Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06CHIANGMAI82
2006-06-01 05:22:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Consulate Chiang Mai
Cable title:
WALK-IN POLITICAL ASYLUM REQUEST FURTHER REVEALS LIMBO OF SHAN LEGAL STATUS IN THAILAND
how-toThis record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. 010522Z Jun 06
UNCLAS CHIANG MAI 000082
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREF ASEC TH BM
SUBJECT: WALK-IN POLITICAL ASYLUM REQUEST FURTHER REVEALS LIMBO OF SHAN LEGAL STATUS IN THAILAND
REF: CHIANG MAI 59
UNCLAS CHIANG MAI 000082
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREF ASEC TH BM
SUBJECT: WALK-IN POLITICAL ASYLUM REQUEST FURTHER REVEALS LIMBO OF SHAN LEGAL STATUS IN THAILAND
REF: CHIANG MAI 59
1. (SBU) SUMMARY. A Burmese national of Shan ethnicity attempted to apply for political asylum May 31 at Consulate General Chiang Mai during an interview for a non-immigrant visa. Based on post's finding that there was no proof of an imminent threat to the subject's safety, ConOff advised the subject to take other measures to ensure his wellbeing and subject departed the consulate. However, if the subject indeed faces threats to his and his family's security in Thailand, because of his Shan ethnicity he cannot appeal for help with the RTG or UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) offices in Thailand as would other refugee and asylum cases. End Summary.
2. (SBU) At approximately 10 am on May 31, ConOff interviewed
U Zau Sam HLAT (DPOB: January 25, 1937, Theinni, Burma),aka Hkun Sam DOUGLAS, who said he was the vice president of the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD)'s Interim Shan Government (ISG) and believed his life was in danger. Hlat had applied for a non-immigrant visa and indicated on his application and during the interview with ConOff that he wished to seek asylum in the United States.
3. (SBU) As the vice president of an organization that
declared independence on behalf of the Shan State, he is considered an outlaw by the Government of Burma and would face persecution should he return or be deported there, he said. In Chiang Mai, Hlat said he faced specific threats from a Burmese government operative who was threatening exiles in Thailand with physical harm and convincing police to deport undocumented Shan back to Burma. (COMMENT: Post confirms that Hlat is a fairly prominent member of the Shan exile community. However, titles such as "vice president" can mean little in the rapidly changing and overlapping quilt of Shan organizations. End Comment.)
4. (SBU) Hlat said the Burmese agent (an ethnic Sino-Burmese
he identified as Seng ZAW) previously threatened other ISG cabinet members and recently visited a temple in Chiang Mai, where he questioned a Shan monk on the whereabouts of Hlat and his family. Hlat said this same alleged GOB agent visited the homes of other Shan leaders in the Thai border town of Mae Sai with Thai police officers, with the intent of forcibly returning them to Burma. Hlat said those Shan leaders had been able to flee the scene before they could be detained. Hlat said he had not had any direct contact with a GOB agent or knew of the exact whereabouts of anyone making threats against him.
5. (SBU) Because the RTG does not give ethnic Shan official
refugee status (see reftel for explanation),Hlat and his family have lived illegally in Thailand for up to a year and fear that going to Thai authorities with their concerns will result in deportation to Burma, where they will face certain persecution.
Moreover, under an agreement between the UNHCR and RTG, UN officials cannot consult with or process Shan asylum requests in Thailand. ConOff confirmed this with the UNHCR's offices in northern Thailand following Hlat's request for asylum.
6. (SBU) After reviewing guidance and consulting with Embassy
Bangkok, post concluded that Hlat's concerns did not pose an imminent threat to his safety, and that while his allegations that GOB agents may be targeting him for deportation back to Burma could be real, it is a situation potentially faced by dozens or even hundreds of Shan organization members living in Thailand.
7. (SBU) ConOff denied Hlat's visa application under Section
214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, related the details of UNHCR's inability to formally offer him assistance, and advised him to seek alternate means to ensure his safety, such as through the many Shan organizations operating in and around Chiang Mai.
