Commitment to the Mine Ban Treaty

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. As it has reported since 2002, Thailand is still in the process of passing an executive measure, the Office of the Prime Minister Regulations Governing the Implementation of the Convention.[1]

Thailand submitted its thirteenth Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report on 30 April 2011, covering calendar year 2010.[2]

Thailand attended the Tenth Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in Geneva in November–December 2010, where it became co-chair of the Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention. Thailand made interventions during sessions on enhancing international cooperation and assistance, assisting victims, clearing mined areas, and evaluation of the Implementation Support Unit.

At the intersessional Standing Committee meetings in Geneva in June 2011, in addition to its co-chair role, Thailand made interventions during the sessions on Article 3 under the General Status and Operation of the Convention on mines retained, clarifying some changes reported in its Article 7 report, and also on its clearance progress since receiving an extension on its Article 5 obligations. Thailand also made interventions during the sessions on victim assistance, international cooperation and assistance, and Implementation Support Unit funding models.

Thailand is not party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

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 2011, Thailand reported that at the end of 2010, it retained 3,466 antipersonnel mines for training purposes, a reduction of 160 mines from the previous year.[3] Two hundred antipersonnel mines held by the army were transferred for training of new deminers, while 40 antipersonnel mines held by the Thailand National Police Department were retained. Thailand has never reported in any detail on the intended purposes and actual uses of mines kept for training—a step agreed by States Parties at the Review Conferences in 2004 and 2009.[4]

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.”[5] At the end of 2010, the Royal Thai Army retained 2,800 mines, the Royal Thai Air Force retained 581 mines, and the National Police Department retained 85 mines.[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 are also reports of increased use of homemade, or so-called “craft mines”[9] or victim-activated IEDs. In May and July, rubber tappers were injured by victim-activated IEDs in Thanto district, Yala province. In May 2010 a rubber tapper lost his leg after stepping on a mine. In July 2010 a rubber tapper was killed by a mine.[10] In October 2010 a woman was injured after stepping on a mine while tapping rubber trees in Raman district, Yala province.[11] In January 2011 a woman rubber tapper was injured after she reportedly stepped on a mine in Narathiwat’s Bacho district.[12] No group has claimed responsibility for the explosive devices, but news reports frequently state that the mines are laid by insurgents seeking to expel ethnically Thai rubber plantation owners. A female soldier was injured after reportedly stepping on a mine near the site of an insurgent attack.[13]

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 landmines 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.[14] Cambodia and Thailand have never reached a resolution of this matter, and other States Parties have apparently not pursued a resolution of this serious compliance concern.[15]

 

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

In June 2011, Thailand informed the convention’s first intersessional meetings that it hopes to accede to the convention in “the near future.”[1] In a March 2011 letter to the CMC, Thai Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow said that the government “places high importance” on the convention and noted that Thai authorities would continue to “seriously consider the possibility of acceding” to it.[2] On 14 February 2011, Thailand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Kasit Piromya informed the UN Security Council that, “We are seriously considering joining the Convention on Cluster Munitions.”[3]

These statements came after Thailand used cluster munitions in early February 2011 during its border conflict with Cambodia (see Use section below). Thailand has stated that it “fully understands the concerns raised” by States Parties over its use of cluster munitions and has promised to “remain committed to engaging with the international community on this issue.”[4] Thailand said it had “concern for safety of civilians” and “no intention to exacerbate the situation” on the border, but noted that, “important lessons have been learnt from this episode and we therefore see the need to close this chapter and move forward.”

