Uwazi

Police arrested a 24-year-old Lao man for posting a video clip on Facebook, criticizing officers in a northern province for demanding bribes from travelers passing through a checkpoint near the Chinese border.

After his arrest, police released a video of the man, identified only as Bee, apologizing for making a false accusation, saying his earlier clip contained “twisted content about the way the police are doing their job.”

However, the audio portion didn’t sync up with the video — the voice didn’t match the mouth movements — making it appear that the audio portion may have been laid over the video.

The video, where Bee sits facing the camera at a wooden desk in a darkened room, appeared on the Phongsaly provincial police’s website.

“The content I posted was actually propaganda slandering the authorities, and it was against the government and the (ruling) party,” the voice says.

“I said that the police were taking bribes,” it says. “In fact, the police didn’t ask for any kickback from me, and I didn’t pay anything to them. For that, I’d like to apologize to the party, government and public.”

The male voice goes on to say that he would be mindful when posting social media content and that authorities could punish him to the fullest extent of the law if he did something wrong again.

When RFA contacted the Phongsaly provincial police, an official said it was not convenient for him to give details about the arrest.

But an employee at the provincial prosecutor’s office told RFA on Tuesday that her office had not yet received a police report about the incident.

Re-educated and released?

Bee, who hails from Khonkeo village in Houeixay district of Bokeo province in northwestern Laos, made his initial critical remarks about the Houeixam checkpoint in Phongsaly province’s Boun Tai district, bordering China, on Feb. 21.

A villager in Boun Tai district where the arrest was made said Bee was not punished, and he had heard that police freed him after he apologized on social media.

“He was not charged with anything more serious — only re-educated then released,” said the villager who requested anonymity out of fear of reprisal for speaking to the media.

Another district resident said police at the checkpoint were strict about checking all passports and IDs.

But a criminal lawyer said Bee was on the “wrong side of the law” by trying to defame authorities online, though the incident was not serious.

When citizens see authorities do something wrong, they should collect evidence and file a formal complaint with other relevant authorities who can investigate, rather than take to social media to criticize them, he said.

RFA has reported other incidents in which Laotians who publicly criticized authorities were arrested, re-educated and jailed or released.

In March 2023, police in Houaphanh province told a woman to apologize and amend a social media post on Facebook in which she said she had paid 95 million kip (US$4,500) for a job on the police force. When apologizing, she said she made a false statement that made police in the province look bad.

In a 2019 incident, Houayheuang Xayabouly, nicknamed Mouay, was sentenced to five years in prison for criticizing the government’s slow response to severe flooding in southern Laos.

Six Lao residents were arrested on charges related to their roles in connection to a multi-day protest against a government seizure of their land, which protesters told Radio Free Asia was the latest example of government corruption.

Four of the arrested residents, all men, were part of a group of about 20 protesters from Xang village in northern Laos’ Xieng Khouang province, who gathered on Tuesday morning to rally against their land being given to a wood processing company, a protester who requested anonymity for security reasons, told RFA Lao.

They were arrested on the second day of the protest.

When two women, members of the village’s Women’s Union, went to visit the arrested men and bring them food, they too were arrested, he said.

Sketchy title

The land grab is illegal because the Phengxay Import-Export Company bribed corrupt officials to make a fake land title on their land, the protester said.

A resident of the village told RFA that the land had been a part of the village for generations and had become a historical and cultural site for the community.

In a video clip published on social media, one of the protesters explained the situation.

“Right now, nobody can help us. Earlier, we relied on the district authorities to help us, but they wouldn’t,” he said. “Therefore, we gathered together today to call on other authorities to enforce the law, respect our rights, and to help us, who have been taken advantage of by this company.”

These protesters explained that the Phengxay Import-Export Company leased about one hectare (2.47 acres) of land, then built a wood processing factory on it for use in a ten-year lease between 2008 and 2018.

They extended the lease for five years from 2018 to 2023, meaning the lease has expired as of August 2023.

Later last year, the villagers wrote a letter to the Khoun District authorities asking for the land back.

It was then that they learned that the company possessed a land title issued by the district authorities.

Crowd dispersed

A witness to the arrest explained what he saw, saying, “The protest stopped after the police took away some protesters, which included members of the village authority,” he said. “I don’t know exactly how many and where they took those protesters to.”

A Xieng Khouang province official declined to discuss the protest or the arrests, only saying that the relevant officials were meeting to try to solve the conflict.

When RFA contacted a member of the Xieng Khouang Inspection Authority, that person said that the relevant officials were in a meeting discussing this matter at that time, and requested a call back in one day for more information.

UN experts today called on Lao People’s Democratic Republic to end the arbitrary detention of lawyer and human rights defender Lu Siwei and permit him to continue his journey to reunite with his family.

“The surveillance, persecution and detention of Mr. Lu Siwei must end immediately,” the experts said.

Lu Siwei is a well-known Chinese human rights defender and lawyer. On 28 July 2023, he was arrested in Lao by police, while preparing to board a train for Thailand. He had recently fled China and intended to fly from Thailand to the United States of America to reunite with his family.

To date, Lu Siwei remains in an unknown place of detention, without access to his lawyers, his family or any other person of his choice.

“We fear Mr. Lu Siwei is at risk of imminent deportation to China, where there are substantial grounds to believe that he would be in danger of being subjected to irreparable harm upon return, on account of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. He is also at risk of other serious human rights violations, including arbitrary detention or enforced disappearance,” the UN experts said.

Under international human rights law, the principle of non-refoulement guarantees that no one should be returned to a country where they would be in danger of being subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, enforced disappearance and other irreparable harm.

“Should the deportation take place, it would contradict the core principle of non-refoulment as enshrined, among others, in Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), to which the Lao People’s Democratic Republic is party,” the experts said.

“It is outrageous that human rights defenders working peacefully to promote, defend or protect the rights of others, are being persecuted even while fleeing,” the experts said.

“Based on humanitarian grounds and in line with Lao’s international human rights obligations, we call on authorities to take all necessary measures to prevent any irreparable harm to the life and personal integrity of Mr. Lu Siwei,” the experts said.

They urged the Government of Lao People’s Democratic Republic to refrain from returning him to the People’s Republic of China, ensure his release and allow him to reunite with his family in the United States of America.

The experts are in contact with the Lao People’s Democratic Republic authorities on the issue.

A former Chinese judge who tried to visit detained human rights lawyer Lu Siwei at an immigration detention center in Laos has described being grabbed and manhandled by Lao police, who snatched away his cell phone.

Canada-based Li Jianfeng, a former judge in China's legal system, said the scuffles ensued after he tried to visit rights attorney Lu Siwei in an immigration detention center on Aug. 1, following what rights groups said is another example of "long-arm" international law enforcement by Beijing.

Lu, a prominent rights advocate who lost his law license after speaking out about the cases of 12 Hong Kong activists detained by the Chinese coast guard after the 2019 protest movement, was arrested in Vientiane on Friday morning as he boarded a train for Thailand, en route to the United States to join his family.

Li told Radio Free Asia that he was concerned about Lu, who was held by Lao immigration police amid claims of an issue with his passport. But when he arrived at the immigration detention center, he was unable to visit because Tuesday was a public holiday.

But just as he and his friend – a U.S. national – were leaving the facility, they found an office filled with police officers, knocked and entered, he said.

One of the officers in that room was the same policeman who took Lu away.

"The police were very nervous ... and surrounded us as if they were facing an enemy," Li said, adding that he had started filming right from the start.

Li and his friend were taken upstairs to separate interrogation rooms, and Li was interrogated by four police officers, who told him to delete the video from his phone.

At China's behest

Police told Li that Lu wasn't being held at the facility, and threatened him, he said.

"They asked their superiors for instructions, then asked me again to delete the video on my phone, but I refused," Li said. "Then they said ... that if I didn't delete it, they couldn't guarantee my safety if something should happen to me in Laos."

"They tried to snatch my cell phone ... then they called four more policemen, making a total of eight officers," he said. "They pinned my arms behind my back, grabbed my head and my legs, and finally snatched away my phone."

But the officers were unable to get into the phone without the access code, he said.

Li said he believed the Lao police were acting on instructions from China, whose "long-arm" law enforcement has prompted a wave of international criticism in recent months.

He said he had personally witnessed a large number of Chinese police billeted in a hotel in Laos.

"They're in a hotel not far from me," he said. "I can take full responsibility for telling you that there are 200 police officers there, sent by the Chinese Communist Party."

He noted that Beijing wields enormous influence in Southeast Asia, particularly in Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam.

Informal rendition worries

Rights groups and Li's U.S.-based wife Zhang Chunxiao are particularly worried that Lu could get sent back to China informally, bypassing formal, criminal extradition processes.

"Lawyer #LuSiwei, detained in Laos, faces imminent return to China," the overseas-based Chinese Human Rights Defenders network said via its X account.

"His wife notes the Convention against Torture states that Laos must not 'return a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture'," it commented.

"If my husband is forcibly repatriated to China, he is certain to be tortured or subjected to ill-treatment," Zhang said in a video appeal posted to the group's account. "I call on the government of Laos to ensure that my husband receives the protections he is due according to the United Nations and international law on refugees."

