Thailand’s proposed Associations and Foundations Law threatens the survival of Myanmar’s exiled civil society organisations (CSOs) and media by imposing barriers that could force them to cease operations. Already marginalised and working under significant security risks, this law exacerbates vulnerabilities and endangers their critical work.
Register or face fines
The draft law requires all non-profit organisations in Thailand to register with the government (Article 6). Unregistered organisations face an initial fine of up to USD 3,000 (Article 51), followed by USD 30 per day for continued non-compliance (Article 61).
This applies to any Myanmar group that identifies as a CSO and would probably include non-profit exiled media too. It also specifically includes groups operating in Thailand that identify themselves as CSOs in a foreign language, such as in Burmese, English, or an ethnic language (Article 51).
This prohibition on unregistered organisations violates international human rights law on the right to freedom of association.1 It would have a devastating effect on Myanmar groups many of which cannot register for practical and security reasons outlined below.
Nationality requirement excludes Myanmars
Organisations must have at least 30 members to register (Article 18), and over half of the leadership must be Thai nationals, with the remainder required to be Thai residents (Article 17).
Myanmar organisations typically operate with few resources, small memberships, and little Thai involvement, as their focus is on Myanmar-related advocacy and assistance. Requiring Thai-majority leadership excludes them entirely. Many Myanmar people do not have clear legal status in Thailand and fear exposure. This provision excludes Myanmar organisations from legal recognition, effectively barring them from operating.
No anonymity or privacy
The registration process includes publishing the organisation’s name and leadership in the national gazette (Article 14) and requiring a visible name sign at the office (Article 15). Organisations must also share meeting notes with the Thai government (Article 24), and government officials have the authority to inspect offices and documents (Article 49).
Publishing names and requiring office signage strips away the anonymity that protects members from the Myanmar military’s retaliation. Leaders and their families could face harassment, surveillance, or violence in both Thailand and Myanmar.
Vague laws threaten leaders
The draft law includes broad and undefined crimes for organisation leaders, such as causing harm to “others,” “peace or public order,” or “public morals” (Article 52-3). Violations carry penalties of up to three years of imprisonment.
The vague language of these provisions could target Myanmar CSOs for activities as benign as public advocacy or criticism of the Myanmar military. Such laws may also be exploited for corruption, with authorities extracting bribes to overlook perceived infractions.
Unchecked government power
The government has broad powers to dissolve organisations for vague reasons, such as threats to “peace or public order” (Articles 30-1). It can also dismiss an organisation’s leadership, appoint replacements (Article 27), and overturn leadership decisions (Article 20).
These provisions allow the Thai government to directly interfere with or shut down Myanmar organisations, further suppressing their ability to function. Such unchecked power fosters insecurity and discourages vital advocacy and humanitarian work.
Funding under threat
Organisations must report large foreign donations to the government within 15 days (Article 8), and sub-granting to partner organisations may be prohibited (Article 8).
Myanmar CSOs and exiled media depend heavily on foreign funding to sustain their operations. These restrictions add bureaucratic hurdles and severely limit their ability to collaborate with local partners or distribute resources effectively, undermining their work.
What Is Thailand’s Intention?
Thailand’s proposed law mirrors efforts seen in Russia and other restrictive regimes to suppress dissent under the guise of regulation. While it may claim to address security or financial transparency concerns, the law’s sweeping provisions seem designed to consolidate control over civil society and curtail advocacy efforts, particularly by groups critical of powerful actors.
By enacting this law, Thailand risks damaging its reputation as a relatively safe haven for persecuted individuals and organisations since the 2021 coup. It also raises broader concerns about a regional trend toward authoritarianism.
Recommendations
Human Rights Myanmar urges the Thai government to withdraw the proposed law. If it proceeds, we recommend:
- Allow unregistered associations to operate without penalties.
- Remove vague provisions and criminal penalties to prevent misuse.
- Remove nationality requirements for members and leaders.
- Protect anonymity where necessary to safeguard security.
- Ease restrictions on foreign funding.