Thailand has accepted a proposal from Norway to organize an interagency seminar on cluster munitions and has expressed its hope that “the seminar will help pave the way for Thailand to better prepare for our accession to the Convention in the near future.”[5]

Prior to 2011, Thailand had expressed concern about how it would meet the convention’s obligations if it were to join. In November 2010, Thailand said that it was “seriously considering” joining the convention, but described implementation as “challenging” and said it would accede “only when we are fully ready to join.”[6] In February 2010, a Ministry of Foreign Affairs official told the Monitor that an interagency review was looking at implementation considerations, including stockpile destruction obligations.[7]

Thailand participated in most of the diplomatic conferences of the Oslo Process that created the convention, but attended the formal negotiations in May 2008 as an observer and did not sign the convention when it was opened for signature in Oslo in December 2008.[8]  

Since 2008, Thailand has continued to show a strong interest in the convention.  It attended the First Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions in Vientiane, Lao PDR in November 2010 as an observer and made statements on its position on joining the convention as well as on international cooperation and assistance. Thailand also participated the convention’s first intersessional meetings in Geneva in June 2011, where it provided a statement expressing its intent to join the convention.

Thailand is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty.

Thailand is not a party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW). It participated as an observer in CCW deliberations on cluster munitions in 2010 and 2011, but did not make its views known on the chair’s draft text.

Civil society groups have undertaken several activities in support of the Convention on Cluster Munitions and Thailand’s accession.[9]

Production, transfer, and stockpiling

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

Thailand possesses a stockpile of cluster munitions, but the composition and status is not known. 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] Thailand also possesses French-made 155 mm NR 269 ERFB extended-range artillery projectiles each containing 56 M42/M46[11] type dual purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) submunitions.[12] Based on the types of submunitions identified in Cambodia after artillery strikes, Thailand also possesses a cluster munition that delivers M85 self-destructing DPICM submunitions.

Thailand has said that it does not intend to acquire more stocks of cluster munitions.[13] Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) has been providing the government with advice and information on efficient solutions for the destruction of Thailand’s stockpile of cluster munitions.[14]

Use

In recent years, Thailand and Cambodia’s military forces have engaged in several brief skirmishes over disputed parts of the border near Preah Vihear temple, resulting in claims and counter-claims of new antipersonnel mine use.[15] On 9 February 2011, the Cambodian Mine Action Centre (CMAC), a government entity, claimed that Thai military forces had fired cluster munitions during fighting on the border, which had started on 4 February.  CMAC said it had identified “evidence of heavy artilleries such as 105MM, 130MM and 155MM used by Thai military, and CMAC experts have verified and confirmed that these artilleries contained Cluster Munitions including M35, M42 and M46 types.”[16]

The Thai army denied the claim of cluster munition use.[17] On 10 February, the Cluster Munition Coalition issued a public statement noting the use allegations and requesting that both countries “clarify if their armed forces have used cluster munitions in the recent border conflict.”[18] On 15 February, Thailand’s diplomatic mission in Geneva provided the CMC with a one-page statement denying cluster munition use.[19] On 16 February 2011, the CMC sent a formal letter to Thailand requesting an investigation into whether Thai forces used cluster munitions.[20] In a 28 March 2011 response, Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow expressed Thailand’s support for the convention, but did not state if Thailand had taken any measures to investigate the allegations of cluster munition use.[21]

In February and April 2011, CMC members conducted separate missions to cluster munition contaminated areas in Cambodia including in Svay Chrum Village, Sen Chey Village, and around the Preah Vihear temple hill, and witnessed unexploded M42/M46 and M85 type DPICM submunitions as well as fragmentation damage caused by cluster munitions.[22] The Cambodia programme of NPA was shown an unexploded NR269 projectile by the CMAC office in Sraaem.[23] 

On 6 April 2011, the CMC issued a press statement announcing that, based on the on-site investigations, it had established that cluster munitions were used by Thailand on Cambodian territory during the February 2011 border conflict. The statement also acknowledged Thailand’s allegation of heavy use of rocket fire by Cambodian forces against civilian targets in Santisuk, Khun Han district of Thailand. The CMC statement noted that during a 5 April meeting with the CMC, Thai Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow had confirmed Thai use of 155mm DPICM and said that Thailand used the weapons in accordance with the principles of “necessity, proportionality and in compliance with the military code of conduct.”[24] The CMC urged Thailand to provide detailed information on the cluster munition strikes and urged both Cambodia and Thailand to take urgent action to denounce cluster munitions and join the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[25]

