Despite denials, Thailand's online surveillance plans are alive and well
Originally published at Siam Voices on October 22, 2015 "We will not talk about this any more. If we say we won't do it, we won't do it," said Thai Deputy Prime Minister Somkid Jatusripitak at an economic forum in Bangkok last week. His decisive words were in response to the ongoing controversy over the Thai military government’s plans to introduce an online single gateway.
Last month, Thai internet users discovered a cabinet resolution surveying the implementation of a single online gateway ”to be used as a device to control inappropriate websites and flow of news and information from overseas through the internet system.” Subsequent resolutions ordered the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) and related agencies to speed up their preliminary work.
If realized, Thailand’s internet traffic would be bottlenecked through a single gateway, making it possible for officials to filter and block undesirable content. This is in line with the military junta’s ongoing efforts to monitor and censor dissenting voices, both in real life and online, ever since it launched a military coup in May 2014.
Amidst widespread criticism and a coordinated mass-click-and-refresh bombardment that briefly knocked several government websites offline, Thai officials were scrambling to calm public opinion, only then to contradict themselves justifying why the junta wants to have a single gateway in the first place. The explanations varied from economic reasons, cybersecurity concerns and ultimately ending at Thai junta leader and Prime Minister General Prayuth Chan-ocha being initially ”worried” about the ”youth addiction to online games and access to inappropriate media”.
A week later, the government was hoping that the debate had died down. However, despite repeated statements insisting that it won’t pursue the single gateway plan anymore, not everyone is convinced by their declaration. And it seems there is more trouble coming the junta’s way:
Online activists have announced they will launch attacks against the government beginning Thursday after the prime minister said the project to route all internet traffic through a single point of control is still alive.
The coalition of anonymous internet users known as Citizens Against Single Gateway last night warned private sector operations with IT systems linked to government servers to transfer them to safe places before the assault on government systems begins at 10am on Thursday.
Those behind a crippling attack earlier this month, the Thailand F5 Cyber Army, issued the announcement yesterday after Prime Minister and junta chairman Prayuth Chan-ocha said agencies are still studying the project (…).
”First Chapter of ‘Cyber War’ to Begin Thursday”, Khaosod English, October 21, 2015
The little detail that the government is "still studying" the single gateway plan is enough reason for opponents to distrust the Thai military government. But there are several more signs that justifies the continuous skepticism by many online users.
CAT TELECOM has announced that it will proceed with the plan to build a national Internet gateway, which it claims would help make Thailand a digital hub in Asean.
The aim of the project is not to control the flow of information into the country over the Internet as some fear, said CAT acting chief executive officer Colonel Sanpachai Huvanandana. He said a working committee for the project would be set up. Whether that committee is under the Information and Communications Technology Ministry or under the Digital Economy Committee is up to the ICT minister.
The national Internet gateway is one of two priorities for making Thailand a digital hub for the region by expanding capacity and reducing costs. The other is to have large content providers such as Facebook, Google and YouTube establish servers in Thailand.
”Net gateway for digital hub”, The Nation, October 21, 2015
The other part of the plan to have internet tech giants like Google and Facebook setting up shop in Thailand (the latter already did) seems ambitious to say the least, given a potentially significant infrastructural disadvantage and previous persistent, but unsuccessful attempts by the military government seeking cooperation of these companies to censor posts deemed insulting to the monarchy and also identify their authors.
At the same time it is being reported that General Thaweep Netrniyom, the secretary-general of the Office of the National Security Council (NSC), could be appointed the head of the aforementioned CAT Telecom. It would be the first time that somebody from the NSC would take up that position at the state-owned telecommunication company and unsurprisingly his focus is expected be on cyber security - just as CAT’s current CEO (a Colonel nonetheless) announced they are still not giving up on the single online gateway.
However, as mentioned before, that is not the only measure by the military junta to control the flow of online information in Thailand. It already has blocked more than 200 websites deemed a threat to national security (source), ordered internet providers to censor on sight, reportedly also procured software to intercept encrypted SSL-connections and additional hacking and surveillance software, it is also in process of passing its so-called cyber laws, a set of bills aimed officially at “preparing Thailand for the digital economy”. But it also includes passages that enables widespread online surveillance, prosecution against intermediaries (e.g. website owners) and more legal uncertainty, benefitting the state more than Thai online users.
Most recently, Defense Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan announced on Tuesday the creation of a new ”Army Cyber Center” specifically to ”protect” the Thai monarchy and to ”keep track of information on media and social media and to sort them out systematically,” essentially underlining their priorities. In August this year, two people were sentenced to a record 28 and 30 years in prison respectively for allegedly posting Facebook messages deemed insulting to the monarchy.
Thai military courts hand down record prison sentences for insulting monarchy
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 7, 2015
Thailand's military courts have issued record prison sentences - 30 years and 28 years - against suspects for allegedly defaming the country's monarchy on Facebook. Two separate verdicts have found the accused guilty of posting content on Facebook that is deemed a violation of the country's infamously draconian lèse majesté law, also known as Article 112 of the Criminal Code, that states “whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years.”
The first sentence was delivered Friday morning in the Thai capital Bangkok:
On Friday morning, 7 August 2015, the Military Court of Bangkok sentenced Pongsak S., a suspect of offences under Article 112 or the lese majeste law and Article 14 of the Computer Crime Act (importing of illegal content into a computer system), to 60 years imprisonment.
The court gave 10 years prison term to each of the six lese majeste counts he was charged with. Since the suspect pleaded guilty as charged, the court, however, halved the sentence to 30 years in jail.
Pongsak used Facebook under the name “Sam Parr” to distribute messages and images defaming the monarchy, which he copied from other sources. At the press conference in January 2015, he pleaded guilty to all charges and said he did so because he was instigated by some Facebook friends. He also said that he went to anti-establishment red-shirt demonstrations.
He told Prachatai that he was tricked into meeting a decoy who had been talking to him via facebook under name ‘Numbannok Rak Seri’ (a free country boy) in the northern province of Tak and was arrested on 30 December 2014 at the bus transit in Phitsanulok Province.
“It turned out when I met the guy at the military base later that he was an officer out of uniform,” said Phongsak.
"Military court sets new record on lese majeste sentence; man gets 30 years behind bars", Prachatai English, August 7, 2015
Hours later on the same day, another military court in the northern city of Chiang Mai sentenced a woman to prison:
According to Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), the military court of the northern province of Chiang Mai on Friday afternoon, 7 August 2015, sentenced Sasiwimol (surname withheld due to privacy concerns), a 29-year-old employee of a hotel in the province, to 56 years in jail for allegedly posting six lese majeste messages under the Facebook identity ‘Rungnapha Kampichai’.
The military court gave 8 years jail term to each of the 7 lese majeste counts of the suspect. However, since the defendant pleaded guilty as charged, the court halved the jail term to 28 years.
At the deposition hearing in June 2015, the defendant denied all allegations. However, during the plaintiff’s examination hearing today, 7 August 2015, she retracted her pretrial statements and pleaded guilty.
Prior to the ruling, Sasiwimol submitted a letter to the court, requesting the judges to reduce the jail sentence because she has never committed any crime and is a mother of two daughters aged seven and five. The military court judges dismissed the request and reasoned that the jail sentence is already light since case is severe because it is related to the revered Thai monarchy and gravely affected public sentiment of Thai people.
"Northern military court sends mother of two to 28 years in prison under lese majeste", Prachatai English, August 7, 2015
Both cases have set an unprecedented record for long prison sentences, since the court issued the punishment per offense that was deemed not only a violation of the lèse majesté law, but also to the Computer Crimes Act. In other words, the accused were punished twice for allegedly violating two vaguely worded laws and also accumulated a long prison term because the courts counted each Facebook post as separate offense. Both defendants have pleaded guilty not only to halve their sentences (the fact that they were still unprecedentedly long is telling) but also to keep the possibility of a royal pardon open.
Lèse majesté-related complaints have sky-rocketed in the past decade (regardless of who was in power) thanks to self-proclaimed ultra-nationalist vigilantes as more verdicts have shown increasingly looser interpretations of the law, rendering a reasonable debate or even a possible amendment of the law impossible. To make matters worse, ever since Thailand's military - which sees itself as the defender of the Thai monarchy - took power in the coup of May 22, 2014, it has transferred jurisdiction of lèse majesté cases to military courts. Unsurprisingly, the number of cases have piled up under the junta.
The Thai military government is fighting against lèse majesté suspects at multiple fronts: evidently, social media is under increased surveillance and Facebook itself reported a sharp increase of blocked content in the second half of 2014, while it also states that Thai authorities have requested information of certain Facebook users three times.
Furthermore, the junta is hunting a number activists charged with lèse majesté that have fled abroad, often resulting in diplomatic spats, and other repeated requests to countries that have granted asylum to the prosecuted suspects.
No laughing matter: Thai junta leader's renewed threat to media
Originally published at Siam Voices on March 26, 2015 Thai junta leader General Prayuth Chan-ocha this week warned that he has power to 'execute' critical reporters. Maybe this time he wasn't joking, writes Saksith Saiyasombut
THE allegations against the four men are severe: they are accused of being in connection to an alleged ”terrorism network” plotting to launch bomb attacks in Bangkok. A blast on March 7 at the Criminal Court (where no one was injured) is being pinned on them. They were held in military barracks for almost a week without charges, in accordance with martial law that is still in force since the military coup almost a year ago.
During the detention these four men were also allegedly tortured into making false confessions, according to human rights lawyers. One suspect said he was punched, kicked and even electrocuted ”30-40 times” by soldiers during interrogations.
Unsurprisingly, the Thai military disputes these allegations as a ”distortion of facts” and army chief General Udomdej Sitabutr has threatened legal action after the accusations.
That is in essence an example of how Thailand’s military junta deals with accusations and criticism leveled against them: denial and rejection - so far, so common. But that also comes with a heavy dose of self-righteous zeal to claim the ultimate sovereignty over what they constitute as the truth.
And no one defends this "truth" more vigorously than Gen. Udomdej’s army chief predecessor: General Prayuth Chan-ocha, current military junta leader and also prime minister.
Even the most casual Thai political observer is aware of Gen. Prayuth’s frequent contentious exchanges, especially with the press, in which he is at best sardonic and at worst goes on a tirades mostly ending with threats - and coming from a military man in charge of a government with wide-reaching powers, and with no one seemingly stopping him, this makes it very problematic, to say the least.
Case in point, from earlier this week:
"Our country has seen so much trouble because we have had too much democracy, unlike other countries where the government has more power to restrict freedoms," Gen. Prayuth (…) told investors and businessmen at a conference in Bangkok today. "Even the media can’t criticize [those leaders], like they do here. I insist that today, we are 99 percent democratic, because I didn't overthrow democracy at all."
Gen. Prayuth continued, "I can’t even stop people from opposing me at this moment. If I genuinely had complete power, I would have imprisoned [critics] or handed them to a firing squad. It would be over, I wouldn't have to wake up at night like this. Today there are some people who love me, but there are also many people who hate me. But please know that I am not doing this for myself. I am here to work for the country."
”Junta Leader Blames Thai Crisis on 'Too Much Democracy’”, Khaosod English, March 23, 2015
It gets even worse later this week, when Gen. Prayuth had yet another episode in which he scolded reporters for a particularly (from his perspective) annoying question that quickly escalated into a rant accusing everyone not thankful enough for the "freedoms" he permits to criticize him and the junta. But then it deteriorated even more after reporters asked what would happened to media outlets stepping out of line, to which he said this:
"We'll probably just execute them," said Prayuth, without a trace of a smile, when asked by reporters how the government would deal with those that do not adhere to the official line.
"You don't have to support the government, but you should report the truth," the former army chief said, telling reporters to write in a way that bolsters national reconciliation in the kingdom.
