Thailand

Cluster Munition Ban Policy

Last updated: 21 July 2016

Summary: Non-signatory Thailand has expressed support for the convention’s humanitarian objectives, but has not taken any steps towards accession besides study the implications of joining. Thailand has participated in all of the convention’s meetings and voted in favor of a UN resolution on the convention in December 2015. Thailand is not known to have produced or exported cluster munitions, but it has imported them and possesses a stockpile. Thailand’s only known use of cluster munitions was in Cambodia during a February 2011 border dispute.

Policy

The Kingdom of Thailand has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

At the UN General Assembly (UNGA) First Committee on Disarmament and International Security in October 2015, Thailand said it “recognises and supports the humanitarian principles, as well as the object and purpose” of the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[1] Its representative said, “We are in the process of verifying scope and meaning under the CCM [Convention on Cluster Munitions], with a view to possible accession in the future.”

In a statement to the high-level segment of the convention’s First Review Conference in September 2015, Thailand similarly stated that it has “been closely following developments with a view to consider acceding to the Convention once we are ready to fulfill its obligations.”[2] It noted the “growing number” of States Parties to the convention, which it said has “firmly established an international norm against the use of cluster bombs.”

Thailand has often expressed its support for the humanitarian objectives of the convention.[3] In June 2015, a government representative told the Monitor of Thailand’s desire to accede to the convention, but was unable to provide a timeline for when it might join.[4] After Thailand used cluster munitions in early February 2011 during a border conflict with Cambodia, Thailand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Kasit Piromya, told the UN Security Council, “We are seriously considering joining the Convention on Cluster Munitions.”[5] (See section on Use below.)

On 7 December 2015, Thailand voted in favor of a UNGA resolution on the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which urges states outside the convention to “join as soon as possible.”[6] Thailand did not explain why it voted to support the non-binding resolution, which 140 states voted to adopt, including many non-signatories.

Thailand participated in most of the diplomatic conferences of the Oslo Process that created the Convention on Cluster Munitions, but attended the formal negotiations in May 2008 only as an observer and did not sign the convention when it was opened for signature in Oslo in December 2008.[7]

As Thailand has noted, it remains engaged in the framework of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, despite the lack of accession. It participated as an observer in the convention’s First Review Conference in Dubrovnik, Croatia in September 2015. Thailand has attended all of the convention’s annual Meetings of States Parties as well as its intersessional meetings in Geneva in 2011–2015.

Thailand voted in favor of a UNGA resolution on 23 December 2015 that expressed outrage at the continued use of cluster munitions in Syria.[8]

Thailand is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty. It is not party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

Production, transfer, and stockpiling

Thailand is not known to have ever produced or exported cluster munitions.

Thailand possesses a stockpile of cluster munitions, but has not disclosed information on the types or quantities possessed. In December 2008, Thailand announced that it does not intend to acquire more cluster munitions.[9]

The United States (US) supplied Thailand with 500 Rockeye and 200 CBU-71 air-dropped cluster bombs at some point between 1970 and 1995.[10] Cluster Munition Monitor learned in January 2016 that Thailand also received 2,806 cluster munitions containing 850,268 submunitions from the US after the US War Reserve Stock in Thailand (WRS-THAI) was dissolved by a 2002 agreement.[11]

Thailand also possesses French-made NR-269 ERFB extended-range 155mm artillery projectiles, each containing 56 M42/M46-type[12] dual-purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) submunitions.[13] Based on the types of submunitions identified in Cambodia after the February 2011 artillery strikes, Thailand also possesses a cluster munition that delivers M85 self-destructing DPICM submunitions.

Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) has provided the government with advice and information on possible solutions for the destruction of Thailand’s stockpile of cluster munitions.[14]

Use

In 2009 and 2010, Thai and Cambodian military forces engaged in several brief skirmishes over disputed parts of the border near the Preah Vihear temple, resulting in claims and counter-claims of new antipersonnel mine use.[15] In February 2011, the Cambodian Mine Action Centre (CMAC), a government entity, claimed that Thai military forces fired cluster munitions during fighting on the border at Preah Vihear.[16] Separate missions by CMC members in February and April 2011 confirmed that ground-delivered cluster munitions were used by Thailand on Cambodian territory, including M42/M46 and M85-type DPICM submunitions.[17] The CMC urged Thailand to provide detailed information on the cluster munition strikes and encouraged both Cambodia and Thailand to join the Convention on Cluster Munitions without delay.

Thailand’s use of cluster munitions elicited widespread concern and a strong international response.[18] Thailand at first denied using cluster munitions.[19] It then stated that it “fully understands the concerns raised” over the cluster munition use and promised to “remain committed to engaging with the international community on this issue.”[20]


[1] Statement of Thailand, UNGA First Committee on Disarmament and International Security, New York, 26 October 2015.

[2] Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions First Review Conference, Dubrovnik, 7 September 2015.

[3] For example, in 2013, Thailand stated it “fully supports the humanitarian principles which lie at the core of the international efforts to tackle the inhumane weapons such as…cluster munitions.” Statement of Thailand, UN General Assembly (UNGA) First Committee on Disarmament and International Security, New York, 29 October 2013.

[4] Monitor meeting with Varapote Chensavasdijai, Senior Counsellor, Permanent Mission of Thailand to the UN in Geneva, Geneva, 22 June 2015.

[5] Statement by Kasit Piromya, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Thailand, UN Security Council, New York, 14 February 2011. Government officials also expressed Thailand’s intent to accede to the convention in “the near future.” Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meetings, Geneva, 27 June 2011. Notes by the CMC.

[6] “Implementation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions,” UNGA Resolution 70/54, 7 December 2015.

[7] For details on Thailand’s policy and practice regarding cluster munitions through early 2009, see Human Rights Watch and Landmine Action, Banning Cluster Munitions: Government Policy and Practice (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, May 2009), pp. 245–246.

[8] “Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic,” UNGA Resolution 70/234, 23 December 2015. Thailand voted in favor of similar resolutions on 15 May and 18 December 2013, and on 18 December 2014.

[9] Interview with Cherdkiat Atthakor, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bangkok, 24 February 2010; and statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Signing Conference, Oslo, 4 December 2008. Notes by Landmine Action.

[10] US Defense Security Assistance Agency, Department of Defense, “Cluster Bomb Exports under FMS, FY1970–FY1995,” obtained by Human Rights Watch in a Freedom of Information Act request, 28 November 1995.

[11] Department of State, “Memorandum of Agreement between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and THAILAND Signed at Bangkok November 26, 2002.” The stockpile was comprised of 1,000 M483 munitions, 800 CBU-71 bombs, 432 M449A1 munitions, 200 CBU-58, 200 Mk-20 Rockeye II,100 CBU-52, and 74 CBU-87. The cluster munitions were stored at the Korat Munitions Storage Area at the time of the 2002 agreement. See, Andrew Haag, “Thailand received cluster munitions from the United States in 2002–2005,” 19 January 2016.

[12] The DPICM submunition is also often called a “grenade.” A certain amount of contradictory information exists publicly about the specific type of DPICM submunition contained in the NR269 projectile. France lists it as an “M42 type” in its initial Article 7 report in January 2011. Other international ammunition reference publications list the type as M46. There is little outward visual difference between the two types: the M46 DPICM is heavier/thicker and has a smooth interior surface. A portion of the interior of the M42 DPICM body is scored for greater fragmentation.

[13] NPA, “Impact Assessment Report: Preah Vihear Province, Cambodia,” undated, but circulated 3 April 2011. Both Canadian and South African companies were involved in the development of this weapon. “155 mm ERFB cargo projectiles,” Janes, articles.janes.com, undated.

[14] Email from Lee Moroney, Programme Manager, NPA, 17 August 2010.