On 8 April, Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement that said the CMC had “misinterpreted” Ambassador Sihasak’s statement, and noted, “The Permanent Representative had informed the CMC that Thailand had used ‘Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions’ (DPICM), not ‘cluster munitions’ as erroneously reported by CMC.”[26]

The CMC views the DPICM as a “classic example of a cluster munition” that clearly and unequivocally falls under the definition of a cluster munition contained in the Convention on Cluster Munitions. It has noted that dozens of states stockpile the DPICM and has cited the large numbers of civilian casualties caused by the use in Iraq (2003), Lebanon (2006), and Georgia (2008) of DPICM cluster munitions with M85 DPICM submunitions (including with self-destruct mechanisms which are banned under the convention).[27]

Thailand’s use of cluster munitions elicited a strong international response. During April 2011, Austria, Lao PDR, Norway, and the United Kingdom (UK) all condemned Thailand’s use of cluster munitions.[28]  On 21 April 2011, Norway, together with Austria, New Zealand, and Switzerland, issued a joint demarche to the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressing their concern over the cluster munition use and urging Thailand to accede to the convention.[29]

Cluster munition remnants

Survey by the Thai Civilian Deminers Association (TDA) in 2010 identified contamination by US Mk-118 submunitions dating back to the Vietnam War and covering an estimated 315,000m² in Fakta district of northern Uttaradit province.[30] They were apparently dumped by US aircraft returning to bases in Thailand after sorties over Vietnam and Lao PDR.[31] The contamination is located in a remote area of forest and mountains and no casualties have been reported.[32] TDA said the contamination limits villagers’ access to forest products, grazing for livestock, farming, and recreation.[33] 

Clearance of cluster munition contaminated areas

No clearance of cluster munition remnants was reported in 2010.  TMAC’s HMAU 4 started clearing cluster munitions in 2011 and, as of April, had cleared 56,816m² in the Pooh Nong Sam Yai area of Uttaradit province.[34]

 

Contamination and Impact

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, Myanmar, and Malaysia.

Mines

The precise extent of mined areas is not known. A 2001 Landmine Impact Survey (LIS) identified 530 communities in 27 of Thailand’s 76 provinces and more than 500,000 people as mine/ERW-affected. The LIS estimated the total area of mine/ERW contamination at 2,557 km².[1]

Thailand’s revised Article 5 deadline extension request submitted in 2008 claimed it had released 1,355km² of this area, leaving a total of 1,202km² of suspected hazardous area to be tackled, including an estimated 528.2km² of “real minefield” requiring manual clearance.[2]

In 2010 the Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) reported that it had found an additional 3km² of contaminated areas,[3] but as of May 2011 it was still in the process of revising official estimates of contamination.[4] At the Standing Committee meetings in Geneva in June 2011 TMAC said the “total minefield clearance area” amounted to 546.8km².[5]

Thailand’s 700km-long border with Cambodia, used as a base by Cambodian non-state armed groups (NSAGs) in the 1980s and 1990s, is the worst affected, accounting for three-quarters of the LIS estimate of contamination and 51 of its 69 high-impacted communities.[6] More than half of the mine incidents in Thailand have occurred on this border.[7] On the border with Myanmar, the LIS identified 139 affected communities and 240 contaminated areas.[8] In 2010–2011, the conflict along the Thai-Myanmar border has continued since Myanmar’s independence in 1948.[9] Periodic spillover into Thailand of fighting between Myanmar government forces and Burmese NSAGs has deterred efforts to survey or clear affected areas on the border.[10]

Cluster munition remnants

Survey by Thai Civilian Deminers Association (TDA) in 2010 identified contamination by United States (US) Mk-118 submunitions dating back to the Vietnam War and covering an estimated 315,000m² in Fakta district of northern Uttaradit province,[11] apparently dumped by US aircraft returning to bases in Thailand after sorties over Vietnam and Lao PDR.[12] The contamination is located in a remote area of forest and mountains and no accidents have been reported.[13] TDA said the contamination limits villagers’ access to forest products, grazing for livestock, farming, and recreation.[14] 

