Thai authorities better put their energy in investigating the mentioned companies ( do they violate really the thai labor laws and international human rights declaration?) rather than 'attack 'the messenger'. Seems to me a non effective approach of a very serious problem ( violation of labor laws by big influential companies).

Posted by Kurt on July 20, 2015 10:03

The phrase "honesty is always the best policy" comes to mind. With the compromises available to influential law breakers, even companies that have been breaching laws or codes would be wise to follow this policy. They could even turn it into a PR stunt !

Posted by James on July 20, 2015 14:14

This case is every bit as important as the Navy vs. Phuketwan.

You wouldn't know it though from comments on this site over time - correct me if I'm wrong though, I want to be...

Posted by farang888 on July 20, 2015 22:29

Hi farang888

Well, I won't be correcting you about the relative importance of the cases.

Of course, as you know there were four cases brought against Andy Hall in four different courts. This is a tactic that tends to create a greater burden in the defence.

Two cases are civil cases in which Natural Fruit Co seeks financial compensation and the other two cases relate to ordinary criminal defamation and the Computer Crimes Act.

There are many similarities between the Phuketwan case and the Andy Hall cases.

Andy Hall won his first case (criminal defamation) on a procedural technicality but the trial observer and Brisbane barrister, Mark Plunkett found there was "no case to answer" in any event. Natural Fruit is appealing the decision.

In Andy's Computer Crimes Act case it is clear that the prosecution is actually complaining about the conduct of Finnwatch, the NGO that published the report "Cheap has a High Price" and not Andy.

Finnwatch is backed by the Finnish government so the Thai Natural Fruit Co is pursuing the little guy, Andy Hall who has been running rings around the company so far.

The major shareholder Khun Wirat is the older brother of the Secretary-General of the Thai Democratic Party.

In the PW case the Navy did not go after the big guy, Reuters, but picked on the little guy being PW and its two main reporters. That provides an obvious similarity.

It should be noted that Andy Hall has his own website, twitter account and Facebook page which focus more on his battles although he also mentions PW from time to time.

No sensible person would ever conclude that the importance of a news story can be assessed by reference to the amount of media coverage it attracts.

Some celebrities attract enormous media attention while leading frivolous and profoundly unimportant lives.

Cheers
Ian Yarwood
Barrister & Solicitor
And supporter of both Andy Hall and Phuketwan.

Posted by Ian Yarwood on July 21, 2015 09:54

@farang888

One should remember that Phuketwan writes for a mostly Phuket audience.

The PW trial is an important story. It is also an important LOCAL story. In addition it is a story that affects the future of the very news service that locals are reading.

In the circumstances, I think the emphasis on the PW case is justified. It should also be remembered that given the journalists were forced to focus on defending their personal liberty there was reduced time for them to investigate other stories.

Cheers

Posted by Ian Yarwood on July 21, 2015 10:42

How many products does the western world enjoy, knowing that many may be produced/manufactured in appauling conditions just for increased profits ?

The answer is that we are all responsible to ensure that governments, corporate bodies enforce better conditions, and as standard, basic human rights for all. If not, then really we must question should we be buying a product on the back of others?

There is enough information out there to make an informed choice, so ignorance is not an excuse !

Posted by reader on July 22, 2015 12:47

@reader

You are 100% correct. For change to occur there needs to be more people like you to speak up - to speak up to other consumers, to speak up to supermarkets and to politicians.

Suppliers take notice when consumers and governments exercise their purchasing power.

Posted by Ian Yarwood on July 22, 2015 13:15

Reader and Ian,
If we were to boycott products based on the abuse of persons employed to produce those products, should we also then boycott holidays in Thailand or most other third world countries?

Unless, of course, tourism related services are not considered a product or service?

Posted by MoW on July 22, 2015 15:38

Hi MoW

Great comment as always and a good question.

Well, I am not the fount of wisdom but since you asked this is my off the cuff response.

I personally would not advocate a blanket ban on all goods or services coming from a country with a record of exploiting workers and/or a record of using slave labour.

Such a policy harms ethical employers (and their workers) along with the unethical employers and slave-owners.

I personally believe that any bans or restrictions (voluntary or otherwise) should be as well targeted as possible. Yes, I know this is easier said than done but I do not believe that it is impossible.

Some Thai industries deserve special attention such as fishing and prawn farming.

I imagine the Trafficking in Persons Report to be released on 27 July 2015 will discuss those industries.

Tourists in Thailand consume both goods and services.

A tourist might stay in a lovely hotel that was built by migrant workers - some of whom died during construction due to grossly negligent work practices. MoW you would have read of many examples on this Phuketwan website.

That creates a difficult problem for ethical consumers.

Those are some of my quick thoughts. It is better that I do not name any specific companies that export goods to the West.

Cheers

Posted by Ian Yarwood on July 22, 2015 16:54

Ian,
Abuse of people takes many forms and to finally put an end to it, or at least improve the situation, it requires a fairly major change in attitude of those in positions of power.
It also requires that those whom suffer abuse have options or an alternative where they can make a choice, not based on necessity nor that no other option exists.