"I call on international governments to help rescue my husband and allow our family to be reunited in the United States," she said.

A consortium of international rights groups including Amnesty International and PEN America said Lu faces a "high likelihood of torture," adding that China frequently puts pressure on Southeast Asia governments to forcibly repatriate its nationals, many of whom have then been subjected to "arbitrary detention, unfair trials, torture, enforced disappearances, and other ill-treatment."

"These individuals are effectively disappeared for extended periods, with family members and colleagues unable to obtain information until months or years after," the groups said in a July 28 statement posted to the website of PEN America.

"By handing Lu Siwei over to the Chinese authorities, the Lao government would be putting Lu Siwei at grave risk of torture and inhuman treatment," it said. "UN rights experts have found that the Chinese government frequently subjects rights defenders and lawyers to torture and inhuman treatment."

It called on the Lao government to halt any repatriation process and release Lu, or at least disclose his whereabouts and allow him to meet with U.S. and other diplomats, as well as a lawyer.

'Dangerous situation' for Lu

Lu's detention comes amid ongoing concerns for safety of Laos-based Chinese free-speech activist Qiao Xinxin, whose associates say he has been incommunicado since early June, amid reports of his arrest by Chinese police in the Laotian capital.

Qiao, whose birth name is Yang Zewei, went missing, believed detained on or around May 31 in Vientiane, after launching an online campaign to end internet censorship in China, known as the BanGFW Movement, a reference to the Great Firewall, according to fellow activists.

Peter Dahlin, founder of the rights group Safeguard Defenders, said via his account on X -- formerly known as Twitter -- that Chinese influence is very likely a factor behind Lu's detention.

"Hard to believe the Laotian government isn't acting on behalf of the Chinese police," Dahlin posted on July 28. "What happens next will clarify why lawyer #LiSiwei has been detained."

Bob Fu, who heads the U.S.-based Christian rights group ChinaAid, said he had sent an assistant to Laos to try to track Lu down.

"Lu Siwei is in a very dangerous situation right now," he said, calling on the Lao immigration bureau to take "humanitarian considerations" into account.

Lu made international headlines after he was hired by the family of Quinn Moon, one of 12 protesters who were jailed after trying to escape to democratic Taiwan by speedboat following the 2019 Hong Kong protest movement.

He was particularly vocal in the months following their initial detention and repeatedly commented about his unsuccessful attempts to gain access to his client.

After his law license was revoked in 2021, Lu told RFA that he couldn’t have predicted he would end up in this situation.

“Sometimes it is difficult to imagine what your life will bring,” he said. “You can make some plans, but there are still some certain events that will change your life.”

Concerns are growing over the fate of Laos-based Chinese free-speech activist Qiao Xinxin, whose associates say he has been incommunicado for several days amid reports of his arrest by Chinese police in the Laotian capital.

Qiao, whose birth name is Yang Zewei, is missing, believed detained on or around May 31 in Vientiane, after launching an online campaign to end internet censorship in China, known as the BanGFW Movement, a reference to the Great Firewall, according to fellow activists.

The case reflects China’s growing “long-arm” repression of its critics outside the country. Some have been detained on foreign soil, while others have told Radio Free Asia they face regular harassment from people believed to be acting on Beijing's behalf targeting loved ones back home and via their social media accounts.

According to an online petition posted by a group called the China Citizens' Action Party, activist Wang Qingpeng tweeted on June 2 that Qiao had been incommunicado for 48 hours.

A State Department spokesperson on Monday condemned threats, harassment and cross-border abductions of dissidents by the Chinese authorities, saying there were concerns for Qiao's safety following media reports of his disappearance.

In comments made in an email to VOA Chinese on June 12, the spokesperson called on the government of Laos to respect and fulfill its obligations under international law, including not allowing the deportation of anyone who could face torture or other serious harm in their country of origin.

In an April 20 statement released via Twitter, Qiao had called on fellow activists to stage protests outside China's embassies around the world, should he fail to post to his social media accounts for 48 hours.

In the statement that he termed a "Declaration of Not Suicide," Qiao said police in China were investigating his postings to social media and putting pressure on his loved ones back home.

"I am now in Laos, but police in my hometown are investigating my speech online and trying to harass my family members in China," said the handwritten statement, which he held up in a selfie posted to his Twitter account.

"I still love this world and [am] confident about the democracy of China," it said. "If there's no more online updates for 48 hours, please help to protest in front of [Chinese] embassies. Thanks!"

Tearing down the wall According to the Citizens' Action Party, Qiao launched the #BanGFW movement online in March, after which police started putting pressure on his relatives to contact him and tell him to stop.

"Qiao Xinxin didn't back down, but fought harder and harder," petition author "Prince Ye" wrote. "He invited more netizens to raise placards calling for the Great Firewall to be torn down, to contact different governments and to get in touch with the media."

Qiao, who briefly worked as a contributor for Radio Free Asia, was visited on June 1 by two Laotian policemen and six Chinese police officers, who arrested him, according to Wang and fellow activist Lin Shengliang, who cited Qiao's neighbor in Vientiane.

Lin, who lives in the Netherlands, said Qiao had likely come back from his daily swim in the Mekong River to find the police officers waiting for him.

"It's very likely that the people were hiding [in his apartment] and grabbed him as soon as he walked in the door," Lin said. "They likely pressed him to the floor in an instant."

"He would definitely have resisted ... but there would have been no time for him to send out any signal for help."

According to Qiao's neighbors, he was taken away by eight uniformed police officers in handcuffs, six of whom were believed to be Chinese.

Lin said he had called the local police station to ask who had taken Qiao.

"The guy said, 'It's not our case,' and was eager to wash his hands of it," Lin said. "But it was passive confirmation that he was arrested."

Transnational repression Fellow #BanGFW activist Wang Nan said cross-border law enforcement by Chinese police is common in Laos and Thailand.

"China [is believed to have] arrested people in Thailand more than once," Wang Nan said. "As far as I know, most of Thailand's economy and export trade depend on China, while the same is true in Laos."

Former Guangzhou police officer Deng Haiyan says he was forced to cut off all contact with his China-based family after coming to live in the United States.

"They harassed all of them – my father, even my wife's sister and brother-in-law," Deng told Radio Free Asia in a June 12 interview. "I have basically cut off contact with them now, for fear they will be treated as guilty by association."

"They also do certain things online to target me, like posting my personal details like my ID card number and that of my wife on social media, and libeling me, saying I am part of a pornography ring," he said. "All of this is ongoing."

Harassed at home A U.S.-based dissident who asked to remain anonymous said her family is being targeted for harassment back in China.

"My brother is harassed by them every month, and it gets worse in June, when they freeze his bank account," she said, in a reference to the politically sensitive anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.

Meanwhile, New York-based journalist Ma Ju said he cut off contact with his family in China seven years ago.

"I have also had all kinds of online harassment on a daily basis," Ma said. "I think the Chinese Communist Party are behind it."

"I have been hacked so many times while making online content -- my power just cut out on two occasions," he said. "I contacted the FBI about it some time ago, and it turned out there had been a hacker attack that disconnected my internet."

"If I'm doing a live stream I'll use mobile data instead, so they can't cut me off."

In November 2022, police in Bangkok Police detained an exiled Chinese dissident after he staged a lone street protest against Chinese leader Xi Jinping inspired by the Oct. 13 "Bridge Man" protest in Beijing.

Veteran rights activist Li Nanfei, who has been stranded in Thailand for several years despite being a U.N.-registered refugee, was arrested after holding up a placard on a Bangkok street that read: "His Majesty President Xi, put an end to dictatorship in China! Give the people back their freedom!"

Earlier in the same month, Adiyaa, an ethnic Mongolian Chinese national who fled the country after his involvement in 2020 protests over a ban on Mongolian-medium teaching in schools, reported being held by Chinese state security police in Bangkok.

In 2019, Thai police detained two Chinese refugees – Jia Huajiang and Liu Xuehong – who had earlier helped jailed rights website founder Huang Qi before fleeing the country.

Thailand has sent refugees from China back home in the past.

In July 2018, authorities in the southwestern Chinese city of Chongqing jailed rights activist Dong Guangping and political cartoonist Jiang Yefei after they were sent home from Thailand as they were awaiting resettlement as political refugees, prompting an international outcry.

A human rights activist and member of the Thailand-based Free Laos group was arrested when he recently returned to Laos to visit his hometown, friends of the activist told Radio Free Asia.

Savang Phaleuth, in his 40s, has worked in Thailand for years, according to a friend. He traveled to Done Sart village in Song Khone district last month and was detained at his family’s home on April 20 and later taken to Savannakhet city, the friend said.

“Friends had reminded him not to go home because Lao officials have identified him,” the friend said. “But he insisted on going.”

Laos deals severely with dissidents who call for democracy and respect for human rights in the one-party communist state, and Lao dissidents living abroad have been harshly punished after returning or being forced back to Laos.

The rights group Free Laos was set up by Lao workers and residents in Thailand to promote human rights and democracy in their home country.

Savang had posted on social media about those issues in Laos. It’s unclear where he is being held or if he has been charged.