Other explosive remnants of war

Thailand is also contaminated by other ERW, including unexploded artillery and mortar shells, rocket-propelled grenades, recoilless rifle ammunition, and hand grenades.[15] The extent is not known. Much of it is along the border with Cambodia border which was affected by cross-border shelling by Vietnamese and Cambodian government forces and where Cambodian guerrilla groups abandoned caches of mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, and ammunition.[16]

Mine Action Program

Key institutions and operators

The National Committee for Humanitarian Mine Action (NMAC), set up in 2000, has responsibility for overseeing the national mine action program. NMAC’s mandate expired in January 2005 but was renewed in November 2006 after a military coup d’état. However, the committee has not met since 2008. TMAC reported plans to arrange a meeting of NMAC in 2011,[17] but Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, who took office on 20 December 2008, had not chaired a meeting before his government fell in a general election in July 2011.[18]

TMAC was established in 1999 under the Armed Forces Supreme Command to coordinate, monitor, and implement mine clearance, mine/UXO survey, mine awareness/risk education (RE) and victim assistance throughout Thailand. TMAC is also responsible for establishing a program to meet Thailand’s obligations as a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty.[19] A major turnover of personnel continued in 2010–2011. It became one of a number of constraints that not only hampered continuation of works, but also affected to outcome and efficiency.[20]

TMAC has pressed for a change in its status to a civilian organization since 2005, prompted by the slow progress of demining and the armed forces’ limited budget for its operations.  UNDP, reporting in 2011 on its support for TMAC, observed that: “TMAC’s current status as an ad hoc unit within the Royal Thai Armed Forces greatly hampers its functioning as staff rotates annually and capacity development efforts cannot gain traction.”[21] 

The NMAC agreed in principle to change TMAC’s status in February 2007, but a proposal that TMAC becomes a foundation under the Armed Forces is still pending. The February 2007 meeting also decided to set up five sub-committees for victim assistance, coordination with foreign organizations, demining, RE, and monitoring and evaluation. The victim assistance subcommittee met at least once in 2010,[22] but it was not possible to confirm whether subcommittees met.

TMAC’s priorities in 2010 included reviewing and amending its land release methodology in consultation with Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), revising Thailand’s National Mine Action Standards (NMAS), and revising the Mine Action Master Plan 2011–2018, drafted in 2009 with support from UNDP and NPA.[23]

In February 2010, TMAC completed a National Mine Action Strategy of Thailand for 2010− 2014 after a series of workshops and consultation with concerned government ministries. The strategy had not received government approval by the time elections on 3 July 2011, which resulted in the formation of a new coalition government.[24]

TMAC has sought increased international support since 2008 to raise capacity and speed up clearance. UNDP completed a two-year capacity building project in January 2011 that focused on strengthening TMAC’s strategic planning, information management, and coordination with government ministries and other stakeholders.[25]

NPA continued a program of support started in October 2008, focusing in 2010 on developing mine action standards, particularly relating to land release and information management.[26] NPA handed over draft NMAS to TMAC in December 2010. The standards were under review by TMAC and due to be finalized after a series of workshops with stakeholders in 2011. NPA provided two data technicians from April 2010 to support TMAC in consolidating clearance data, helping to clarify the extent of remaining contamination, and it also developed clearance reporting procedures and standards. This support was due to continue throughout 2011.[27]

Under a memorandum of understanding signed with TMAC in November 2010, NPA started a land release pilot project in early 2011 working with a 10-man survey team undertaking technical and non-technical survey on the border with Cambodia (see Land Release section, below).[28]

The Belgian NGO, APOPO, also started conducting non-technical and technical survey in two provinces bordering Cambodia, beginning in 2011 (see below).[29]

Land Release

Thailand released a total of 5.23km² in 2010, 1.99km² by manual clearance and 3.24km² by the Locating Minefield Procedure (LMP), TMAC’s variant of area reduction.[30] TMAC said it had received a 60% increase in its budget for mine action and it expected land release to accelerate in 2011 as a result of the extra funding and projects agreed with NPA and APOPO.[31]

