MONGABAY.COM
Mongabay.com seeks to raise interest in and appreciation of wild lands and wildlife, while examining the impact of emerging trends in climate, technology, economics, and finance on conservation and development (more)
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
|
|
Laos
Index
The criminal justice system, like every aspect of life
in Laos,
is controlled by the party and the government. There are
few legal
restraints on the often arbitrary actions--including
arrests--by
the government, and dissent is handled by suppressing
basic civil
rights. Although the constitution provides for the
freedoms of
worship, speech, and press, as of the mid-1990s, citizens
did not
feel free to exercise these rights fully. There are no
legal
safeguards, and people are frequently arrested on vague
charges.
Although a penal code and a constitution that guarantee
certain
civil liberties have been promulgated, implementation is
another
matter, particularly where freedom of political expression
is
concerned. And, the media are state-controlled
(see Mass Media
, ch.
4).
Nonetheless, there is a system for prosecuting criminal
behavior. Common crimes are evaluated at the local village
level.
More serious cases, especially politically sensitive ones,
are
referred to higher authorities. People's tribunals operate
at
district and provincial levels with judges appointed by
the
government.
Both Laotian journalists and Western officials are
critical of
the limitations on personal freedoms. In 1987 a Laotian
journalist
living in Thailand noted that there was little popular
support for
the government, but that most Laotians accepted its
authority
because they had little choice. In 1988 a Laotian
journalist
protested that open criticism of the government was
forbidden and
that, as a result, one of his friends was imprisoned after
he
complained about the continuing lack of a constitution. In
1988
Western diplomats reported that hundreds--perhaps
thousands--of
individuals were being held in dention centers around the
country
and that people still were being arrested and held for
months
without being charged.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the government
instituted
the New Economic Mechanism, a series of sweeping economic
reforms
geared toward establishing a market-oriented economy.
Along with
these economic reforms came a slight opening to the West,
which
provided some opportunity for scrutiny of human rights
violations.
However, few foreign journalists are allowed to visit
Laos, and
travel by diplomats and foreign aid workers is restricted.
Both
domestic and foreign travel by Laotians also is subject to
scrutiny
and restriction.
The Ministry of Interior is the main instrument of
state
control and guardianship over the criminal justice system.
Ministry
of Interior police monitor both Laotians and foreign
nationals who
live in Laos, and there is a system of informants in
workplace
committees and in residential areas. According to the
United States
Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights
Practices
for 1993, both the party and state monitor various
aspects of
family and social life through neighborhood and workplace
committees. These committees are responsible for
maintaining public
order and reporting "bad elements" to the police, as well
as
carrying out political training and disciplining
employees.
The criminal justice system is deficient in the area of
legal
precedent and representation. Trials are not held in
public,
although trial verdicts are publicly announced. Although
there is
some provision for appeal, it does not apply to important
political
cases. Under the constitution, judges and prosecutors are
supposed
to be independent and their decisions free from outside
scrutiny.
In practice, however, the courts appear to accept
recommendations
of other government agencies, especially the Ministry of
Interior,
in making their decisions. Theoretically, the government
provides
legal counsel to the accused. In practice, however,
defendants
represent themselves without outside counsel. The
government
suspended the bar in late 1992, pending new rules on the
activities
of private lawyers, thereby paving the way for private
lawyers to
practice in Laos. Meanwhile, persons accused of crimes
have to
defend themselves.
In 1992 the government launched a campaign to
disseminate the
new constitution, adopted by the National Assembly in
1991. The
leadership touted its efforts at developing a legal system
with a
codified body of laws and a penal code. By most Western
accounts,
however, as of mid-1994, there had been little, if any,
progress in
implementing the freedoms provided for in the
constitution.
Although the National Assembly had enacted a criminal code
and laws
establishing a judiciary in November 1989, as of mid-1994
these
codes still had not been implemented. Individuals are
still being
held without being informed of the charges or their
accusers'
identities.
Data as of July 1994
Civil Liberties and Human Rights
The criminal justice system, like every aspect of life
in Laos,
is controlled by the party and the government. There are
few legal
restraints on the often arbitrary actions--including
arrests--by
the government, and dissent is handled by suppressing
basic civil
rights. Although the constitution provides for the
freedoms of
worship, speech, and press, as of the mid-1990s, citizens
did not
feel free to exercise these rights fully. There are no
legal
safeguards, and people are frequently arrested on vague
charges.
Although a penal code and a constitution that guarantee
certain
civil liberties have been promulgated, implementation is
another
matter, particularly where freedom of political expression
is
concerned. And, the media are state-controlled
(see Mass Media
, ch.
4).
Nonetheless, there is a system for prosecuting criminal
behavior. Common crimes are evaluated at the local village
level.
More serious cases, especially politically sensitive ones,
are
referred to higher authorities. People's tribunals operate
at
district and provincial levels with judges appointed by
the
government.
