Why HRW’s website blocked in Thailand? (Part 1)

10/12/2014

Over the years, by claiming the mission to “protect human rights worldwide”, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published repeatedly distorted information about human rights issues, making irrational requires against the government in some countries and it is always opposed. In this context, the fact that HRW’s website has been banned in Thailand recently is a warning to it.
World opinion considered that the action of Thailand was in response to the November 25 report HRW on the situation of human rights in Thailand. As of this report, HRW criticized the Thailand’s militant government has severe repression of basic freedoms of man after six months since the coup (May 22); even B. Adam, director of Human Rights Watch in Asia also said that the human rights situation in Thailand “fell into bottomless pit”.
Thailand protested human rights report and blocked HRW website were a blow to the long-standing shaken reputation of this organization. This is not the first time and Thailand is not the only country that has been criticized by HRW. Many countries around the world, some non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the media and Mr RL Bernstein - one of the founder and former chairman of Human Rights Watch have repeatedly criticized HRW itself. It can divide the criticisms to HRW into two categories, including: Weak research capacity, lack of accurate reporting and biased attitude and ideological advantage.

Every year, Human Rights Watch published the so-called human rights report reflecting the situation of human rights in nearly 100 countries, including Vietnam. This would be normal if the HRW has an objective attitude, honesty and willingness to contribute to the development of human rights in the world in general and of each country in particular. Unfortunately, the information and  reviews made by HRW were primarily amasse and untrue leading to a question that what the real purpose of the HRW? They proclaimed themselves a “mission” then regarded it as a condition to hide under the “guise of human rights” that intrusive into the internal affairs of countries in the world? There is a problem that can not help paying attention that for many years, the so-called HRW’s report only focused on civil and political rights, ignoring the economic and social rights. HRW stated that their mission is to protect human rights worldwide, forcing governments to terminate the form of abuse of power, respect the rules of international law on human rights, namely the Declaration UN human rights (UN), which provides full political rights, civil, economic, social and cultural. However, it seems that HRW is not “satisfied” with the provisions of the UN Declaration of Human Rights as written requires governments to guarantee the social, economic rights for the people, whether their requirements are contrary to the values that HRW pursuing? Maybe the persons who working for Human Rights Watch consider the UN Declaration of Human Rights states that “the right to food, clothing, housing rights, entitled to health care and other social services” (Article 25), "”he right to be shared the benefits of scientific progress” (Article 27) as the individual’s responsibility but is not the government’s so they only focus on pursuing and supporting freedom of religion and xpression. The operations of HRW shows that they are protecting the fundamental rights of people in an one-sided ways. (To be continued)
Chia sẻ bài viết ^^
Other post

All comments [ 10 ]


Huy Quốc 10/12/14 21:13

HRW's annual reports are “false assertions”.

Vân Nhàn 10/12/14 21:14

HRW also made false assertions. For example, contrary to assertions in its news article1, capital punishment is not prohibited by international law.

Lê Tín 10/12/14 21:16

A large number of countries, including many modern, developed countries (like the US) impose the punishment.

Quốc Kiên 10/12/14 21:18

In Singapore, capital punishment has contributed to low rates of crime and drug use; and is overwhelmingly supported by Singaporeans.

Phạm Hiếu 10/12/14 21:19

Statements in HRW’s Report relating to detentions, freedom of speech and association, and the civil rights, as reported in your article, are likewise inaccurate.

Huy Lâm 10/12/14 21:20

HRW’s casual approach towards research and analysis, has been criticised by none other than its founder.

Quốc Cường 10/12/14 21:23

HRW “often relies on witnesses whose stories cannot be verified and who may testify for political advantage”.

Hùng Quân 10/12/14 21:24

please Sue and bankrupt them

Hoàng Lân 10/12/14 21:25

We should arrest the HRW people and put them in jail.... or sue them if they are lying, isnt that what you are all good for?

Quân Hoàng 10/12/14 21:28

The truth is out there.

Your comments