NPA deployed one team to conduct non-technical and technical survey in Surin province on the Cambodian border in May 2011, applying updated and International Mine Action Standards-compliant land release standards.[32] APOPO recruited and trained 25 staff in 2011 and started work conducting non-technical and technical survey in Trat and Chanthaburi provinces.[33]

Five-year summary of clearance[34]

Mine clearance in 2010

Manual clearance by TMAC’s four Humanitarian Mine Action Units (HMAUs) and 219 deminers fell to 1.99km² in 2010, 22% less than in the previous year and representing less than 5% of the clearance foreseen in Thailand’s Article 5 deadline extension request. Most clearance took place in provinces bordering Cambodia, notably Trat, Chanthaburi, Sakeo, and Sisaket. A small amount of clearance also took place in Nan province bordering Laos. Thai NGOs, which have undertaken manual clearance in the past, failed to attract funding and, as a result, were not actively demining in 2010.[35]

Mine clearance in 2010[36]

In June 2011, at the Standing Committee meetings in Geneva, TMAC disclosed that its budget for mine action had increased by 60% and reported that the HMAUs had cleared 2.2km² since December 2010.[37]

Compliance with Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty

Under the extension it received to its deadline under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty, 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.[38] However, Thailand has already fallen far behind the targets set out in its Article 5 extension request.

Land released in 2010 totaled 5.23km²,[39] representing less than 1% of the 546.8km² Thailand identifies as mine contaminated. UNDP observed in an end-January 2011 report that at the current rate of clearance, “it is estimated that it will take Thailand several decades to clear all landmines.”[40]

Lack of attention to mine action on the part of political leaders has become the biggest constraints on progress resulting in a lack of funds for TMAC or the sector. UNDP observed that TMAC’s priority is to bring the issue up to the Humanitarian Mine Action Committee, chaired by the Prime Minister, for advocacy at the policy level on the vulnerability of mine-affected people and the need to have all mines cleared by 2018.[41]

TMAC reported a 60% increase in the budget allocated for fiscal 2011 (year beginning October 2010) to US$2.5 million, but noted this represented 10% of what it had sought under the Article 5 extension plan.[42] In a bid to attract international support, Thailand organized a conference on mine action with donor countries and international organizations in January  2011 and introduced a concept of “Mine-free Provinces” focusing on all pillars of mine action in individual provinces so as to raise donor awareness of needs.[43] Nonetheless, TMAC continues to identify fundraising as a major challenge.[44]

Clearance of cluster munition contaminated areas in 2010

No cluster munition clearance was reported in 2010.

TMAC’s HMAU 4 started clearing cluster munition remnants in 2011 and as of April had cleared 56,816m² of contaminated area in the Pooh Nong Sam Yai area of Uttaradit province.[45]

TDA also submitted a project proposal for clearing cluster munition remnants in Uttaradit province to potential donors in February and April 2011.[46]

Compliance with Article 4 of the Convention on Cluster Munitions

Thailand is not a State Party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Battle area clearance in 2010

No battle area clearance (BAC) was conducted in 2010.

After cross-border shelling between Thailand and Cambodia in April-May 2011, TMAC’s HMAU 3 conducted BAC in a border district of Sisaket province, destroying six items of UXO.[47] NPA Thailand also deployed its team to the area to conduct non-technical and technical survey, finding and marking the location of seven unexploded rockets and releasing surrounding land.[48]

Quality management

Clearance operations by TMAC’s HMAUs are quality assured by TMAC’s Bangkok-based Coordination and Evaluation Division.[49]

Safety of demining personnel

Five HMAU deminers were injured in two incidents in the course of clearance operations in 2010. Three deminers were injured in the first accident on 18 February 2010 and one deminer suffered slight injuries to his left hand in an accident on 13 May 2010.[50]

Other Risk Reduction Measures

TMAC’s HMAUs conduct regular RE and in 2010 TMAC also cooperated with the Ministry of Education’s Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC) to organize a series of RE activities through school directors and teachers in affected areas and a follow-up workshop in December. UNDP and TMAC also reproduced and distributed teacher and student manuals, teaching and learning tools, and self-learning tools developed by the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center and Handicap International (HI), marking the first participation of a national institution in RE.[51]

