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
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 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'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.
Lèse majesté vigilantism and Thailand's political crisis
Originally published at Siam Voices on April 23, 2014 UPDATE (April 23): The head of the newly created radical royalist cyber-vigilante group has filed a lèse majesté charge against Ms. "Rose" himself. In separate story on Wednesday, Kamol Duangphasuk, better known among the red shirts as a poet under his pen name "Maineung K. Kunthee" has been shot dead by unknown assailants. "Maineung" was also known to be an anti-lèse majesté activist.
ORIGINAL STORY (April 22)
As Thailand's political crisis lingers on, the country's draconian lèse majesté law is still being applied, as two related cases show. Moreover, a new online vigilante group is making sure it stays that way.
The words Wutthipong Kotchathammakhun spoke into the camera were as straightforward as they were blunt. The man more commonly known as red shirt activist and radio talk-show host "Ko Tee" has always been more outspoken than the mainstream umbrella red shirt organization, the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), and he also doesn't shy away from openly criticizing the monarchy.
In a documentary by VICE News on the current Thai political crisis posted on YouTube earlier this month, "Ko Tee" implies that anti-government protest leader Suthep Thuagsuban "is only the figurehead" and points to somebody higher behind the protest movement.
The reporter asks Kotee what the red-shirts’ demands are. Kotee replies: “We demand that they stop mob gatherings on the streets. We demand the electoral system. They say they love the country. But all they do is destroy it and the economy. I'm fighting the system that has dominated Thailand for a long time. Suthep is only the figurehead. I'm fighting the one who is really behind the mob. You know the meaning, right?"
After a pause, he asks the reporter if she understands the implication of his gesture. He then says the name of the alleged de facto leader of the anti-government protest.
"Hardcore red Kotee target of lèse majesté charge", Prachatai English, April 9, 2014
The reactions were swift and even the Yingluck government were quick to pull the trigger, ordering the police to take legal actions against "Ko Tee", who remains at large at the time of publishing. Furthermore, the authorities have also threatened the public not to share said video, since they could also be implicated for lèse majesté.
That wasn't the only lèse majesté charge this month.
A Thai mother and father have sued their daughter, a vocal anti-establishment red-shirt residing in the UK, for posting video clips of herself defaming the monarchy after they received a storm of hate phone calls from Thai loyalists.
Thai media reported on April 17 that Surapong and Somchintra Amornpat filed a police complaint against their daughter Chatwadee Amornpat, 34, who is now working as a hair stylist in London and holds British citizenship.
Declaring herself a “progressive red shirt” and republican, Chatwadee, aka Rose, recorded several video clips, voicing her opinions on the Thai political conflict and attacking the monarchy and published them on her Facebook profile. (...)
Her parents decided to press charges against her because they were threatened by phone calls from people in Thailand. Pressing charges is to show that they do not condone their daughter’s actions, the parents said, adding that they have warned her to stop defaming the King.
"I want people to understand that just because a daughter is doing something wrong, it doesn't mean the parents are also guilty, because we don't condone such actions," Khaosod English quoted Surapong as saying.
"Parents sue daughter for lèse majesté", Prachatai English, April 19, 2014
While "Rose" is in the United Kingdom, she could be arrested if she returns in Thailand. What is more striking in this case is not only that the parents are filing a lèse majesté complaint against their own daughter, but also the apparent climate of fear in the form of the threats made against the parents.
Such a climate of fear and pre-emptive social obedience - something we have mentioned a few times here when it comes to (over-)emphasizing one's loyalty to the monarchy - has now gained another supporter in form of an online vigilante group. The Facebook group, roughly translated to the "Organisation to Eradicate the Nation's Trash" ("องค์กรเก็บขยะแผ่นดิน" in Thai), has taken it upon itself to, as the name implies, to “exterminate” those that in their view "insult, defame and discredit the monarchy." The group, opened by a former military doctor called Dr Rienthong Naenna, has as of writing more than 140,000 likes since its launch a little over a week ago.
Pro-monarchist vigilantism online is not a new phenomenon in Thailand - at one point in recent history it was even state-sponsored. Those accused of being critical of the monarchy have often been the target of cyber witch hunts. Victims of such attacks have often have their personal details and contact information disclosed in public.
