Detention
Key issues of concern relating to detention, as identified in MMN’s research and in consultation with project partners, include:
Special needs (e.g. elderly, disabled, children)
Welfare (medical care, counseling)
Access (lawyers, NGOs, family)
Screening for refugee status and protection as a trafficked person
Verbal abuse
Migrants frequently experience verbal abuse while being detained. For example, in MMN’s earlier study, female migrants who were held at Mae Sot IDC reported that the officers were often drunk and verbally abused all the women.
MMN has received reports of police using excessive force against migrants in detention, including violence and physical abuse, such as kicking of migrants.
Sexual abuse
Some female migrants in some isolated locations appear particularly vulnerable to sexual harassment while in detention.
‘When I was in a Mae Sot police cell, I saw the police and “police dog” (the Burmese slang for the police interpreter which translates as “police dog”) buy whisky with the money obtained from the detainees. When they were drunk they verbally abused the girls in the cell. Sometimes they took the girls out and gave them body searches, saying they were looking for amphetamines. If men made any complaints they were kicked and taken to other cells, where some stayed for two – three months unrecorded.’
(Burmese factory worker)
One incident reported by detainees was of five female detainees being removed from their cells at 8 pm and then brought back the following morning at 5am. When questioned by their friends, these five women said that they had a terrible experience and did not want to talk about it.
Conditions of detention
Since migrants pass through many different police cells, holding centres, and immigration detention centres, it is difficult to generalise conditions. However, it generally appears that police holding cells are crowded and in some rural areas, men, women and children are held together. The Immigration Detention Centre in Bangkok appears to provide better conditions but the male section can be overcrowded. All migrants were concerned that there was generally no drinking water made available and they had to drink the water from the taps. While the Water Authority of Thailand claims that tap water in Thailand is clean, few people in the cities drink tap water. Migrants were also concerned by the lack of adequate toilets, and the lack of privacy while using these facilities. Others complained that there was a lack of mosquito nets provided, although in some places a fan was kept on.
‘I was detained in Chum Porn province of Thailand for 15 days, and in Ranong for 14 days. We had to cut the grass and trees. In Ranong, the detention area was dirty and foul. Everyone got eyesores. There wasn’t enough space for sleeping and we had to eat foul vegetable three times a day.’
(27-year old Cambodian male from Prey Veng District, Prey Veng Province)
‘In the cell, there is one bath and four toilets in the corner but two toilets are full of shit and could not be used. …There was no mat and we slept on the dirty cement floor without any mosquito nets. There were no fans.’
(Male, Burmese factory worker, detained at the Mae Sot IDC)
Arbitrary detention
It is clear that often administrative detention is used arbitrarily as a tool used by authorities with little or no concern for the impact such a decision has on the individuals’ well-being or human rights. The inconsistent standards and operational procedures used at the local and national level results in an incoherent enforcement system. The differences in treatment can be dramatic, and results in detainees being subject to unsanitary and degrading conditions. Little or no consideration is given to the welfare of the individuals subject to detention. The system fails to notify these people of their rights, inform them of the duration of their detention, or provide any recourse for redress if there are problems. In the end, all considerations of convenience are based on the authorities and not on those subject to detention.
Mandatory medical exam
Some migrants have reported being subjected to mandatory medical exams while in detention. For example, in a study by MMN, migrants detained at the Kyauk Ta Lone Pagoda compound in Myawaddy reported that a nurse took a blood sample from each deportee followed by a medical check up. The migrants believed that the blood was tested for HIV, a claim that has never been confirmed nor denied by the authorities. One migrant reported that during the night, the authorities separated one couple from the rest saying that they had a disease and required treatment. The authorities took photos of each deportee and assigned them with a number card, which they were required to keep.
Special needs (e.g. elderly, disabled, children)
MMN has received reports of many instances of detention where pregnant migrant women, the elderly, the sick, and others with particular needs are not detained separately, and regard is not given to their particular situations.
Communication issues
Similar to the problems faced by migrants during arrest, communication issues are also widespread during detention. Migrants are often not informed of their rights, the reason for their detention, or the duration of time they will be detained. Miscommunication or lack of information is compounded by language barriers, as important information is often not provided to migrants in a language they can understand.
Duration of detention
There is an apparent lack of consistency in applying ADD procedures across different areas, and therefore migrants are often uncertain about how long they will be detained for. Duration of detention varies widely from anywhere between 24 hours or less, to up to several months, and is often arbitrary or determined based on a migrant’s willingness and ability to pay bribes or fines.
Welfare (medical care, counselling)
The entire ADD process often puts migrants’ health and welfare at risk, for example in unsanitary detention facilities or unsafe deportation vehicles. Migrants have very limited access to medical care and counselling in the ADD process. There appears to be little consistency in screening procedures in detention to identify migrants with special medical needs. A lack of medical and welfare assistance, and the disregard for the basic human rights of migrants, has resulted in tragedies such as the April 2012 death of two migrants who were detained and then deported on a hot and overcrowded deportation truck from Songkhla Province in Southern Thailand, bound for Burma.
Access (lawyers, NGOs, family)
While detained, migrants often have very limited access to lawyers, NGOs, their families and other support. Based on MMN’s previous study, it appears that Laotian migrants were better able to contact relatives at home by mobile phone, while in the holding cells or detention centres. Indeed in some police stations, for example Khong Tan, detainees were actively encouraged to make phone calls home. Most migrants do not receive visits whilst being held in detention. A few mentioned that their relatives had come to visit or that that volunteers visited them. In a few cases, employers would visit the migrants and bring food for them.
Screening for refugee status and protection as a trafficked person
In practice, Thai policies requiring the screening of special categories of migrants, such as those with refugee status or trafficked persons are not consistently adhered to. The result is that if migrants with special status do not know they have special rights, and do not identify themselves to authorities, they are at risk of wrongful detention and potentially deportation.
ISSUES
