term limits arrived speaks to the institutional approbation and permanence enjoyed by the NHRC.
The process of filing a complaint has changed somewhat since the foundation of the NHRC, when it was located at 422 Phayathai Road, in the heart of Bangkok, a short walk from two Skytrain stations (the elevated metro system), down the road from the National Stadium and several major shopping malls. The Anti–Money Laundering Office remains at that address, but the NHRC has moved to a less accessible government complex near Don Muang Airport, in the northern extremity of Bangkok, well past the last of the Skytrain or subway stops. In the early 2000s, as Table 5 shows, one could file a petition by phone, mail, email, or in person (the latter of which was greatly facilitated by the NHRC’s location). In Rattana Sajjathep’s case, which I discuss in Chapter 4, she approached the NHRC in person to lodge her complaint. An ONHRC staff member received her complaint and, as they do with complaints received through any of the other means, generated a report. After the preliminary report is ready, a small working group (typically four or five staff members in the cases I observed directly) discusses the nature and merits of the complaint, deciding how to categorize it (that is, as a violation of a particular human right), and who the stakeholders are (as aggrieved parties—in Chapter 4, we will see that entire families may be included as co-petitioners even though only a single member of the family files the complaint—and as rights violators). The working group would draft a report that the NHRC could present to the National Assembly, use to urge the parties into mediation, or provide a paper trail tracking a case as it continues to unfold (often in close contact with the party who filed the petition). As we will see in Chapter 3, however, the NHRC can undertake investigations unilaterally (without a petition filed from outside) and/or in concert with independent organizations (like the Law Society of Thailand). Currently, the NHRC website also offers a hotline and a link with a template for online complaints but has no dedicated address for mail-in filing. Despite its increased inaccessibility by public transit and by mail, Table 6 and Figure 1 show that the public continued to file petitions in high numbers, indicating the sustained relevance of the NHRC to the Thai public, even in times of political upheaval.
Table 1. Complaints Received (by month/year)
Table 2. Complaints by Region in 2003
| Region | Proportion |
| Bangkok | 20.39 |
| Eastern | 5.06 |
| Upper northeast | 7.92 |
| Lower northeast | 8.57 |
| Upper north | 15.97 |
| Lower north | 9.09 |
| Western | 7.66 |
| Upper south | 9.09 |
| Lower south | 4.16 |
Table 3. Complaints by Violation in 2003
| Violation | Proportion |
| Foreigner/alien citizenship | 3.14 |
| Assets/property | 2.29 |
| Health/environment | 4.83 |
| Assembly | 7.13 |
| Labor rights | 4.23 |
| Youth/education | 0.97 |
| Family | 0.72 |
| Political rights | 0.48 |
| Freedom of communication | 0.48 |
| Disability | 0.85 |
| Dwelling | 6.16 |
| Due process | 55.56 |
| Other | 13.16 |
Table 4. Complaints by Accused, by Percent
| Type | 2003 | 2004 |
| State project/policy, law | 38.41 | 6.22 |
| Police | 17.75 | 21.56 |
| Military | 0.85 | 1.88 |
| Administration/locality | 8.09 | 9.41 |
| Physician | 1.21 | 1.56 |
| Teacher | 2.17 | 2.75 |
| Government officer | 4.35 | 18.23 |
| Employer | 4.11 | 3.18 |
| Private individuals | 7.97 | 7.69 |
| Business | 7.13 | 12.16 |
| Other | 7.97 | 15.05 |
Table 5. Complaints Received (by delivery method)
| Proportion | ||
| Type | 2003 | 2004 |
| Letter | 57 | 76.7 |
| Phone | 20.53 | 3.76 |
| 3.38 | 1.88 | |
| In person | 16.67 | 17.08 |
| Raised by NHRC | 1.69 | 0.43 |
| Private organization/interest requesting mediation | 0.72 |
|