”Thai PM Prayuth warns media, says has power to execute reporters”, Reuters, March 25, 2015
He went on to target specific outlets like Matichon by literally pointing at copies of their newspapers and lambasting their coverage (which you can read here in a transcript of the whole tirade by Khaosod English that is - for a lack of a better word - just amazingly mind-boggling).
If there’s still any doubt about what kind of man and what kind of mentality we are dealing with here, then there’s your answer! This is a man ruling a regime under which dissent is outlawed and the media is under constant surveillance.
In an ironically tone-deaf incident, earlier on the same day, Gen. Prayuth he blasted Channel 3 journalist Thapanee Ietsrichai for her investigative report into the inhumane slave-like conditions on Thai fishing boats (coinciding with a similar investigation by the Associated Press following similar reports by The Guardian and Global Post in recent years) for the damaging the country’s reputation and summoned to explain herself to the authorities.
As amusing (and admittedly cathartic) as it is to laugh and ridicule the general’s verbal outbursts and this junta’s ineptitude to deal with criticism (as we have extensively chronicled it), it’s no laughing matter and perhaps we should stop treating it as such.
Maybe we should stop portraying Prayuth’s outbursts as amusing one-note anecdotes about somebody’s public anger issues, but rather as the dangerously misguided delusions of somebody who knows no other way to exert power than by abusive force - and more worryingly, is in a situation and position powerful enough to actually do it.
Gen. Prayuth’s mere mention of considering the use of execution against critical journalists - twice, no less! - crosses yet another line after so many other lines have been already crossed. Maybe it is time for others to take Thailand’s plight under the military junta more seriously.
ThaiMiniCult's newest puritan crusade targets underboob selfies
Originally published at Siam Voices on March 19, 2015
Thailand's overzealous cultural watchdogs made international headlines again this week, and as usual for entirely the wrong reasons. This time, they have targeted yet another apparent online phenomenon:
Thailand's military government warned women on Monday against posting 'selfie' photos of the lower half of their breasts - a social media trend that has gone viral - saying their actions could violate the country's computer crime laws.
Thailand's 2007 Computer Crimes Act bans any material that causes "damage to the country's security or causes public panic" or "any obscene computer data which is accessible to the public".
The culture ministry said offenders faced up to five years in jail, but did not say how they would identify the culprits.
"When people take these 'underboob selfies' no one can see their faces," ministry spokesman Anandha Chouchoti told Reuters. "So it's like, we don't know who these belong to, and it encourages others to do the same.
"We can only warn people to not take it up. They are inappropriate actions."
"Thais warned against taking 'underboss selfies'", Reuters, March 16, 2015
Yes, (regular readers know what's coming next) the self-proclaimed cultural heralds of everything "Thainess" we usually call ThaiMiniCult are once again setting out on their puritan crusade again to safeguard sanctimonious sanctity of what's appropriate and what's not.
And even though there's no concrete evidence that the "underboob" selfies have gotten ahold in the Thai online community, as Yupa Taweewattanakijbaworn admitted to Thai Rath, the director of the ThaiMiniCult's Culture Surveillance Center nevertheless insisted almost step-motherly that, "Thai culture [as a whole] doesn't approve public display of scantily clothed [people] anyways."
Predictably, this (non-)incident was picked up by the international media rather quickly (and due to the fact that an international news agency like Reuters actually wrote about it), further making a mockery of the ruling authoritarian military junta, which has already a tough time to promote itself and its "values" - let alone to foreigners. However, this open vigor by the ThaiMiniCult is not a new occurrence and popped up even before the current military government.
As previously with Buddhist tattoos on foreign skins, mediocre foreign TV-sketches, and whatever that short-lived 'planking'-meme was, Thai authorities - and especially their colleagues at the Ministry of Culture - always see the need to combat these with a threat to use the law to their fullest possible punishment. It doesn't make it any better when the law they are citing to clamp down possible offenders with - when these acts of perceived cultural indecencies are made online (and, much to the apparent annoyance of the Thai authorities, anonymously) - is the Computer Crimes Act, which we've lambasted in its current and very likely future form.
Also, long-time Siam Voices readers will have noticed by now, most episodes of ThaiMiniCult's outrage involve the public display of female breasts one way or the other. The most infamous case goes back as far as 2011 when the then-Culture Minister called for a public witch hunt after an online video emerged showing women dancing topless in the streets during the Songkran new year holidays - only then to find out the women were underaged.
Back then, author and Siam Voices contributor "Kaewmala" said in an interview with this author that Thai society "needs to get real" with sexuality and stop hiding behind a "taboo only when it’s inconvenient or causes embarrassment." In a later article on this blog, she said that the Thai cultural heralds have pathological "mammophobia". The underlying theme of sexual hypocrisy in Thailand was also picked up by Siam Voices contributor Thitipol Panyalimpanun, who recently wrote that "Thailand put itself into this struggle by positioning itself as noble society."
It is this holier-than-thou-attitude by the self-proclaimed Thai cultural heralds that leaves easily mockable, mostly because of their overzealousness in protecting whatever their one solid vision of "Thainess" entails, but also their argumentative inconsistency. In an online post that mercilessly mocks this brouhaha, while the ThaiMiniCult has an apparent problem with "underboob" selfies, it hasn't gawked at Thai magazine and newspaper covers featuring otherwise barely covered female breasts - and never mind that infamous banner (see above) the ThaiMiniCult itself had on their website in 2011...
Thailand’s new cyber laws – Part 5: Admin error
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 26, 2015
In the last part of our Siam Voices series examining the new cyber laws, we chronicle the criticism against and the defense for the controversial bills - and what’s behind the military junta’s motivation to push these into law.
In the past two weeks we have analyzed the cyber law bills for its potential impact on policies, censorship and also business. More often than not we found that the flaws outweigh the benefits and, if signed into law without large-scale amendments will have very serious implications of the civil liberties, free speech, personal privacy and even e-commerce of every Thai internet user - except for those in charge of the law.
So it is no wonder why there has been a significant amount of criticism against the cyber bills. Here’s just a small selection:
"Proposed cyber-security legislation in Thailand represents a clear and present danger to media freedoms," said Shawn Crispin, CPJ's senior Southeast Asia representative. "If Prime Minister Prayuth is sincere about returning the country to democracy, he should see that Parliament scraps this bill, which is reminiscent of a police state, and instead enact laws that uphold online freedoms."
”Cyber security bill threatens media freedom in Thailand”, Committee to Protect Journalists, January 20, 2015
"The consumers will feel that they are being watched when they go online,” said Arthit Suriyawongkul, an expert on cyber and computer law from the Thai Netizen Network. (…)
“They'll feel unsure about sharing their private information fearing that officials could abuse their privacy,” Mr Arthit said. “If consumers are not confident then online businesses will suffer."
"Fears over Thailand's online freedom, as junta drives towards digital economy”, Channel NewsAsia, January 29, 2015
Six civil organizations [Thai Netizen Network, FTA Watch, Foundation for Community Education Media (FCEM), Green World Foundation, People’s Media Development Institute, and Thailand Association for the Blind (TAB)] denounced the eight Digital Economy bills recently approved by the junta, saying they are national security bills in disguise and that the bill will pave the way for a state monopoly of the telecommunication business.
"Thai junta’s Digital Economy bills are national security bills in disguise: rights groups”, Prachatai English, January 14, 2015
Also, almost 22,000 people have signed an online-petition against the bills, calling for them to be stopped.
At the moment the right cyber bills are in the military junta’s all-appointed ersatz-parliament, the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) - dominated by active and former military officers - and are awaiting deliberation. It is not expected that the rubber-stamping body will be making any fundamental changes to the drafts.
Nevertheless, the military government’s response to the criticism is - like with any other criticism out there - aggravated and irritated. Prime Minister General Prayuth Chan-ocha responded in his usual style:
“We will develop software for goods and services. If there is private [online] content, no one would mess with it. But if [some people] commit crimes [such as lèse majesté], we have to investigate the matter. The accusation that the government is not taking care of Article 112 [of the Criminal Code, known as the lèse majesté law] is because those lèse majesté websites operate from overseas.
"Junta leader admits controversial digital economy bills target lèse majesté”, Prachatai English, January 22, 2015
And when pressed by another reporter…
"Today, have I ever restricted anyone's rights? Have I ever done that?" asked Gen. Prayuth, who imposed martial law after leading a military coup on 22 May 2014, and has banned any political protests or public criticism of his regime.
The reporter pressed Gen. Prayuth to justify the sweeping nature of the bill, prompting Gen. Prayuth to lose his temper and shout, "I don't have to answer why! I will pass it. You have a problem with that? Otherwise, why the hell am I the Prime Minister? Why am I the Prime Minister?"
Gen. Prayuth then walked away from the reporters and said angrily, "I'm in a very bad mood."
"Thai Junta Leader Deflects Concern Over Mass Surveillance Bill”, Khaosod English, January 21, 2015
This incident at a small activist symposium shows how much the military government is trying to claim its narrative over the bills:
Also present at the Bangkok symposium was an Army Lieutenant who arrived uninvited with three other soldiers in an armoured Humvee and "asked" to be allowed to defend the draft bills. (…)
Army Lieutenant Kittiphob Tiensiriwong (…) urged the 35-strong crowd to accept the bills, saying that the NLA had good intentions but acknowledging that the bills must have more positive than negative aspects.
When asked to explain, Kittiphob, who did not remove his footwear like the other participants, said there were times when speedy access to the Internet was needed.
He said the bills aimed "to control those who think unlike others - those who have their own mind and are not considering the thinking of the collective."
"Calls to hold cyber bills until democracy is restored”, The Nation, February 2, 2015
While this should come as no surprise to anyone, that right there is actual main motivation of the military junta for the cyber law bills and for the way it was written! Ever since the military coup in last May, one of the key elements of its tight grip is the massive monitoring of the media, including online, to curtail any signs of criticism and dissent.
Even without the cyber laws and thanks to the still ongoing martial law, the military junta has already taken steps for wide-spread online surveillance as we have previously reported, as well as ordering Thai internet service providers to preemptively block websites. Since then, there have been further developments that are in line with the authorities' efforts to scrutinize online traffic: the development of software to intercept secured SSL-connections, mandatory sim-card registrations (in a country that predominantly uses their phones with pre-paid subscriptions) as well as for free wifi and the reported creation of a "cyber warfare" unit by the Thai military.
The desire by Thai authorities to control the flow of information online is not new and was evident in past governments (see here, here, here and here), but under the authoritarian rule of the military junta, it can operate with no checks and balances - and thus also legalize its unprecedented powers to monitor, spy, filter, censor and collect anything online.
The main purpose of an army is to protect the country from external threats, but history has shown that the Thai army has mainly acted against the Thai people. Now with the new online surveillance measures and the cyber law bills, the Thai military and the junta is expanding its fields of operations (or rather battlespace) to the cyberspace - and thus not against an external force, but again against every Thai internet user.
THAILAND'S NEW CYBER LAWS: Part 1: Introduction - Part 2: Changes to Computer Crime Act - Part 3: Far-reaching and all-encompassing cyber security - Part 4: Bad for business, too! - Part 5: Admin error
Thai court jails theater activists for lese majeste
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 25, 2015 Thailand's courts are continuing to jail people under the lèse majesté law, as two young students have been sentenced to two and a half years in prison for allegedly insulting the monarchy in a theater play. The conviction shows yet again the draconian law is still thriving and even more so under the current military junta.
Dozens of students outside the Criminal Court in Bangkok began to sing when Patiwat "Bank" Saraiyaem (23 years old) and Porntip "Golf" Mankong (26) were taken out of the building (see video below) in shackles and back into their prisons after the judges handed down their sentences: five years in prison, reduced to two and a half. Both students were found guilty of allegedly violating the lèse majesté law by seemingly insulting the monarchy with a theater production.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH0X9mPMjW0?rel=0]
The draconian lèse majesté law, Article 112 of the Criminal Code, states that it is a criminal offense to “defame, insult or threaten” the king, queen, heir to the throne or regent. If convicted, the accused can face up to 15 years in prison. The law also prohibits media and anyone else from citing or quoting the details of the offense, as this also constitutes a violation of the law itself.