[15] See, ICBL, Landmine Monitor Report 2009: Toward a Mine-Free World (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2009), pp. 243–244 and pp. 719–710; and ICBL, Landmine Monitor 2010: Toward a Mine-Free World (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2010).

[17] For full analysis of the 2011 use incident, see CMC, Cluster Munition Monitor 2011 (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2011), pp. 319–320. The missions were conducted by Cambodia Campaign to Ban Landmines and Cluster Bombs (on 9 February and 12 February) and NPA (1–2 April). CMC Press Release, “CMC condemns Thai use of cluster munitions in Cambodia,” 5 April 2011.

[18] For example, the Beirut Progress Report issued by the convention’s Second Meeting of States Parties stated: “Several states have reported actions reacting to the instance of use of cluster munitions by Thailand in 2011. This includes individual and joint demarches, support for fact-finding missions and condemnation of the use in public statements. The President of the Convention has also issued a statement, stating his concern over the use of cluster munitions. States and civil society have reported on how they follow up, in terms of actions to increase the understanding and knowledge of the Convention. States and civil society have had a good dialogue with Thailand.” “Draft Beirut Progress Report: Monitoring progress in implementing the Vientiane Action Plan from the First up to the Second Meeting of States Parties,” CCM/MSP/2011/WP.5, 25 August 2011.

[19] Guy De Launey, “Thailand ‘admits cluster bombs used against Cambodia,’” BBC News, 6 April 2011.

[20] Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meetings, Geneva, 27 June 2011. Notes by the CMC.

Mine Ban Policy

Last updated: 28 October 2014

Policy

The Kingdom of Thailand signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997 and ratified it on 27 November 1998, becoming a State Party on 1 May 1999.

Thailand has not enacted domestic legislation to implement the Mine Ban Treaty. Since 2002, Thailand has attempted to implement the convention by executive measure, but the directive has never been issued.[1]

Thailand submitted its sixteenth Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report on 30 April 2014, covering calendar year 2013.[2]

Thailand has attended all of the Mine Ban Treaty’s Review Conferences held in 2004, 2009, and 2014 as well as most of the treaty’s Meetings of States Parties and many of the intersessional meetings held in Geneva, including in April 2014.

Production, transfer, stockpile destruction, and retention

Thailand states that it has never produced or exported antipersonnel mines. Thailand formerly imported antipersonnel mines from China, Italy, the United States, and the former Yugoslavia. It completed destruction of 337,725 stockpiled antipersonnel mines on 24 April 2003.

In its Article 7 report submitted in 2014, Thailand stated that at the end of 2013 it retained 3,227 antipersonnel mines for training purposes, a reduction of 23 mines from the previous year.[3] Twenty-three antipersonnel mines held by the army were transferred for training of new deminers. Thailand has never reported in any detail on the intended purposes and actual uses of mines kept for training—a step agreed upon by States Parties at the Review Conferences in 2004 and 2009.[4] At the end of 2013, the Royal Thai Army retained 2,646 mines, and the Royal Thai Air Force retained 581 mines.[5]

In June 2011, Thailand stated, “Inventories of mines retained will continue to be done so that our article 7 submissions accurately reflect mines in official possession.”[6] In June 2010, Thailand said that since the number of mines retained is high compared to the number used each year, it would review its retention and destruction plans.[7]

Thailand is not known to have undertaken physical modifications of its Claymore mine stockpile to ensure use only in command-detonated mode. Officials have previously stated that all units have received orders that Claymore mines are to be used only in command-detonated mode.[8]

Use

The insurgency in southern Thailand has seen extensive use of command-detonated improvised explosive devices (IEDs). There were previously reports of use of homemade mines that function as victim-activated IEDs.[9] Insurgents used these devices against Buddhist Thai owners of rubber and fruit plantations, and also against the Malay Muslims working in those places. Several incidents were recorded between 2009 and 2012, however in 2013 and early 2014 no further use of victim-activated explosive weapons by the insurgency have been recorded.[10]

There were no allegations of new use of antipersonnel mines on the Cambodian border with Thailand in the second of 2013 or first half of 2014.

Previously, in March 2013, three Thai soldiers were injured by what the Thai military described as newly planted mines near the Ta Kwai Temple in Phanom Dong Rak district. Cambodia investigated and in its report to States Parties stated that it had found the mines to be old, dating from the Cambodian civil war.[11] Other allegations made by Thailand of Cambodian use of antipersonnel mines on the Cambodian-Thai border in 2008 and 2009 were never resolved.[12]

 


[1] Interview with Lt.-Gen. Tumrongsak Deemongkol, Director-General, Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC), Bangkok, 25 February 2010. Thailand’s Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 reports submitted from 2007–2009 state, “The issuing is still in progress.” The 2010 report apparently mistakenly dropped that phrase, as the regulations have not yet been adopted and are still in progress; they had not been entered into the Royal Thai Government Gazette as of late July 2010. TMAC reported in 2009 that the Subcommittee on Administration and Evaluation is responsible for this process and that in early 2009 it was in the process of submitting the draft regulations to the National Committee for Humanitarian Mine Action for consideration. The draft was first developed by TMAC in 2002. Thailand has reported that the draft regulations have been pending approval of various entities each year. See previous editions of the Monitor available on the Monitor website; and Landmine Monitor Report 2009, p. 718. On 7 September 2012, the representative from the military’s Judge Advocate General’s Office suggested in a meeting of the sub-committee on Facilitating, Monitoring, and Evaluation that the military issue an order for the implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty as it would be less complicated. Response to Monitor written questions by Col. Jirat Seetachan, Deputy Head of Special Affairs Unit, TMAC, 20 May 2013.

[2] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, 30 April 2014. Thailand has provided annual updated Article 7 reports every year since the initial report was provided on 10 November 1999.

[3] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2013.

[4] The Royal Thai Army, Navy, Air Force, and National Police Department initially retained a total of 4,970 antipersonnel mines for training. In the past 10 years, Thailand has reported that 504 mines have been consumed by its training programs. The number of retained mines did not change from 2001 to 2004. In 2005–2006, Thailand reduced the number of mines retained by 257. There were discrepancies in the reporting on the number of mines. See Landmine Monitor Report 2007, p. 665. In 2007, it reduced the number by another 1,063 mines. It appears that 63 of the mines retained by the National Police Department were consumed during training activities, and all of the 1,000 mines retained by the navy were simply destroyed, presumably because they were no longer deemed necessary. See Landmine Monitor Report 2008, p. 678. In 2008 and 2009, Thailand destroyed another 12 mines per year. In 2010, Thailand reported transferring 200 mines for training, apparently 13 M2, 84 M14, 39 M16, and 64 M26 antipersonnel mines. Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on General Status and Operation, Geneva, 20 June 2011; and Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2011. The types transferred are not noted in the Article 7 report.

[5] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2014.

[6] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on General Status and Operation, Geneva, 24 June 2011; and Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, Geneva, 30 April 2011. The number of mines retained by the Air Force has remained unchanged since 2006. It is unclear why different services retain mines and whether each has a training program for mine clearance.

[7] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on General Status and Operation, Geneva, 21 June 2010.

[8] Interview with Lt.-Gen. Deemongkol, TMAC, Bangkok, 19 March 2009. TMAC stated this in 2007 as well as in 2008. In its Article 7 report for 1999, Thailand reported that it had 6,117 M18 and M18A1 Claymore mines in stock.

[9] Craft landmines are explosive devices made out of locally available materials that are designed to detonate due to the proximity or activity of a human being. Such devices are banned under the Mine Ban Treaty.

[10] While no new incidents have been known to have occurred, indicating a change in policy, there has been no public statement pledging non-use of victim activated explosive devices. For previous incidents see Landmine Monitor 2013, 2012, 2011, and 2010 profile for Thailand.