Catholic Office for Emergency Relief and Refugees (COERR) cooperated with HMAU 1 in 2010, providing RE to adults in 10 villages of four districts of Sakeo province and to schoolchildren in 16 schools of Sakeo and Surin provinces. RE for schoolchildren continued in 2011 in Buriram (two districts) and Surin (four districts).[52]

During Thai-Cambodian border clashes in February–May 2011, HMAU 3 conducted RE for villagers at five temporary shelters in Sisket and Surin provinces.[53]

HI has conducted RE in 2010 and 2011 for children from Myanmar crossing into Thailand to attend schools in two camps in Tak province.[54]

 

Casualties Overview

In 2010, the Monitor identified 35 mine/explosive remnants of war (ERW) casualties reported in Thailand. Four casualties were women, two were girls, and the rest were men. Eleven were security personnel from the military or police. The total number of casualties for 2010 represented an increase from 18 casualties in 2009 and 26 casualties in 2008.[1] The Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) reported 23 of the casualties in 2010; 13 in 2009, and 18 for 2008.[2]

In 2010, 19 casualties occurred on the Thai-Cambodian border and four on the Thai- Myanmar/Burma border. Another 12 casualties of improvised mines or similar improvised explosive devices were recorded in southern Thailand in 2010.

The most comprehensive casualty data collection for Thailand, including casualties both killed and injured, remains the Landmine Impact Survey, which identified at least 3,468 casualties to May 2001 (1,497 killed; 1,971 injured).[3]

From June 1998 to the end of 2010, the Monitor recorded 608 mine/ERW casualties in Thailand: 29 people killed, 219 injured, and 360 of unknown status.[4]

Victim Assistance

The total number of mine/ERW survivors in Thailand at the end of 2010 was estimated to be about 1,302.[5]

Assessing victim assistance needs

In early 2011, the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS) conducted a survey of survivor needs in Sakaeo province using an in-depth interview method. One key finding was that survivors needed to receive more information and wanted to have strengthened self-help groups.[6] This and other key findings confirmed the results of the retrospective survivor survey completed in 2009 and the follow-up survey with UNDP support in late 2009. In 2010, UNDP used its 2009 focus-group survey findings from Sa Kaeo province by establishing two prostheses repair centers with co-support from sub-district administrative offices in 2010.[7]

Victim assistance coordination[8]

The National Sub-Committee on Victim Assistance met twice in 2010. The main point of discussion was developing the Master Plan for Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016.[9]

Thailand strongly connected its work on victim assistance with the implementation of its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).[10]

Thailand provided updates on victim assistance activities in its Article 7 reporting and statements at the Tenth Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in November–December 2010 and the Mine Ban Treaty intersessional Standing Committee meetings in June 2011.[11]

Survivor inclusion

A mine survivor and community leader of persons with disabilities participated in the discussions to create the Master Plan for Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016.[12]

At the national level, the President of the Association of Persons with Disabilities International, who is a mine survivor, participated in disability-related activities and meetings organized by government agencies. The association also provided some consultations with persons with disabilities who live in remote areas.[13]

Survivors participated in a variety of victim assistance activities at the community, local, and provincial levels. In Sakaeo province, survivors were consulted on the creation of a prostheses workshop. In Aranyapratet district, survivors also participated in service provision and data collection. A survivor organization representative in Pan-suk sub-district, Aranyapratet, Sakaeo Province participated at the sub-district meetings to plan and develop budget allocations for social support.[14] Survivors in Chanthaburi province were included in meetings related to disabilities and development at a provincial level. Also, a survivors’ micro-credit and social welfare group in Pong Nam Ron district, supported by Chanthaburi provincial administration, participated in an evaluation process and regular coordination meetings.[15]

Service accessibility and effectiveness in 2010[16]