Use (or rather abuse) of the law has been constantly on the rise for most of the past decade, but has seen a sharp increase since the military coup last May. One of the first orders by the military junta was to transfer jurisdiction of such cases to a military court, as martial law remains since the coup.
Patiwat and Porntip - respectively, a student until his suspension at Khon Kaen University because of the trial, and a recent graduate - were part of the "Prakai Fai" (literally Sparking Fire) activist theater group and staged the play "The Wolf's Bride" ("เจ้าสาวหมาป่า" in Thai) at Bangkok's Thammasat University in 2013, which was the scene of the student-led pro-democracy rallies and its bloody military crackdown in 1973 and 1976.
The play itself is set in a fictional kingdom about a fictional king and his fictional advisor. Nevertheless, its contents (which we cannot elaborate further upon for the aforementioned reasons), were still deemed enough to defame the actual Thai monarchy. Patiwat (who acted in the play) and Porntip (who primarily co-ordinated the production) were arrested last August, while many others of the group have fled Thailand fearing they would be targeted as well.
The fact that a work of fiction is at the center of the offense shows not only the problematic flexible interpretation of the law by the authorities of what constitutes lèse majesté and what doesn't, it also bears some similarities of the case of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk. The veteran labor activist was sentenced to 11 years for merely editing political essays - that were written by somebody else - which were at best vague allusions to the royal family. He has been incarcerated (including his detention before the trial) since April 2011 and has been denied bail 16 times so far.
The two accused students have been denied bail six times as well, as have most other lèse majesté suspects. Both defendants have previously pleaded guilty, which doesn't necessarily mean they acknowledge the crime, as this is a standard procedure to reduce the sentence. Also, like many other sentenced lèse majesté prisoners, it seems unlikely that the two will be appealing the verdict, which would leave a royal pardon the only legal avenue to shorten the prison term.
The judges reasoned their verdict and sentencing as following:
"Although the defendants have never committed previous crimes, their action - performing the play in an auditorium at Thammasat University - was an act of defamation and insult in front of numerous people," said a judge at Ratchada Criminal Court in Bangkok. "Moreover, it was disseminated on many websites, causing damage to the monarchy, which is revered by all Thais. Such action is a grave crime that warrants no suspension of the punishment."
"Theater Activists Jailed Over Satirical Play About Monarchy", Khaosod English, February 23, 2015
The judge's assumption that the offenses in that theater play were insulting to the monarchy despite being "revered by all Thais", underlines "the contradictory task of trying to argue how inflammatory the slanderous remarks are (...) while at the same time maintaining that the words have no such effect on them," as academic and lèse majesté expert David Streckfuss wrote once (read here).
In fact, this contradiction has reached new (and absurd, if it wasn't so serious) lows under the current military government, which is hunting for lèse majesté suspects and dissidents alike with vigorous zeal - especially an estimated 40 suspects that have fled abroad.
A change for the better in Thailand is not in sight with the authoritarian military junta at the helm. But dissent is still alive, which is currently mostly upheld by student activists and public displays of resistance still do occur (as seen recently last Valentine's Day), only to be immediately shut down by the skittish authorities.
Porntip's and Patiwat's family members broke down in tears after the verdict was read out, as the dozens of supporters were waiting downstairs at the exit of the Criminal Court in Bangkok and started singing "The Faith Of Starlight" ("แสงดาวแห่งศรัทธา" in Thai), a song written by Thai leftist intellectual Chit Phumisak and popularized as a protest anthem by the pro-democracy student activists in the 1970s, which ended with the words:
ขอเยาะเย้ย ทุกข์ยากขวากหนามลำเค็ญ / คนยังคง ยืนเด่นโดยท้าทาย / แม้นผืนฟ้า มืดดับเดือนลับมลาย / ดาวยังพราย ศรัทธาเย้ยฟ้าดิน / ดาวยังพราย อยู่จนฟ้ารุ่งราง
May I mock the miserable thorns of poverty / the people are still standing defiantly / and even the skies turn dark and the moon vanishes forever / the stars are still shining, the faith of the starlight / the stars are still shining, until heaven is obscured
As the choir kept chanting, the pair were put in a transport van. Patiwat "Bank" Saraiyaem and Porntip "Golf" Mankong - the two thespians, now prisoners - calmly and defiantly flashed the three-finger-salute from "The Hunger Games" movies (and declared illegal by the military junta) as the van darted out of the garage to drive them to their prisons.
Thailand’s new cyber laws – Part 4: Bad for business, too!
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 25, 2015
In the fourth part of our series examining Thailand's new and controversial cyber laws, we look at the impact it can have on business - and it doesn't necessarily look very profitable.
In the last couple of instalments of this series, we have highlighted the pitfalls, flaws and loopholes of some of the new proposed cyber laws of the Thai military government. Obviously, since this blog mainly focusses on politics and media freedom, we have so far examined the bills with regards to cyber security, surveillance and its implications on censorship, civil liberties and privacy.
However, for some people and entities these aspects are simply not on the top of their priority list - and we’re not talking about the junta this time! No, this time we mean the economic sector. And it is often said from that direction that an effective, stable political situation is preferable - cynics would argue that democratic values are not economic factors.
The main selling point by the current military junta of the new cyber laws is to lay out the legal groundwork to improve the conditions for Thailand’s ”digital economy” and thus position the country more competitively, especially with the ASEAN Economic Community lurking just around the corner. Another objective is to integrate governance and state business better in to the ”digital economy” as well.
And there are some very good reasons to focus on that: With an internet penetration of 35 per cent (roughly 28.3m people) and an even higher percentage of mobile phone users (125 per cent or 84m people, in fact more than the actual Thai population!), there are a lot of opportunities to be made digitally (source and more stats here).
But when you take a closer look at the eight different cyber law bills, there are many passages that also potentially can spell bad business as well. As usual, the devil is in the details.
Let's start off with the Personal Data Protection bill (full translation available here). As the name of the bill implies, it is initially set up to (supposedly) protect personal data of every Thai online user and for that reason a committee overseeing that would also include representatives of three consumer protection NGOs on board. According to Article 7 of the new bill however, they are now gone and have been replaced by the Secretary of the National Security Council instead.
And it doesn't get any better as we encounter yet another example of a typical problem when it comes to Thai legalese:
The draft bill also imposes significant legal burdens on foreign tech companies as responsibility falls solely on the data controller. Such companies would also run a greater risk of being subject to legal action, said Dhiraphol Suwanprateep, a partner at Baker & McKenzie. (...)
He said the bill posed a challenge for the government's digital economy policy, as there is no clear distinction between "personal data processor" and "personal data controller". The draft only identifies a data controller as the person with the authority to control and manage his or her personal information.
"Data processor" typically refers to a third party that processes personal data on behalf of a data controller, Mr Dhiraphol said. In the absence of such identification in the bill, data processors such as internet service providers, web hosting providers, cloud service providers and content hosting platforms could be broadly interpreted as a data controller. (...)
"If there is no separate definition between data controllers and data processors, it will be difficult to enforce the law, as most technology businesses are dwelling on cloud-based services which are physically located outside the country," Mr Dhiraphol said.
"This will not attract foreign investors into Thailand, as stringent legislation would rather hamper businesses' innovative technology instead of promoting Thailand as a digital economy hub for the Asean Economic Community."
"Legal expert shreds data security bill", Bangkok Post, January 26, 2015
Another passage at Article 25 would affect a lot of different sectors as well:
Section 25: Any collection of personal data pertaining to ethnicity, race, political opinions, doctrinal, religious or philosophical beliefs, sexual behaviour, criminal records, health records, or of any data which may upset another person’s or the people’s feelings as prescribed by the Committee, without the consent of the Data Owner or the person(s) concerned, is prohibited, (...)
Following the words of the law, it would make it very difficult to use somebody's yet-to-be-defined "personal information" for any kind of work without their permission. For example, journalists wouldn't be able to use these sources for any critical investigation or marketing campaigns and wouldn't be able to implement social media posts (unless they write some crafty terms of services that nobody reads anyways).
Another crucial point of contention for many critics is the upcoming allocation of new frequency spectrum that would bring 4G mobile connection to Thailand (and hopefully soon and not as drawn-out as the farcical 3G auction was). However...
It also empowers the [Digital Economy Commission chaired by the Prime Minister] to order any private telecommunications operator to act or refraining from acting in any way and also compels companies to provide information on request as well as hand over executives for questioning.
The portfolio of digital economy laws also has a new frequency act that gives the final say in spectrum allocation to the Digital Economy Commission and emancipates the telecommunications regulator, leaving it in charge only of commercial spectrum and imposing strict budget controls on the former autonomous agency. (...)
But while on the one hand [the government] are signalling compromise with the aforementioned committee, the junta are also threatening that 4G will be delayed unless the laws are passed quickly, and of course everyone loves more bandwidth.
"Thai spying law controversy rages on", Telecomasia.net, February 6, 2015
And generally one of the biggest problems is that the cyber law bills are creating a bureaucratic monster:
Paiboon Amornpinyokait, an expert on cyber and computer law, said (...) they gave too much power to the new Ministry of Digital Economy and Society by allowing it to oversee too many areas.
They include areas currently under the jurisdiction of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) Bill, the Cyber Security Bill, the New Computer Crime Bill, the Personal Data Protection Bill, the Digital Economy Promotion Bill, and the Digital Economy Development Fund Bill.
Paiboon said the bills would result in too much centralised power and will give too much authority to officials or authorities, which could easily lead to abuse of power.
"Digital economy bills 'need to be amended'", The Nation, January 19, 2015
These passages and many other legislative pitfalls that we haven't covered yet show that this is not only a matter of human rights, free speech and personal privacy, but it also could have potentially serious implications for the economy and scare away potential foreign investors.
Just as the military junta tries to fix the economy and could be doing more harm than good, these batch of cyber bills could have the same effect as well if they're not being thoroughly amended or rejected by the junta's ersatz-parliament. As we explain in the next and last past of our series, there is definitely not a lack of criticism from all sides but a severe lack of justification from Thailand's military junta.
Translated sections of draft bills by Thai Netizen Network. You can read complete translations here.
THAILAND'S NEW CYBER LAWS: Part 1: Introduction - Part 2: Changes to Computer Crime Act - Part 3: Far-reaching and all-encompassing cyber security - Part 4: Bad for business, too! - Part 5: Admin error
Thailand's new cyber laws - Part 3: Far-reaching cyber snooping
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 20, 2015 In this part in our series examining the Thai military government’s new cyber laws, we look at the most controversial bill among the eight drafts: The Cyber Security Bill.
Any government nowadays has to adapt its laws and at the same to keep it up to date with technological advancement - which is a seemingly herculean task given their vastly contrasting respective pace. One issue many lawmakers are focusing on is cyber security. Given the growing reliance on internet access in our everyday lives and the increasing number cyber attacks, the legislative base to counter that are either still archaic (some by design) or in some cases simply non-existent.
Thailand is obviously not exempt and thus created the 2007 Computer Crime Act (CCA) - the problem is that the wording of the CCA is so vague that is has often been (ab)used for online censorship and the 2015 update doesn't fix these problems either (read previous part).
With the new Cyber Security Bill (full PDF and translation here), the current Thai military government is seemingly adding another legislative basis to combat cyber crime - but what it actually does is an assault on online freedom and personal privacy, starting with the creation of a new government agency:
Section 6: There shall be a committee called “The National Cybersecurity Committee” (NCSC) consisting of:
(1) Minister of Digital Economy and Society as Chairperson;
(2) Secretary of the National Security Council, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Defence, Commander of the Technological Crime Suppression Division, the Royal Thai Police as 4 ex officio members;
(3) Not more than 7 qualified members appointed by the Council of Ministers (…)
As it can be seen from the make-up of the committee, its members are almost all from the military and police - all positions that have been or can be filled with people close to the current military government, who will be on the committee for 3 years (Article 9).
