Muslim people in Thailand have condemned the Thai junta government for deporting Uighur refugees to China, pointing out that it is a violation of international law.

On Friday, 10 July 2015, a group of Muslim people in Thailand issued a statement condemning the Thai junta’s forced deportation of Uighurs, a Turkic Muslim minority from western China, back to their supposed country of origin.

The statement was signed by Zakariya Amataya, a well-known Muslim poet in Thailand and Ekkarin Tuansiri, a political science lecturer at Prince of Songkhla University.

According to the statement, the deportation of Uighur refugees back to China violates international standards on the treatment of refugees and the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT), because the refugees who were sent back are at risk of torture or ill-treatment in China.

The statement added that the group did not agree with violent actions of protesters in Turkey who destroyed the Thai Consulate in Ankara.

The group urged the junta to apologise and comply with international law by letting other Uighur refugees stay in the country before being sent to a third country of their choice.  

The authorities must be held responsible for the well-being of the deported Uighurs, the statement added.

The statement concluded that the authoritarian rule of the Thai junta, which suppresses freedoms and rights, cannot provide transparent solutions to refugee problems, such as the Rohingyas and Uighurs.   

On Thursday, 9 July 2015, Uighur supporters who were angered over the Thai junta’s deportation of nearly 100 Uighurs back to China stormed the Thai Consulate in Ankara, Turkey. Some of the protesters smashed windows and destroyed property.

International and foreign organisations such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the US, have condemned the deportation.

Although Thailand has signed the 1951 Refugee Convention, it has not ratified it, which according to successive Thai governments, means that it has no obligation to observe its provisions.