But the aforementioned group is seemingly upping the ante:
Mongkutwattana General Hospital director Rienthong Nanna, who unveiled his new Rubbish Collection Organisation (RCO) last Wednesday, yesterday warned critics that he would “respond with violence” to any violent attacks committed against his supporters.
It came as Dr Rienthong claimed yesterday that about 7pm on Saturday he saw “suspicious-looking men” in three cars lurking outside his house on Chaeng Watthana Road. (...)
Dr Rienthong said he was working on the establishment of a “People’s Army to Protect the Monarchy”, which would recruit people in every region (...). He also invited retired military and police officers who are loyal to the King to a meeting (...) to discuss the establishment of “a special task force of old soldiers” to help the National Police Office punish perpetrators of the lese majeste law.
However, Dr Rienthong told the Bangkok Post that his “People’s Army” and the soldiers task force are not intended to persecute or use violence against fellow Thais. Their mission will be only to look for lese majeste suspects and bring them to justice. He denied the RCO is a rogue organisation and vowed that it will operate within the law, without links to political or business groups.
"Monarchists vow to fight ‘armed threat’", Bangkok Post, April 20, 2014
Even if the online mob does not translate its vigilantism into the real life, it does plant yet another dangerous seed in the already hatred-filled plains by naming their perceived enemies as "trash" and vowing to collect and "eradicate" them. The radical monarchists are setting a dangerous precedent, which some observers have compared to the Thammasat massacre of 1976. The holier-than-thou mindset of those claiming to defend the monarchy is further polarizing an already emotionally charged political crisis and could damage the monarchy in the long run more than they're actually protecting it.
Phuket journalists on trial for quoting Pulitzer-prize winning Rohingya trafficking report
Originally published at Siam Voices on April 17, 2014 UPDATE: After spending five hours in court cell, Phuketwan reporters Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian are released on bail (100,000 Baht each) and are remanded to appear in court again on May 26, according to a report by Australia's The Age.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE:
The trial against two Phuket journalists for alleged defamation is set to begin today. The Royal Thai Navy has sued Phuketwan reporters Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian for their coverage of the Thai authorities' involvement in human trafficking of Rohingya migrants from Burma. This has been complicated by the fact that the offending passage was a quote from another report done by the international news agency Reuters. Both are facing up to seven years in prison if found guilty.
The charges were filed in December last year (see our original blog post here). Both journalists were charged not only for libel, but also also allegedly breaching the Computer Crimes Act, which makes arbitrary legal suits against online dissent (including by third parties) possible thanks to the vague wording of the law. Phuketwan - which has reported extensively on the plight of the Rohingya at the hands of Thai authorities - has quoted from a Reuters special report that specifically accuses members of the Royal Thai Navy of being involved in the trafficking of Rohingya refugees.
The case has drawn international condemnation and has now seen an interesting development:
Reuters won a Pulitzer Prize on Monday for international reporting on the violent persecution of a Muslim minority in Myanmar [Burma], the Pulitzer Prize Board at Columbia University announced.
The board commended Jason Szep and Andrew Marshall of Reuters for their "courageous reports" on the Rohingya, who in their efforts to flee the Southeast Asian country, "often falls victim to predatory human-trafficking networks."
"Reuters, Guardian US, Washington Post, Boston Globe win Pulitzer prizes", Reuters, April 14, 2014
A list of their coverage can be seen here.
Several observers have noted that the Royal Thai Navy have so far not pressed charges against the global news agency Reuters, but instead after the local Phuketwan and to "make an example of them for others," as Bangkok Pundit blogged yesterday.
Several journalists and media advocacy groups have repeated their calls to drop the charges against Morison and Sidasathian ahead of today's trial. Their case - as with the plight of the Rohingya refugees themselves - has received hardly any coverage in the Thai-language media:
However, [Chutima Sidasathian] said she received little or no help from the Thai authorities. Neither the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) or the Thai Journalist Association (TJA) has offered their assistance in the legal procedure, Ms. Chutima told Khaosod, while her letter to the Rights and Liberty Protection Department went unanswered.
"I filed the letter to the officials in Phuket last month. I just discovered that somehow they did not forward the document to Bangkok," Ms. Chutima said, "I am shocked".
She is also disheartened by the fact that the lawsuit against Phuketwan has received very little coverage in the Thai mainstream media.
