PART TWO: CONTENT OF COMPREHENSIVE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW COMPENSATION IN THAILAND: THE ROLE OF THE COMMITTEE ON CONSIDERATION OF UNFAIR GENDER DISCRIMINATION PART TWO – II In Thailand, the Committee on Consideration of Unfair Gender Discrimination (WorLorPor Committee) has powers to establish temporary measures for protection or mitigation, issue orders and submit complaints to the Ombudsman, among other powers. Remedies include compensation, paid in cash or in kind, for “loss of income during the period of inability to work” or for “loss of commercial opportunity”; compensation “for expenses on medical care including physical and mental rehabilitation”; and “compensation and remedy in other forms or characteristics”.606 Beyond appropriate compensation for both financial loss and other harms, effective remedy for discrimination requires restitution – measures designed to “restore the victim to the original situation”.607 Such measures would include reinstatement to a job or other position, or provision of a good or service denied as a result of discrimination, for example. The Human Rights Committee608 and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights609 have both noted that reparation entails obligations of restitution and rehabilitation. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has recognized a similar obligation, noting in L.R. et al. v. Slovak Republic, for example, that effective remedy under article 6 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination requires that the State “take measures to ensure that the petitioners are placed in the same position that they were in” prior to a discriminatory decision by the local authorities.610 The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has noted that the relevant Convention creates obligations of “restitution, rehabilitation and reinstatement”.611 These elements of reparation should be guided by an overarching victim-centred approach. Generally, Thomas Antkowiak notes that a victim-centred approach is critical to ensure that reparation measures are adjusted to the specific needs, concerns and rights of victims of human rights violations.612 Victim-centred reparation measures have a greater potential to allow for recovery and healing at the individual and community levels, in line with the restorative justice model.613 In addition, it is essential that reparations are equality sensitive, reflecting the specific situation of those exposed to discrimination and involving victims in the determination of what would be appropriate remedy. D. Institutional and societal remedies In addition to the application of effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanction for perpetrators and the provision of adequate and appropriate reparation for the individual victim of discrimination, effective remedy may require measures that address the wider social and institutional impacts of discrimination. Such remedies – described as “forward-looking” or transformative by some authors – “indicate commitment to tackling the pervasive effects of discrimination”.614 The Human Rights Committee has noted that reparation under article 2  (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights includes “measures of satisfaction, such as public apologies, public memorials, guarantees of non-repetition and changes in relevant laws and practices”, noting further that “the purposes of the Covenant would be defeated without an obligation … to take measures to prevent a recurrence of a violation”.615 The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has noted that effective remedy for 606 Gender Equality Act, B.E. 2558 (2015), sect. 26. 607 Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, para. 19. 608 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004), para. 16. 609 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 20 (2009), para. 40. 610 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, L.R. et al. v. Slovak Republic (CERD/C/66/D/31/2003), para. 12. 611 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, general recommendation No. 28 (2010), para. 32. 612 See, for example, Thomas M. Antkowiak, “An emerging mandate for international courts”. 613 Shelton, Remedies in International Human Rights Law, chap. I, especially pp. 22–27. 614 Iordache and Ionescu, “Discrimination and its sanctions”, pp. 18–19. 615 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004), paras. 16–17. 81