On May 29, social critic Sulak Sivaraksa sent a letter to the HM the King’s Principal Private Secretary, asking him to look into the case of nominated human rights commissioner Parinya Sirisarakarn, owner of a salt mining business in Nakhon Ratchasima which has been the subject of complaints about its impact on the livelihoods of local communities.

Sulak quotes in the letter a resolution of the previous National Human Rights Commission that says, ‘Parinya Sirisarakarn is associated with human rights violations, which are so evident that the Department of Primary Industries and Mines, Ministry of Industry, has ordered the shutdown of a salt mining factory, and compensation for damages to be paid to communities.’

This Parinya’s unethical record is explicitly in breach of the constitution and the National Human Rights Commission Act, the letter says.

Sulak asks whether it is appropriate to ask HM the King to appoint this person on the advice of the Senate, and what responsibility the Senate Speaker, who countersigns the appointment, will take, if, after receiving the royal signature, citizens, Members of Parliament or Senators ask the Senate to impeach Parinya on the basis of his violations of human rights?

Sulak expresses his concern about the consequences that might arise if no attempt is made to examine the attributes of Parinya as to whether he is qualified for a royal appointment. And if the unethical behaviour of Parinya is verified as stated by the complainants and concluded by the National Human Rights Commission, Sulak is afraid that the appointment may cause vexation to HM the King, and opportunists might exploit this issue to do harm to the institution.