"Phuket Journalists To Face Lawsuits Filed By Navy", Khaosod English, April 8, 2014
The case has already set a worrying precedent - it is reportedly the first time the Thai military has made use of the Computer Crimes Act - and things could get even worse if they are convicted. It shows that the Thai authorities have no apparent interest in the treatment of Rohingya migrants in Thailand (as summarized here) or investigating the human trafficking allegations.
Thai webmaster Chiranuch loses appeal against suspended sentence
Originally published at Siam Voices on November 8, 2013 Thai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn has lost her appeal against her sentence for not deleting online comments deemed insulting to the monarchy quickly enough from the now defunct web board of the Thai news site Prachatai. The Criminal Court found her guilty in May 2012 and initially sentenced her to 1 year in prison, which was then reduced to an 8-month suspended sentence thanks to her testimony and a THB20,000 (US$630) fine.
The court stated that Chiranuch had failed to delete one comment for 20 days, whereas the other nine objected comments were deleted within 10 days, thus violating against Article 14 and 15 of the 2007 Computer Crimes Act which punishes “false data” that damages a third party, causes public panic or undermines the country’s security and “any service provider intentionally supporting” the said offenses, respectively – despite the fact that the court also states that the expectation to pre-emptively delete illegal comments was “unfair”.
On Friday morning, the Appeal Court turned down her appeal, essentially agreeing with the Criminal Court's original verdict, adding that Chiranuch should have known better based on her professional experience:
Appeal court agrees with criminal court: claim by defendants that not consent for comments published on Web for 1-11 days is convincing
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) November 8, 2013
Court: monarchy is needed for Thai society. the current king has devoted himself for the county and is an ideal monarch.
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) November 8, 2013
Court: it's duty for all Thais to protect the king
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) November 8, 2013
Court: given that defendant was 41 yr and graduated from media school, defendant should have taken better precaution measure to prevent LM.
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) November 8, 2013
Appeal court: Same sentence with suspended jail term #freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) November 8, 2013
This case highlights the flawed legal foundation: the Computer Crime Act (CCA), which became effective in 2007, is vaguely worded and leaves a lot of room for interpretation and thus also legal arbitrariness, which can be made worse in conjunction with the draconian lèse majesté law (which Chinranuch isn't charged with in this case, by the way). A new version of the CCA is currently being drafted and already faces criticism by several Thai journalism associations (we will take a closer look at it in a future post).
Today's ruling shows again the ambiguous legal situation not only for online users, but also for providers of online content platforms, as they can be held liable for the contents of others. In the context of free speech, it is a severe hindrance to open discussions especially on politically sensitive issues. The condescending remark by the judges that the defendant should have known that online platforms could be used "to defame the King" is a strong hint of the authority's duty to protect the royal institution from any perceived danger, even if it means restricting online debates and online users have to censor themselves.
Thai authorities use scare tactics to curb political rumors online
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 12, 2013 Thailand's authorities are openly resorting to scare tactics to curb online discussions of politics after the summoning of several users for posting coup rumors on Facebook and a dumbfoundingly revealing interview with an official admitting his division's use of said methods.
The debate of the amnesty bills in parliament last week and the anticipation of opposition both in and outside the House caused the government to invoke the Internal Security Act in order to deal with anti-government protests. This, along with suspicious tank movements to the capital Bangkok (later dispelled by the army as a routine exercise), triggered heightened political tensions with fears of an escalation of the ongoing standoff between the various factions.
So it comes to no surprise that these tensions are being discussed online, including the inevitable mention of a possible military coup (which unfortunately is never out of the question in Thailand). However, such talk is not tolerated by the Thai authorities and have launched counter-measures, as seen last week:
Four people, including an editor of a TV channel, will be summoned for posting statements on social media which could lead to anxiety among the general public, a senior police officer said today.
Pol Maj Gen Pisit Pao-in, commander of the Technology Crime Suppression Division [TCSD], said the four suspects posted messages via social media, saying they anticipated a coup and urged people to stock up on food and water in preparations for shortage. Their statements could put people in a state of panic, he said.
The four included Sermsuk Kasitipradit, political and security editor of Thai Public Broadcast Service (ThaiPBS), Dechatorn Tirapiriya, a Red Shirt leader in Chonburi province, Warnuee Kamduangwong and a user under the pseudonym “Yo Onshine”.
"Four people to be summoned for posting unwanted texts on social media", MCOT, August 5, 2013
The contents of the Facebook posts themselves are largely unknown to the public and the most prominent person to be accused, ThaiPBS' Sermsuk Kasitipradit, has reportedly already deleted the offending Facebook post. He was interrogated on Friday.
