The Thai parliament has voted during the second reading of the Ethnic Way of Life bill not to include indigenous peoples in its definition of ethnic groups despite calls for the bill to ensure the protection of indigenous cultures.

Called “The Strengthening and Protection of Ethnic Way of Life” bill, it first went to parliament for a second reading on 25 September 2024. Parliament voted to have the committee withdraw the bill for revision following discussions about whether to include the term “indigenous people” in the bill.

While a majority of the drafting committee members voted not to include the term, a minority proposed that it be included in Section 3 of the bill so that the definition of ethnic groups would include those who “self-identify” as indigenous.

Apinan Thammasena, a researcher from the Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Centre (SAC), said that relevant civil society groups wanted indigenous peoples included in the bill to guarantee their rights under international law, particularly the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

During parliamentary discussion on 8 January, drafting committee member Chupinit Kesmanee explained that including indigenous people in the bill would mean that indigenous communities in Thailand will have access to the support available at the international level and will be able to participate in international discussions on indigenous rights.

Although Thailand is a signatory to the UNDRIP, Chupinit said that its terms were never incorporated into Thai laws. The 2017 Constitution states that the government should promote and protect different ethnic groups, but does not refer to “indigenous” people.

Sunee Chaiyarot, former national human rights commissioner and a member of the drafting committee, said that, although indigenous people are already included among ethnic minority groups, they need special support and protection. She noted that connecting with international law would not privilege indigenous groups but rather protected and prevent them from being culturally dominated or oppressed.

During the discussion, Ruam Thai Sang Chart MP Akkaradet Wongpitakroj argued that recognising indigenous people might lead to the southern provinces seceding from the country because the UNDRIP stipulates that indigenous people have the right to self-determination. He also denied that Thailand has indigenous people, saying that indigenous people are the original owners of land taken over by other groups, which never happened in Thailand.

In response, People’s Party MP Manop Keereepuwadol explained that Article 46 of the UNDRIP stipulated that the declaration could not be used to back separatist movements. He also insisted that there are indigenous peoples in Thailand - groups of people who lived here before the advent of the modern nation-state.

“We consist of many cultures that we call collectively Thai people,” he said. “Thai society is multi-cultural and has deep roots from several origins.”

Pheu Thai MP Chonlanan Srikaew argued that the term “indigenous people” could not be in a legislation because the Constitution only uses the term “ethnic groups” and would therefore need to be amended first.

Sunee disagreed, saying that the term “indigenous people” could still be used in other pieces of legislations while adding that, as a member of the UN Human Rights Council, Thailand should prove that it understands international framework and issue solid legislations.

Parliament voted 252 to 153, with 2 abstentions, to remove the term “indigenous people” from the bill. However, it did not vote on the third reading of the bill during the session. Discussion was suspended after some MPs objected to Section 27 of the bill, which states that some laws would not be enforced in an ethnic way of life protection area.

Under the bill, an ethnic way of life protection area could be declared to protect ethnic culture, conserve natural resources and environment, promote quality of life, and empower communities. Communities whose land  has been classified as a way of life protection area are required to work with relevant government agencies to develop a master plan in line with the community’s way of life so that they will be able to live and make use of the land without being subjected to some legislation relevant to that area.

The discussion was previously scheduled to resume on 15 January.  It was postponed again to 5 February, after Pheu Thai MP Chanin Rungtanakiat said that some MPs were concerned that parts of the bill would be unconstitutional.  He asked the committee to take some time to revise the bill to ensure that it can pass with ease and be readily enforced.