[11] See Landmine Monitor 2013, Thailand Mine Ban Policy profile. According to a request made by the ICBL, Cambodia conducted a fact-finding mission to the site from 10–12 May 2013 that determined the Thai solders were injured by mines laid during the Cambodian civil war. It said its soldiers found indications of the incident on the same day, and recorded a GPS reference that differed from the reference declared by the Thai military. Cambodia stated that the incident took place to the side of, not on, a specially cleared path used for military-to-military meetings between the Thai and Cambodian military in the area. The Cambodian delegation provided copies of the report at the May 2013 intersessional meeting in Geneva.

[12] In October 2008, two Thai soldiers stepped on antipersonnel mines while on patrol in disputed territory between Thailand and Cambodia, near the World Heritage Site of Preah Vihear. Thai authorities maintained that the area was previously clear of mines and that the mines had been newly placed by Cambodian forces. Cambodia denied the charges and stated that the Thai soldiers had entered Cambodian territory in an area known to contain antipersonnel mines and were injured by mines laid during previous armed conflicts. In April 2009, another Thai soldier was reportedly wounded by an antipersonnel mine at the same location during further armed conflict between the two countries. In September 2009, Commander in Chief of the Royal Thai Army, Gen. Anupong Paochinda, stated that Cambodian troops were laying fresh mines along the disputed areas and close to routes where Thai soldiers make regular patrols. See Landmine Monitor Report 2009, pp. 243–244 and 719–720; and also ICBL-CMC, “Country Profile: Cambodia: Mine Ban Policy,” 6 August 2010.

Mine Action

Last updated: 17 November 2016

Contaminated by: mines (massive contamination) and explosive remnants of war.

Article 5 deadline: 1 November 2018
(Not on track to meet deadline)

Recommendations for action

  • The Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) should complete non-technical survey (NTS) of all mined areas to international standards.
  • TMAC should draw up a strategy setting down detailed timelines for completing clearance of remaining mined areas.
  • Thailand should submit a revised Article 5 extension request committing to a date for fulfilling its Mine Ban Treaty obligations. 

Contamination

The Kingdom of Thailand is affected by mines and explosive remnants of war (ERW), including both abandoned explosive ordnance and unexploded ordnance (UXO), the result of conflicts on its borders with Cambodia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, and Myanmar.

In 2015, Thailand reported that 14 of 77 provinces are mine affected, two fewer than the previous year, but the precise extent of contamination is not known. Thailand estimated total contamination at the end of the year at 450km2 affecting 314 areas, down from 474km2 affecting 328 areas at the end of 2014, a drop of 23km2, although TMAC reported releasing almost double this amount of land in 2015 (see table below).[1]

Contamination by province (km2)

Region

Province

End-2014

End-2015

CHAs*

Area

SHAs*

Area

North

Chiang Mai

4

28.97

5

35.49

Chiang Rai

1

0.92

1

0.92

Mae Hong Son

1

5.43

0

0

Nan

1

2.65

0

0

Pitsanuloke

1

32.99

1

32.99

Tak

2

10.06

1

0.37

Uttaradit

1

3.35

1

3.35

Northeast

Buriram

15

19.48

15

19.48

Surin

32

39.56

32

37.60

Sisaket

56

93.47

54

88.87

Ubon Ratchathani

75

122.85

71

119.95

East

Sakeo

32

9.78

29

10.11

Chanthaburi

24

5.13

24

5.13

Trad

75

91.55

72

88.41

South

Chumporn

2

6.92

2

6.92

Yala

6

1.15

6

1.15

Total

 

328

474.26

314

450.74

Note: *As part of a re-survey of contaminated areas, TMAC reclassified confirmed hazardous areas (CHAs) as suspected hazardous areas (SHAs).

Program Management

The National Committee for Humanitarian Mine Action (NMAC), chaired by the prime minister, has responsibility for overseeing the national mine action program, but has not met since 2008.

TMAC, which is under the Armed Forces Supreme Command, coordinates, monitors, and conducts mine/UXO survey, mine clearance, mine/ERW risk education, and victim assistance. TMAC is also responsible for establishing a program to meet Thailand’s obligations as a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty.[2] However, TMAC has had to contend with limited funding and, as a military organization, with regular rotation of personnel at all levels.[3] Lieutenant-General Wittaya Wachirakul took over as Director General in April 2015, becoming the ninth director since TMAC became operational in 2000 and the fifth in the last five years. General Wittaya was promoted in 2016 and handed over to a new director, Lieutenant-General Prasopchai Kongburan in October.[4] 

Strategic planning 

TMAC does not have a strategic mine action plan. TMAC however, under new management, embarked quickly on a number of initiatives intended to galvanize Thailand’s mine action sector and accelerate progress towards completion. These included a non-technical re-survey of Thailand’s mined areas applying international standards, restructuring TMAC’s humanitarian mine action units (HMAUs) and strengthening information management.[5]

Standards 

A revision of the national mine action standards was completed on 1 April 2015, mainly amending chapters on land release and evidence-based survey.[6]

Operators 

TMAC completed accreditation of operators for the first time in March 2015, accrediting the four HMAUs, one international NGO (Norwegian People’s Aid, NPA), and two national NGOs (Thai Civilian Deminer Association and Peace Road Organization Foundation, PRO). Operators are now required to renew their accreditations annually.[7]

In 2015, TMAC operated with four HMAUs, employing a total of around 276 operations staff and 61 headquarters personnel.[8]

NPA has supported TMAC operations since 2011. Since 2014, it has worked on the Myanmar and Lao PDR borders under a memorandum of understanding that ran to the end of 2015.[9] NPA also supported TMAC’s database unit until January 2015.[10]

PRO conducted land release in Nam Yuen district, Ubon Ratchathani province.[11] 

Another NGO, Thai Civilian Deminers Association (TDA) started a project due to run from April 2014 to September 2015 to clear 2.42km2 of mined area in Buached district of Surin province.[12]

Land Release 

Thailand released a total of 41.72km2 in 2015, two-thirds more than in the previous year, reflecting a more efficient application of land release methodologies and accelerating clearance.

Survey in 2015

NPA, working with HMAUs in northern Thailand and on the border with Myanmar and Lao PDR in 2015, undertook six tasks covering a total of 28km2, canceling 21.1km2. As a result of these activities, two provinces, Mae Hong Son and Nan, were declared mine-free.[13]

TMAC decided to re-do the NTS of remaining mined areas and therefore reclassified CHAs as SHAs. This recommendation from NPA drew from their experience of NTS in northern Thailand resulting in cancelation of large areas of land classified as mined. Of a total of 23.63km2 released in five northern provinces, no mines were destroyed and full clearance was conducted on just 47,534m2 (see table below).[14]

PRO conducted NTS in Nam Yuen district, Ubon Ratchathani Province in 2015.[15]

Clearance in 2015 

TMAC did not provide detailed data with a breakdown of clearance results by its HMAUs and other operators in 2015 but Thailand’s Article 7 transparency report recorded clearance of 2.05km2 by all operators in 2015, almost 10-times the 0.22km2 they cleared in 2014. Clearance was almost entirely conducted in provinces bordering Cambodia. TMAC attributed productivity gains in part to a policy of releasing operational funds to HMAUs on a quarterly basis linked to performance.[16]

Release of mined areas in 2015[17]

Province

Area canceled (m2)

Area reduced (m2)

Area cleared (m2)

Total area released (m2)

Mines destroyed

Chiang Mai

3,354,380

0

0

3,354,380

0

Mae Hong Son

5,433,500

0

0

5,433,500

0

Tak

9,652,098

0

47,534

9,699,632

0

Phayao

0

2,499,917

0

2,499,917

0

Nan

2,653,871

0

0

2,653,871

0

Ubon Ratchathani

2,124,816

1,979,010

109,606

4,213,432

104

Surin

1,856,607

5,716,890

958,001

8,531,498

2,921

Sa Kaeo

0

897,662

400,426

1,298,088

846

Trat

2,348,266

1,158,379

532,095

4,038,740

462

Total

27,423,538

12,251,858

2,047,662

41,723,058

4,333

  

Progress in 2016

NPA completed its work in northern Thailand at the end of 2015, and under a new agreement with TMAC started work in 2016 on a Baseline Survey, focusing on NTS of eastern Ubon Ratchathani province bordering Cambodia and Lao PDR, deploying three six-man teams.[18]

Article 5 Compliance

Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty (and in accordance with the nine-and-a-half-year extension granted by States Parties in 2008), Thailand is required to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible, but not later than 1 November 2018.[19] Thailand will miss its deadline and will need to request a second extension.