The TCSD chief also was of the opinion that the four persons summoned - even before any charges were filed - violated Article 116 of the Criminal Code and Article 14 of the Computer Crimes Act (and NOT "National Computer Act", MCOT!). Both articles address the matter of "national security" stating that "words, writings" or "false computer data" respectively that can cause "disturbance" or "a public panic" is punishable with either a hefty fine or five years in prison or both.
Regular readers know that the Computer Crimes Act (CCA) is vaguely worded and deeply flawed, and thus its interpretation and application in conjunction with the Criminal Code by the authorities are arbitrary as the countless lèse majesté-related cases have shown in the past.
What this case also reveals is the blatant view of the Thai authorities in regards of curbing free speech online with straight-up intimidation, as the TCSD's chief Police Maj.-Gen. Pisit Pao-in shows in what can only be described a dumbfounding interview:
Q : Are asking if clicking "like" is now against the law. [sic]
A : It will be if you 'like' a message deemed damaging to national security. If you press 'like', it means you are accepting that message, which is tantamount to supporting it. By doing so, you help increase the credibility of the message and hence you should also be held responsible. (...)
A : The TCSD action is just meant to have a psychological impact. We don't want these four persons to be jailed. We just questioned them and it's okay for them to say they didn't mean to create panic. After this action, people are now more careful [about their Facebook messages]. I am mainly aiming at social peace. (...)
Q : What about "sharing" such a message?
A : There are two kinds of sharing. If you share in a way to support the original message, this is wrong. But if you comment against the message, this is okay.
"'Liking' political rumours is a crime", The Nation, August 11, 2013
Unfortunately, Pisit's staggering and blatantly anachronistic comments are in line with past and present governments in handling online censorship: under the premiership of Abhisit Vejjajiva the number of blocked URLs skyrocketed and the 'Cyber Scouts'-program to monitor online dissidents was launched. The current government of Yingluck Shinawatra has maintained if not even worsened the trend by doing essentially more of the same, as current Minister for Communication and Technology (MICT) Anudith Nakornthap vowed to continue the crackdown on lèse majesté contents and has also pledged to criminalize Facebook 'likes' not once, but twice now with the current case!
It is just astonishing yet unsurprising that such a self-image and understanding the Thai authorities still have of what and how discussions - especially of political nature - are ought to be like and ought to be dictated by only them. By admitting to openly use such scare tactics against online users and to outlaw simple 'likes' and 'shares' on Facebook, it really begs the question what their understanding of 'social peace' is, that can only be enforced.
Thai army ordered to stand down after bullying yellow shirt paper
Originally published at Siam Voices on January 14, 2013 This past weekend, around 40-50 military officers suddenly showed up in front of the building of ASTV-Manager protesting the paper's harsh criticism of the army and the 'slandering' of their armed forces chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha. The soldiers from the 1st army region assembled on Friday afternoon after the newspaper compared Prayuth's most recent outburst to a "woman in her periods". A second protest was staged on Saturday morning at the same spot and they threatened to repeat it again every day until the paper apologizes.
The show of force by the officers in green came after a public tit-for-tat between General Prayuth and the newspaper, the latter attacking the armed forces for their handling of the border conflict with neighboring Cambodia over the ancient Buddhist Hindu temple Preah Vihear. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will hold hearings in April, after the Cambodia has requested the ICJ to reinterpret aspects of the 1962 ruling in their favor. A decision is expected to take place in October later this year.
Just to be very clear, the publication the soldiers were protesting is far from being the beacon of the Thai press media: ASTV-Manager is the press outlet of the ultra-nationalistic and ill-named "People's Alliance for Democracy" (PAD), also commonly known as the yellow shirts. Apart from their regular anti-democratic diatribes and low punches as seen above (that reflects its comments section), the Preah Vihear temple conflict is one of the issues the political pressure group is using to rally up supporters - just that it's one of the less popular ones compared to those that have a distinct anti-Thaksin and nowadays anti-Yingluck agenda to it.
The last PAD protest over the temple conflict was in early 2011, following another deadly clash at the border between Thai and Cambodian troops. At the short-lived and small protest sit-in, the yellow shirts were at times calling for an open war with Cambodia. Frustrated with their diminished relevance in Thai (street) politics, it was also during that time when they broke off their formerly close alliances with the Democrat Party (which were in power back then) and with hawkish factions of the military, as the PAD accused both of not doing enough for the "interest of the country" over the border conflict.