A village headman told RFA that someone named Savang was arrested in Done Sart on April 20 but the reason was unknown.

A source who is close to a high ranking police officer in Savannakhet province told RFA that Savang was arrested for his political campaign work.

“The police took Savang away but I don’t know where he is detained,” the source said. “First of all, he must be questioned for more details.”

Previous arrests of Thai-based Laotians

The co-founder of Free Laos, Khoukham Keomanivong, urged the Lao government to respect people’s rights and to not treat rights activists as traitors.

Khoukham, a U.N.-recognized refugee, was convicted last year in a closed-door Thai trial of overstaying his visa and had been held pending deportation to Laos, where he faced arrest for his advocacy work. He was later released on bail and was finally allowed to leave Thailand for Canada, where he now lives.

“We don’t like that the government treats people with different opinions as enemies,” he said. “It’s a severe abuse of human rights when people who express opinions different from the government are arrested and then disappear.”

Savang’s arrest is reminiscent of three rights activists who were arrested in Laos in March 2016.

Somphone Pimmasone, 29, Lodkham Thammavong, 30, and Soukane Chaithad, 32, were arrested after entering Laos to renew their passports from Thailand, where they had been working.

They were charged with criticizing the Lao government online while working abroad and for taking part in a protest outside the Lao embassy in Thailand. The three were handed prison terms described by rights groups as harsh at a secret trial in April 2017.

In another case, democracy activist Od Sayavong, a friend of Khoukham, vanished under mysterious circumstances in Bangkok in 2019 after posting a video clip online criticizing the government.

Listed as a “person of concern” by the UNHCR because of his advocacy for democracy and human rights, his whereabouts remain unknown. He was 34 at the time he went missing.

Vientiane shooting

Meanwhile, police said on Monday that a preliminary investigation into the April 29 shooting of a Lao political activist in Vientiane indicates it was related to either a business or romantic dispute.

That statement was met with skepticism from Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch and others who questioned whether Lao authorities were serious about investigating the attack on Jack Anousa.

Anousa, 25, has been the administrator of a Facebook group that’s uncovered and denounced human rights abuses and has called for the end of one-party rule in Laos.

Security camera footage that was later posted on the Facebook group page showed an unidentified gunman, wearing a cap and beige jacket, firing two shots at Anousa at a Vientiane shop.

The same Facebook page said Anousa died at a hospital the next day, but that report proved to be false after Anousa’s family and other sources gave verbal confirmation and photographic evidence that he survived the shooting. The identity of the gunman remains unknown and no arrest has been made.

“Coming to such a quick, convenient conclusion without doing a thorough investigation is just the sort of pathetically poor performance we’ve come to expect from the Lao police,” Robertson said on Monday. “This looks like the start of the Lao government cover-up rather than the sort of thorough and impartial investigation that is truly needed to find the shooter and anyone else connected with him.”

Bounthone Chanthalavong-Weiser, president of the Germany-based Alliance for Democracy in Laos, said Anousa was an employee, not a business owner – so a business conflict was unlikely.

“He also didn’t have a love conflict with anyone,” she said. “He was shot because he was fighting for democracy and human rights in Laos. The Lao government just doesn’t like these people.”

A Laos political activist who was reported to have died after being shot point blank in the face and chest is alive, activists say.

The family of Anousa Luangsuphom, 25, has told Human Rights Watch (HRW) he is recovering in hospital after being shot in a cafe in the capital Vientiane.

They had initially told people he had died in a bid to protect him from being targeted again, the rights group said.

This reflects the level of fear for dissidents in Laos, the group added.

"Friends and family basically told people he was dead because they were worried if the gunman knew that they had not succeeded in killing him, they would return to finish the job," said HRW spokesman Phil Robertson.

Mr Luangsuphom is a prominent critic of the Laos government. Security camera footage of his attack on Saturday night has been widely shared on social media and reported in local media.

It shows a gunman dressed in a brown long-sleeved shirt and black cap using a facemask to open the cafe door, before entering and firing twice at Mr Luangsuphom, who is seated on the floor.

The video then shows the gunman fleeing while bystanders rush to Mr Luangsuphom's aid.

The activist is known for running the Kub Kluen Duay Keyboard (Driven By Keyboard) Facebook page, where people have expressed criticism of the Communist authorities.

On Wednesday night, the page's administrators shared a message from another Laos political commentator, based in Europe, who has a large online following among people in Laos and abroad.

The family had requested that the Facebook influencer release the information that Mr Luangsuphom was alive, Mr Robertson said.

They had chosen to do this after the incorrect news of Mr Luangsuphom's death was reported by global outlets, including the BBC, prompting Laos police to track him down in a Vientiane hospital.

Photos published by the Facebook page appear to show him unconscious in a hospital bed with wounds and bruising on his face. The BBC has sought comment from the page's administrator.

There has been criticism of Laos authorities' slow response to the shooting. Before Wednesday, authorities had not announced an investigation into it.

Police are still yet to show they are properly investigating the attack, Mr Robertson said.

He said the family's "protective" actions showed "there is clearly no confidence in the Laos government whatsoever that it is there to protect the citizens of the country".

It follows similar criticism over cases of other activists who have vanished or been targeted,

HRW had earlier noted the "enforced disappearance" of activist Sombath Somphone, whose whereabouts remain unknown more than 10 years after he was taken into police custody in Vientiane.

It also cited the case of Od Sayavong, a Lao activist living in Bangkok, who has been missing since August 2019.

Government officials had denied any knowledge of both disappearances.

There is little room for political opposition or dissenting voices in Communist-ruled Laos, one of Asia's poorest countries.

The landlocked country between Thailand and China is a one-party state, ruled by the Lao People's Revolutionary Party, where "authorities use legal restrictions and intimidation tactics against state critics", says the US political advocacy group Freedom House.

Jack Anousa, an administrator of a Facebook group that uncovered and denounced human rights abuses in Laos and called for the end of one-party rule, was shot at 10:26 pm on Saturday in the After School Chocolate & Bar shop in Vientiane’s Chanthabury district.

On his Facebook page, which has over 10,000 followers, Anousa recently posted comments saying that while the government has blamed thick haze on farmers burning forests and farmland, city dwellers have also burned lots of trash and Chinese and Vietnamese companies have burned toxic waste that has polluted the air.

Last May, he published a post about how the Lao and Chinese governments helped each other get rich while Lao people have only grown poorer.

The five villagers detained by soldiers on Sunday had not been formally arrested but were taken away for “re-education” because they had gathered others to stage a protest and cause disruptions, Phouvone said. “Thus, the officers had to assert their control and prevent more problems.”

Sources told RFA on Tuesday that the five now held are being questioned by military authorities, with no word given yet on when they may be released.

“The military will release them later, but they may still end up being held for a while,” a Naxaithong district official said. “Their families have asked the military for permission to visit and bring them some food, but their request was denied.

“The military officers haven’t said when they’re going to release the villagers. But some rumors say they might be freed sometime after the Lao New Year on April 15,” a district villager added.

Reached for comment, family members of some of those now held declined to speak about the case, fearing retaliation by authorities, while one family member was ordered on Monday to delete a video he had taken of the arrests.

An official of the People’s Council, meanwhile, said his office had received no reports of the conflict or arrests.

“A report may have been sent to the economic committee, though, because the conflict involves land,” he said.

Some of the families living on the 25-hectare area of land now claimed by the army had inherited the land from their parents even before the 1975 communist takeover of Laos, and had paid property taxes on the land ever since, another villager told RFA.

“The military says that the land belongs to the army, but everybody knows that the land belongs to the villagers,” the villager said, also speaking on condition of anonymity. “Before building anything, the military should at least have asked for approval from the village authorities, but in this case they began building things without any warning,” he said.

Poy and another villager, a woman named Keo were arrested over the next two days after the video appeared on Facebook Monday.

A resident of Xiengda village told RFA’s Lao Service Thursday, “Poy and Keo should not be arrested for merely posting the video on Facebook.”

“People can use their smartphones to record what happens to them so that they have evidence if something terrible occurs. Also taking photos and videos there isn’t against any laws,” the villager said.

Another villager told RFA, that the villagers were fully cooperating with authorities and not physically resisting the land-clearing operation.

“We were just requesting fair compensation. They had proposed that the project compensate us at a cost of 1,500 Thai baht per square meter [U.S. $4.26 per square foot], and to provide each family with a new 500 square meter [5382 square feet] plot of land,” the second villager said.

A village official told RFA on the same day that Poy and Keo had not been officially detained­.

“They are only being reeducated in the district police station. There’s no problem. The police will reeducate and release them,” the official said.

“They were taken to the police station for defaming the police and officials on duty and posting it on Facebook, which is just not right,” the official added.

The official also said that the area in question was state land and it was once a national forest preserve.

RFA spoke to Linthong, an official of the medical college project, who said the villagers were merely being opportunistic.

“They settle the land in a forest preserve to eke out a small living, but when the land suddenly becomes more valuable, they try to take it over,” said Linthong.

Keo’s father told RFA Friday that he was trying to secure her release.