In 2010, continued improvements in the quality and quantity of services to survivors were reported in Thailand. In 2010 the Emergency Medical Institute of Thailand under the MoPH, in cooperation with TMAC, provided a unified response plan for emergency evacuation and medical care in the most mine-affected areas, Si Sa Ket, Sakaeo, and Nan provinces. It also organized a series of simulation exercises with different agencies. The simulation was to integrate the varying responses. The Emergency Medical Institute also formulated a comprehensive operations manual to be distributed to all relevant agencies in mine-affected provinces on how different agencies respond to a mine accident to ensure the effectiveness of rescue missions.[17]

Mine survivors from Myanmar seeking assistance in Thailand received medical care and rehabilitation at hospitals in refugee camps and public district hospitals in the Thai-Myanmar border provinces.[18]

The MSDHS continued the community-based rehabilitation program into its seventh year of operations, offering links to physical rehabilitation and psychological and economic support. The CBR network also raises awareness of the rights of persons with disabilities and promotes attitudinal change within communities.[19]

Continuing a trend over the past several years, the role of the Sirindhorn Center in providing mobility devices decreased significantly.[20] In 2010, the Sirindhorn Center focused on research and development (innovation) of devices with more advanced technology, while the NHSO was responsible for providing funding for rehabilitation and devices.[21]

The NHSO significantly increased its capacity to provide rehabilitation and different kinds of assistive devices (especially mobility assistive devices) for persons with disabilities, having put its resource allocating and reporting systems in place in 2009. Overall, persons with disabilities received one-and-a-half times more assistive devices in the 2009 Thai fiscal year than in the 2008 fiscal year. These were the last periods for which full reporting was available. The number of persons with disabilities who received other services from NHSO and the number of services provided also increased significantly.[22]

There was no reported improvement in employment opportunities for survivors. Most survivors live in rural areas and work in the agricultural sector and generally did not benefit from existing employment and training programs.[23]

In 2011, a new labor regulation was being developed to ensure that public agencies and private employers plan their workforce to include at least 1% of persons with disabilities, doubling the previous legal quota.[24] Persons with disabilities were made exempt from personal income tax for Thai fiscal year 2010.[25]

Following the plan to register all persons with disabilities launched in November 2009, the registration process was in place in 2010.[26] Most mine survivors were registered by the end of 2010.[27] Persons with disabilities, including mine/ERW survivors, who are registered with the government are entitled to pensions, free medical examinations, and assistive devices. The government provided five-year, interest-free, small business loans for persons with disabilities.[28]

Thailand has legislation protecting the rights of persons with disabilities and its constitution prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities and provides for access to services. The constitution also requires newly constructed buildings to have facilities for persons with disabilities, but this was not consistently enforced. Disability rights activists continued to work to amend laws that allow employment discrimination against persons with disabilities.[29] Due to policy changes, by 2011 disabled persons’ organizations, including mine/ERW survivors’ self-help groups, could provide services such as peer counseling with the financial support of the NHSO.[30]

Thailand ratified the CRPD on 29 July 2008.

 

In 2010, Thailand did not report any contributions to its mine action program.

In 2010, Norway was Thailand’s sole international mine action donor, contributing NOK700,000 ($115,796) towards clearance activities.[1]

Thailand’s Article 5 deadline extension request submitted in 2008 included annual cost estimates for clearance activities and specified annual funding amounts projected for the government of Thailand and international donors. From 2009 to 2013 Thailand committed to contributing THB1 billion ($30.3 million) for mine clearance, and THB1.5 billion ($45.5 million) from 2014 to 2018, for a total contribution of THB12.5 billion ($378.8 million), or approximately 72% of its total Article 5 extension budget. Unspecified donors were projected to cover the remaining costs, totaling approximately THB 4.9 billion (about $149 million) and ranging from THB421.3 million ($12.8 million) in 2009 to THB635.4 million ($19.3 million) in 2016 before falling back to THB595.8 million ($18.1 million) in 2018.[2]

Thailand’s statements at the June 2010 and June 2011 Mine Ban Treaty intersessional Standing Committee meetings, and its Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 transparency reports submitted in 2010 and 2011, did not provide any substantial information regarding national funding provided,  international funding received, or resource mobilization strategies for meeting the commitments outlined in the deadline extension request.

Summary of national and international contributions: 2006–2010[3]

N/R = Not reported