Thailand’s land release has progressed slowly (see table below), hampered by lack of clarity about the precise location and extent of mined areas and very slow rates of clearance. Just two of the last five years accounted for more than 80% of the areas released through full clearance.

Land release in 2011–2015 compared to extension request targets (km2)[20]

Year

Mined area cleared

Area canceled/reduced by survey

Total area released

Extension Request target

2015

2.05

39.67

41.72

61.95

2014

0.23

24.84

25.07

62.92

2013

0.31

 31.91

32.22

41.05

2012

0.29

20.6

20.89

41.95

2011

2.41

4.3

6.71

41.73

Total

5.29

89.41

126.61

249.60

 

The re-survey should provide the first realistic assessment of the extent of Thailand’s contamination and the basis for a credible timeline for completing its Article 5 obligations. It should also enable Thailand to replace the now obsolete 2008 extension request with a credible strategy for meeting an extended Article 5 deadline.

 

The Monitor gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the Mine Action Review supported and published by Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), which conducted mine action research in 2016 and shared it with the Monitor. The Monitor is responsible for the findings presented online and in its print publications.

 


[1] Article 7 Report (for 2015), Form D.

[2] “About us: Thailand Mine Action Center,” TMAC website, undated.

[3] Response to Landmine Monitor questionnaire by Lt.-Gen. Attanop Sirisak, Director General, TMAC, 20 May 2011.

[4] Email from Shushira Chohenchob, Programme Manager, NPA, Bangkok, 10 October 2016.

[5] Interview with General Wittaya Wachirakul, Director General, TMAC, Geneva, 19 May 2016.

[6] Thailand’s National Mine Action Standards, 1 April 2015.

[7] Blog by Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief of Cooperation and Evaluation Unit, TMAC, accessed 14 June 2015 at: http://hdothailand.blogspot.com/p/blog-page30.html (but no longer available); and interview with Aubrey Sutherland-Pillai, Country Director, Humanitarian Disarmament Programme, NPA Thailand, Bangkok, 8 May 2015.

[8] Information provided by TMAC, 12 June 2015.

[9] Interview with Aubrey Sutherland-Pillai, NPA Thailand, Bangkok, 8 May 2015.

[10] Ibid.

[13] Interview with Shushira Chohenchob, NPA, Bangkok, 13 May 2016.

[14] Article 7 Report (for 2015), Form D.

[16] Article 7 Report (for 2015), Form D; and interview with General Wittaya Wachirakul, TMAC, Bangkok, 19 May 2016.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Interview with Shushira Chohenchob, NPA, Bangkok, 13 May 2016.

[19] Revised Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 7 August 2008, p. 7.

[20] Compiled from Article 7 Report (for 2015), Form D; and Revised Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 7 August 2008, p. 23.

Support for Mine Action

Last updated: 06 October 2016

The Kingdom of Thailand has not reported any national contributions to its mine action program since 2008, when it provided US$3.2 million.

From 2010–2012, Norway had been Thailand’s sole international mine action donor, contributing US$1.4 million toward clearance activities. In 2013, four donors—Germany, Japan, Liechtenstein, and Norway—provided a total of $1.5 million for clearance operations.[1] In 2014, international contributions totaled about $1million with only two donors (Japan and Norway) providing support.[2]

In 2015, Thailand received $720,946 of international assistance from Norway and Japan for clearance operations. This represents a 30% decrease compared to 2014.[3]

Since 2011, international contributions to mine action in Thailand totaled $4.6 million, and averaged less than $1 million per year ($916,439).

Summary of international contributions: 2011–2015[4]

Year

International contributions ($)

2015

720,946

2014

1,023,067

2013

1,525,915

2012

687,510

2011

624,755

Total

4,582,193

 

[1] Germany, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form I, 5 May 2014; Japan, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form I, 30 April 2014; response to Monitor questionnaire by Esther Schindler, Counselor, Swiss Office for Foreign Affairs, 20 March 2014; and email from Ingunn Vatne, Senior Advisor, Section for Humanitarian Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 28 April 2014.

[2] Japan, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form I, 30 April 2015; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Ingrid Schoyen, Senior Adviser, Section for Humanitarian Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 18 May 2015.

[3] Japan, Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form J, April 2016; and email from Ingrid Schoyen, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 May 2016.

[4] See previous Monitor reports.

Casualties and Victim Assistance

Last updated: 27 October 2015

 Summary of action points based on findings

  • Employment, work training, livelihood incentives, and other economic opportunities continued to be areas with the greatest need for improvement for survivors.
  • Representation of local survivors’ networks through survivor leaders should be maintained and developed through all levels of coordination.
  • Improve the system for ordering prosthetic components and introduce functional waitlists in rehabilitation centers.

Victim assistance commitments

The Kingdom of Thailand is responsible for significant numbers of landmine and explosive remnants of war (ERW) survivors. Thailand has made a commitment to victim assistance through the Mine Ban Treaty.

Casualties

Casualties Overview

All known casualties by end 2014

3,560 casualties (1,505 killed, 2,055 injured)

Casualties in 2014

7 (2013: 16)

2014 casualties by outcome

7 injured (2013: 1 killed; 15 injured)

2014 casualties by device type

4 antipersonnel mines, 3 victim- activated improvised explosive device (IEDs)

Details and Trends

In 2014, the Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) reported four mine/ERW casualties in Thailand. All casualties were men: one casualty was a civilian Cambodian national collecting forest food in Sakaeo province. One casualty was an on-duty military personnel patrolling in Si Sa Ket province. The other two causalities were humanitarian deminers from the military. According to other sources, an additional two soldiers were injured when they drove over an IED and one man was injured by an IED that he stepped on. [1]

The total number of casualties for 2014 represented a significant decrease from 16 in 2013, 20 in 2012, 49 in 2011, and 35 casualties in 2010. The four casualties in 2014 was the lowest number recorded annually in Thailand since data collection began.[2]

The TMAC recorded all casualties in 2014 and 2013, 13 casualties in 2012, 24 casualties in 2011, and 23 casualties in 2010.[3] In 2014 and in 2013, all casualties recorded by TMAC occurred on the Thai-Cambodian border.[4] There was no report on casualties of improvised mines or similar improvised explosive devices in southern Thailand in 2013.[5]

The most comprehensive casualty data collection for Thailand remains the Landmine Impact Survey (LIS), which identified at least 3,468 casualties as of May 2001 (1,497 killed; 1,971 injured).[6] From June 1998 to the end of 2014, the Monitor recorded 697 mine/ERW casualties in Thailand: 37 people killed, 300 injured, and for 360 it was unknown if they survived.[7]

Victim Assistance

In total, at least 1,383 mine/ERW survivors were recorded in Thailand by the end of 2014.[8]

Summary of victim assistance efforts since 1999[9]

Since 1999, the number of services provided to survivors from both government agencies and civil society organizations/NGOs gradually increased. Government responses to ongoing advocacy efforts by NGOs and local survivors’ groups led to improvements in the quality and coverage of services for mine/ERW survivors. In 1999, few government agencies or civil society groups provided services to survivors, yet by 2013-2014 a wide range of victim assistance services were being maintained.