In the run-up to the ICJ hearings - to which the PAD has urged the government not to accept anything at all by the ICJ in the irrationale fear of losing sovereignty - the PAD's news-outlets are repeating their diatribes against Cambodia, the ICJ and also the army as they started criticizing General Prayuth, which deteriorated into the spat and ultimately to the soldiers' protest, who see not only their army chief being attacked but also the institution of the armed forces as a whole:
The green-uniformed protesters on Saturday said the article has damaged their morale because the army chief is like their "second father". They demanded the media outlet issue an apology to the general.
They also denied being ordered by their superiors to stage the event. Gen Prayuth told reporters earlier that the soldiers were free to hold such rallies because they were trying to protect the armed forces, not just him. (...)
"If [the PAD] were the government, I would have to listen to it. But since it is not, I have no idea what to do with it," Gen Prayuth said during a visit to the border area earlier in the week.
"Prayuth to troops: Stand down at ASTV", Bangkok Post, January 12, 2013
Despite the fact that Prayuth has ordered the soldiers to cease from any more protests, the public display by the soldiers underlines the over-confident self-perception of the armed forces' role in Thai society that they are above from criticism - given Prayuth's erratic outbursts at the media (read here, here and here) that is hardly surprising. While this is mouthpiece of an ultra-nationalistic pressure group we're talking about, having 50 troops show up at their doorstep isn't right either! And to make matters worse, the army is now asking for forgiveness "confidence in the army" - quite an ambitious request after this weekend.
Generally, the reactions by fellow Thai journalists on this incident were swift and clear:
The TJA statement called for the army to respect freedom of the press. If the army feels the media have violated its rights, it can file a complaint with the National Press Council. As well, it said the army chief should listen to media coverage that fairly reflected the army's and his performance without bias and in a constructive way.
At the same time, it said, all media (...) should refrain from distorting the facts or abusing the dignity and human rights of people appearing in the news. They should also refrain from using rude or insulting words, it said.
"Journalists decry threats", Bangkok Post, January 12, 2013
While this response is in principle correct, it begs the question where the TJA was during other (arguably equally severe) interferences and threats to the media and freedom of speech in the past few years? Where was the TJA on the countless lèse majesté cases affecting free speech and charges made against journalists? Where were they when on the verdict of Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn, held liable for online comments she didn't make? Did they say anything about the media interferences by the Abhisit administration? Was there any criticism made over the apparent failure by Thai TV to inform about a potential tsunami warning? And what did the TJA say when (of all people) journalism students were protesting against reforms of the lèse majesté law?
UPDATE: As soon as this post was published on Monday afternoon, news came out that army chief Prayuth has "apologized". However, he merely did only excuse his choices of words ("a lousy newspaper"), but not the message itself.
Thailand in 2012 - Some personal thoughts (Part 2)
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 29, 2012 This is the second and final part of the Siam Voices year-in-review. Yesterday in part 1, we looked at the year of prime minister's government, that of the opposition and the prevailing impunity over the 2010 crackdown.
Lese majeste: Cowardice in the face of first victim
One topic we expected to continue to play a role in 2012 is the draconian lèse majesté law and its unjust application to crack down on alleged dissent voices. And in many ways - despite the release of Thai-American Joe Gordon and an 'only' suspended sentence against Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn for not deleting monarchy-insulting web comments quickly enough - it unfortunately still made headlines for the wrong reasons.
The death of Amphon "Akong" Tangnoppakul marked what could be argued the first victim of lèse majesté. The 64-year-old retiree was serving a 20 year sentence for allegedly sending four defamatory text messages to the personal secretary of Abhisit Vejjajiva (despite inconclusive evidence). Having repeatedly being denied bail and suffering bad health, Akong died in detention on May 8. Obviously, his death sparked universal condemnation against the law - almost: Thailand politicians showed little sympathy and interest to do something about the arbitrary law, with Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra insisting not to do anything to change Article 112 of the Criminal Code.
Up until this point, the heated discussion about how to amend or if not abolish the law altogether was ongoing. Leading this debate was the Nitirat group, a collective of reformist law academics from Thammasat University, amidst considerable uproar. And it was that university that had a reputation for being one of the more liberal institutions in this country that was struggling and battling with itself, which led to one of the most astonishing sights of this year: of all people, journalism students (!) were seen protesting against Nitirat and the reform of the lèse majesté law by saying “Don’t use knowledge to distort morality!”
