Thai elite tend to be enamoured with the English high culture, from uniforms, horses and costumes to Eton [an elite high school] where the departing Thai PM [Abhisit Vejjajiva] had been groomed.

England had been asked by Siam to put pressure on France over territorial claims and treaty negotiations [to establish the Siam-Cambodian borderline]. This British historical influence had resulted in the 1904/1907 Franco-Siamese demarcation Treaty between Siam and French Indochina [Cambodia and Laos] which would have been accepted by Siamese rulers at the time as something of a favourable deal for Siam who still held on to most of the former Khmer provinces, but not by their descendants today who see nothing wrong in reneging on the treaty because one of the parties to that agreement - France - is not in Indochina anymore!

Kouprey