Coordination among governmental bodies responsible for victim assistance has improved steadily since 2000. NGOs completed a national mine/ERW survivor survey and needs assessment in 2009. By 2010, Thailand had linked victim assistance to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The linkages between disability-rights, victim assistance, and community-based rehabilitation (CBR) on the ground strengthened over time through improved interagency cooperation and identification of focal points in relevant ministries.

Access to free healthcare programs increased through universal health coverage, provided survivors were Thai nationals or registered refugees. Emergency transportation was widely available and rescue response time improved with training. CBR and its outreach worker network (which covered 99% of the country by 2007) expanded significantly since 1998–1999. Gradual improvements were made in the availability of employment opportunities, social inclusion activities, and accessibility of existing services. Inclusive education programs provided by the government and relevant organizations increased. There were slight improvements in responding to the specific economic-inclusion needs of survivors working in the agricultural sector.

Victim assistance in 2014

In 2014 government support for strengthening and promotion of local landmine survivor networks was further developed through close consultation with survivors. Changes to policy meant that all survivors, including stateless survivors living in Thailand without identification, were better able to access health services.  Supply of prosthetic components to regional workshops was sometimes delayed causing interruptions to services.

Assessing victim assistance needs

TMAC and other government agencies demonstrated improved coordination in registering data on each new casualty and following up to ensure that they received assistance and support. Use of the record system, which had existed in past years, improved significantly in 2012 and continued improving through 2014.[10]

The National Office for the Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (NEP) under the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS) organized six workshops on landmine victim assistance in 2012–2013. These workshops were used as a forum to hear survivors’ concerns through local representatives of survivor groups.[11] It was found that survivors and persons with disabilities required access to updated information on their rights,services. Economic inclusion and microcredit were identified as priority needs.

TMAC and its Humanitarian Mine Action Units (HMAUs) visited landmine/ERW survivors to assess their needs. From late 2013 to October 2014, TMAC’s Coordination and Evaluation Division carried out a specific project and made 30 follow-up visits to survivors, while also providing small emergency funds to meet urgent needs.[12]

The greatest challenges TMAC found were the distance from communities to prostheses centers and economic inclusion.[13]

Victim assistance coordination[14]

Government coordinating body/focal point

Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Coordinating mechanism

The National Sub-Committee on Victim Assistance under the National Committee for Humanitarian Mine Action, includes TMAC, relevant government ministries and agencies: Foreign Affairs, Public Health, Social Development and Human Security, National Office for the Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (NEP), Interior, and Labor, as well as NGOs

Plan

The Master Plan for Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016

The National Sub-Committee on Victim Assistance did not hold formal meetings in 2013 and 2014, however there was regular coordination among the victim assistance stakeholders including the TMAC throughout the two-year period.[15]

The Master Plan on Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016 provides five action plans to strengthen victim assistance efforts, in the areas of mine victim database management; physical and psychological rehabilitation; social and economic reintegration; CBR; and sharing of best practices and experience.[16]

Thailand connected its work on victim assistance both in line with planning and implementation of its obligations under the CRDP[17] and also its universal health coverage strategy. Thailand reported that to assist landmine survivors it has adopted a holistic and integrated approach to victim assistance. Care for landmine victims is integrated into the broader legal framework, national plans and programs for persons with disabilities, and is implemented under the umbrella of universal health coverage for all.[18]

Thailand stated that other legislative measures that guarantee the rights of persons with disabilities include: 1) the National Health Security Act; 2) the Emergency Medical Service Act; and 3) The Persons with Disabilities Education Act.[19] Thailand also revised the Persons with Disabilities’ Quality of Life Promotion Act, which provides a comprehensive legal and institutional framework regarding rights and entitlements for persons with disabilities. The revised act decentralized coordination of essential services to the local administrative authorities, which are closer to communities.[20]

In 2014, the National Commission on Promotion and Development of the Quality of Lives of Persons with Disabilities met twice to address issues including: increasing disability pensions; withdrawal of its interpretative declaration to the CRPD;[21] the establishment of provincial service centers for people with disabilities; amendments to regulations under the Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act; procedures for acquiring  accessible public buses; approval of projects for income generating activities; house modifications; making government venues accessible; and the development of an smart phone application to monitor the accessibility of public spaces.[22]

The National Commission also met twice in 2013 to include organizations of persons with disabilities in coordination, activities, and funding opportunities. The Commission drafted or made amendments to seven rules and regulations under the Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act and developed implementation strategies for the Promotion and Development Quality of Lives of Persons with Disabilities National Plan (2012-2015), and related work on disability issues under the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Socio–Cultural Community (ASCC) framework.[23]

Thailand provided updates on victim assistance activities through statements at the Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference in Maputo in June 2014. Thailand also provided information about mine/ERW casualties in its Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report for calendar year 2013.[24] Thailand also made a statement on victim assistance at the Fourth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions in September 2013[25] and during the General Exchanges of Views at the Fifth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions in September 2014.[26]

Inclusion and participation in victim assistance

In 2013 and 2014, survivor participation continued to increase at the community and provincial levels, and several survivors remained active in leadership roles in their communities. Survivor leaders from different communities also met regularly to discuss local advocacy approaches and to share information and services as well as lessons learned, with the support of the Catholic Office for Emergency Relief and Refugees (COERR).[27]

Survivors were consulted about survey and clearance needs. They were also key informants during the baseline survey, non-technical survey and impact assessment processes conducted by demining operators.[28] Survivors and other persons with disabilities continued to participate in provincial coordination meetings in Chanthaburi.[29] Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) also supported the transportation, accommodation expenses, and other costs for survivor representatives to attend group meetings of survivor leaders.[30]

TMAC regularly visited mine/ERW survivors to consult them and leaders of survivor networks as did other concerned government agencies and NGOs about their needs.[31]

Through informal networks, survivor leaders assisted other survivors and people with disabilities in making referrals, completing paperwork such as registering for benefits or filling in other forms, and liaising with local authorities at the leader or province level including liaising with NGOs focal points working on victim assistance.[32]

Based on feedback from local landmine-survivor leaders received by Thailand’s governmental team of victim assistance experts which indicated that survivors wanted to meet with other leaders in order to share experiences, in May 2013 the NEP organized the first formal Meeting of Leaders of Landmine Survivors in Aranyaprathet district, Sakaeo province. Some 20 participants from five provinces along the Thai-Cambodia border shared experiences and visited several local victim-assistance facilities.[33]

In 2014, the MSDHS organized two workshops to raise awareness about the rights of persons with disabilities among persons with disabilities and other people in the community. In May 2013, the MSDHS organized a victim assistance workshop to build the capacity of leaders of survivors and relevant parties. It also carried out four workshops on the Quality of Lives of Persons with Disabilities plan, each in a different in mine-affected province.[34] 

Service accessibility and effectiveness[35]

Name of organization

Type of organization

Type of activity

Changes in quality/coverage of service in 2014

Ministry of Public Health (MoPH)

Government

Operated healthcare facilities in mine-affected areas and a network of emergency response teams

Ongoing

National Health Security Office (NHSO)

Government

Responsible for funding the provision of prosthetic and other mobility devices and managing individual rehabilitation programs for persons with disabilities

Ongoing, rehabilitation funds allocated per person unchanged

Ministry of Development and Human Security (MSDHS)

Government

Community-based program providing social support for persons with disabilities

Ongoing

Sirindhorn National Medical Rehabilitation Center

Government

Provided free prostheses, assistive devices, wheelchairs, and other aids for persons with disabilities through hospitals

Ongoing

Catholic Office for Emergency Relief and Refugees (COERR)