“I am filing for the police to release my daughter. They told me she resisted against the police,” he said.

Poy’s family is also requesting his release.

Failed commune

According to residents of the village, the project area was not a forest preserve, but communal land that was used as a collective farm to grow rice from 1979-1980, which failed.

Villagers started occupying the land for their own agricultural purposes, but the government never issued them permanent land titles, regardless of how long they resided there.

A third villager told RFA, “I lost 8,000 square meters [86,111 square feet] of my land to the government, but they just gave me 1.2 million kip [$134]. That is not a fair price.”

A Lao land expert told RFA that the arrest and detention of villagers who demand fair compensation is not new and it frequently happens in areas needed for government projects.

The expert added that no matter how long the villagers lived on the land, even if their occupancy precedes the forestry laws, they can still be removed for occupying state land.

Laos often comes under criticism for land grabs in which authorities seize land from people for development projects without paying them fair compensation for lost crops, property, and livelihoods.

Rights groups say the illegal appropriations violate basic human rights and that such land grabs are a major cause of social tensions in Laos and in neighboring countries in Southeast Asia.

Police in the Lao capital Vientiane detained eight people this week who were planning protests calling for free speech and condemning land grabs and dam projects, later releasing six of them, RFA’s Lao Service learned on Friday.

The arrests took place on Nov. 11 and 12, thwarting demonstrations the activists had planned for four locations in the capital during the That Luang festival, a Buddhist celebration of a 450-year-old, gold-covered temple.

“On November 11, policemen arrested some of protest leaders … and on November 12, the policemen locked some more protesters in Oudomphone guesthouse in Phonesinuan village, in Vientiane’s Sisatthanak district,” a leader of the planned protest, who avoided arrest, told RFA on Friday.

“First, people were going to rally for respect of human rights, and freedom of speech,” the organizer told RFA, speaking on condition of anonymity to protect his liberty.

“Second, they wanted to ask the government to prevent land grabs, dam building, deforestation, and unfair relocation of communities,” the activist added.

A Lao official with knowledge of the matter confirmed to RFA on Friday that “people were arrested on those days for planning to stage protests at four places (in Vientiane.”

The protests were planned for the That Luang pagoda grounds, the National University of Laos and two points along highway 13, the official said.

The guesthouse detention was witnessed by villagers.

“I don’t know whether or not those people had come to join the rally, but I saw around six people locked up by the policemen on November 12,” one villager told RFA on Friday.

“I heard some saying they are from the Phonethong district in the southern province of Champassak, but some were not from the south,” he added.

Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said "these wrongful arrests are just the latest example of the government’s phony pledges to donor agencies and foreign governments that it will respect fundamental liberties.”

The protest leader identified the eight detained activists as Sounthone Fasongsay, Kamkone Phanthavong, Bounnhone Phanthavong, Chiengsone Phanthavong, Kiatthisak Hakmisouk, Phouvong Xaiyaseng, Santinoy Thepkaisone and the wife of Thepkaisone, whose name was unavailable.

On Friday, the Sisatthanak district police station issued an order to release the six would-be protesters who were held at the guest house.

“On November 12, policeman detained an individual for gathering and making a noise longer than limited time during the celebration of the That Luang festival,” read a copy of the order received by one of the six.

“After investigation, police officers reached a compromise to release him on conditions defined in the law. He has been released and handed over to his relatives and local authorities for reeducation,” it read.

One of the six who were released confirmed with RFA that he and five others were “released today after being held for a few days.”

RFA was unable to confirm the fate or whereabouts of two detainees who were not released with the others on Friday.

Reports of protests are rare in Laos, a one-party communist state since 1975 that brooks no public opposition and deals with dissent harshly.

"Lao authorities have frequently labeled as national security threats anyone peacefully expressing dissenting views, criticizing the government, or simply calling for respect for human rights and democratic rule." said Human Rights Watch.

There are no publicly available government figures on political prisoners in Laos, whose opaque judicial system makes it hard to give a reliable estimate on how many are being held. Three were arrested in 2017 and charged with treason after protesting in front of the Lao embassy in neighboring Thailand.

The fate of about 10 other detainees, including students protesters arrested in 1999 and self-styled freedom fighters who launched a raid via a Thai border checkpoint in 2000 remains unclear.

A first draft of Guidelines for the implementation of the Prime Minister's Decree on International Non-Governmental Organizations has recently been prepared. While welcoming information that international non-governmental organizations have been consulted in the drafting process, several serious concerns have been brought to our attention, as follows. It is reported that the authorities' prior authorization will be required for any international non-governmental organizations willing to register, and to operate in the Lao People's Democratic Republic. It is alleged that the Guidelines do not set any minimum timeframes for authorities' approval or the grounds upon which an approval may be denied. It is reported that in the absence of such human rights safeguards, applications may be arbitrarily rejected. It is also brought to our attention that, when delivered, the authorization allowing an association to operate ("Operation Permit") will be valid for one year only; thus unduly limiting the ability for these associations to pursue their activitieswithout any discontinuity and without state's interference. Concerns have also been reported that international non-governmental organizations are defined as "an international or foreign nonprofit organization having a legal status, which desires to provide development assistance and humanitarian aides without any pursuit of profit". This definition might prevent organizations focusing on other issues, such as human rights, equality between women and men, marginalized groups empowerment, amongst others from operating in the Lao People's Democratic Republic. Similarly, it is reported that in order to be able to implement a project, international non-governmental organizations will have to seek and obtain the approval from the authorities through the submission of a project proposal and a draft Memorandum of Understanding. Such a procedure may interfere with the independence of international non-governmental organizations, which is a key component of freedom of association. According to the draft Guidelines, the organization's budget shall be made "of 70 percent for project activities and 30 percent for administration." These Guidelines also stipulate that "the objective and activities of the project[of an international non-governmental organization] should also be in line with the National Socioeconomic Development Plan". While the participation of the State in development policies is paramount, it is reported that such a provision will seriously compromise the ability for organizations to choose their thematic areas and to operate freely and independently from state's oversight. In addition "any project with a budget that is less than 30,000 USD should not be implemented directly by the International Non-Governmental Organizations, but should be given to local authorities to implement it instead." It is reported that such restrictions do not meet the cumulative conditions of international law, according to which any restriction must "be motivated by a limited interest, have a legal basis and be "necessary in a democratic society". It is also reported that the requirements for international non-governmental organizations who wish to open an office are particularly strict and will be very difficult to meet. A "minimum of five-year experience of successful development assistance in Lao PDR with a value assistance of no less than five hundred thousand US dollars annually, as stated in Article 9 of the Prime Minister's Decree, No. 013/PM, dated 08/01/2010" is reportedly required to open a Country Representative Office. Moreover, an international non-governmental organization "wishing to open its Regional Office in Lao PDR shall meet the requirement of having greater development programme in Lao PDR than in other countries in the region as contained in Article 10 of the Prime Minister's Decree, No. 013/PM, dated 08/01/2010". These two provisions will reportedly make it very difficult for organizations to open an office, be it a Country Office or a Regional Office, thus limiting their ability to operate.The authorities will be reportedly entitled to approve the appointment of several categories of staff, including the Country Representative or the project director, of Country or Regional Offices of an international non-governmental organization. Furthermore, it is alleged that after the completion of a project or the closing of an Office, "the equipments and vehicles must be re-exported, or otherwise handed over to the Government". It is alleged that the draft legislation does not specify the rationale of this provision and may impede organizations to develop activities without state's interference.

Two Lao villagers detained for almost two years without trial for protesting the loss of land awarded by the government to a Vietnamese rubber company are now seriously ill in jail, a local source says. In July 2017, 15 residents of Yeub village in Sekong's Thateng district were taken into custody for obstructing workers and cutting down trees on their former land, with several beaten or subjected to electric shocks in the days following their arrest. Four members of the group have since been released, with another reported to have died in custody last year, sources told RFA in earlier reports. Ten others remain in detention. Two of the villagers still in custody, Souvanh and a villager named Nay, are now in failing health due to the harsh conditions in their jail, a local villager told RFA's Lao Service this week. "Souvanh's body, legs, and arms are swollen, while Nay suffers from a stomach problem and is passing blood," RFA's source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Nay had been taken earlier by police for medical treatment, but is now again behind bars, the source said. Souvanh and Nay are now confined with two others in a district police security division jail in Laman district, with six others held at Ban Mo Jail, a provincial police security division facility also in Laman, RFA's source said. Souvanh, who is regarded by police as the group's leader, is being held apart from the others in a separate cell, he added. Call for release Speaking to RFA, Vanida Thepsouvanh-president of the Lao Movement for Human Rights, based in France-called on the government of Laos to "immediately and unconditionally" release the 10 Sekong villagers still in jail. "We recall with great sadness that one has already died in prison," Thepsouvanh said. "The remaining prisoners, most of them from the Brou ethnic minority, who are suffering from poor nutrition and harsh treatment and are confined in dark cells, have serious health problems and could lose their life at any moment," she said. "As we have said before, these persons would not have been arrested if they were living in a country where rule of law prevails." Land grabs and the appropriation of public property to turn over to foreign and domestic companies are common in Laos, and villagers affected by them often refuse to speak out publicly because they fear retribution.