Both Laotian journalists and Western officials are
critical of
the limitations on personal freedoms. In 1987 a Laotian
journalist
living in Thailand noted that there was little popular
support for
the government, but that most Laotians accepted its
authority
because they had little choice. In 1988 a Laotian
journalist
protested that open criticism of the government was
forbidden and
that, as a result, one of his friends was imprisoned after
he
complained about the continuing lack of a constitution. In
1988
Western diplomats reported that hundreds--perhaps
thousands--of
individuals were being held in dention centers around the
country
and that people still were being arrested and held for
months
without being charged.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the government
instituted
the New Economic Mechanism, a series of sweeping economic
reforms
geared toward establishing a market-oriented economy.
Along with
these economic reforms came a slight opening to the West,
which
provided some opportunity for scrutiny of human rights
violations.
However, few foreign journalists are allowed to visit
Laos, and
travel by diplomats and foreign aid workers is restricted.
Both
domestic and foreign travel by Laotians also is subject to
scrutiny
and restriction.
The Ministry of Interior is the main instrument of
state
control and guardianship over the criminal justice system.
Ministry
of Interior police monitor both Laotians and foreign
nationals who
live in Laos, and there is a system of informants in
workplace
committees and in residential areas. According to the
United States
Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights
Practices
for 1993, both the party and state monitor various
aspects of
family and social life through neighborhood and workplace
committees. These committees are responsible for
maintaining public
order and reporting "bad elements" to the police, as well
as
carrying out political training and disciplining
employees.
The criminal justice system is deficient in the area of
legal
precedent and representation. Trials are not held in
public,
although trial verdicts are publicly announced. Although
there is
some provision for appeal, it does not apply to important
political
cases. Under the constitution, judges and prosecutors are
supposed
to be independent and their decisions free from outside
scrutiny.
In practice, however, the courts appear to accept
recommendations
of other government agencies, especially the Ministry of
Interior,
in making their decisions. Theoretically, the government
provides
legal counsel to the accused. In practice, however,
defendants
represent themselves without outside counsel. The
government
suspended the bar in late 1992, pending new rules on the
activities
of private lawyers, thereby paving the way for private
lawyers to
practice in Laos. Meanwhile, persons accused of crimes
have to
defend themselves.
In 1992 the government launched a campaign to
disseminate the
new constitution, adopted by the National Assembly in
1991. The
leadership touted its efforts at developing a legal system
with a
codified body of laws and a penal code. By most Western
accounts,
however, as of mid-1994, there had been little, if any,
progress in
implementing the freedoms provided for in the
constitution.
Although the National Assembly had enacted a criminal code
and laws
establishing a judiciary in November 1989, as of mid-1994
these
codes still had not been implemented. Individuals are
still being
held without being informed of the charges or their
accusers'
identities.
Data as of July 1994
The criminal justice system, like every aspect of life
in Laos,
is controlled by the party and the government. There are
few legal
restraints on the often arbitrary actions--including
arrests--by
the government, and dissent is handled by suppressing
basic civil
rights. Although the constitution provides for the
freedoms of
worship, speech, and press, as of the mid-1990s, citizens
did not
feel free to exercise these rights fully. There are no
legal
safeguards, and people are frequently arrested on vague
charges.
Although a penal code and a constitution that guarantee
certain
civil liberties have been promulgated, implementation is
another
matter, particularly where freedom of political expression
is
concerned. And, the media are state-controlled
(see Mass Media
, ch.
4).
Nonetheless, there is a system for prosecuting criminal
behavior. Common crimes are evaluated at the local village
level.
More serious cases, especially politically sensitive ones,
are
referred to higher authorities. People's tribunals operate
at
district and provincial levels with judges appointed by
the
government.
Both Laotian journalists and Western officials are
critical of
the limitations on personal freedoms. In 1987 a Laotian
journalist
living in Thailand noted that there was little popular
support for
the government, but that most Laotians accepted its
authority
because they had little choice. In 1988 a Laotian
journalist
protested that open criticism of the government was
forbidden and
that, as a result, one of his friends was imprisoned after
he
complained about the continuing lack of a constitution. In
1988
Western diplomats reported that hundreds--perhaps
thousands--of
individuals were being held in dention centers around the
country
and that people still were being arrested and held for
months
without being charged.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the government
instituted
the New Economic Mechanism, a series of sweeping economic
reforms
geared toward establishing a market-oriented economy.
Along with
these economic reforms came a slight opening to the West,
which
provided some opportunity for scrutiny of human rights
violations.
However, few foreign journalists are allowed to visit
Laos, and
travel by diplomats and foreign aid workers is restricted.
Both
domestic and foreign travel by Laotians also is subject to
scrutiny
and restriction.
The Ministry of Interior is the main instrument of
state
control and guardianship over the criminal justice system.
Ministry
of Interior police monitor both Laotians and foreign
nationals who
live in Laos, and there is a system of informants in
workplace
committees and in residential areas. According to the
United States
Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights
Practices
for 1993, both the party and state monitor various
aspects of
family and social life through neighborhood and workplace
committees. These committees are responsible for
maintaining public
order and reporting "bad elements" to the police, as well
as
carrying out political training and disciplining
employees.