National NGO

Supplied basic essentials such as food to persons with disabilities, including mine survivors in Sa Kaeo province; provided income generating activities trainings and small funds for six persons with disabilities

Ongoing and started income-generating activities trainings and funds for six persons with disabilities in September 2014

Prostheses Foundation

National NGO

Prostheses and assistive devices provided free-of-charge

Continued to provide mobile prosthetic services in Thailand and other countries, i.e. Malaysia, Myanmar, Bangladesh, and Senegal

Jesuit Relief Services (JRS)

International NGO

Assistance to mine/ERW survivors and their children as part of its broader programs, including visits to mine survivors, and emergency support such as dry food and blankets

Ongoing

Emergency medical care

The National Institute for Emergency Medicine (NIEM) maintained community emergency health volunteer groups in every province in Thailand.[36] In early 2015, the NIEM, in cooperation with TMAC was planning specialized emergency care training for all Humanitarian Mine Action Units (HMAU’s) together with relevant NGOs.[37]

Thailand improved its medical emergency services by integrating the three main government medical funding schemes. Emergency patients are to be sent to the nearest hospital without being asked about their eligibility, and patients’ expenses are settled directly at one shared focal point for the three funds without patients first having to pay fees out-of-pocket and then await reimbursement.[38]

Physical rehabilitation including prosthetics

The National Health Security Office (NHSO) remained responsible for providing funding for rehabilitation and mobility devices for persons with disabilities in Thailand.[39] Government funding budgeted for the rehabilitation of persons with disabilities increased in 2013 and 2014.[40]

The NHSO continued to promote a system of matching funds, which were integrated with the funds managed by other government agencies. The NHSO fund had two operational components. Under the first, not less than 90% of total resources were dedicated directly to rehabilitation and assistive devices. Under the second, not more than 10% of resources were dedicated to support and promotion of service provision. The NHSO fund also had a policy component that could allow the cost of transportation to services to be covered for persons with disabilities.[41]

The NHSO faced challenges to integrating the health services and benefit packages provided by the hospital-based NHSO with the activities of the community-based rehabilitation (CBR) network. The NHSO recognized the importance of CBR but was only able to provide funded health care services through hospitals or health care units. Therefore the benefits did not reach the community level. In response, the NHSO started to explore solutions and held a seminar to discuss the issues in March 2014.[42]

Continuing a trend ongoing over the past several years, the role of the Sirindhorn Center in providing mobility devices remained minimal compared to when it had been the primary national referral hospital for prosthetics.[43] In 2013 and 2014, the Sirindhorn Center continued to focus on research, development, and innovation of devices, applying more advanced technology and testing.[44]

In 2013 and through 2014, the two UNDP-established repair centers in Sa Kaeo province, which operated with co-support from subdistrict administrative offices, continued but due to reduced funding the quantity of services decreased. As of February 2015, it was uncertain if the subdistrict administrative office would be able to continue prostheses repair activities in 2015, depending on the availability budget support.[45]

Irregular supplies of prosthetics components to prosthetic department of Aranyaprathet hospital caused delays for people waiting for services. The prosthetic workshop did not have a coordinated waitlist so survivors in need either travelled needlessly, or had to call regularly to find out when services were available.[46]

Community-based rehabilitation

The national CBR program remained active in all provinces of Thailand.[47] The NEP, with support fromCBM (previously Christian Blind Mission), hosted the official launch of the Thai edition of the World Health Organization CBR guidelines to support and guide the CBR network in implementing disability work that focuses on community participation.[48]

Economic and social inclusion

Improvement in employment opportunities for survivors was reported. The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives provided small grants and fishery training to new survivors.[49] HMAUs also provided support for income-generation activities as well as for some basic needs.[50] TMAC and all four HMAUs coordinated with relevant government and non-government agencies to facilitate survivors access to services.[51]

Survey data presented in September 2013 found that 20% of all persons with disabilities of working age needed training and capacity building, while 77% needed support for economic inclusion.[52]

The Ministry of Social Development and Human Security and the Ministry of Labor established a task force on the “Promotion of Employment of People with Disabilities for Social Work in Local Community.” A pilot project on Section 35 of the Person with Disabilities Empowerment Action BE 2550 (2007)[53] matches persons with disabilities who live in remote areas with the companies who are required by law to employ persons with disabilities under the quota system, whereby the company supports the person to work in their own communities rather than for the company directly.[54] The Commission approved projects for income-generation activities for people with disabilities in rural areas for the period November 2014 to September 2015.[55]

In 2014, following the reductions in the level of services over several years, JRS focused facilitating/linking victim assistance activities between the field and the capital. In 2013-2014, it reduced services for survivors, citing a general increase of services by government and an internal reprioritization of the organization.[56]  

The Community Based Rehabilitation Program and the Community Learning Center for People with Disabilities project operated in all provinces. Each province contained two centers, while Bangkok had 10 centers in 2013.[57] This marked a significant expansion from having at least one center of each province during 2012.[58]

The government provided five-year, interest-free, small business loans for persons with disabilities. Government regulations require private firms either to hire one person with a disability for every 100 workers or contribute to a fund that benefits persons with disabilities. However this provision was not uniformly enforced.[59]

National registration of persons with disabilities was completed by 2011. All survivors were reportedly registered and random monitoring through leaders of survivor groups in several provinces confirmed that their constituents were registered. Persons with disabilities, including mine/ERW survivors who are registered with the government, can receive monthly, free medical examinations, and assistive devices.[60]

For several years disability benefits were set at 500 Thai Baht (approximately US$15) per month. In November 2014, the Cabinet approved a proposal to increase the disability pension by 60% to 800 Thai Baht per month.[61]

COERR, with support from private donors, started a pilot income-generating project for six survivors and people with disabilities in Sakaoe province for the period September 2014 until March 2015, which included training.[62]

Modified buildings with accessible toilets for survivors and people with disabilities in Aranyapratet were provided through the donations of a small volunteer group. Toilet instillation based on the sanitation needs of the most vulnerable in the community was assessed through requests to local survivor leaders by survivors, persons with disabilities and their families.[63]

Laws and policies

The constitution and law prohibit discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities in education, transportation, access to health care, or the provision of other state services. Government enforcement was not consistently effective. The law also mandates that persons with disabilities have access to information, communications, and newly constructed buildings, but these provisions were not uniformly enforced.[64]

In 2013, Thailand issued the revised “Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act B.E.2556 (2013).” The key changes included increasing the role of the NEP, introducing focal points for disability with more authority and responsibility to work at the department level, expanding services to the persons with disabilities without legal status in Thailand, particularly stateless persons, and establishment of service centers by organizations of persons with disabilities and local authorities.[65]

Thailand has a Master Plan for Development of Women with Disabilities B.E 2556-2559 (2013-2016). The plan’s six key objectives include: promotion of accessibility to equal rights and ending discrimination against women and female children with disabilities; elimination of violence against women and female children with disabilities; promotion of health and quality of life for women and female children with disabilities; capacity building; promotion of the capacity of organizations of women with disabilities; and promotion of positive attitudes towards these groups.[66]

In what was regarded as a significant victory for the right of accessibility for persons with disabilities in Thailand, in January 2015 the Supreme Administrative Court ordered Bangkok Governor and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration to carry out three essential accessibility measures to facilitate use of public transit by persons with disabilities within one year.[67]

Thailand ratified the CRPD on 29 July 2008.