Section 7: The NCSC shall have the following powers and duties:
(1) to determine the approaches and measures for responding to and tackling cyber threats in the event of undesirable or unforeseeable situation or circumstance concerning security that affects or may cause significant or serious impact, loss or damage so that the NCSC becomes the centre of operation in the event of situation or circumstance concerning security in a timely and uniform manner, unless the cyber threat is such that affects military security, which is a matter within the powers of Defence Council or the National Security Council;
Section 14: The Office of the National Cybersecurity Committee shall be set up as a State agency having a juristic person, not being a State division or a State enterprise.
Section 17: The Office shall have the following powers and duties:
(1) to respond to and tackle cyber threats in the event of undesirable or unforeseeable situation or circumstance concerning security that affects or may cause significant or serious impact, loss or damage by issuing operation measures that take into account the degree of secrecy and the access to classified information; (…)
(3) to co-operate with State agencies or private agencies for the purpose of collecting information on cyber threats, the prevention and tackling of circumstances of cyber threat, and other information concerning the maintenance of Cybersecurity, to be analysed and submitted to the NCSC for consideration; (...)
(5) to monitor and speed up the operations of the State agencies involved in maintaining Cybersecurity, and report to the NCSC; (…)
(13) to perform other acts concerning national Cybersecurity as entrusted by the NCSC or the Council of Ministers.
While Article 7 and 17 are pretty much standard fare regarding its tasks, Article 14 hints that the NCSC has wider powers and fewer bureaucratic hurdles to overcome in order to act swiftly - which also potentially means less transparency. And whatever is meant in Article 17.13 with "other acts concerning national Cybersecurity as entrusted" by the Cabinet is highly unlikely to be ever publicly disclosed - maybe unorthodox ways to 'gain information'?
As the next excerpt shows, the NCSC will have so much power it can even take over command of other state agencies in a crisis:
Section 33: Upon the occurrence of an emergency or danger as a result of cyber threat that may affect national security, the NCSC shall have the power to order all State agencies to perform any act to prevent, solve the issues or mitigate the damage that has arisen or that may arise as it sees fit and may order a State agency or any person, including a person who has suffered from the danger or may suffer from such danger or damage, to act or co-operate in an act that will result in timely control, suspension, or mitigation of such danger and damage that have arisen. (...)
Section 34: In case where it is necessary, for the purpose of maintaining Cybersecurity, which may affect financial and commercial stability or national security, the NCSC may order a State agency to act or not to act in any way and to report the outcome of the order to the NCSC as required by the Notification of the NCSC.
Another interesting tidbit is in Article 18.3:
Section 18: For the purpose of the fulfilment of the objectives under Section 17, the Office shall have the following powers and duties:
(3) to enter into an agreement and co-operate with other organisations or agencies, both in the public and the private sectors, [both based domestic and abroad] in activities concerning the fulfilment of the Office’s objectives;
One way to interpret that is that the NCSC will seek "co-operation" from private corporations, including those providing social media platforms and messaging apps. In the past Thai authorities, in their quest to criminalize even mere Facebook 'likes' linked to unwanted content or dissent, tried to contact the company behind the messaging app LINE in order to access all messages - they didn't a reply, but nevertheless later boasted that they could monitor everything.
Nevertheless, Thai authorities would be empowered to snoop thanks to the already infamous Article 35:
Section 35 For the purpose of performing their duties under this Act, the Officials who have been entrusted in writing by the Secretary shall have the following powers: (…)
(3) to gain access to information on communications, either by post, telegram, telephone, fax, computer, any tool or instrument for electronic media communication or telecommunications, for the benefit of the operation for the maintenance of Cybersecurity.
The performance under (3) shall be as specified by the Rules issued by the Council of Ministers.
Yes, even the good old telegram is not safe from long arms of the authorities! It is self-evident that with that wording the NCSC will have far-reaching powers to look into the personal data of every Thai internet user. And given the paranoia of the military junta with social media, the potential for abuse of the law in the name of national (cyber-)security is nigh on endless. It remains to be seen if the aforementioned guidelines will ever be issued by the Cabinet when this bill is signed into law.
Translated sections of draft bills by Thai Netizen Network. You can read complete translations here.
THAILAND'S NEW CYBER LAWS: Part 1: Introduction - Part 2: Changes to Computer Crime Act - Part 3: Far-reaching and all-encompassing cyber security
Thailand's new cyber laws - Part 2: Changes to the Computer Crime Act
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 17, 2015 With the passing of eight new draft bills under the banner of "Digital Economy" by the Thai junta cabinet and awaiting approval by the ersatz-parliament, the National Legislative Assembly (NLA), the main focus of criticism is aimed at the cyber security bill and the amendments to the 2007 Computer Crime Act (CCA).
In this part, we take a look at the most crucial changes to the Computer Crime Act.
The old Computer Crime Act was itself a problematic piece of legislation when it was passed in 2007 due to the vague wording of certain sections. Particularly there’s a high legal ambiguity in Article 12.2, which punishes anything that is "likely to damage computer data or a computer system related to the country’s security, public security and economic security or public services" with 3-15 years in prison, and Article 14, which punishes any computer-related act that causes "damage the country's security or causes a public panic" (especially if it is "related with an offense against the Kingdom's security under the Criminal Code") with a maximum of five year in prison.
That led to many cases where people were charged for political expressions made online that were deemed by the authorities as lèse majesté, which almost doubles the potential punishment of the accused (as mentioned in our introduction previously).
Now these two passages has been mashed together into into one Article, which says:
Section 14/1 - Any person committing an offence that involves import to a computer system of false computer data in a manner that is likely to damage the country's security or cause a public panic must be subject to imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine of not more than sixty thousand baht [US$1,843] or both.
Section 14/2 - Any person committing an offence that involves import to a computer system of any computer data related with an offence against the Kingdom's security under the Criminal Code must be subject to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than one hundred thousand baht [US$3,070] or both.
It’s not much different than the previous versions in terms of punishment, but the problematic vague wording (e.g. what constitutes "false computer data"?) remains. What's worse is the following Article 15:
Section 15 - Any service provider intentionally supporting or consenting to an offence under Section 14/1 or Section 14/2 within a computer system under their control must be subject to the same penalty as that imposed upon a person committing an offence under Section 14/1 and Section 14/2.
If any service provider can prove that they follow the instruction to restrain the dissemination of such computer data or destroy such data from a computer system as required by a Minister, the perpetrator is not guilty.
Under the new law, the intermediaries are subject to prosecution as well. Basically, if for example a webmaster has content that's deemed offensive on their site and doesn't remove it, then they can be charged - even if they didn't write it themselves. That’s exactly what happened to Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn, who was accused of not deleting online comments from her website quickly enough that were deemed lèse majesté. The main problem in this case was how long is too long for somebody not to remove something seemingly offensive. In Chiranuch's case, it seemed the prosecutors more or less expected every webmaster to anticipate it even before the offense happens and to preemptively act against it. She was convicted and given a suspended jail sentence in 2012.
One of the major changes are the amendments to Article 18:
Section 18 of the Computer Crime Act of B.E. 2550 (2007) is added the following provisions as paragraph two and paragraph three:
"For the benefit of investigation and inquiry, in case there is a reasonable cause to believe that there is the perpetration of an offence to computer system, computer data, or any computer data storage devices under any laws, the superior administrative or police official under the Criminal Procedure Code or the competent official under other laws shall perform under this Act only the necessities for the benefits of using as evidences related to the commission of an offence or searching for an offender under the competent authorities indicated in paragraph one, paragraph two and paragraph three. The aforementioned officials shall request the relevant competent official to take action provided that their power of authority is limited under this Act.”
In simple words, authorities still need a court order in order to intercept online communication and it has to be specific. However, as the watchdog organization Thai Netizen Network points out, there's no limitation on how long these interceptions can take as compared to e.g. Article 25 of the 2008 Special Investigation Act, which allows access of 90 days (but permits unlimited extensions).
Also, Article 12 in the new CCA will punish cases which involves hacking of computer systems "that is likely to damage computer data or a computer system related to the country's security, public security and economic security" with up to 15 years in prison.
And finally in this short look, Article 31 already hints at the next part we'll be examining:
Section 31. Nation Cyber Security Committee (NCSC) shall be the central agency to control, monitor and assess operational performance of the competent official under this Act.
In the next part, we will look at the controversial new Cyber Security Bill, which seemingly could allow intrusive actions by the Thai authorities against internet users and the aforementioned National Cyber Security Committee will be an integral part of it.
Translated sections of draft bills by Thai Netizen Network. You can read complete translations here.
THAILAND'S NEW CYBER LAWS: Part 1: Introduction - Part 2: Changes to Computer Crime Act - Part 3: Far-reaching and all-encompassing cyber security
Thailand’s new (and controversial) cyber laws - Part 1: Introduction
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 10, 2015 The Thai military government has greenlit a large batch of draft laws that aim to pave the way for the digitization of governance and state business. However, they also come with a slew of strengthened cyber surveillance and censorship upgrades for the authorities.
The year was 2007. Social media was yet to be discovered by most people in Thailand as many were conversing on blogs or the still-popular web forums. The first ever iPhone was only available as an expensive import, 3G was still several years away and even broadband internet was just getting starting to become widely available.
That’s when the then-military government signed the 2007 Computer Crimes Act (CCA) into law. Initially drawn up to provide a legal groundwork to combat online scams and hacking, the main motivation behind the rather hasty drafting of the CCA was a YouTube video mocking Thailand’s King Bhumibol Adulyadej and the online video platform’s refusal to delete it despite requests from the Thai government - which subsequently led to a temporary block of the whole site for Thai users.
In the following years, the CCA became known for its crude implementation of online censorship and criminalizing political criticism, especially when it deals with lèse majesté. When somebody is being convicted of having allegedly committed a crime violating both the lèse majesté law and the Computer Crimes Act (especially Art. 12.2) - in practice, posting something online that is perceived insulting to the monarchy - the accused could face up to 15 years in prison for each violation of each law.
There were two notable cases that highlight the (ab)use of both laws: Chiranuch Premchaiporn, the webmaster of the Thai alternative news website Prachatai, was sentenced to a suspended prison sentence in 2012 for simply not deleting web comments quickly enough that were deemed lèse majesté, while Amphon Tangnoppakul was less fortunate. The man commonly known as ‘Ahkong’ or ‘Uncle SMS’ was imprisoned for 20 years for allegedly sending four SMSs insulting the monarchy (despite inconclusive evidence). After four years in jail, he died in May 2012 at age 61, arguably becoming a martyr to critics of the lèse majesté law.
All attempts at amending the CCA in whatever direction so far have gone nowhere, either because it got lost in the drafting process or no government stayed long enough in office to push it through.
Now, with the military in charge, the largest legislative change to the cyber laws seems imminent and it doesn't look good.
Last week, the junta’s cabinet approved in principle eight proposed bills which were claimed to prepare Thailand for the “digital economy”. The groups said they were in fact designed to restructure and tighten control of telecommunications and the internet in Thailand.
The junta-appointed parliament earlier passed a law to change the title of the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) to the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES). The MDES will be the main agency overseeing the “digital economy”.
”Thai junta’s Digital Economy bills are national security bills in disguise: rights groups”, Prachatai English, January 14, 2015
While the main intention of the new batch of laws is officially to push for bigger integration of the internet in governance and state business with the ”digital economy” at the very top of the priority list to make the country more competitive, it also comes with a slew of sections that essentially results in cyber surveillance and monitoring.