The criminal justice system is deficient in the area of
legal
precedent and representation. Trials are not held in
public,
although trial verdicts are publicly announced. Although
there is
some provision for appeal, it does not apply to important
political
cases. Under the constitution, judges and prosecutors are
supposed
to be independent and their decisions free from outside
scrutiny.
In practice, however, the courts appear to accept
recommendations
of other government agencies, especially the Ministry of
Interior,
in making their decisions. Theoretically, the government
provides
legal counsel to the accused. In practice, however,
defendants
represent themselves without outside counsel. The
government
suspended the bar in late 1992, pending new rules on the
activities
of private lawyers, thereby paving the way for private
lawyers to
practice in Laos. Meanwhile, persons accused of crimes
have to
defend themselves.
In 1992 the government launched a campaign to
disseminate the
new constitution, adopted by the National Assembly in
1991. The
leadership touted its efforts at developing a legal system
with a
codified body of laws and a penal code. By most Western
accounts,
however, as of mid-1994, there had been little, if any,
progress in
implementing the freedoms provided for in the
constitution.
Although the National Assembly had enacted a criminal code
and laws
establishing a judiciary in November 1989, as of mid-1994
these
codes still had not been implemented. Individuals are
still being
held without being informed of the charges or their
accusers'
identities.
Data as of July 1994
Civil Liberties and Human Rights
The criminal justice system, like every aspect of life
in Laos,
is controlled by the party and the government. There are
few legal
restraints on the often arbitrary actions--including
arrests--by
the government, and dissent is handled by suppressing
basic civil
rights. Although the constitution provides for the
freedoms of
worship, speech, and press, as of the mid-1990s, citizens
did not
feel free to exercise these rights fully. There are no
legal
safeguards, and people are frequently arrested on vague
charges.
Although a penal code and a constitution that guarantee
certain
civil liberties have been promulgated, implementation is
another
matter, particularly where freedom of political expression
is
concerned. And, the media are state-controlled
(see Mass Media
, ch.
4).
Nonetheless, there is a system for prosecuting criminal
behavior. Common crimes are evaluated at the local village
level.
More serious cases, especially politically sensitive ones,
are
referred to higher authorities. People's tribunals operate
at
district and provincial levels with judges appointed by
the
government.
Both Laotian journalists and Western officials are
critical of
the limitations on personal freedoms. In 1987 a Laotian
journalist
living in Thailand noted that there was little popular
support for
the government, but that most Laotians accepted its
authority
because they had little choice. In 1988 a Laotian
journalist
protested that open criticism of the government was
forbidden and
that, as a result, one of his friends was imprisoned after
he
complained about the continuing lack of a constitution. In
1988
Western diplomats reported that hundreds--perhaps
thousands--of
individuals were being held in dention centers around the
country
and that people still were being arrested and held for
months
without being charged.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the government
instituted
the New Economic Mechanism, a series of sweeping economic
reforms
geared toward establishing a market-oriented economy.
Along with
these economic reforms came a slight opening to the West,
which
provided some opportunity for scrutiny of human rights
violations.
However, few foreign journalists are allowed to visit
Laos, and
travel by diplomats and foreign aid workers is restricted.
Both
domestic and foreign travel by Laotians also is subject to
scrutiny
and restriction.
The Ministry of Interior is the main instrument of
state
control and guardianship over the criminal justice system.
Ministry
of Interior police monitor both Laotians and foreign
nationals who
live in Laos, and there is a system of informants in
workplace
committees and in residential areas. According to the
United States
Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights
Practices
for 1993, both the party and state monitor various
aspects of
family and social life through neighborhood and workplace
committees. These committees are responsible for
maintaining public
order and reporting "bad elements" to the police, as well
as
carrying out political training and disciplining
employees.
The criminal justice system is deficient in the area of
legal
precedent and representation. Trials are not held in
public,
although trial verdicts are publicly announced. Although
there is
some provision for appeal, it does not apply to important
political
cases. Under the constitution, judges and prosecutors are
supposed
to be independent and their decisions free from outside
scrutiny.
In practice, however, the courts appear to accept
recommendations
of other government agencies, especially the Ministry of
Interior,
in making their decisions. Theoretically, the government
provides
legal counsel to the accused. In practice, however,
defendants
represent themselves without outside counsel. The
government
suspended the bar in late 1992, pending new rules on the
activities
of private lawyers, thereby paving the way for private
lawyers to
practice in Laos. Meanwhile, persons accused of crimes
have to
defend themselves.
In 1992 the government launched a campaign to
disseminate the
new constitution, adopted by the National Assembly in
1991. The
leadership touted its efforts at developing a legal system
with a
codified body of laws and a penal code. By most Western
accounts,
however, as of mid-1994, there had been little, if any,
progress in
implementing the freedoms provided for in the
constitution.
Although the National Assembly had enacted a criminal code
and laws
establishing a judiciary in November 1989, as of mid-1994
these
codes still had not been implemented. Individuals are
still being
held without being informed of the charges or their
accusers'
identities.
Data as of July 1994
|
|