Services for Myanmar nationals in 2013

Mine survivors from Myanmar who went to Thailand for assistance received medical care and rehabilitation at hospitals in refugee camps, in public district hospitals in the Thai-Myanmar border provinces and from NGOs.[68] Hospitals in Thailand also provided medical care and rehabilitation to survivors from Cambodia.[69]

Victim assistance activities on Thai-Myanmar Border and in Thailand for Myanmar nationals

Name of organization

Type of organization

Type of activity

Thai hospitals

Government

Providing medical care to mine/ERW survivors from Myanmar and Cambodia

Prostheses Foundation of H.R.H The Princess Mother

National NGO

Prostheses and assistive devices provided free-of-charge

The Mae Tao Clinic (MTC)

National NGO

Prosthetics and rehabilitation services, trauma surgery, psychological support, and other health services

Shan Health Committee (SHC)

Community-based organization

Prosthetic services in Pang Ma Pha, Wieng Hang, Mae Fa Luang, and Loi Kai Wan; and economic inclusion activities

Care Villa established by the Karen Handicap Welfare Association

Community-based organization

Assistance to blind amputee mine/ERW survivors in Mae La refugee camp

Handicap International (HI) Burmese Border Project

International NGO

Physiotherapy, prosthetics, and accessibility to buildings; social inclusion activities

ICRC

International organization

Covers costs of hospitalization and surgery for war injured people from Myanmar in Thai hospitals

The Mae Tao Clinic (MTC), an NGO health facility run by and for asylum seekers and migrants from Myanmar, provided prosthetic limbs and other medical services near the join border. In addition to the successes, the program faced hurdles that were beyond the Clinic’s control. MTC reported that the supply of artificial feet (ordered from Cambodia by HI) often could not keep up with the demand. Loss of experienced technical staff who resettle overseas was also a challenge to capacity. The program’s financial future was more secure with a long-term support guarantee for the Clinic’s prosthetics program made by an Italian community organization.[70] In 2013 the number of MTC prosthetics fitted decreased by some 5% from in 2012.[71]

The refugee-run Care Villa facility continued to offer special care and assistance to blind amputee landmine/ERW survivors residing in the Mae La refugee camp. HI provided prosthetic limbs, orthotics, and other assistive devices for refugees in some of the camps and has also trained refugees in the Mae La camp to make the prostheses.[72] In 2013, Care Villa residents (mostly landmine survivors that are both amputees and blind) received only very basic rations. The United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCR) reported providing funding to help provide physical and psychosocial support at Care Villa as well.[73]

ICRC continued to pay for the surgical treatment in Thai hospitals of weapon-wounded people from Myanmar unable to be treated in their own country. Despite reduced fighting in parts of Myanmar, 42 weapon-wounded patients in 2013 from there sought treatment in Thai hospitals and had their medical costs covered. The number of people reduced from 111 in 2011 to 38 in 2012. It slightly increased to 42 in 2013.[74]

In 2013 and 2014, the peace talks between members of armed ethnic groups and Myanmar government representatives continued.[75] Although it was uncertain if the groups would reach a cease-fire agreement,it resulted in the possibility of refugees being returned, leading to a reduction in financial assistance by some donors to NGOs in order to focus on activities within Myanmar. Given the global economic situation and competing demands in other countries, particularly Myanmar, it was becoming harder to sustain enough donor funding to provide basic services to refuges living in camps in Thailand.[76] The work of the MTC was similarly threatened by the redirection of donor funding.[77]

HI also continued to produce prosthetics and to support rehabilitation in refugee camps as well as to support self-help groups. Key activities included functional rehabilitation services, livelihood and social inclusion for persons with physical disabilities in three camps in Tak province and two camps in Mae Hong Son province.[78]

As part of humanitarian mine action study visit organized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand in August 2013, a delegation from Myanmar visited the Aranyaprathet Hospital in Sakaeo province to observe services for landmine survivors including operations, prosthetic services, and rehabilitation, as well as the Prostheses Foundation in Chiang Mai Province and two community learning centers for persons with disabilities in Chiang Mai and Lampang Provinces which served as models for a community-based rehabilitation.[79]


[1] Information from TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2014 and 6 February 2015. Analysis of AOAV data received by email from Jane Hunter, Armed Violence Researcher, AOAV, 7 October 2015.

[2] See previous editions of the Monitor, www.the-monitor.org.

[3] Information provided by TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2013, 20 May 2013, 30 April 2014, and 6 February 2015.

[4] Information provided by TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2014; and Monitor media monitoring for calendar year 2013.

[5] Based on Monitor analysis of media reports for 2013 and 2014.

[6] Survey Action Center and Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), “Landmine Impact Survey: Kingdom of Thailand,” 2001, p. 18

[7] See previous editions of the Monitor, www.the-monitor.org. The LIS recorded 346 new casualties between June 1998 and May 2001. This total includes some casualties injured in Myanmar and recorded in Thailand, which could not be separated from the data.

[8] A survey completed in the beginning of 2009 identified 1,252 survivors in Thailand; another 50 survivors were identified during 2009 and 2010. See Handicap International (HI), “Mine Victim Survey and Situation Analysis: Findings, Analyses and Recommendations,” Bangkok, June 2009, p. 3. These figures are thought to differ from the high number of injured reported in the LIS, as they include only Thai nationals resident in Thailand.

[9] Unless otherwise noted, information presented in this section is drawn from the Thailand country reports and profiles from 1999 to date, www.the-monitor.org.

[10] TMAC, “Database sheet of casualties and follow up, Special Affairs Unit,” provided to the Monitor by TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2013 and 30 April 2014; and data from TMAC, 6 February 2015.

[11] Interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, Disability Specialist, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013, 5 December 2014; and telephone interview with Saowalak Vijit, NEP, 2 February 2015.

[12] TMAC’s Humanitarian Demining Operations Thailand, TMAC's Coordination and Evaluation Division, accessed 30 December 2014; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Head of TMAC’s Coordination and Evaluation Division, TMAC, Bangkok, November and December 2014.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2012 and 2013), Form J; and Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 24 June 2014.

[15] Telephone interview with Chidchanok Suwakhon, National Institute for Emergency Medicine, Bangkok, 19 January 2015.

[16] Thailand’s Master Plan on Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016.

[17] Interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013.

[18] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 24 June 2014.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid.

[21] On 5 February 2015, Thailand informed the Secretary-General of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities that it had decided to withdraw the following interpretative declaration made upon ratification:

“The Kingdom of Thailand hereby declares that the application of Article 18 of the Convention shall be subject to the national laws, regulations and practices in Thailand,” UN Treaties Collection.

[22] Minutes, National Committee on Promotion and Development Quality of Lives of People with Disabilities (NCPDQo-PwD) (2nd/ 2014), 4 November 2014; and Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (1st/ 2014), 7 August 2014.

[23] Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (2nd/ 2013), 18 September 2013; and Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (1st/ 2012), 27 May 2013.

[24] Statement of Thailand, Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-Economic Reintegration, Geneva, 29 May 2013; Mine Ban Treaty Thirteenth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 3 December 2013; Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2012 and 2013), Form J; and Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 24 June 2014.

[25] Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munition Fourth Meeting of States Parties, Lusaka, 11 September 2013.

[26] Statement of Thailand, General Exchanges of Views, the Fifth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, 2 September 2014.

[27] Telephone interview with Supranee Deerada, Senior Operations Officer, COERR, Aranyapratet, 8 February 2015.

[28] Interview with Aubrey Sutherland-Pillai, Country Director, Norwegian People’s Aid Humanitarian Disarmament Programme Thailand, 7 February 2015.

[29] Telephone interview with Chusak Saelee on 1 May 2013 and 8 February 2015.

[30] Interview with Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 28 December 2014.

[31] Telephone interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Head, Landmine Survivors and People with Disabilities in Pan-suk Subdistrict, 1 May 2013; and telephone interview with Chusak Saelee, Landmine Survivors and People with Disabilities in Pong Nam Ron District, 2 May 2013; email from Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 3 May 2013; email from Chidchanok Suwakhon, NIEM, 10 May 2013; interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, 20 December 2014; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief, Coordination and Evaluation Unit, Thailand Mine Action Center, 5 February 2015.

