On 7 July 2010, the Independent Fact-finding Commission for Reconciliation, set up as part of the Thai Government’s reconciliation plan, held its first press conference to provide the public with preliminary information on its mandate and scope of work.

          The Commission Chairman, Dr. Kanit Na Nakorn, said that on 6 July 2010, the Cabinet acknowledged the name list of eight persons whom he had selected as members of the Independent Fact-finding Commission for Reconciliation. The Cabinet also approved the Regulations of the Prime Minister’s Office on the Independent Fact-finding Commission for Reconciliation, thereby officially establishing the Commission.

          In selecting Commission members and setting the Commission’s tasks, Dr. Kanit underscored that he had given due consideration to views expressed during the continuous process of consultations he had conducted with individuals, political groups and opinion leaders from various sectors, as well as the need to create an environment of trust. The appointed Commission members are all qualified individuals with experience, knowledge and capabilities from diverse professions, comprising:

          1) Mr. Kittipong Kittiyarak, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Justice;

          2) Associate Professor Dr. Jutharat Ua-amnoey, lecturer at the Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University;

          3) Associate Professor Dr. Decha Sungkawan, Dean of the Faculty of Social Administration, Thammasat University;

          4) Mr. Pairote Polaphet, Secretary-General of the Union for Civil Liberty;

           5) Mr. Manich Sooksomchitra, President of the Thai Press Development Foundation;

           6) Professor Dr. Ronnachai Kongsakon, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital;

           7) Mr. Somchai Homlaor, Chair of the Campaign Committee for Human Rights; and

           8) Associate Professor Dr. Surasak Likasitwatanakul, Dean of the Faculty of Law, Thammasat University.

           In carrying out its work, Dr. Kanit gave assurances that the Commission would uphold the core principles of independence, honesty, transparency, integrity and diversity of areas of expertise. Its mandate and terms of reference would be based upon the following three concepts:

           1) Truth seeking: This would be to uncover and establish the truth and facts especially with regard to political violence, violations of human rights, loss of lives, physical and psychological injuries, and property and other damages, which occurred during April-May 2010, including the underlying roots causes of the conflict and violence during the past several years, so that all these issues could be clearly identified and common understanding on them achieved;

           2) Conflict prevention: This would concern the need to create understanding and provide short-term remedies to people in various groups affected by the violence so as to prevent the recurrence of violence and losses; and

          3) Restoration: This would involve the rehabilitation and healing of Thai society, organisations, institutions and individuals affected by the violent incidents through restorative justice and social justice in order to promote long-term reconciliation.

         In closing, Dr. Kanit acknowledged that the Commission faced a very difficult task ahead and therefore would need cooperation from everyone, including the media, and that it would welcome all views and comments.

        During the Q&A session that followed, Dr. Kanit responded to a question regarding the Commission’s timeframe and work schedule, saying that the Commission aimed to complete its work as soon as possible within a limit of two years, during which it must report its progress to the Cabinet every six months. The public would also be kept informed of progress made so as to allow for any input they might have on the Commission’s work. The Commission would convene its meeting at the earliest opportunity to formulate a plan of action and work schedule, and would inform the public of the results.

        On questions about the nature of the truth seeking process, Dr. Kanit explained that the Commission would place emphasis on the preventative dimension of its work which would involve studying the underlying roots of the conflict, and also to create understanding amongst the various groups involved in the conflict. While its authority would not extend to the punishment of individuals as this responsibility lies with the judicial process, he said there would be sharing of information between the Commission and those involved in the judicial process. In this connection, Mr. Kittipong added that as the scope of the Commission’s work would be wider than that of the judicial process and covers a broader range of issues, the Commission would be able to give context to why the crimes were committed. The Commission would also be considering various means of providing remedies. He noted that no comparable experiences could be found in other countries on resolving a situation where conflict is still ongoing. Therefore, the Commission’s focus would be to prevent further conflict and recurrence of violence.

        With regard to the issue of access to information, Dr. Kanit said that he had extensive networks to provide him with information, and that in his consultations with various sectors, including the state security forces, all groups expressed their willingness to cooperate. Mr. Kittipong noted that the Foundation for Democracy and Development Studies would also provide an important forum for people of different groups to hear one another’s views, which would also facilitate understanding among the various groups. In addition, Mr. Manich expressed his hope to get cooperation from local and foreign media as he believed that they were not involved in the conflict and could provide useful facts.

         In response to questions about the Commission’s budget, Mr. Kittipong explained that the Government would provide support but the Commission had not yet determined the amount of funds needed as its plan of work had first to be formulated. In this regard, fact-finding on some issues might require foreign experts and there would be the possibility of utilising the United Nation (UN)’s lists of experts although this would not amount to UN involvement in the Commission’s work. In any case, once the budget is set, the Commission would be able to explain how it intends to spend the funds.

        When asked about what concrete results the public could expect, Dr. Kanit said that after six months, there would be tangible progress made. The Commission would keep the public informed in accordance with the provision in the Regulations of the Prime Minister’s Office stipulating that the Commission has a duty to keep the public informed. Mr. Manit believed that the Commission would be able to produce information which covered all relevant aspects and would be detailed and accurate. The public would be presented with this information and could decide whether to believe it or not. Dr. Decha said he expects the provision of remedies would help resolve the conflict, and that society would be able to learn from past experiences in using non-violent means to solve conflicts. On her part, Dr. Jutharat expressed her confidence that restorative justice would lead to reconciliation.

***********************

9 July 2010