The Lao government should urgently investigate the disappearance of three Thai political activists who were last seen in the capital, Vientiane, in December 2018, Human Rights Watch said today. On January 22, 2019, Thai authorities told Human Rights Watch that DNA samples from the bodies found in the Mekong River matched two of the missing activists, Phu Chana and Kasalong. Prominent Thai anti-monarchist Surachai Danwattananusorn, 78, and two close aides, known as Phu Chana, 54, and Kasalong, 47, were last seen in Vientiane on December 11, 2018. Their colleagues promptly reported the disappearances to Lao authorities. The identification of Phu Chana and Kasalong's bodies, raised grave concerns for Surachai, Human Rights Watch said. The two bodies' hands and feet were bound and their faces smashed beyond recognition. They also both had been disemboweled and stuffed with concrete. "The Lao government seems intent on sweeping the abduction and gruesome murder of Thai activists under the rug," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Lao authorities need to credibly investigate and prosecute this heinous case, which has raised alarms for Thai activists in exile in Laos." Two days before the Thai military staged a coup and took power on May 22, 2014, Surachai fled to Laos to escape charges brought against him for lese majeste (insulting the monarchy) and accusations by the Thai military junta regarding his involvement with anti-government militia groups. While in Laos, Surachai, along with the other missing activists, operated online radio programs that strongly criticized military rule in Thailand and the Thai monarchy. The Thai government repeatedly demanded that Laos hand over Surachai and all other Thai anti-monarchists, most recently when Thai Prime Minister Gen. Prayut Chan-ocha visited Vientiane on December 13. The Lao government has not conducted serious investigations into previous disappearances of Thai anti-monarchists living in Vientiane, including Itthipol Sukpaen, missing since June 2016, and Wuthipong Kachathamakul, missing since July 2017, Human Rights Watch said. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) does not operate an office in Laos, which could offer protection to refugees. The Lao government also does not permit the regional UNHCR office based in Bangkok to provide protection for Thais who to flee to Laos to escape political persecution. "The Lao government has an obligation to find out what happened to Surachai and all other Thai activists who have gone missing in Laos," Adams said. "Foreign governments and donors should press the Lao government to take serious steps to investigate these cases and prosecute whomever is responsible."

Three Lao workers arrested last year for criticizing their government on Facebook while working in Thailand have been sentenced to lengthy prison terms, one of the workers' relatives said on 16 May 2017, drawing condemnation from rights groups and calls for their immediate release. Somphone Phimmasone, 29, his girlfriend Lod Thammavong, 30, and Soukane Chaithad, 32, disappeared in March 2016 after returning to Laos to renew their passports, their family and friends told RFA's Lao Service in earlier reports. While working in Thailand, the three had strongly criticized the Lao government online, accusing it of human rights abuses, and they were later shown on Lao television making what appeared to be public confessions for what they called the mistake of protesting the country's policies. A relative of one of the workers, who spoke to RFA on condition of anonymity, said Tuesday that he had recently contacted a detention center official requesting permission to visit his family member and was told the three "were sentenced last month." The official told the relative that Lod Thammavong, Soukane Chaithad, and Somphone Phimmasone had been sentenced to 12 years, 18 years, and 20 years in prison, respectively. He added that the three had been transferred to Xam Khe prison in the capital Vientiane-the country's largest detention facility. An official at the prison, who did not provide his name, denied that the three had been sentenced when contacted by RFA. Staff members at the Lao People's Court and the country's Prison Department refused to answer questions about the detainees, while attempts by RFA to reach the Vientiane People's Court went unanswered late on Tuesday. However, the Paris-based Federation of International Human Rights (FIDH) said in a statement Tuesday it had confirmed through local rights activists that the three were convicted sometime in early April. FIDH called the sentences "a shocking reminder of Vientiane's intolerance for any form of peaceful dissent" and called on authorities to "immediately and unconditionally" release the three. "By locking up dissidents for up to two decades, the Lao government has abandoned any pretense of compliance with the country's international human rights obligations," FIDH president Dimitris Christopoulos said. "It's time for the international community to drop the diplomatic niceties and condemn the Lao government's latest attack on civil society in the strongest possible terms." "Violation of rights' Khamtanh Phouthonephakdy, a member of the Germany-based Alliance for Democracy in Laos, called the sentences harsh and unjust. "To administer sentences normally associated with committing a political crime or an anti-government activity is a violation of their rights," he said. "They were sentenced behind closed doors, but the Lao people-and particularly their families-have the right to know what happened to them." In March, Phil Robertson, deputy director of the Asia division of Human Rights Watch, had said that the arrest of the three was a signal that Laos "intends to treat them quite harshly, and teach a lesson to other Lao migrant workers overseas to do nothing to oppose the government." "The only hope that these three imprisoned activists have now is if the U.N. or bilateral foreign aid donors take up their cases and demand the authorities immediately release them," Robertson said at the time. In 2014, the Lao government issued a decree prohibiting online criticism of the government and the ruling Lao People's Revolutionary Party (LPRP), setting out stiff penalties for netizens and internet service providers who violate government controls. The decree also requires netizens to use their real names when setting up social media and other accounts online.

Lawmakers in Laos have approved an amendment to the country's media law that further tightens the government's control of reporters, ensuing that they disseminate the policies of the ruling communist party in a country where press freedom is already nonexistent. Members of parliament on Nov. 4 debated and approved the draft amendment to the Media Law of 2008 based on a change proposed by the Ministry of Information, Culture and Tourism. "The media law has been amended to ensure that the media implements their duties and mission to be a sharp voice of the[ruling Lao People's Revolutionary] Party and the people in order to propagate the guidelines and directions, and laws and social-economic development plans of the state," said information minister Bosengkham Vongdara at the National Assembly. "In the meantime, it will improve the principles and rules for controlling the media in accordance with the directions and policy of the party and the rule of law in order to ensure the freedom of our media as well as the people," he said. A Vientiane resident, who declined to be named, told RFA's Lao Service on Thursday that the amendment to the media law will not benefit Lao citizens. "We understand all media are controlled by the government," he said. "Even though there are private media, the contents of the news are determined by the government. No matter how the media law is amended, it will not serve the people and society at large." "People know that the local media cannot report the facts completely and cannot properly fulfill their roles," he said. "They they do not have any expectations for the mainstream media because of heavy censorship, so they prefer to use social media instead." A Lao community-education developer who requested anonymity told RFA that he would like the Lao media to present the news with more facts and conduct investigative reports rather than issue stories about what policymakers dictate. "[But] the amended draft of the law is not open for public comments as to which articles should be amended to comply with international conventions on media and freedom of speech," he said. Ninety-three of 103 lawmakers approved the amendment with nine rejections and one abstention, according to a report in the Vientiane Times. Some lawmakers want the drafting subcommittee to further change certain points to more clearly define individuals and legal groups that are authorized to participate in media activities, cap the proportion of funds provided by foreigners to Lao media outlets at 20 percent, and ensure that the media provide information "in a more scientific way," the article said. "Absolute control of media' Laos constantly scores among the lowest rungs in the annual press freedom indexes issued by Reporters Without Borders, the Paris-based international nongovernmental organization that defends freedom of information and press. The country ranked 173 out of 180 nations in this year's report, dropping two places from its position at 171 in 2015. "The Lao People's Revolutionary Party (LPRP) exercises absolute control over the media," the report said. The Lao government issued a decree in September 2014 prohibiting online criticism of itself and the ruling party as well as banning content that encourages terrorism and social disorder, pornography, photos that contradict Lao traditions and culture, and images that violate intellectual property rights. Netizens or internet service providers that violate the law can be fined or face criminal charges. "The adoption in late 2014 of a decree providing for jail sentences for internet users who criticize the government and the Marxist-Leninist LPRP threatens the boom in online news and information platforms," the Reporters Without Borders report said.

Mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders REFERENCE: OL LAO 2/2016: 6 May 2016 Excellency, We have the honour to address you in our capacity as Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders pursuant to Human Rights Council resolutions 25/2 and 25/18. First of all, we would like to refer to and welcome your Excellency's Government's commitment, expressed during the second cycle of the Universal Periodic Review in 2015, in which it accepted recommendations to remove a number of restrictions on the right to freedom of expression. In particular, the government accepted to fully implement its obligations under the ICCPR to respect and ensure the right to freedom of expression (121.36); to re-examine recent legislation that limits dissemination of certain information via the internet, including through social media (121.142); and to take measures to ensure that all legislation, especially on press and media, including digital media, is fully aligned with its international human rights obligations (121.144)(A/HRC/15/5). In this connection, we would like to bring to the attention of your Excellency's Government information we have received concerning Decree No.377 of 24 November 2015 on the Press Activities of Foreign Media Agencies, Diplomatic Missions, and International Organizations in Lao PDR, which entered into force on 15 January 2016. According to the official translation made available by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the decree aims to regulate and monitor press activities of foreign media, diplomatic missions and international organizations "in order to facilitate that their activities to be carried out in an effective manner and in consistence with laws and regulations of the Lao PDR, thus contributing to the socio-economic development and further promoting cooperation with foreign countries" (article 1). We welcome the expressed intention to promote international cooperation on media in compliance with the relevant international treaties and agreements to which the Lao PDR is a party. However, we are nonetheless concerned that the decree contains a number of provisions which appear to unduly limit the right to freedom of expression in the Lao PDR. In spirit of co-operation and dialogue, and in line with the mandates entrusted to us by the Human Rights Council, we wish to submit the following comments on some of the provisions of the new decree and respectfully to share these concerns with your Excellency's Government. The decree includes several provisions which include requirements for approval prior to publication work and requirements for the registering and prior approval for activities of foreign media personnel, international organizations and diplomatic missions, as well as the approval of the appointment of staff of foreign media agency by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the government. Prior censorship Articles 14 and 18 of the decree provide that foreign media agencies, foreign journalists, diplomatic missions and international organizations must submit their work to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for consideration and approval prior to publication. Articles 17 and 18 require submitting media content to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for review, and article 18 includes an obligation to submitting requests for publication within certain time frames. Requirement on registration and prior approval Article 6 obliges foreign media personnel accompanying a diplomatic delegation to engage in reporting in Lao PDR, to inform the Ministry of Foreign Affairs three working days in advance of their names, equipment and programme of activities. Article 7 requires obtaining a permit fifteen days in advance for foreign media personnel who work for a non-resident foreign media agency. The application for permit must include CV, application letter and list of previous articles and publications about the Lao PDR. Moreover, the head of the office of a foreign media agency and the staff must be approved by the Ministry of foreign Affairs of Lao PDR (article 11(1). Obligations to abide by the traditions, and culture of the Lao PDR Articles 14 and 19 require that the press activities of foreign media agencies, diplomatic missions and international organizations in Lao PDR to abide by the traditions and culture, in addition to the laws and regulations of the Lao PDR. We express serious concern is that the decree would unduly restrict the legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression and access to information in Lao PDR, in contradiction with article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Lao PDR ratified 25 September 2009. We are particularly concerned at the provisions of Articles 6, 7, 14, 17 and 18, which impose prior approval by the Government of publications and reporting work of foreign media agencies, foreign journalists, diplomatic missions and international organizations, set a system of prior censorship, allowing the authorities to have broad discretion to control information and communication. Further concern relate to Article 11 for granting competencies to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to approve the appointment of the head of the office of a foreign media agency as well as other staff of these agencies, which would impose undue control of the authorities over the independence of international media. We also express concern at the provisions of Articles 14 and 19 requiring foreign media, diplomatic missions and international organizations to abide by the traditions and culture of Lao PDR, the definition and interpretation of which lacks sufficient clarity and precision to avoid undue interference and overly broad discretion from the authorities to restrict the exercise of the right to freedom of expression. In light of the abovementioned concerns, we would like to recall article 19 of the ICCPR that explicitly safeguards the right to freedom of expression, which includes the "freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". The right to freedom of expression cannot be restricted unless the high threshold of article 19(3) of the ICCPR is met. That is, be provided by law, serve a legitimate government interest, and meet the strict tests of necessity and proportionality. In particular, the Human Rights Committee has indicated that general systems of registration or licencing of journalists is incompatible with article 19(3) of the ICCPR and has highlighted that "free, uncensored, unhindered[...] media[are] essential in any society to ensure freedom of opinion and expression and the enjoyment of other Covenant rights" (General Comment 34, CCPR/C/GC/34). The targeting of foreign media, diplomatic missions and international organizations would be incompatible with article 19 of the ICCPR, which explicitly states that the right to freedom of expression applies to "everyone". By restricting the ability of foreign actors to function and to serve the public in Lao PDR with information, the decree could undermine their right to freedom of expression and people's access to information in the country. In relation to the vague formulation of provisions of the Decree, we would like to stress that, as stated by the Human Rights Committee, a norm "must be formulated with sufficient precision to enable an individual to regulate his or her conduct accordingly". A law must provide "sufficient guidance to those charged with their execution to enable them to ascertain what sorts of expression are properly restricted and what sorts are not" (CCPR/C/GC/34). We would like to reiterate that the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as to access information, including through the media and the Internet, is of central importance in the effective functioning of a democracy. At it is our responsibility under the mandates of the Human Rights Council to seek to clarify all cases brought to our attention, we would be grateful for your observations on the following matters: 1.\tPlease provide information on measures taken, or to be taken, to ensure the compliance of the decree with the Lao PDR's obligations under international human rights law, particularly with regard to the right to freedom of expression. 2.\tPlease explain how the new decree will contribute to the accepted recommendations by Lao PDR during the second cycle of the UPR. 3.\tPlease explain the purpose behind differential treatment between foreign and international actors and domestic ones, and explain how this is compatible with international human rights norms and standards. 4.\tPlease provide detailed information on the implementation of the Decree since its enactment, providing desegregated data and information on the reports and publications subject to the prior authorization of the government or on the cases reviewed by the authorities relative to the appointment of foreign media agency staff. 5.\tPlease provide information regarding the guidance given to law enforcement officials for the execution of the decree, specifically, indicating what kind of consideration is involved in granting or denying publication. Please indicate how this guidance refers to international human rights norms, such as article 19 of the ICCPR. We would appreciate receiving a response within 60 days. Your Excellency's Government's response will be made available in a report to be presented to the Human Rights Council for its consideration. While awaiting a reply, we urge all relevant authorities in the Lao PDR to take all necessary measures to ensure the full compliance of domestic legislation with international human rights norms and standards, in particular revising or revoking the legislative provisions, regulations, administrative and other measures that impose undue limitations to the legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression. We would like to take this opportunity to express my interest and availability to discuss the decree in more detail with your Excellency's Government at your convenience and provide further assessment towards its revision.

Laos' representatives attending a meeting of civil society organizations that is held each year during the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit said little about human rights issues inside their own authoritarian country because they were selected by the government in Vientiane, sources tell RFA. While the ASEAN People's Forum is designed to highlight human-rights issues in the 10 countries that make up ASEAN, the Lao government made sure that rights criticisms of that country were kept to a minimum by hand-picking the Lao civil society representatives attending the forum, according to the sources. "Most Lao representatives are selected by the Lao Ministry of Home Affairs to participate the 2016 APF in East Timor," a civil society official told RFA's Lao Service, on condition of anonymity. "They are fully registered and verified Lao civil society organization members, but those with temporary registrations were not selected." Laos's single-party government likes to keep civil society organizations on a short leash by granting organizations that don't toe the party line temporary status, making it easier to pull the plug on an organization if it bucks the government. A reminder Just days before the ASEAN Peoples' Forum was to begin, the Ministry of Home Affairs conducted a meeting with Lao representatives to the forum reminding them they should avoid politically sensitive issues and fully follow the Lao People's Revolutionary Party philosophy and the government's rules and policies, the source told RFA. "During the meeting, we were told to talk about human rights problems in Laos indirectly and were told we cannot say something on a specific case," the source said. "We can only say or raise topics in general terms that relates to any problem or issues about human rights in Laos during the meeting." Laos has tried to keep a lid on discussion about rights abuses since it took over as ASEAN chair. The country refused to allow the ASEAN People's Forum to meet in Laos, host of the ASEAN summit. Lao officials cited the potential criticism by participants of the region's governments and inadequate resources as the reasons for keeping the forum outside of Laos. Instead the ASEAN People's Forum was conducted in East Timor. Maydom Chanthanasinh, who headed the Lao delegation, was critical of the forum, saying it has lost credibility because people who lost economic interest and political power have come to use it simply as a way to criticize their governments. The attempt to keep criticisms to a minimum worked for most of the People's Forum as discussions about the arrest of government critics, the lack of press freedom, unsustainable development, dam construction and land seizures were minimized. "Where is Sombath Somphone?" While the disappearance of Sombath Somphone was among the topics that Lao representatives were told was off limits, supporters of the Lao agricultural and community development worker attempted to be heard in spite of the obstacles. Sombath's 2012 abduction remains unsolved even though there is video footage of Sombath's Jeep being stopped at a police checkpoint that also shows Sombath being herded into a white truck and taken away. In the video, a man dressed in white returns and drives off in his Jeep. He is well known in Laos for his decades of work on behalf of farmers and sustainable agricultural practices. He pioneered an agricultural approach in Laos that aims to incorporate the knowledge and opinions of rural people in the planning and management of development projects. Sombath was generally apolitical, but just before his abduction he challenged the massive land deals the government negotiated that left thousands of rural Laotians homeless with little compensation. The deals sparked rare popular protests in Laos where political speech is tightly controlled. While the Lao government was apparently successful in keeping the delegation quiet inside the forum, it was unable to muzzle protests and other events outside the forum. A member of the Alliance for Democracy in Laos, an overseas pro-democracy organization, told RFA the alliance was able to set up a workshop and discuss human rights violations in Laos including the disappearance of Sombath Somphone. Demonstrators also carried a large poster of Sombath inscribed with "Where is Sombath?" as they also yelled out the question.