[32] Interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Landmine Survivors and People with Disabilities in Pan-suk Subdistrict, 24 November 2012; and field mission notes and interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Sakaeo, 20 December 2014.

[33] Email from Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 23 May 2013.

[34] Information provided by Mayuree Pewsuwan, Disability Specialist, Bangkok, 16 March 2014 and 29 January 2015; and telephone interview with Saowalak Vijit, NEP, 2 February 2015.

[35] Interview with Pairoj Boonsirikamchai, Maputo, 27 June 2014; Interview with Prachaksvich Lebnak, NHSO, 27 June 2014 and 28 December 2014; information from Mayuree Pewsuwan, former Disability Specialist, NEP, Bangkok, 16 March 2014 and 29 January 2015; and telephone interview with Saowalak Vijit, NEP, 2 February 2015; Sirindhorn National Medical Rehabilitation Center, http://www.snmrc.go.th/index.php/en/, accessed 21 December 2014; interview with  Suleepun Solanda, Public Health Technical Officer and  Sarinee Kaewsawang, Physiotherapist, Sirindhorn National Medical Rehabilitation Center (SNMRC), Ministry of Public Health, 21 February 2014; Telephone interview with Supranee Deerada, Senior Operations Officer, COERR, Aranyapratet, 8 February 2015 and COERR www.coerr.org; Prosthetics Foundation, www.prosthesesfoundation.or.th; and interview with Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 28 December 2014. 

[36] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 4 December 2012.

[37] Telephone interview with Chidchanok Suwakhon, National Institute for Emergency Medicine, Bangkok, 19 January 2015.

[39] Interview with Dr. Prachaksvich Lebnak, NHSO, 28 December 2014; and NHSO, “NHSO Funds Management Manual for Fiscal Year B.E.2557 (2014)”, Section 5, pp. 162-398.

[40] Funding increased from 12.88 Thai Baht per capita for 48.445 million people in 2013 fiscal year (1 October 2012 to 30 September 2013) to 14.95 Thai Baht per capita or 730,337,440 Thai Baht total in 2014 fiscal (1 October 2013 to 30 September 2014) NHSO, “NHSO Funds Management Manual for Fiscal Year B.E.2557 (2014)”, Section 5, pp. 162-398

[41] NHSO, “NHSO Funds Management Manual for Fiscal Year B.E.2558 (2015)”, Section 5, pp. 126-140.

[42] Interview with Ms. Orajitt Bumrungskulswat, Director of Medical Rehabilitation, Traditional Medical and Community Health Care Program, National Health Security Office (NHSO), Nonthaburi province, 17 March 2014; and telephone interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 16 March 2014.

[43] Sirindhorn Center, “Mission,” see http://www.snmrc.go.th/index.php/en/..

[44] Sirindhorn Center, “Programme and Important Plans according to the Four-Year-Plan of Action 2010-2013” (in Thai), and notes from Monitor visit, 21 February 2014.

[45] Telephone interview with Saichon Konto, Chief Administrator, Tapsadet Subdistrict Administrative Office, 6 February 2015; presentation by Saichon Konto, Chief Administrator, Tapsadet Subdistrict Administrative Office, to the participants of the Fieldtrip to Humanitarian Mine Action Units, Sa Kaeo and Chanthaburi provinces, 7 June 2012; “Thailand’s Experiences on Victim Assistance” side event presentation, Geneva, 5 December 2013;Thailand’s Subcommittee on Victim Assistance: “Thailand’s Experiences on Victim.Assistance,”YouTube,24 November 2012.; and interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013.

[46] Notes from Monitor field mission, Aranyapratet, Sakaeo province, 21 December 2014.

[47] Telephone interview with Saowalak Wijit, NEP, Bangkok, 20 February 2014 and 20 January 2015.

[49] Information from Database Unit, TMAC, 29 January 2015.

[50] Telephone interview with Chusak Saelee, Head, Landmine Survivors and Persons with Disabilities Network in Pong Nam Ron District, 3 May 2013 and 8 February 2015.

[51] Information from Database Unit, TMAC, 29 January 2015; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief, Coordination and Evaluation Unit, Thailand Mine Action Center, 5 February 2015.

[52] According to the survey there were 1,379,103 registered people with disabilities (2% of population). Of this number, 703,078 were of working age (age 15 to 60); 38% were working and 51% were not working; 11% were unable to work. People with disabilities who were employed through the quote system under by law were 19,211 (section 33) and 2,513 (section 35). Minutes,  NCPDQo-PwD (2nd/ 2013), 18 September 2013.

[54] Ministry of Labour, “Ministry of Labour Discussed Employment in Local Communities” ; and Information from Mayuree Pewsuwan, , NEP, Bangkok, 29 January 2015.

[55] Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (2nd/ 2014), 4 November 2014.

[56] Email from Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, Bangkok, 3 May 2013; and interview with Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, Bangkok, 28 December 2014.

[57] US Department of State, “2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 27 February 2014.

[58] US Department of State, “2012 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 17 April 2013.

[59] US Department of State, “2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 27 February 2014.

[60] Monitor interviews with survivors 1 January to 13 June 2012: Prakaikul Teppanok, Nid Chabathong, Chamroon Pengpis and Lao Sena, in Surin; Chusak Saelee from Chanthaburi; Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Tongsao Soiwijit, Supan Kota and Somkiat Chuesingh from Sa Kaeo; Vichai Pokkapan from Si Sa Ket; Pinya Siwilai from Trad province; and interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo in December 2014 and Chusak Saelee in February 2015; and statement by Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-economic Reintegration, Geneva, 22 June 2011; and interview with Mr. Ram Chintamas, Director of the Division of Social Welfare, Department of Local Administration, Ministry of Interior, Bangkok, 19 February 2014.

[61] Cabinet Resolution, 25 November 2014, accessed 30 December 2014.

[62] Telephone interview with Supranee Deerada, Senior Operations Officer, COERR, Aranyapratet, 8 February 2015; and COERR, Activities.

[63] Notes from Monitor field mission, Sakaeo province, 20 December 2014.

[64] US Department of State, “2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 27 February 2014.

[65] “Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act (Second Revision) B.E.2556 (2013),” Thailand Royal Gazette, Volume 130, 29 March 2013, p. 6, para 30; and interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013 and 8 February 2015.

[66] NEP, “Master Plan for Development of Women with Disabilities B.E 2556-2559 (2013-2016).”

[67] “The disabled win one”, Bangkok Post,22 January 2015. 

[68] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand, “3 disabled Myanmar Children got 'New Legs, New Life' in Thailand.”

[69] Presentation by Aranyapratet Hospital to the participants of the Field Trip to Humanitarian Mine Action Units, Sa Kaeo and Chanthaburi provinces, Sa Kaeo, 7 June 2012; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief, Coordination and Evaluation Unit, TMAC, 5 February 2015.

[70] Mae Toe Clinic, “Prosthetics.”

[71] Mae Tao Clinic, Annual Report 2013, p 8. In 2013, 256 new and replacement prosthetic limbs were fitted compared to 268 in 2012.

[72] Edward Winter, “A Refuge for Myanmar’s Disabled Refugees,” Reliefweb, 1 February 2013.

[74] ICRC, “Annual Report 2013”, pp. 319-321.

[75] Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team, “Meeting”.

[76] The Committee for the Coordination of Services to Displaced Persons in Thailand (CCSDPT) and The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Strategic Framework for Durable Solutions 2013/14 (Version 5, 2013), p 5.

[77] Belinda Thompson, “Burmese refugees the forgotten victims of AusAID cuts,” 24 October 2013.

[79] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand, “Thailand Supports Myanmar in humanitarian mine action efforts.”

Profile documents

Profiles are updated annually, when warranted.

Back to Thailand