If we consider the employment of persons in certain 'trades', these people have the choice between starving or taking on employment where they are probably promised a lot and once in a vulnerable position, they have no option.

Until employers or governments recognise that labour isn't just a cheap resource to improve their own wealth, abused persons will never have the opportunity to improve their quality of life and that for their families.

Until people are willing to stand up for themselves, rather than accept their situation as fate, with a faith that equalisation will occur in the next life, it is difficult for an outsider to pressure for any change without affecting those in the weakest position, the very people we are trying to protect.
If a factory decreases output due to low demand, the boss may suffer some loss of profit but some workers at the lower end of the scale will also end up without jobs.

I am sure there is a solution but it is difficult to see how this will occur when many of those people affected live basically a subsistence livelihood and the negative impact of any sanctions will be seen by them as another example of outsiders telling us how to live our lives.

I, like probably many readers here, have never been in a position where everyday life was a struggle to survive or to feed a family. However, I can imagine someone in this position who's employment has been terminated due to sanctions, being annoyed and directly blaming those who are trying to help improve their situation.

It is a fine line between help and hindrance.

Posted by MoW on July 22, 2015 18:25

Hi Ian,
In speculating that the Andy Hall case did not have the latent "cachet" of the Navy vs. Phuketwan (at the Phuketwan news site only I may add) I was stating the obvious, albeit rather lamely - that those of us that support Alan and Chutima should - by osmosis - also get on the Andy Hall "bandwagon."

I suppose it was a fruitless endeavor, (pardon the accidental pun) - but despite the fact that we all write on the Phuketwan website - reader's support of unjust causes would by default spill over to the Andy Hall "saga."

As much as I personally support Alan and Chutima in spirit if not cash, I found myself not putting much emphasis on the "other" case that's all, to make a short story long - and thought that Andy deserved a little more ink - not that we should take away the focus on the other case one iota.

Now for The Tangent: I've been accused of having too much time on my hands now, spending 35 years of working at jobs I didn't particularly enjoy (Carpenter - Yes I know, LOL, Peace Officer - Yes I know, LOL, Special Needs and Woodwork Teacher - in a correctional protective custody setting - with murderers and sex offenders mostly).

That a surly, sullen but ultimately wimpy inmate threw a hammer at my head the first day on the job was par for the course in that (damned) place. It missed by a foot - as it was just a not-so-subtle cry for help - like all the arm-slashing those folks laid on themselves - in a vain attempt to sublimate the "pain."

All the Best

Posted by farang888 on July 22, 2015 22:18

"It's a fine line between help and hindrance."

And hopefully when the considerable dust settles (if ever), the fine line isn't another 50 Shades of Grey - more like right or wrong, black or white.

Posted by farang888 on July 22, 2015 22:34

Hi MoW

I read your comments with interest.

It is difficult to get into a full discussion on a forum such as this. It is also a bit awkward for me right now as I am just using an iPhone.

I can make some quick comments though.

If one factory pays below legal minimum wages then it will have a competitive advantage over the factory that pays the legal minimum wage or above. If the first factory is forced to pay the legal minimum wage then the second factory will enjoy a level playing field and can retain workers or possibly hire more, all on the legal minimum wage or above.

This argument is even more cogent when considering those workers whose wages are zero. Slaves earn nothing and there are plenty of them in Thailand and throughout Asia.

Abuse is not just about wages though. Often working conditions are more important and it is not necessarily that expensive to improve working conditions.

Obvious examples of things that improve working conditions are: adequate toilet facilities and toilet breaks; safety; 10 minute breaks every couple of hours; absence of physical and/or verbal and/or sexual abuse.

You are right in saying that it does not help if workers just accept their fate in a religious belief that things will even out in the next life.

It never helps when people in positions of power feel they have a right to abuse others. It is healthier when there is a wider distribution of power. Attitudes in some countries would need to change and that won't happen overnight.

Attitudes in the West regarding workers' rights have improved dramatically in the last 150 years.

By the way, I am certainly no left-wing trade unionist. I just believe in treating people with respect and giving a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

Cheers

Posted by Ian Yarwood on July 23, 2015 01:12

Hi Ed

I note that in the above media release Human Rights Watch states that: "The FinnWatch report, which Hall wrote.."

In personal discussions I have had with Andy Hall he insists that he did not write the report. He says that he researched the report. I also recall that he has written that he simply researched the report.

I think it is well accepted that Finnwatch published the report and that Andy did not.

I have previously pointed out an important error that Human Rights Watch made in a media release about the Phuketwan case.

Human Rights Watch has a huge audience so in my view it would be prudent for HRW to check its media releases with the objects of its support for accuracy prior to publication.

I fear that some comments from HRW could confuse and mislead many readers and could potentially harm people such as Andy Hall, Khun Chutima and you if some Thai decision-makers accept what HRW says.

Posted by Ian Yarwood on July 23, 2015 01:48

I've observed that Phuketwan readers are upping their game in regards to quality content - this post an exception.

With the alleged increased quality of content - where did all the doomsayers go? - not to hell in a handbasket one would presume..

Best

Posted by farang888 on July 23, 2015 06:31