8. (SBU) COMMENT. Although Hlat's case did not constitute an
actionable asylum request, his situation further reveals the limbo in which Shan in Thailand exist. Under normal procedures, post would refer an asylum request to the UNHCR. However, if the UNHCR cannot process Shan asylum requests in Thailand, and Shan face legitimate risk of being deported to Burma should they go to Thai authorities, they must rely on local contacts (who may also face the same threats) or will likely seek to go directly to third countries for assistance. End comment.
MURPHY
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREF ASEC TH BM
SUBJECT: WALK-IN POLITICAL ASYLUM REQUEST FURTHER REVEALS LIMBO OF SHAN LEGAL STATUS IN THAILAND
REF: CHIANG MAI 59
1. (SBU) SUMMARY. A Burmese national of Shan ethnicity attempted to apply for political asylum May 31 at Consulate General Chiang Mai during an interview for a non-immigrant visa. Based on post's finding that there was no proof of an imminent threat to the subject's safety, ConOff advised the subject to take other measures to ensure his wellbeing and subject departed the consulate. However, if the subject indeed faces threats to his and his family's security in Thailand, because of his Shan ethnicity he cannot appeal for help with the RTG or UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) offices in Thailand as would other refugee and asylum cases. End Summary.
2. (SBU) At approximately 10 am on May 31, ConOff interviewed
U Zau Sam HLAT (DPOB: January 25, 1937, Theinni, Burma),aka Hkun Sam DOUGLAS, who said he was the vice president of the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD)'s Interim Shan Government (ISG) and believed his life was in danger. Hlat had applied for a non-immigrant visa and indicated on his application and during the interview with ConOff that he wished to seek asylum in the United States.
3. (SBU) As the vice president of an organization that
declared independence on behalf of the Shan State, he is considered an outlaw by the Government of Burma and would face persecution should he return or be deported there, he said. In Chiang Mai, Hlat said he faced specific threats from a Burmese government operative who was threatening exiles in Thailand with physical harm and convincing police to deport undocumented Shan back to Burma. (COMMENT: Post confirms that Hlat is a fairly prominent member of the Shan exile community. However, titles such as "vice president" can mean little in the rapidly changing and overlapping quilt of Shan organizations. End Comment.)
4. (SBU) Hlat said the Burmese agent (an ethnic Sino-Burmese
he identified as Seng ZAW) previously threatened other ISG cabinet members and recently visited a temple in Chiang Mai, where he questioned a Shan monk on the whereabouts of Hlat and his family. Hlat said this same alleged GOB agent visited the homes of other Shan leaders in the Thai border town of Mae Sai with Thai police officers, with the intent of forcibly returning them to Burma. Hlat said those Shan leaders had been able to flee the scene before they could be detained. Hlat said he had not had any direct contact with a GOB agent or knew of the exact whereabouts of anyone making threats against him.
5. (SBU) Because the RTG does not give ethnic Shan official
refugee status (see reftel for explanation),Hlat and his family have lived illegally in Thailand for up to a year and fear that going to Thai authorities with their concerns will result in deportation to Burma, where they will face certain persecution.
Moreover, under an agreement between the UNHCR and RTG, UN officials cannot consult with or process Shan asylum requests in Thailand. ConOff confirmed this with the UNHCR's offices in northern Thailand following Hlat's request for asylum.
6. (SBU) After reviewing guidance and consulting with Embassy
Bangkok, post concluded that Hlat's concerns did not pose an imminent threat to his safety, and that while his allegations that GOB agents may be targeting him for deportation back to Burma could be real, it is a situation potentially faced by dozens or even hundreds of Shan organization members living in Thailand.
7. (SBU) ConOff denied Hlat's visa application under Section
214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, related the details of UNHCR's inability to formally offer him assistance, and advised him to seek alternate means to ensure his safety, such as through the many Shan organizations operating in and around Chiang Mai.
8. (SBU) COMMENT. Although Hlat's case did not constitute an
actionable asylum request, his situation further reveals the limbo in which Shan in Thailand exist. Under normal procedures, post would refer an asylum request to the UNHCR. However, if the UNHCR cannot process Shan asylum requests in Thailand, and Shan face legitimate risk of being deported to Burma should they go to Thai authorities, they must rely on local contacts (who may also face the same threats) or will likely seek to go directly to third countries for assistance. End comment.
MURPHY