The chances that the law will be somehow changed (or even just remotely touched by politicians) remain slim as two incidents have shown that it is untouchable: the Constitutional Court rejected a petition by Somyot Pruksakasemsuk and Ekachai Hongkangwan, both currently on trial for lèse majesté, as it does not see the constitutional right to free speech being violated by Article 112 of the Criminal Code. In another story, a bill petition proposing to amend the law - signed by over 30,000 - was dismissed by the speaker of the parliament.
Meanwhile earlier this week, a former stockbroker has been sentenced to four years in prison under the equally flawed Computer Crimes Act for spreading "false information".
Emerging neighbors: Thailand's geo-political opportunities and blunders
This past year showed the rapid rise of neighboring Myanmar, as the country carefully progresses economically and politically - despite the unmasking of the ugly side of the Burmese pro-democracy movement regarding the genocide against the Rohingya - and other countries of course are in a gold rush mood, as they see new investment opportunities and also to grow their regional influence.
Thailand was one of the few countries that already did business with its neighbor before the change and the upcoming industrial area and deep sea port in Dawei on Myanmar's west coast is the biggest of them. But we reported at the beginning of this year that the mega-project ran into some problems and also caused the Thai government to reconsider their commitment. However, after a visit by Prime Minister Yingluck to Myanmar it seems to be on track again.
A different story shows how Thailand has lost some regional credibility: When NASA planned to use the Thai naval airbase in U-Tapao for atmospheric research study, the opposition Democrat Party drummed up nationalistic outrage and tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists came out crawling again - conveniently forgetting that...
Officials have noted that the Democrats, now opposed to the NASA initiative, approved the program while in power in 2010 and that it would not entail the use of military aircraft.
"Baseless controversy over Thailand's U-Tapao", Asia Times One, June 22, 2012
It was petty domestic political squabbles that eventually led the annoyed NASA to kill the project and gave Thailand a huge slap to the face geo-politically for not being able to sort itself out.
While the prime minister was busy traveling the world this year to bolster economical ties (read our exclusive report on her visit to Germany and France here), Thailand needs to take charge in the ASEAN region (and without looking down on its neighbors), if it doesn't want to loose relevancy.
The exploits of "ThaiMiniCult" in 2012: Mammophobia!
Of course it wouldn't be Siam Voices if we wouldn't monitor the self-proclaimed cultural heralds of everything “Thai”-ness - or in short "ThaiMiniCult". And while this year they have been noticeably less outraged in quantity, there were still instances when we could only shake our heads.
There was for example the ThaiMiniCult that was rumored (and thank god it was only a rumor) to order that "100 per cent males" shouldn't play transgender roles on TV. Or some arbitrary survey that blames Facebook for teen pregnancies, only to find out that it was lazy journalism that caused that headline, while the real problem of nearly non-existing sexual education is being swept under the carpet. Or the MP that was caught looking up some naughty pictures on his phone in parliament.
But probably the most noticeable media outrage (and also the most-clicked Siam Voices story of 2012) was the 'controversy' over the literally bare-breasted painting performance on the TV show "Thailand's Got Talent" that caused one of the judges to throw a sanctimonious tantrum on national TV and a moral witch-hunt. In the end, it turns out that the producers have "hired" her for a staged controversy. However, given how Thais reacted (or claimed to react) to this brouhaha, it was in many ways revealing.
What else happened this year? (in no particular order)
- The four-part series on Thai Education Failures by our regular Siam Voices contributor Kaewmala is a must-read! Be it ridiculous O-Net questions, questionable standardization, our poor international performance and lacking English proficiencies - our archaic education system is in dire need of change! And what does the Pheu Thai government do? Give away free tablets...!
- A rape case in Krabi, the disgusting denial by the Thai tourism minister in order to 'protect' the image and a father's creative plea for justice.
- Thais being outraged by five tourist douchebags cutting down a tree while most population doesn't give a damn about their own environmental lifestyle and willingly plastic-bags everything...!
- Thais being outraged at Lady Gaga for tweeting the intention of buying a fake Rolex while most of the population otherwise willingly ignores the countless counterfeit markets, and after campaigns by outraged religious groups in the Philippines and Indonesia to ban her concerts, looking rather silly and childish...!