Ms. Lodkham Thammavong, 30, and Messrs. Somphone Phimmasone, 29, and Soukan Chaithad, 32, were arrested in March 2016 after returning to Laos from Thailand on 18 February 2016. The three had returned to apply for passports in order to re-enter Thailand and obtain the necessary documents to work legally. On 5 March 2016, police arrested Lodkham and Somphone, who worked in Bangkok as a domestic worker and a security guard respectively, at Lodkham's family home in Ban Vang Tay Village, Nong Bok District, Khammuan Province. The two were initially held at the Khammuan provincial prison in Tha Khaek town. In early May 2016, they were both transferred to an unknown prison in Vientiane. It is believed Soukan, who worked in Bangkok as a delivery driver, was arrested on 22 March 2016 at the Ministry of Public Security head office ("'Ko Po So") in Savannakhet City, where he went to apply for a passport. On 25 May 2016, state-run TV showed Lodkham, Somphone, and Soukan in custody at police headquarters in Vientiane. The news report said the three had been arrested for threatening national security by using social media to tarnish the government's reputation. The date on which the video of Somphone, Lodkham, and Soukan was taken is not known and the fate or whereabouts of the three remain unknown. The arrest of Lodkham, Somphone, and Soukan was due to their repeated criticism of the Lao government while they were working in Thailand. The three had posted numerous messages on Facebook that criticized the government in relation to alleged corruption, deforestation, and human rights violations. On 2 December 2015, Lodkham, Somphone, and Soukan were among a group of about 30 people who protested against their government in front of the Lao embassy in Bangkok. "It is extremely troubling that Lodkham, Somphone, and Soukan are likely to face years of imprisonment in Laos' terrifying jails because they told the truth about the appalling human rights situation and the lack of good governance in the country. Authorities must disclose their fate or whereabouts and immediately and unconditionally release them." Vanida Thephsouvanh, LMHR President Arbitrary detention of peaceful dissidents is not a new phenomenon in Laos' recent past. On 26 October 1999, police in Vientiane arrested five members of the Lao Students Movement for Democracy (LSMD), Thongpaseuth Keuakoun, Sengaloun Phengphanh, Bouavanh Chanhmanivong, Khamphouvieng Sisa-at, and Keochay, for planning peaceful demonstrations that called for democracy, social justice, and respect for human rights. All five were sentenced to 20 years in prison for "generating social turmoil and endangering national security." Two of them, Thongpaseuth and Sengaloun, remain in solitary confinement in Vientiane's Samkhe prison. Khamphouvieng died in Samkhe prison from food deprivation and prolonged heat exposure in September 2001. To this day, the fate or whereabouts of Bouavanh and Keochay remain unknown despite the Lao government's claim that authorities released Keochay upon completion of his prison term in 2002 and transferred him "to guardians to further educate him to become a good citizen." Also unknown are the fate or whereabouts of nine other activists - two women, Kingkeo and Somchit, and seven men, Soubinh, Souane, Sinpasong, Khamsone, Nou, Somkhit, and Sourigna - who were detained in November 2009 for planning to participate in pro-democracy demonstrations in Vientiane. Many of the above-referenced cases amount to enforced disappearance. Article 2 of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED) defines enforced disappearance as "the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person." Despite signing the ICPPED on 29 September 2008, Laos has not yet ratified the convention. FIDH and LMHR reiterate their call for the Lao government to conduct swift, thorough, and impartial investigations into all cases of enforced disappearances in the country and hold those responsible accountable. The two organizations also urge the Lao government to speed up the investigation into the enforced disappearance of prominent civil society leader Sombath Somphone, who was last seen at a police checkpoint on a busy street of Vientiane on the evening of 15 December 2012. On 23 June 2015, during its second Universal Periodic Review (UPR), Laos rejected all eight recommendations that called for investigations into all allegations of enforced disappearance in the country and dismissed such allegations as "not true." The government acknowledged Sombath's disappearance, but accepted only four of the 10 recommendations that called for an investigation into his disappearance. UPDATE: 21/7/2016 Three Lao citizens arrested in March for criticizing their government and ruling party via social media while working in Thailand are being held in a jail in the capital Vientiane, where they are denied family visits while waiting to be tried, sources said. Somphone Phimmasone, 29, his girlfriend Lod Thammavong, 30, and Soukane Chaithad, 32, disappeared after returning to Laos earlier this year to renew their passports, their family and friends told RFA's Lao Service in a previous report. Police acknowledged in May that the three had been taken into custody in Laos' Khammouane province and later transferred to Vientiane. They are now detained at the Phonethan jail in Vientiane's Sisatthanak district, Soukane's father told RFA's Lao Service. "They are being held there for sure, because we can bring food to them there, though we are not allowed to meet with them," Soukane's father said. "The police have told us that we will be able to see them sometime during the next few months after they have been tried and sentenced," he said. Reached by an RFA reporter for comment, Lt. Col. Phoumiphone Somsihapanya of the Ministry of Public Security's intelligence department refused to discuss the case. Media controls Lao journalists have been similarly discouraged from looking too closely into the matter, one local reporter told RFA. "In the case of the three detained workers, I once asked the police for an interview and they told me to send them a letter requesting permission," the reporter said. "But when I sent it to them, they never replied," he said. Media controls in Laos have meanwhile been tightened even more as talks get under way at the 49th ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Meeting, scheduled for July 21 through July 26 in Vientiane, one source working in the Lao media said. "We are being restricted in our reporting on the Foreign Ministers' Meeting, and all news must come from press releases issued by the press department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs," RFA's source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. "A few days ago, a ministry official accused one reporter from a Lao news agency of editing the content in a press release, and his report was taken off of their website," he said.

A court in Laos has sentenced a Polish activist to nearly five years in prison after he posted criticism of the Lao government online, according to state media, drawing criticism from a diplomatic official who said the defendant was never given access to an attorney. Bounthanh Khammavong-a 52-year-old Polish citizen of Lao heritage-was arrested in June and charged with "disseminating propaganda against the government with the intention of undermining the state" under Article 65 of the penal code after police found evidence connecting him to the Facebook posting during a search of his home in the capital Vientiane. On Sept. 18, the Vientiane Supreme Court found Bounthanh guilty and sentenced him to four years and nine months in jail, according to a report by the Ministry of Public Security, which was televised over the weekend. He had faced a maximum of five years in prison and a fine of between 500,000 and 10,000,000 kip (U.S. $60 and $1,225) if convicted. "Based on the investigation and evidence, Bounthanh has been found guilty ... of campaigning and carrying out activities against the regime of the Lao PDR," the report quoted Colonel Thonglek Mangnormek, deputy director general of the Ministry of Public Security Police Department, as saying. "[He has] also criticized the guidelines and policies of the party and government," Thonglek said. The report did not provide details of the message Bounthanh had posted. A diplomatic official based in Laos who is familiar with the case called the court "one-sided" in favoring with the prosecution against Bounthanh, who was unable to meet with his lawyer during the trial. "The prosecution and sentencing was unfair because he could not get access to legal assistance," said the official, who spoke to RFA's Lao Service on condition of anonymity. Officials at the Polish Embassy in Thailand's capital Bangkok refused to comment on Bounthanh's sentencing when contacted by RFA over the weekend, other than to say they have sent representatives to visit with him once a month in prison. A prominent democracy activist, Bounthanh was forced into exile from Laos and subsequently became a citizen of Poland, where he founded the Organization of Lao Students for Independence and Democracy. He relocated to Laos in 2010 to run a business dealing with foreign investment after receiving assurances from Lao officials that he would not face arrest on his return, and visited his wife in Poland twice a year, prior to being detained. Shirking rights recommendations Vanida Thephsouvanh, president of the Paris-based Lao Movement for Human Rights, told RFA that Bounthanh's sentencing was the latest example of how Vientiane had chosen to ignore recommendations from the United Nations during its latest Universal Periodic Review (UPR). "At the last adoption of its UPR in June 2015, the Lao PDR rejected several important recommendations on human rights, including media and internet freedom," she said. "Bounthanh's arrest is another proof that free expression has no place in the country." On June 23, Laos accepted only 116 of the 196 recommendations it received at its second UPR in January, with its U.N. representative Thongphane Savanhphet explaining that the remaining 80 "did not enjoy the full support" of the government. Other recommendations the Lao government rejected included calls for the greater protection of human rights defenders, removal of obstacles to the work of civil society organizations and nongovernmental organizations, and new safeguards against forced disappearances. "We can see that Lao citizens are claiming their space, but the government is responding with increasing repression," Vanida said. "Its repeated failure to implement basic international human rights standards clearly shows that the Lao PDR is absolutely not a credible candidate for the U.N. Human Rights Council ...[nor should it] host the ASEAN Civil Society Conference/ ASEAN People's Forum (ACSC/APF) in 2016," she added. In September last year, Lao Prime Minister Thongsing Thammavong signed Decree No. 327 into law, prohibiting online criticism of the government and the ruling communist party, and setting out stiff penalties for netizens and Internet service providers who violate controls. Under the decree, which took effect on Oct. 1, netizens face criminal charges for publishing "untrue information" about policies of the ruling Lao People's Revolutionary Party or the Lao government for the purpose of "undermining ... the country." In May, authorities arrested a woman after photos she took of alleged police extortion were posted to Facebook, while in June, a second woman was detained for posting a document to the website which purportedly showed a decision by a local official granting a controversial land concession to a developer, prompting online criticism.

