Pattaya Mail interviewed Ms. Sudarat Sereewat, Secretary General of the Coalition to Fight Against Child Exploitation (FACE).

Sudarat became involved with FACE through her work with another organisation, the commission to study Negative Effects of Tourism on Third World Countries. Her work with the commission began in 1987 and concerned all adverse effects which tourism brought to developing countries.

Don't ask why the child is doing this, don't ask about the parents, or what's wrong with the community and society. Ask what's wrong with people who come across the world to rape children.

The Negative Effects of Tourism on Third World Countries’ original members were Sri Lanka, Thailand and the Philippines. As her counterparts in Sri Lanka and the Philippines had other government responsibilities, she volunteered to do the bulk of the research.

After trips to India, the Philippines and Sri-Lanka, she found that child sex-tourism was a major problem. She also found that in Sri-Lanka, 90% of the sex-tourists or paedophiles were white Europeans.

In 1991, Sudarat, her husband Dr. Kosol, and Mr. Ron O’Grady set up ECPAT or End Child Prostitution in Asian Tourism.

PM: How did you plan to end child prostitution?

SS: We had three aims. The first was to raise awareness about the issue. This phenomenon was not widely known at that time and we constructed a campaign to make the international community know this was happening.

Our second aim was to raise awareness of the people in the serving countries. We wanted them to take a firm stand against this evil, which was often being ignored.

Our third goal was to induce the paedophiles’ countries of origin to prosecute offenders in their own countries - an ‘international law enforcement’ effort.

PM: Why do you think Asian countries were not doing more to stop this before?

SS: It was a question of attitudes, which are slow to change. Among one sector of society, the attitude in Thailand used to be that if boys were involved in sexual behaviour, there was really nothing wrong. They could not lose their ‘virginity’ and ‘boys will be boys.’ The law enforcement officers’ attitudes were rather similar. If boys were involved in prostitution, they were just ‘making extra money’ and the foreigners just ‘wanted sex.’ They didn’t give any thought to the psychological damage the children suffered.

The majority of society was shocked, though. They asked me "What is the world coming to? Selling young girls is bad enough, but young boys too?"

PM: Has the general attitude changed among law enforcement officers?

SS: Yes, it has. The judicial system began to see that abused children became abusers and procured children became procurers. The police realised that it was becoming a vicious cycle and began to give it a great deal of attention.

PM: There is still a considerable lack of faith in Thai police officers in other countries though.

SS: Unfortunately, there is justification of that lack of faith. There are still many dishonest police officers. It is very frustrating when I have to deal with these officers in my work as an advocate for children. Even though I officially work with the government, many officers are very evasive when I ask them details of cases. But many of the police officers are very honest.

PM: You said ECPAT campaigned to have foreign laws allow for cross border prosecution. Were you successful?

SS: Yes. Our first case was an Austrian physician who was caught in the Philippines. As the laws there did not have provisions for such cases, the Austrian government took up the case and he was prosecuted in his own country. After that, laws were enacted in Germany and then Australia. It was a victory for abused children.

PM: How did you continue?

SS: I contacted Interpol. At first, ECPAT did not want Interpol involved, as we were not a government organisation and Interpol is an international law enforcement agency. But the agency was very co-operative and sent 2 Swedish agents, a man and a woman. It was very encouraging.

The agents helped us arrest a Swedish paedophile in Pattaya in 1993. He was released on ‘bail’ of 150,000 baht. He then jumped bail and escaped the country. The Swedish government worked in co-ordination with us and he was brought to trial.

PM: How was he able to leave the country?

SS: At that time, and even now, the laws have weaknesses. There is no law prohibiting someone on bail from leaving the country. New immigration laws must be enacted to remedy this.

PM: Were there any other cases of paedophiles on ‘bail’ leaving the country?

SS: There was one which was given a lot of attention in the media. A Japanese paedophile was released on 50,000 baht bail. He left the country. When interviewed by the Japanese media, he announced that he had paid 50,000 baht bail and an additional 600,000 baht to police officers. This made dishonest officers realise that their actions were not secret and reflected badly on them and the country.

PM: What was the outcome of this?

SS: The Legal Mutual Assistance, which is a co-operative effort between prosecutors in different countries. Now, when there are inter-country arrests, the Thai police must provide all documentation done in Thailand to the prosecutors in the paedophile’s country of origin. This quickly exposed any law Thai law enforcement officer’s misdeeds.

The judicial system began to see that abused children became abusers and procured children became procurers. The police realised it was becoming a vicious cycle...

SS: It opened a lot of people’s eyes and new laws have been enacted. I still feel they are not tight enough, though.

PM: Any examples?

SS: There was the case of the Belgian paedophile arrested and released in July on 50,000 baht bail. He skipped the country and was caught in Belgium. The law enforcement official’s intentions are not always dishonest. Sometimes the existing laws work against them. We need more legislation. But we also need committed and trained people to do the needed work in stopping child abuse.

PM: What else do you hope will happen?

SS: We hope that more countries will change their laws so paedophiles will not be able to run to safety in other countries. We want people to understand that Thailand’s laws now specify that those abusing children or paying them for sex will be arrested.

PM: Many people use the excuse that children consent to sell sex.

SS: Remember, though, consenting or willing, sex with child is a crime. Most children whom I have talked with say they consented but were not truly ‘willing’ to do it.

PM: Why do you only talk about foreigners?

SS: I’m not saying that only tourists do this. Tourism is not the only factor. Child abuse happens in Thai families. But sexual abuse is different from children in commercial sex. Remember, my field is the negative aspects of tourism on third world countries. This is not the only negative aspect of tourism.

I’m not just talking about foreigners buying children. There are procurers, doctors, and others in Thailand who benefit from exploiting children in commercial sex. I’m not saying foreigners are more in number or more guilty than Thai people who sell them. What foreigners do is PAY MORE. This encourages procurers to approach and offer children to foreigners. There is even heavy competition between procurers in Thailand to provide better looking, younger and ‘newer’ children.

PM: Do you ever become frustrated?

SS: Sometimes, but I’m not fighting alone. All concerned government agencies are working on this problem.

PM: Do foreigners really pay that much?

SS: True paedophiles come to Thailand for one purpose and I have personally seen them pay $500 dollars for one sexual session with a child. That’s creating a market and encourages child abuse. The staggering amounts that paedophiles are willing to pay increases demand. We want to reduce demand.

PM: There are a lot of ‘sex tourists’ here.

SS: That is also a problem. It is also a matter between consenting adults. But paedophiles views cannot be changed. Those who engage in this activity must be prosecuted.

PM: If you could say one thing to people, what would it be?

SS: Yes. Don’t ask why the child is doing this, don’t ask about the parents, or what’s wrong with the community and society. Ask what’s wrong with people who come across the world to rape children.

Many times, the media comes and wants to talk to the child. They are willing to pay to have the child pulled out the foster home. They usually make offers to pay by the hour. The media wants to exploit the child in a different way than the paedophile. But any exploitation is traumatising. I wish the media would go to the paedophile and ask, "Why did you do this?"

PM: Thank-You.