- The Thai senator who accidentally shot his wife...or secretary...or cousin...with an uzi...or not...!
- In upside-down world news this year: The reactionary right-wing ASTV/Manager (media outlet of the anti-democratic yellow shirts) accuses the blatantly anti-Thaksin The Nation (an attempt of a newspaper) of being pro-Thaksin - mind blown!
- "Double, double toil and trouble;" - Thailand's movie adaptation of Shakespeare's "Macbeth" gets banned, but not for the depiction of regicide, rather for the depiction of another "Dear Leader" and the disparagement of his followers.
- Three Iranian terrorists literally blowing up their cover on Valentine's Day in the middle of Bangkok after a warning by the United States Embassy and the immediate arrest of a Hezbollah suspect a month before that and the tweeting motorcycle taxi driver that got the scoop of his lifetime. And deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung as the spiritual successor of the former Iraqi information minister by saying that there's "absolutely no terrorism" in the kingdom.
- Deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung as our new regular contributor to the "Tongue-Thai’ed!"-segments and coming up with the most creative name for the new command center in the South!
- The tsunami scare in April and the failure of Thai TV to inform the public because of a royal cremation ceremony.
- The Dhammakāya Movement's newest revelation: the afterlife of Apple's Steve Jobs...!
- The visit of US President Barack Obama to Thailand, and his meeting with Yingluck Shinwatra and half of the internet not able to be mature about it.
- The Bangkok Futsal Arena fiasco, as the city has failed to construct a purposed-built arena in time for FIFA Futsal World Cup and thus embarrassing themselves on a world stage.
- The return of the fraudulent bomb-sniffing device also known as the GT200, essentially a horrendously overpriced empty plastic shell with a dowsing rod. It's ineffectiveness has been proven since 2010, but it has emerged that the bogus device is still in use by the armed forces for the simple reason that there's "no alternative" but to keep on using it until there's a replacement, while soldiers are unnecessarily risking their lives more than they should because of this fraud, whose UK manufacturer has been charged this year.
- Thailand has FINALLY reached the early 21st century with the arrival of real 3G network coverage after an eternal farce and one last court decision - while neighboring Laos is preparing for 4G already...!
- And last, but not least: The still undisputed, most coherent article by The Nation - EVER!
I’d like to thank my co-writers and editors at Siam Voices and Asian Correspondent for their contributions and work this year, and YOU, the readers, for the support, feedback, criticism, links and retweets! Here’s to an eventful, exciting 2013 that brings us news, changes, developments to discuss and report for all the right reasons! Happy New Year!
Public seminar on ‘Democracy and Freedom of Expression’ in Ubon Ratchathani
By Saksith Saiyasombut There were a few events and discussion panels on freedom of speech and how the lèse majesté laws is heavily contributing to the continuous deterioration of that in Thailand in recent years. There was the panel discussion with Sulak, Pravit, Marshall and Anderson hosted by Siam Voices contributor Lisa Gardner, then at the FCCT (where the former event was initially supposed to take place) held an event with Professor Tongchai Winichakul and Professor Andrew Walker earlier this week. Also, Al Jazeera English devoted a whole episode of their weekly "101 East" program on Thailand's draconian Article 112 (lèse majesté), including a panel talk with Sulak, a hapless Panitan Wattanayagorn (government spokesperson under Abhisit and now back being an academic) and the dimwitted statements of Dr. Tul Sitthisomwong (leader of the reactionary, pro-112 multi color shirts).
On this coming Friday there's another public event, that discusses all of the above. However, this time it is a little bit different: First off it takes place in Ubon Ratchathani, and secondly it widens the scope not only on lèse majesté, but also on whether or not democratic values, human rights and personal freedom are actually compatible with Thai culture. The speakers are well-known to regular observers and readers: Thitinan Pongsudhirak, one of the most quoted academic on Thai politics, Prachatai's Chiranuch "Jiew" Premchaiporn, Preut Taotawin and Pavin Chachavalpongpun, currently one of the most active academics and also a staunch activist against 112 - not without consequences. The even is hosted by Dr. Titipol Phakdeewanich, academic and Bangkok Post contributor.
Blurb down here or on the Facebook event page.