The eight proposed bills (with links to some translated versions provided by the Thai Netizen Network) are:
- National Digital Committee for Economy and Society Bill
- Ministry of Digital for Economy and Society Bill
- Electronic Transaction Bill (amendment)[PDF] [Open Document]
- Computer-related Crime Bill(amendment) [PDF] [Open Document]
- Cybersecurity Bill [PDF] [OpenDocument]
- Personal Data Protection Bill [PDF] [Open Document]
- Digital Economy Promotion Bill
- Digital Development for Economy and Society Fund Bill
- Broadcasting and Telecommunication Regulator Bill (amendment)
- Electronic Transaction Development Agency Bill (amendment)
"Thailand’s Digital Economy-Cyber Security Bills [English translation]", Thai Netizen Network, January 15, 2015
The amendments to the Computer Crime Act and the new Cyber-Security Bill are at the center of the controversy. This is not just simply a case of legislation not being able to keep up with technological advancement, but rather the legal enabling of long-desired, ill-intended motives to be more in control of the flow of information online.
In the coming weeks this mini-series will look at the some of the controversial passages of the cyber law drafts and examine the severe implications of the laws for every internet user in Thailand.
Thai junta takes further steps towards online mass surveillance, censorship
Originally published at Siam Voices on January 12, 2015 A series of new orders and proposals suggests that Thailand’s military government has taken further steps to monitor and censor online content in continued efforts to curtail criticism of itself and the country's monarchy.
Ever since the coup of May 22, 2014, the military junta has tightened its grip on the media by putting it under close watch and threatening those that are not criticizing the military rulers ”in good faith”. The official attitude of the “National Council for Peace and Order” (NCPO), as the junta is formally called, towards the media is encapsulated by a junta media watchdog representative who stated that it doesn’t limit media freedom, but that the media ”must stay within limits".
Despite this, the junta was apparently still not happy with its control over the public narrative. This is evident from the junta leader, former army chief and current Prime Minister General Prayuth Chan-ocha, after a series of gaffes, verbosities and apparently tired facing the same questions (like when elections will be held, eventually?) from the press, accusing some media of "inciting conflict” and ”personally attacking him” and threatening to shut those offending outlets down under the still existing martial law. That sentiment has been echoed later by his hawkish deputy prime minister and former army chief General Prawit Wongsuwan.
One major headache for the military junta’s urge to control the media is the Internet, and especially social media. We have previously reported on the heightened measures, which reportedly includes the implementation of a mass online surveillance capabilities.
The main thrust of this crackdown on the media is not only the claim over the narrative in post-coup Thailand, but also the military’s junta self-proclaimed duty to hunt everyone defaming the monarchy (something this and previous governments see as a threat to national security), thus banning content it perceives to be lèse majesté, an offense that can carry a maximum sentence of 15 years in jail. Since the coup, all cases that fall under this are handled by a military court and so far more than 20 people have been charged.
In recent weeks, two major developments in Thailand during the last days of 2014 suggest the further curtailing of online traffic.
First, the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) issued this:
Thakorn Tantasith, a member of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunication Commission (NBTC), said today that all Internet Service Providers (ISP) based in the Kingdom have been instructed to monitor the websites under their watch and close down any sites that contain libelous remarks toward the monarchy. (...)
"They can shut down any page with content that threatens the national security or violates Section 112 immediately. They don't need to seek any approval from the NBTC or any agency," Thakorn said, "If they have doubt about whether some websites are guilty of the crime, they can contact a five-person special working group of the NBTC." If the committee deem the website to be in violation of lese majeste laws, it will shut down the site in 30 seconds, Thakorn explained.
He added that the new measure is a response to the spike in lese majeste violations in the past several months. "We have to tighten the screw to prevent any further offences, or at least reduce them," Thakorn said.
"Thai Govt Aims To Shut Down Anti-Monarchy Sites 'In 30 Seconds'", Khaosod English, December 29, 2014
Apart from the obvious reasoning on this measure by the authorities, it also creates yet another problematic precedent as ISPs are being asked to use their own judgement to filter content and block URLs. In the past, such pre-emptive strikes have caused certain websites to be inaccessible on one provider, while they would still work on another one. And since the lines as to what constitutes lèse majesté are pretty blurry themselves, placing this responsibility with somebody else only leads to even more arbitrary application of this law.
In related news from late December, Thai authorities reportedly sought talks with representatives of the social network platform Facebook over ways to ”to identify Facebook users who post messages” deemed lèse majesté - similar to their attempts to reach out to the company behind the mobile chat application LINE after the junta claimed it could monitor personal chats on the app. Facebook reportedly declined to join the meeting, saying that no one was available.
Then this happened:
According to Thai Netizen Network, the cabinet on Tuesday gave the green light to the proposed Cyber Security bill to establish a National Committee for Cyber Security, under the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES), whose former title was the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT). The Cyber Security Bill was one of eight proposed bills on telecommunications which are aimed at restructuring and tightening control of telecommunications in Thailand.
In the draft, the National Committee for Cyber Security will be operated under the supervision of the Minister of Digital Economy and Society to oversee threats to national cyber security, which is defined as cyber threats related to national security, military security, stability, economic security, and interference on internet, satellite, and telecommunications networks. (…)
Most importantly, the committee is authorized to access all communication traffic via all communication devices, such as post, telephone, mobile phone, internet, and other electronic devices. The committee will also have the authority to order all public and private organizations to cooperate against any perceived threats to national cyber security. (...)
In addition to this, the junta cabinet has also previously approved a proposal from the Royal Thai Police to amend the 1934 Criminal Procedure Code to allow the police to intercept communication devices of criminal suspects.
"Thai junta gives green light to bill on mass surveillance", Prachatai English, January 8, 2015
It clearly shows that Thailand's military junta will seek more and more avenues to monitor, block, filter and censor online content on a larger scale - and ultimately take control of its own narrative.
UPDATE: Prachatai English has more details on the proposed changes to the 1934 Criminal Procedure Code to intercept communications of suspects, while Bangkok Post reports on the criticism of the proposed "cyber law" drafts.
LINE denies Thai junta’s claim it is monitoring popular chat app
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 23, 2014 Claims by the Thai military junta that it is monitoring the popular chat app LINE for content deemed insulting towards the monarchy have been refuted by South Korea-based parent company Naver.
The Thai Minister for Information and Communication Technology (MICT) Pornchai Rujiprap stated on Monday that the authorities can "monitor all the nearly 40 million LINE messages sent by people in Thailand each day." LINE has at least 24 million registered users in Thailand, according to the company's latest figures in August - while Pornchai estimated the number to be at 33 million users, based on his own claims.
He continued:
"We can see what type of messages are being forwarded," Pornchai told reporters, "We focus especially on those that are libelous, anti-monarchy, or threatening national security." (...)
"The suspects cannot claim that they were not aware of the consequences of their actions, because the law regards them as conspirators in the crimes," Pornchai said, "Therefore, if you receive [anti-monarchy] messages, you should not forward them."
The Minister also vowed to seek IP addresses and other information about anti-monarchy websites from foreign companies that host their servers, though he admitted that the process could take a long time.
"It could take a long while because there needs to be a negotiation. Some countries have cultures that are different to Thai," Pornchai explained.
"ICT Pledges To Sniff Out Anti-Monarchy Chat Messages", Khaosod English, December 23, 2014
The South Korean parent company of LINE has been quick to dismiss the junta's claims:
“No monitoring by the Thailand government has been conducted,” Nam Ji Woong, a spokesman for South Korea-based Naver Corp., which owns Line Corp., said by e-mail today. “Line considers consumers’ privacy as a top priority.”
"Line Application Denies Reports Thailand Is Monitoring Messages", Bloomberg News, December 23, 2014
The draconian lèse majesté law criminalizes perceived criticism of Thailand's monarchy and carries a maximum sentence of 15 years in jail. Charges based on this law, where every citizen can file a complaint against anyone and police are obliged to investigate every one of them, have seen a rampant rise in recent years and even more so since the military coup of May 22, 2014. According to the Thai legal watchdog ilaw at least 22 people have been arrested on lèse majesté charges since the coup and also on the equally draconian yet vague worded Computer Crimes Act, which also penalizes digital content deemed a threat to national security.
The military junta - more than ever the self-proclaimed protector of the Thai monarchy and intolerant of dissent and criticism - has also imposed widespread media censorship and set up its own media watchdogs. Not only has the junta reactivated the 'cyber-scout' program, which recruits volunteer students to monitor the Internet, it even considered launching its own national social network, and it has also reportedly implemented the technical capabilities for widespread online surveillance.
This is not the first time that LINE and its Thai users have been targeted by Thai authorities. Last year, an overzealous Police Maj.-Gen. Pisit Pao-in of the Technology Crime Suppression Division (TCSD) of the Royal Thai Police has also sought access to user information and chat logs of the messaging app and was even considering criminalizing Facebook users for 'liking' what he thinks is "unlawful" content. Ultimately he was unsuccessful - so much so that even the hawkish then-ICT minister Anudith Nakorn-thap chided him for his overeagerness.
The biggest irony of the junta's boisterous claims that it is able to monitor LINE (that is unless the parent company is cooperating after all or the junta has found another way) is that it was made at the same event when the military junta was presenting series of LINE 'stickers' representing the junta's proclaimed and much touted "12 core values" (more on that in a future Siam Voices post), aimed at instilling what they think makes a "good Thai" like showing respect to superiors, resisting the temptation of “religious sins”, upholding “Thai customs and traditions”, and sacrificing oneself for the good of the country.
In their continuous, widespread media campaign - including commissioning propaganda short movies (one of which gained infamy for a brief, but bizarre Hitler scene) - the military government hopes (after it has spend 7 million baht or almost $213,000 on them) that LINE users will promote these "12 core values" by sending the stickers to each other - if only the junta can find a way to make sure that actually happens...
UPDATE [Dec 24]: ICT Minister Pornchai Rujiprapa has practically backtracked his boisterous claims:
He said it was merely a misunderstanding that the MICT can monitor ‘Line’ and that it is much easier to find evidences lese majeste and others cases via Facebook and websites which the IP address can be tracked. If he ministry need information on Line, it will have to cooperate with its headquarter.
“I merely said don’t send the [lese majeste] messages via Line because the police can make arrests when people file complaints with the messages as evidences. Not that the MICT was monitoring the chat traffic on Line. And warn people to be careful not to share the [lese majeste] messages because it is illegal according to 2007 Computer Crime Act.” Prachatai quoted Pornchai as saying.
"Thai authorities say no surveillance on popular chat app", Prachatai English, December 24, 2014
The Thai office of LINE has also emphasized that there's no surveillance and the Thai authorities need a court order to do so.
And in somewhat related news and ironic timing, LINE Thailand has a job opening for a "Content Editor and Monitoring"...
28 weeks later: Prayuth, censorship and the media in post-coup Thailand
Originally published at Siam Voices on November 18, 2014 Since his time as army chief, General Prayuth Chan-ocha’s relationship with the media has been strenuous at best. Now as the coup leader and prime minister he constantly in the limelight, and his gaffes are under more scrutiny than ever. On the other hand, the media itself is facing stringent censorship.
Reporter 1: [...] so it will be sorted very soon in order to have elections, right?
Prayuth: [inaudible]…see my first answer, I already said it.
Reporter 1: General, may I ask another question: are you now the prime minister?
Prayuth: [pause] It is in progress…I don’t know yet, we’ll see, keep calm! [points to the reporter] You wanna be it?
Reporter 1: [sarcastically] YES, YES, YES…!
Prayuth: Ok, that’s enough! Thank you very much…
Reporter 2: General, just a quick question…how long will the timeline, roadmap take until a new election?
Prayuth: As long as the situation returns to normal!
Reporter 2: General, [the public] may be asking themselves how long’s gonna take, whether if it’s one year…
Prayuth: It depends of the situation! I don’t have an answer. There’s no set time!
Reporter 2: …or one year and a half…
Prayuth: …we’re controlling the situation as fast as possible! Enough! [walks off]
Reporter 2: So do you mean then…General? General…?!
That scene took place when then-army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha held a press conference shortly following the confirmation of him as coup leader by royal command on May 26, 2014 - just a few of days after Thailand’s military has seized absolute power in a coup.
