Dear editor,
The
Bangkok Post is right that a proposal from the Thailand Institute of Justice's (TIJ) Executive Director Kittipong Kittayarak should be promptly followed, however radical it might appear ("Unburden deathtrap jails", Bangkok Post, Editorial, April 1). The proposal to free several groups of prisoners crammed into Thailand's famously overcrowded system is measured. It is sensible and rational. It is informed. It is compassionate and humane. It is, in short, just.
People, even Thai citizens, continue to be human beings, to be persons, even when they are guilty of a crime, even when they have actually done something that justifies imprisonment. When a society locks people up to protect itself from harm by the offenders, which is the sole moral justification for any prison sentence, it has an obligation to care for those it has locked up. If it refuses to provide adequate care, then the incarceration becomes unjust. At the moment, the required social distancing cannot be maintained in Thai prisons, which means that the Thai prison system is even more an injustice system than it has traditionally been.
But the injustice in the Thai and many other traditional prison systems yet more grievously flouts good morals. To the suggested groups of prisoners whom the TIJ suggests be released, a further group needs to be added. Those who ought never have been imprisoned in the first place should also be released. Specifically, all who are truly guilty of nothing more than a victimless crime, which includes all drug crimes, gambling and similar personal vices that do not in themselves directly harm or threaten others. There has never been any justification for locking people up merely because they drink red wine or shoot heroin, because they sell Singha beer or deal
yaa baa, because they gamble or bet on dice with friends, or because freely consent to buying and selling adult sex. Victimless crimes are exactly that: victimless.
Yes, if someone has a track record of drinking and driving, that drug use combined with the driving harms or directly threatens to harm others so justifies imprisonment; but the mere drinking of a few whiskys after work does not justify incarceration or any other action by the state, however paralytic the drinker's drug use makes him or however much she heaves up her stomach in alcoholic bliss. Yes, if a gambling addict puts her children in peril that is a crime warranting prison, but not the mere gambling addiction. Yes, if a sex-buyer knowingly passes on a deadly disease, that is a crime deserving punishment, but not the mere buying or selling of sex by adults.
Yes, if someone deliberately breaches social distancing guidelines for no good reason, that is a crime that threatens others so might justly be punished. If, however, the persons involved in that violation were forced to do it by the official justice system, then the it is that prison system that is guilty of the crime committed against its victims.
Felix Qui
_______________________________
The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.