Civil society organizations in Laos are under pressure to omit key concerns from a list of regional human rights issues to be raised on the sidelines of an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Malaysia this week and "fear for their safety" if they attempt to do so, a CSO official said Wednesday.The groups dare not raise the concerns during the April 21-24 ASEAN Peoples' Forum (APF)-intended to provide civil society with a platform to address ASEAN leaders-because they fear retribution for criticizing government policy, the CSO official told RFA's Lao Service."[The CSOs] will talk mostly about gender roles only, but not other issues such as land rights, the impact of hydropower dams ... and enforced disappearance, because they are afraid for their safety," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.The official said the majority of authentic CSOs in Laos "do not want to attend the forum," especially those which focus on human rights issues, but that the Lao Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of the Interior had persuaded other "irrelevant" organizations to go in their place.Lao activists told RFA last month that a retired Lao official serving as a proxy for the authoritarian government in the capital Vientiane had unsuccessfully lobbied the APF to erase the name of Sombath Somphone-a prominent civil rights leader who has been missing for more than two years-from its list of human rights and governance problems in Southeast Asia. However, a high-ranking official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has told RFA that the Lao government "never intervenes in or controls the work of CSOs" and only seeks to "facilitate and cooperate" with the groups.Sombath went missing on Dec. 15, 2012, when police stopped him in his vehicle at a checkpoint in the capital. He was then transferred to another vehicle, according to police surveillance video, and has not been heard from since. Rights groups suspect that Lao officials were involved in or aware of the abduction of Sombath, who received the 2005 Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership-Asia's equivalent of the Nobel Prize-for his work in the fields of education and development.Lao officials have yet to state a reason for his disappearance or make any progress in the case, which has become a major headache for the Vientiane government, drawing criticism from European and U.S. development partners and aid donors and attention from the United Nations. Upcoming chairmanship In 2016, Laos will assume chairmanship of the 10-member ASEAN coalition and will host the APF, but forum chairman Jerald Joseph told RFA the country's leadership must demonstrate a greater commitment towards improving human rights and progress on Sombath's case before it can earn the trust of CSO participants."We think that any chairmanship who is organizing the next summit must answer these questions and if they are not forthcoming with answers then it will really create doubt in many peoples' minds: "should we go to Laos or organize the APF in Laos?'," Joseph said. "I think it is up to the government of Laos to open up ... and have more disclosure on information about what really happened to Sombath, and then it can build confidence and people will feel ... it is safe to go in."Joseph said Lao CSOs are too closely influenced by the government in Vientiane and that ASEAN needs to do more to help them operate with greater freedom."NGOs (nongovernmental organizations) should have the confidence and empowerment to be more independent away from government. I feel in Laos it's not there yet. NGOs in Laos are not fit to be too critical of what's happening in the country," he said."So I think that's something that really needs to open up ... and I think governments must be comfortable with people who are critical of you or disagree with you ... this is something ASEAN should do for our countries."Joseph was adamant that the Lao government refrain from interfering in the APF process."They should allow local CSOs to decide if they will work with other NGOs from other ASEAN countries and decide as[groups representing] ASEAN countries what should be[discussed at] the APF," he said."The Lao government must learn from other governments how it is possible to respect civil society in organizing the events." Regional concerns Thida Khus, executive director of Cambodian NGO Silaka, expressed solidarity with civil society in Laos, noting that many of the issues raised in the first full day of the forum were problems shared by all ASEAN nations."The common problems among ASEAN countries are land concessions and human rights abuses," she said, adding that "Lao is suffering from similar issues to those in Cambodia."She said more than 70 NGOs from Cambodia were participating in the APF and that around 160 NGO officials from different ASEAN nations had raised different topics on Wednesday, including land grabs and evictions of residents, the destruction of natural resources, and the violation of indigenous and womens' rights.The officials also expressed concerns about plans to integrate the ASEAN economy by the end of 2015, adding that the scheme was likely to lead to more evictions in Cambodia as a result of land concessions."More villagers may become victims of land concessions because so far the government has given priority to the companies rather than the people," she said."We want the government to put a mechanism in place to resolve the villagers' problems."

On 18 June 2012, Mr Souvanh from Yeup village, Thateng District, Sekong Province and an active HRD working on land rights in his local community was arrested by the military. It is reported that he has been detained since his arrest at a provincial military jail, and that he has been given one meal per day and has not been allowed to meet his relatives and lawyer. Before their arrest, in the absence of progress on a solution, Souvanh and the seven human rights defenders had met with local authorities to demand better compensation for the villagers affected by the concession. They had also submitted a petition to the National Assembly, the Lao Front for National Reconstruction, and the Prime Minister's Office which responded by assigning provincial authorities to look into the dispute, although to this date, no action has been taken.

On 15 December 2012, prominent social activist Mr. Sombath Somphone was disappeared in Vientiane, Lao PDR. He left his office around 5pm. Sombath and his wife Ng Shui-Meng were driving back separately from the office to their home for dinner. Sombath's jeep was following Shui-Meng's car. Shortly after passing above-mentioned police post, Shui-Meng noticed in her rear-view mirror that she no longer had eyes on her husband but assumed that he simply fell behind another car. That was the last time Shui-Meng saw her husband. When Sombath did not arrive home at 6pm, Shui-Meng called his mobile phone repeatedly but was unable to reach him. Instead, an automated message indicated his mobile was switched off. Around midnight the family went looking for him on Thadeua Road thinking maybe he had gotten into an accident, looking for both signs of his vehicle and checked hospitals but without success. On the morning of 16 December 2012, Shui-Meng reported that Sombath was missing to the local village authorities and the Sisattanak district police. She then searched again for him in all of Vientiane's hospitals. On 17 December 2012, Sombath's sister-in-law, niece and nephew went to the Vientiane Municipality Police Station and asked to review the closed-circuit television (CCTV) footage taken on 15 December around 6pm, from the KM3 Thadeua Road location where Sombath was last seen. The video footage showed that at 6:03pm, Sombath's jeep was stopped by police at Km 3 Thadeua Road police post while he was on his way home. Sombath was then brought inside the police post. The video footage shows a man dressed in dark clothing arriving on a motorbike at the police post while Sombath was inside. The motorcyclist left his motorcycle by the roadside parked a few feet away nearby the police post and drove off with Sombath's jeep. Within a few minutes delay a beige/off white pick-up truck pulled up to the police post flashing hazard lights. A man wearing light colored top and dark pants stood in front of police post waiting for the vehicle. A few minutes later, Sombath is seen being directed into the vehicle, which then drove off with Sombath, the driver and at least two persons from the police post. Official response so far from government spokesperson is that he was possibly kidnapped because of personal conflicts or business conflicts. Mr. Sombath Somphone is considered a prominent civil society representative, dedicating his life to alternative education in the promotion of sustainable development and peace. He is an anti-poverty activist and founder and former director of the Participatory Development Training Centre (PADETC). PADETC works on poverty reduction and sustainability projects. As a result of his innovative work on poverty reduction and economic development, Mr. Sombath Somphone received the Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership, one of Asia's top civil honors, in 2005. Mr. Sombath Somphone has also been involved as a member of the organising committee of the 9th Asia-Europe People's Forum (AEPF9), an inter-regional forum of civil society and social movements across Asia and Europe organised in Vientiane in October 2012. 20/12/12- Joint Urgent Appeal sent to Laos by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders. 03/01/2013, 25/03/2013, 10/06/2013- Substantive responses by Lao government claiming that it is doing all within its power to locate Mr. Sombath.

On 7 December 2012, the Lao Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent a notice to Mrs. Gindroz, the Country Director of the Swiss development organization Helvetas Laos. The letter ordered her to leave the territory of Lao PDR within 48 hours. The notice states that "the Lao Government is dismayed by the improper behaviour of Mrs. Anne-Sophie Gindroz. Her unconstructive attitude towards the Lao PDR has become apparent and gone far beyond the acceptable norms and practices". She is also accused of "a prejudicial anti-Lao Government campaign." The notice refers to a personal letter sent by Mrs. Gindroz on 21 November 2012 to donor countries and organisations ahead of Round Table Implementation Meeting (RTIM), a mechanism that facilitates meaningful dialogue and constructive engagement between the Lao government and the development partners. In that letter, Mrs. Gindroz criticised the Lao government for its repression of civil society and for creating a difficult operating environment for Helvetas Laos and other development NGOs. Mrs. Gindroz arrived in Thailand on 9 December 2012. Lao authorities ordered Mrs. Gindroz to leave the territory of Lao PDR after she sent a personal letter on 21 November 2012 to the development partners of the Lao PDR ahead an annual meeting on aid to the country. This personal letter describes the restrictions and contradictions faced by civil society in Laos as a consequence of government policies. Mrs. Gindroz's expulsion is a clear reprisal following her personal letter in which she exercised her legitimate right to freedom of expression.