For Prayuth, this was a fairly typical exchange with the media. We have previously pointed out his strenuous relationship with the press here and here - more often than not resulting in the general lashing out at a reporter, resorting to sardonic remarks or simply walking out of a press briefing.
However, that exchange on the May 26 (see full clip here) and what followed shortly after that would set the tone for the coming months: The two reporters from that press conference, Thai Rath’s Supparerk Thongchaiyasit and Bangkok Post’s military correspondent Wassana Nanuam (whose relationship with the top brass has been often brought into question), were summoned and chastised by the military junta for their ”aggressive” hounding of the junta leader.
It was an early sign that the military junta was assuming full control of the press and thus also claiming the sovereignty of the narrative. Mainstream media outlets are put under heavy scrutiny by the “National Council for Peace and Order” (NCPO) as the junta officially calls itself. It has created monitor watchdogs dedicated to each medium in order to check that nobody is breaching the junta’s orders aimed at curtailing criticism against the NCPO. Also, the military government has taken on social media platforms for perceived coup-critical and anti-monarchy content, reportedly having installed a system for mass online surveillance.
And yet, with the General himself - now the leader of Thailand's military government - constantly in the limelight, he still continues to deliver one gaffe after another too tempting for most of media not to report about it. From a seemingly endless stream of gaffes (see a ”best”-of list from September here), here are three examples:
- Amid potential protests by rubber farmers facing falling prices, Gen. Prayuth flippantly suggested that they may have to sell their rubber ”on Mars!” That remark attracted widespread attention on social media with many photoshopping the junta leader into satirical images - so much so that the junta told people to stop it!
- Visibly annoyed by a follow-up question from a Thai journalist aking whether he prefers to seize power via a coup than by elections, Prayuth simply threatened: ”You be careful, or else I’ll slam you with this podium…!” (Full video HERE.)
- Prayuth's statements weren't just picked up by local media. Following the murder of two British tourists on the island of Koh Tao (and the subsequent bumbling police investigation) - Gen. Prayuth’s poorly-worded suggestion that Western tourists, especially bikini-wearing ones, might only be safe in Thailand "when they’re not beautiful!” made international headlines. After much public outcry for this inappropriate remark, he apologized.
As we mentioned, there are a lot more examples of the junta leader putting his foot in his mouth. The continuous stream of gaffes is indicative of a massive PR headache with Gen. Prayuth and the military junta, even though it seems that the former is resistant to advice - that is if he gets any, despite close aides reportedly worried about his ‘loose canon’ nature. And if he’s not being sardonic, he comes across as an annoyed uncle in his weekly TV addresses, seemingly knowing the answers to most of the nation’s problems.
However, the conditions most Thai journalists are currently working under are no laughing matter, no matter how many verbal (and other) fouls the junta is committing. Several journalists have either been directly or indirectly pressured by the military junta for their critical reporting.
Last week, ThaiPBS dropped a TV discussion program after it aired criticism of the junta, seemingly after a visit from army officers voicing their displeasure. The program’s host has also been "temporarily” pulled off-air . This has sparked a campaign by most of the mainstream media to protest against the military’s interference. Even the otherwise tepid and often silent Thai Journalists'Association has joined the chorus calling for restrictions on the media to be lifted.
The military has denied accusations of censorship and says it would never limit press freedom - only then to threaten the media from crossing the line. And that exactly is the problem: with the military junta claiming solid sovereignty of its narrative and almost everything else in the political discourse it can easily move the undefined and invisible line to suit its needs.
And if you need any further evidence of the military junta’s open contempt towards the media, just listen to Deputy Prime Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan - for many the real mastermind behind the coup - responding to the demands in a press conference on Monday (full clip HERE):
The policy of the NCPO is…let me put it this way: I would like to remind the media that the government, the NCPO are currently in the process to achieve reconciliation in this country. Everything that is an obstacle to reconciliation… everything that will create divisions - we won’t let that happen! Let it rest, wait for now. We have the National Reform Council, the National Legislative Assembly - they’re currently at work, so wait… for a year! We have our roadmap, the government, the NCPO are following it, they’re following their promise. So why the hurry?!
________________________ The 28 Weeks Later series – Thailand 6 months after the coup:
Introduction: 28 weeks later in post-coup Thailand Part 1: Economic stability comes at a cost under Thailand’s military junta Part 2: Prayuth, censorship and the media in post-coup Thailand Part 3: An education fit for a zombie? Part 4: Are Thai people really happy after the coup? Part 5: Thailand’s junta and the war on corruption Part 6: PDRC myths and Thailand's privileged 'new generation' Part 7: Thailand tourism down, but not out Part 8: Education reform in Thailand under the junta Part 9: 28 weeks later in post-coup Thailand: Some personal thoughts
Thailand's junta extends censorship with mass online surveillance
Originally published on Siam Voices on September 19, 2014 Thailand's ruling military junta is further tightening its grip on the public discourse by heightening its censorship measures, going as far as reportedly implementing widespread surveillance of Thai Internet users. The new measure seeks to crush criticism at the military government and to crack down on anything that is deemed insulting to the royal institution - also known as lèse majesté.
When the Thai military declared martial law two days before it launched the coup of May 22, 2014, one of the main targets was the complete control of the broadcast media, which resulted in the presence of soldiers at all major television channels and the shutdown of thousands of unlicensed community radio stations and over a dozen politically partisan satellite TV channels, primarily those belonging to the warring street protest groups.
Nearly five months later, most of these satellite TV channels (with one notable exception) are back on the air but have been renamed and had to considerably toned down their political leanings before they were allowed to broadcast again. The TV hosts who were last year's heavy-hitting political TV commentators are now hosting entertainment programs or, if they're lucky, return to a talk show format, but only in the name of national "reform" and "reconciliation".
But the military junta, also formally known as the “National Council for Peace and Order” (NCPO), still has a firm grip on the media, as it has set up specific monitor watchdogs for different media platforms (and also specifically for foreign news outlets) to screen out critical content against the NCPO. Furthermore, it has practically issued a gag order to the Thai media - only then to reiterate that while criticism against the military junta is allowed, it should only be done "in good faith".
The censorship measures and the monitoring efforts also extend online. Unlike during the last military coup in 2006, the emergence of social media networks makes it a daunting uphill battle for the junta to control the narrative. Nevertheless, the authorities have always been eager to have more control to filter and censor online content and have blatantly resorted to phishing for user information, and even considered launching its own national social network. And there was this:
In late May, a brief block of the social network Facebook sparked uproar online, while statements by the Ministry for Information and Telecommunication Technology (MICT) and the NCPO over whether or not the Facebook-block was ordered or it was an “technical glitch” contradicted each other. It emerged later through a the foreign parent company of a Thai telco company that there actually was an order to block Facebook, for which it got scolded by the Thai authorities.
"Thailand’s junta sets up media watchdogs to monitor anti-coup dissent", Siam Voices/Asian Correspondent, June 26, 2014
The junta also reactivated its "Cyber Scout"-initiative, recruiting school children and students to monitor online content for dissidents, and announced plans for internet cafes to install cameras so that parents can remotely monitor what their kids are doing.
The towering motive of the junta's online monitoring efforts has been recently laid out by outgoing army chief, junta leader and Prime Minister General Prayuth Chan-ocha:
Gen. Prayuth outlined a strategy to "defend" the monarchy in a speech (...) [its] transcript describes the monarchy as an important element of Thai-style democracy and an institution that the Royal Thai Government is obliged to uphold "with loyalty and defense of His Majestic Authority."
"We will use legal measures, social-psychological measures, and telecommunications and information technology to deal with those who are not mindful of their words, are arrogant at heart, or harbour ill intentions to undermine the important Institution of the nation," the speech reads.
Under Section 112 of Thailand's Criminal Codes, insulting the royal family is a criminal offense punishable by up to 15 years in prison. The law, known as lese majeste, has been harshly enforced since the military staged a coup against the elected government on 22 May. (...)
"Prayuth Vows Tougher Crackdown On Anti-Monarchists", Khaosod English, September 11, 2014
And in order to achieve this, the junta reportedly doubled down its online monitoring earlier this week:
Thai authorities reportedly planned to implement a surveillance device starting from 15 September to sniff out Thai Internet users, specifically targeting those producing and reading lèse majesté content, a report says. Although the report is yet to be confirmed, it has created greater climate of fear among media.
Prachatai has received unconfirmed reports from two different sources. One said the device targets keywords related to lèse majesté and that it is relatively powerful and could access all kinds of communication traffic on the internet. Another source said it could even monitor communications using secured protocols.
After learning about this, a national level Thai-language newspaper editorial team has reluctantly resorted to a policy of greater self-censorship. Its editor warned editorial staff not to browse any lèse majesté website at work and think twice before reporting any story related to lèse majesté.
"Thai authorities reportedly to conduct mass surveillance of Thai internet users, targeting lèse majesté", Prachatai English, September 10, 2014
On Wednesday, it was reported that amidst severe internet slowdowns across Southeast Asia due to a damaged undersea connection cable extra internet filtering in Thailand has been activated.
There is no doubt that Thailand's military junta is determined to go forward with its own, very exclusive way of governing and tightly controlling the narrative through widespread media censorship and massive online surveillance. By invoking the need to "protect the monarchy", the military has a convenient weapon to act against dissidents in real life and in the virtual domain as well, no matter where they are.
According to the legal watchdog NGO iLaw, over 270 people have been detained by the junta between May 22 and September 5. Eighty-six of them are facing trial, most of them before a military court. Fifteen of those are cases concerning lèse majesté.
Thailand junta reactivates 'cyber scout' program to curb online dissent
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 7, 2014 In late 2010, the Thai Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (MICT) launched the so-called 'cyber scout' program aimed to recruit students and young people to monitor online content that could be deemed potentially offensive, especially to Thailand's monarchy. Now, the military junta is re-introducing the project.
Its originally stated objectives were:
Objectives of the project
1. To create a Cyber Scout volunteer network [...] that observes [...] [online] behavior that is deemed a threat to national security and to defend and protect the royal institution.
2. To collect the work of the Cyber Scout volunteers.
3. To set up a network of Cyber Scout volunteers to contact.
4. To promote the moral and ethics with the help of the volunteers, to ensure the correct behavior, build reconciliation and awareness towards the use of information with regard to morality and safety of individuals in society.
5. To promote and support to various sectors of society to careful and responsible usage of information technology. [...]
Taken from: "Cyber Scout Seminar Schedule, December 20-21", Ministry of Justice Thailand, ca. December 2010
That year, the government of then Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva blocked a record 45,357 URLs under the 2007 Computer Crimes Act, according to a study by Thammasat University. Of these, 39,115 were blocked because they were deemed offensive to the monarchy - lèse majesté - a criminal offense punishable by up to 15 years in prison. This marked a significant crackdown on alleged anti-monarchy dissent, especially after the bloody dispersal of the anti-government red shirt protests earlier in 2010.
A couple of months later, we got to see a glimpse of the inner workings of the project when one 'cyber scout' spoke to AFP:
He explained that if he finds comments deemed offensive to the king he plans to contact the person who posted them to first to warn them and give them a chance to change their views, before informing officials. “Not many people know about the project. They may think they’re talking to a friend because I don’t tell them I’m a cyber scout,” he said. “I feel I am doing an important job. I can give back to the country.”
“Thai ‘cyber scouts’ patrol web for royal insults“, Agence France-Presse, May 11, 2011
It was clear that the government back then was trying to introduce an online society of snitchers against a perceived threat - not unlike the namesake Village Scouts back in the 1970s that were battling against communist threats, both real and perceived. Eventually, the 'cyber scout'-project vanished into obscurity.
Fast forward four years, a change of government, a few protests, one major (enforced) political deadlock and a military coup later. The military junta is now reviving the 'cyber scout'-initiative, according to the Thai government news outlet:
กระทรวงไอซีที เตรียมลงนามความร่วมมือสถานศึกษา 200 แห่ง สร้างแกนนำลูกเสือไซเบอร์ให้กับเด็กนักเรียน อาจารย์และบุคคลากรในสถานศึกษา ช่วยกันสอดส่องดูแลภัยอันตรายและเฝ้าระวังข้อมูลข่าวสารที่เป็นภัยออนไลน์ทุกประเภท
The Ministry of Information and Communications Technology is making preparation for a cooperation with 200 schools in order to create 'Tiger Cyber Scouts' so that students, teachers and school personnel help monitor all kinds of dangerous information online.
นาง เมธินี เทพมณี ปลัดกระทรวง เทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศและการสื่อสาร เปิดเผยว่า วันที่ 26 – 29 สิงหาคมนี้ กระทรวงไอซีทีจะลงนามบันทึกข้อตกลงความร่วมมือกับสถานศึกษาทั่วประเทศ (...) เพื่อทำหน้าที่สร้างความรู้ ความเข้าใจ และความตระหนักในการใช้ ICT อย่างสร้างสรรค์ มีคุณธรรมจริยธรรม มีวิจารณญาน (...)
Ms. Manthinee Thepmanee, permanent secretary at the MICT said that between August 26 - 29, the MICT will sign cooperations with 200 schools nationwide (...) in order to build knowledge, understanding and raise awareness of using information and communication technology constructively, with moral and ethical judgement (...)
เพื่อที่จะช่วยกันสอดส่องดูแลภัยอันตราย และเฝ้าระวังข้อมูลข่าวสารที่เป็นภัยต่อสถาบัน รวมถึงความมั่นคงของประเทศ (...) และใช้งานข้อมูลข่าวสารบนโลกออนไลน์อย่างเหมาะสม และสร้างสรรค์ตั้งแต่รุ่นเยาวชน ตลอดจนเพื่อเป็นเครือข่ายขยายผลการใช้งานเทคโนโลยีอย่างถูกวิธี
[The objectives are] to jointly observe threats and monitor informations that are dangerous to the [monarchy] institution [and] national security, (...) to handle online information appropriately, as well as to incite to youth [with that knowledge] so that they will use technology the right way.
เนื่องจาก ภัยคุกคามจากเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศและการสื่อในปัจจุบัน โดยเฉพาะอินเทอร์เน็ต ทั้งการให้หรือรับข้อมูลข่าวสารที่บิดเบือน การเผยแพร่ และเข้าถึงข้อมูลที่มีลักษณะหมิ่นเหม่ต่อการหมิ่นสถาบันเบื้องสูง การเผยแพร่ภาพลามก อนาจาร ถือเป็นเรื่องสำคัญที่ผู้ใช้งาน และสังคมออนไลน์จำเป็นจะต้องให้ความสำคัญในการคัดกรองหรือเลือกที่จะเข้าถึง
Apart from the dangers coming from information technology and media today - especially from the internet - that receives or transmits information that distorts, circulates and gives access to information of defaming character to the higher [royal] institution, the circulation of pornography is another important issue that our staff and the online community should be monitoring and regulating access [more].
"ไอซีที เตรียมลงนามความร่วมมือสถานศึกษา 200 แห่ง สร้างแกนนำลูกเสือไซเบอร์ให้ช่วยกันสอดส่องดูแลภัยอันตรายและเฝ้าระวังข้อมูลข่าวสารที่เป็นภัยออนไลน์ทุกประเภท", National News Bureau of Thailand, August 6, 2014 - translation by me
This reads almost like carbon copy of the original 'cyber scout'-project from four years ago - with the notable difference that there is a military junta now in charge of Thailand and it has repeatedly shown in the past months that it will not tolerate criticism or dissent, as it has imposed strict censorship measures on the media and warned social media users against posting or sharing anti-coup messages. Reportedly over 200 websites have been blocked since the coup and recently the junta has bizarrely banned the sale of a computer game where you can play the role of a military junta.
Previously, the Royal Thai National Police offered 500 Baht ($15) to anyone providing information on anti-coup protesters and now, more worryingly, the military junta is reinstating state-sponsored cyber vigilantism, especially towards lèse majesté-related cases, while teaching school children early on what the junta thinks is right or wrong.
Why has Thailand banned the Tropico 5 video game?
Originally posted at Siam Voices on August 6, 2014
Ever since the military coup of May 22, 2014 the junta that is ruling Thailand has imposed strict censorship measures on the media and has shown repeatedly that it will not tolerate criticism. Journalists, if they have been temporary detained or reprimanded, have toned their reports down and partisan satellite channels (read: those of political parties) are still off air. The same heavy hand also extends to online and social media, where hundreds of websites have been blocked that carry anti-coup and anti-monarchy contents.
Now, the junta's censorship measures have taken their strangest turn so far:
Censors under Thailand's military junta have banned a city-building simulation computer game, saying it could hurt the country's security, a video game distributor said Monday.
The film and video censorship office blocked sales of "Tropico 5" because they feared "some part of its content might affect peace and order in the country," New Era Thailand marketing manager Nonglak Sahavattanapong said.
She said the office, part of the Culture Ministry's cultural promotion department, did not provide any further explanation in a written statement received by the distributor on Monday.
"Thailand's Censor Bans 'Tropico 5' Computer Game", Associated Press, August 4, 2014
In the fifth installment of the popular strategy and world-building PC game series "Tropico", the player takes the role of a leader in charge of a tropical island in the Caribbean spanning several decades and can either be a benevolent dictator caring for its population or a despot ruling with an iron fist (or anything in between) while trying to keep an eye on the nation's economics, education, foreign relations, military, personal wealth and everything else that's needs to be looked at. In short, the player is in charge of a banana republic and can do what he or she pleases, as long as he or she doesn't get overthrown in a revolution.
The ban by Thailand's junta was quickly picked up in the international media, including major video game news sites such as IGN, Kotaku, Polygon and Eurogamer. Also the game's publisher Kalypso Media stated in a press release:
"We are disappointed to hear that Tropico 5 will not be released in Thailand," commented Simon Hellwig, Global Managing Director Kalypso Media Group. ‘Tropico 3 and 4 both enjoyed successful releases in the country and although the Tropico brand does have a realistic political element to it, the scenarios and content are all delivered with a certain trademark tongue-in-cheek humor.’
Stefan Marcinek, Global Managing Director, Kalypso Media Group added ‘Our distributor has been working hard to gain approval for the release, but it seems that the Board of Film and Video Censors deem some of the content too controversial for their consumers. This does sound like it could have come from one of El Presidente’s own edicts from the game.’
Kalypso Media did release a DLC pack titled ‘Junta’ for Tropico 4 in 2011 which challenges players to turn the island into a militaristic society, something Thailand experienced in May this year when a real-life coups d’état saw the elected government ousted by a military takeover.
Press Release: "Tropico 5 Refused Retail Release in Thailand", Kalypso Media, August 4, 2014
Even the fictional "El Presidente" from the game himself tweeted in disbelief that "real life seems to be better than any parody" and a day later gave away copies the aforementioned 'Junta'-add-on pack for the (as of now still available) predecessor.
So, why was 'Tropico 5' banned from retail (as it is likely still available for purchase online) in Thailand?
On Tuesday, the Thai Ministry of Culture - or as we always call them #ThaiMiniCult - revealed further details of the ban:
Cultural Promotion Department chief Chai Nakhonchai said a subcommittee of the Video and Film Office had examined the game and voted 5-1 to ban it, with two abstentions.
He said the prohibition under the Film and Video Act 2008 was because the game allowed players the freedom to name the country and its leader or king as they pleased, and therefore the content was deemed offensive to the Thai monarchy and might affect national security and the country's dignity.
Chai also cited the report as saying that the game had many scenes in an era of "imperialism", which was a compulsory level for all players to go through in order to pass to other eras, and these scenes tended to mock the monarchy institution. Hence it was deemed to violate all previous constitutions of Thailand.
"Banned game found offensive to monarchy", The Nation, August 6, 2014
Where do I start...? First, the feature at the beginning of the game where you can create and customize your own "El Presidente" and name the island you'll rule is indeed a tool where players can let their fantasies run wild. But there has been no substantial evidence whatsoever that this feature has been used to emulate or mock Thailand and its monarchy. Second, the game takes you through several eras from the "Colonial Era" through "The World Wars" to "Modern Times" - but there's no so-called "Imperial Era" as claimed by ThaiMiniCult and there does not seem to be any reference to Thailand and its monarchy whatsoever.
In fact, the whole game franchise is a parody of a stereotypical Latin American banana republic and other historical figures that have meddled there. That has been the case in the previous four games, but the fifth one is apparently too much for the ThaiMiniCult to handle. At this point, the censorship seems already baseless and frivolous - if it wasn't for this cherry on top:
"Playing a game is different from watching a movie, as this game allows all players to express their beliefs without fear of law, so it is inappropriate to distribute such a game, especially during the current situation," he said.
"Banned game found offensive to monarchy", The Nation, August 6, 2014
Putting aside the debate over behavioral effects and escapism in video games (this is still a political blog, after all), the ThaiMiniCult seems to horribly misjudge fact from fiction and what people can potentially create with it. By invoking the ever-sensitive issue of the monarchy the censors are using a theme under which they can easily ban things - but on the other hand neither the developers nor the players probably had originally that in mind and are probably hearing it for the first time!
In other words, the ThaiMiniCult (and by extension the Thai military junta) does not want you to play a video game where you can play a military junta and have free choice about how you govern your fictitious country, since that can apparently already be deemed a political statement, no matter what choices you make in that game.
Well, there's still the classic board game "Junta!" out there to play...
Thai military junta tightens grip on media, issues gag order
Originally published at Siam Voices on July 22, 2014 Thailand's military government has further tightened its grip on the country's media by banning criticism of the junta, threatening to shut down the offending media outlet and legal consequences.
The edict came at a time when probably not many were listening. On Friday night, shortly after the weekly, self-adulating TV address by army chief and coup leader General Prayuth Chan-Ocha, all television broadcasts were temporarily stopped again for another announcement by the "National Council for Peace and Order" (NCPO), as the military junta calls itself.
In announcement number 97 since the military coup nearly two months ago, the subject line was innocuously titled "Cooperating with the work of the National Council for Peace and Order and the distributing of news to the public".
However, its contents were yet again a reaffirmed open threat to the media and anyone else daring to criticize the military coup and the junta with is now in control of both the government and the narrative:
3. Operators and providers in the media of all types, both state and privately owned - including radio; television broadcasted via terrestrial, cable, digital or internet; newspapers, journals or other publications; including all types of electronic media including social media - are obliged to distribute the information as presented by the NCPO. In this regard, a person should cease presenting information in the following:
(1) False or defamatory information or that creates hatred towards the monarchy, the heir, and all royals.
(2) Information that could harm national security, including the libel of others.
(3) Criticism of the work of the NCPO, its officials and associated persons.
(4) Secret recordings - audio, image and video - of the secret work done by government agencies.
(5) Information that causes confusion, that incites or provokes conflict or divisions in the Kingdom.
- Taken from: "ประกาศคณะรักษาความสงบแห่งชาติ - ฉบับที่ 97/2557", National Council for Peace and Order, July 18, 2014 - Translated by author
Furthermore, the soliciting of resistance against the NCPO and anything else that could "lead to panic" in the population will not be tolerated.
Failure to comply with these points could result in an effective shutdown of the offending news outlet by soldiers, provincial governors or city and provincial police chiefs. This could be followed by legal prosecution that could end up in front of a military court since Thailand is still under martial law, invoked two days before the coup.
The junta has repeatedly already made clear that it will not tolerate dissent - while at the same time Gen. Prayuth has invited the public to voice their disagreements in a civil manner during his weekly addresses. Friday's edict is as broadly worded as previous ones when it comes to defining what actually does constitute as criticism, as defamation, as a threat to national security, etc.
There's also another problem with the edict:
Thai Journalists Association chairman Pradit Ruangdit said the junta's order (...) may allow authorities to abuse their power in suspending the broadcast or publication violating the order.
"It is not clear if there will be any warnings, any steps or any approaches in determining the offense," Pradit said in a statement. "If there is an abuse of power and there is no check and balance process, it is more likely that this will create a bad impact."
He said the Thai Journalists Association would call a meeting next week with media executives and professionals to discuss and find a solution to the problem.
-"Thai Junta's Gag on Media Raises Alarm, Criticism", Associated Press, July 19, 2014
Not only has the edict effectively banned criticism media criticism of the NCPO, but also interviews with academics and former civil servants who could "give opinions in a manner that can inflict or worsen the conflict, distort information, create confusion in the society or lead to the use of violence".
This apparent gag order by the junta is not only limited to the mainstream media and its journalists and reporters. NCPO spokesman Colonel Winthai Suvaree emphasized that the junta is not only seeking "cooperation" from the media, but from all individuals - effectively pointing the finger at all Thai social media users, who have been facing heightened measures by the junta to block or otherwise restrict access online.
The military junta has already set up media watchdogs to monitor unfavorable coverage and debate in print, on air and online, a clear indication that it has a very clear idea how the public political discourse sohould be shaped, but - given its blanket gag order - not so much when it comes to identifying who they're actually up against.
The only aspect in the announcement that was more comprehensible compared to the previous ones is the open contempt of anything that does not fit the junta's narrative that is being discussed in public.
Thailand's junta sets up media watchdogs to monitor anti-coup dissent
Originally published at Siam Voices on June 26, 2014 Thailand's military junta has set up watchdogs to monitor all kinds of media for content that is deemed as "inciting hatred towards the monarchy" or providing "misinformation" that could potentially complicate the work of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), as the junta calls itself.
The committee is chaired by Pol Gen Adul Saengsingkaew, deputy NCPO chief for special affairs. Its members comprise representatives of agencies including the Royal Thai Police Office, army, navy, air force, Foreign Ministry, Prime Minister's Office and Public Relations Department.
The meeting agreed to set up four panels to "monitor" the media:
- A panel to follow news on radio and television stations, led by the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC);
- A panel to monitor news in the print media, led by the Special Branch;
- A panel to monitor news on the social media, headed by the permanent secretary for information and communication technology; and
- A panel to monitor international news, led by the permanent secretary for foreign affairs.
Upon finding news items deemed detrimental to the NCPO and the royal institution, they are to send a daily and weekly report to Pol Gen Adul and the NCPO chief [army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha].
"Media censorship panels formed", Bangkok Post, June 25, 2014
"All agencies have a duty to the people and the various media to make them understand the work of the NCPO, while at the same time to clamp down on the spread of 'information' that could incite hatred towards the monarchy and also on misinformation," Pol Gen Adul was quoted as saying by the Isara News Agency.
The set up of the panels and the large-scale cooperation between the military, government sectors and "independent" federal agencies is another sign of attempts to tighten the control over the narrative in the news and social media, which have been repeatedly warned by the junta not to broadcast content that "could negatively affect the peace-keeping work of the authorities". There has been no clarification on what this would entail, exactly.
During the military coup of May 22, 2014 all TV stations were only broadcasting announcements by the military and several satellite TV stations (mostly associated with the political protest groups) were ordered to cease broadcasting and have remained off air since. Others, including foreign news channels, were gradually allowed back on air under the condition that they do not air shows debating the political situation.
The junta has also been trying to combat dissent online, especially on social media. Efforts are made (with the cooperation of Thai internet service providers) to block access to anti-coup and anti-monarchy content. Reportedly, at least 200 websites have been blocked and social media users have been warned not to spread "wrongful” information that may “incite unrest".
Authorities have suggested creating a national online gateway in order to filter out undesirable website and are even considering a national social network that they're in full control off. The junta has also reportedly resorted to gathering user information via phishing, fooling the unsuspecting user into installing an app on their social network.
In late May, a brief block of the social network Facebook sparked uproar online, while statements by the Ministry for Information and Telecommunication Technology (MICT) and the NCPO over whether or not the Facebook-block was ordered or it was an "technical glitch" contradicted each other. It emerged later through a the foreign parent company of a Thai telco company that there actually was an order to block Facebook, for which it got scolded by the Thai authorities.
The special emphasis by the junta on alleged anti-monarchy content is highlighted by the fact that since the military coup all cases that fall under the draconian lèse majesté law are now under the jurisdiction of a military court.
Manop Thiposot, a spokesman for the Thai Journalists Association (TJA), voiced his concern over the establishment of the junta's media monitoring bodies. "Without clear guidelines it could negatively affect the public's right to information and severely restrict the work of the media," Manop said in an interview with the newspaper Krungthep Turakij. He called on the NCPO to clarify their working process and make it transparent.
Manop also reports that military officers have entered the newsroom of an unnamed newspaper and ordered reporters not to report about the newly established anti-coup movement in exile (founded by former politicians associated of the toppled government), while at the same time the junta publicly claims to be "unfazed" by it.
The junta is making it again clear that it will not tolerate dissent and criticism, all in the name of "avoiding misunderstanding" as it puts it. It aims to control of the post-coup narrative, but will struggle to get a handle on the multiple ways people are getting their information and communicating with each other, as well as the diversity of opinions those media outlets have spawned.
Thailand's military junta wants you to snitch on anti-coup dissidents - for cash!
Originally published at Siam Voices on June 24, 2014 Thailand's ruling junta has unleashed a new weapon in its quest to quell anti-coup activism.
Voice of America reported on Monday:
Thailand’s police force is now asking for citizens’ help in identifying those perceived to be displaying opposition to the military coup in the kingdom.
A Thai police general has announced he will give cash rewards to those turning in photos or videos of anyone illegally expressing a political stance. (...)
Deputy police commissioner General Somyot Poompanmoung has announced rewards of about $15 [THB 500] for each picture of such suspects. The police general said he will personally pay the reward for any photographs that result in charges.
"Thai Police General Offers Cash for Snapshots of Dissidents", Voice of America, June 23, 2014
This comes after a protest in central Bangkok took place on Sunday, exactly one month after the military coup of May 22, 2014 and a little more than a month after the country was put under martial law. Police officers, some of them in plain clothing, were deployed. They detained and later released student activists.
In previous weeks, small but vocal anti-coup protests popped up in the capital, some showing the three-finger salute from "The Hunger Games" movies, reading George Orwell's "1984" in small groups or just eating sandwiches. Such simple and seemingly innocent actions have met with scorn from the military junta, which has repeatedly warned against any form of opposition to the coup. The warning also includes comments made on social media, which the junta is still struggling to control.
The call to report dissidents is not new in Thailand, as very recent history has shown: In 2010, the government of then Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva oversaw the initiation of a so-called "cyber-scout" program to train volunteers for online monitoring of web comments deemed insulting to the monarchy.
A similar tactic was later used by Chitpas Bhirombhakdi, commonly known as the "Singha Beer heiress" and later involved in the anti-government protests of 2013-14. In 2011, working for the opposition Democrat Party, she urged citizens to email any hints of anti-royal slurs online.
As seen in numerous cases regarding alleged lèse majesté suspects, vigilantism was at least tolerated if not actively encouraged. It seems that the military junta is now expanding it to its opponents and those who do not agree with its takeover of power a month ago.
In post-coup Thailand, junta mandates ‘happiness’ and ‘reconciliation’
Originally published at Siam Voices on June 10, 2014 [Author's note: Due to the military coup of May 22, 2014 and subsequent censorship measures we have placed certain restrictions on what we publish. Please also read Bangkok Pundit's post on that subject. We hope to return to full and free reporting and commentary in the near future.]
To bring back love, how long will it take? Please, will you wait? We will move beyond disputes We will do what we promised. We are asking for a little more time.
These words accompanied by the soft melody of synthesized strings could be mistaken for the lines of any other contemporary Thai pop ballad. However, going back a few seconds shows that this song tackles an entirely different theme with a certain schmalz:
Today the nation is facing menacing danger The flames are rising Let us be the ones who step in, before it is too late
The lyrics belong to the song ”Returning Happiness to Thailand” (in Thai: ”คืนความสุขให้ประเทศไทย”) and is claimed to be written by army chief and junta leader General Prayuth Chan-ocha himself in just ”one hour”, but it’s still ”a message from his heart,” according to local media reports.
The song is just one part the military's campaign to win back the hearts and minds of the Thai people after it launched a coup d’ètat on May 22, seizing absolute power, largely censoring media, detaining hundreds of people - many of them members of the toppled government, their supporters and outspoken academics and journalists - and generally cracking down on any criticism of the coup.
National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), as the junta calls itself, launched its reconciliation efforts last week in Bangkok with a street fair:
At a junta-sponsored event on Wednesday in Bangkok — part concert, part street fair — an army truck operating as a mobile kitchen dished out thousands of free "Happy Omelets and Rice." Doctors from a military hospital gave out free medicine and checked blood pressure. A line of soldiers with shields and face paint stood ready for crowds to snap selfies.
The event drew mostly residents who supported the takeover, and it took place at a roundabout where just a few days earlier soldiers in riot gear had faced off against hundreds of anti-junta protesters. (…)
”Cheer up, Thailand! Junta aims to return happiness”, Associated Press, June 7, 2014
If the first two weeks since the power seizure were about ‘shock and awe’ (especially in the provinces whose population supported and elected the toppled government), the efforts since then are focusing on what the junta sees as the most pressing issues, but doing so with a benevolent appearance.
Apart from the street fairs, the junta is also paying back rice farmers what they are owed from the Yingluck Shinawatra government's ill-fated rice pledging scheme, and other populist measures like fixing fuel prices and protection from loan sharks. Furthermore, it is currently reviewing the big-investment projects of the previous, looking what it can salvage as its own policy.
Another main point of the junta’s efforts are the so-called ”reconciliation centers” that are being set up across the country. The general concept of these ”reconciliation centers” are to create a space where people and groups with opposite political viewpoints (think red shirts vs yellow shirts) are brought together to the table with the military acting as the self-appointed mediator.
The organization tasked to oversee these centers is the Internal Security Operation Command (ISOC), a body that has been around for a few decades, as David Streckfuss explains:
The military's Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC), set up 50 years ago to ostensibly root out communists, has now been charged with helping parties separated by the political divide to "dissolve their differences” at “reform centers."
”Thailand's Military Is Forcing People to Stop Worrying and Love the Coup”, by David Streckfuss, VICE NEWS, June 3, 2014
It’s not only ISOC’s involvement that makes critics skeptical of these centers, but also its links with history:
"I think the army tried to apply the techniques and concepts from the Cold War era during which they fought with the Communist Party of Thailand,” said Kan Yuenyong of the Siam Intelligence Unit.
“They apply concepts like the Karunyathep Centre which is like a re-education centre, and then after the program they can get back to the society as normal people."
Karunyathep centre was set up in the 1970s, as part of the military's soft approach towards Communist party members. Captured communists would be sent to the re-education camps to be taught about democratic values before being released.
However, the military maintains that the reconciliation centers will operate in today's context and that this time, participation will be voluntary. "The concept might be quite similar but the implementation is different, we understand the context of the current situation,” said Colonel Weerachon.
”Speculation, unease over Thai reconciliation centres”, by Arglit Boonyai, Channel NewsAsia, June 5, 2014
Whether or not these centers will bring reconciliation remains to be seen. A recent 'peace ceremony' in Nakhon Ratchasima is nevertheless being hailed as an "unprecedented" success.
With the military junta slowly taking shape and setting its goals, much depends on how heavy-handed its actions will be against those that do not support the coup. Especially in the age of social media, the traditional methods of the junta to sooth the dissent are becoming less effective and prolonged restrictions on free expression and political gatherings could further de-legitimize the military rule.
To put it in the words of aforementioned song by the junta: "What danger is the nation really facing?"