A Public Seminar: ‘Democracy and Freedom of Expression’ (in Thai only)
Friday the 22nd of June 2012, from 9.00 am – 1.30 pm Faculty of Political Science, Ubon Ratchathani University
The event is funded by the European Union (EU)
The seminar aims to promote a better understanding of the ways in which democracy, freedom of speech, and human rights are interconnected and cannot be separated if there is to be effective and tangible progress in this regard. The dialogue on this topic will aim towards a clear understanding of the importance of long-term goals in providing a sense of direction and purpose in relation to the promotion of the levels of both political participation and political awareness of the Thai population.
Since the 2006 coup d'état, we have continued to observe the problem of having human rights being more properly respected in a country, which has developed increasingly entrenched colour-code politics. Furthermore, the debate over the reform of ‘Article 112’ has become highly politicised, which has acted to distract from the key principle of promoting human rights.
08.30 – 09.00 am Registration and Coffee
09.00 – 09.20 am Welcoming remarks: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Chaiyan Ratchakul, Dean of the Faculty of Political Science, Ubon Ratchathani University
09.20 – 10.45 am: Speakers
"The importance of freedom of expression in a democratic society" Dr. Thitinan Pongsudhirak, Director of the Institute of Security and International Studies, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University
"Freedom of the media in Thailand: challenges and prospects" Ms. Chiranuch Premchaiporn, Director of Prachatai
"Freedom of Expression: Does it exist in Thailand?" Dr. Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Associate Professor at the Centre for South-east Asian Studies, Kyoto University, Japan
"Grassroots perspectives on freedom of expression and democracy in Thailand" Assistant Professor. Preut Taotawin, Lecturer at the Faculty of Liberal Arts, Ubon ratchathani University
Moderator Dr. Titipol Phakdeewanich, Faculty of Political Science, Ubon Ratchathani University
10.45 – 1.30 am: Q & A, Discussion
Thailand's Democrat Party to hawkishly monitor media like it's 2009
Originally published at Siam Voices on June 6, 2012 A media monitoring group set up by Thailand's opposition Democrat Party in order to flag news coverage deemed 'too favorable' to the current government recalls the hawkish tendencies towards state media control during their rule between 2009-2011, further fueled by the history of the leader of this media monitoring group.
The Nation reported on Tuesday:
The Democrat Party has set up a media-monitoring group to be led by Trang province MP Sathit Wongnongtoey. He urged the public to monitor changes closely at Channel 9 and television hosts such as Sorrayuth Suthasnachinda of Channel 3, as well as newspapers, for what he claims is biased reporting in favour of the Pheu Thai-led government.
Sorrayuth failed to explore the details of the national-reconciliation bills in his reporting, while Channel 9 had continually attacked the Constitution Court's order to delay the House deliberation on constitutional amendment, Sathit said. If the party finds a media organisation that is not reporting well-rounded information, it will provide that organisation with information and ask it to disseminate it, he said.
"Democrats to monitor 'pro-Pheu Thai' media coverage", The Nation, June 5, 2012
Furthermore, another Democrat MP cites the changes at MCOT, a state-owned media organization that owns dozens of radio stations and the Modernine TV channel (formerly Channel 9). Its president was sacked over 'poor performance' in October last year and replaced by Chakrapan Yomchinda, a former MP of Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai Party. He then moved aside last May to pave the way for current president Premkamon Tinnakorn Na Ayutthaya, who reportedly has close ties to Thaksin.
The fact that this media monitoring group, established to keep an eye on any news that is not in their favor, is headed by none other than Sathit Wongnongtoey, is somehow revealing about the mindset of some, if not many, in the opposition party. During his tenure as Minister to the Office of the Prime Minister under the administration of Abhisit Vejjajiva, Sathit left a trail of knee-jerk reactions and gaffes behind him as he interfered with Thailand's media landscape.
Since the Minister to the PM's Office also oversees the state media outlets of MCOT and NBT, the government has some vital tools to get their message across the airwaves. Ever since the political crisis of recent years, these outlets have essentially become propaganda machines for whoever is government. Sathit went all out in 2009 to use this to "counter" everything by Thaksin and the red shirts, while already establishing a total disregard for media freedom early on.
During that year, he maintained his reactionary stance, as evident in several cases such as when he smelled a foreign conspiracy after rumors of the King's medical condition caused the stock market to nosedive. Or when he pledged to curb Thaksin's personal SMS exchanges. Or when he smelled another foreign conspiracy when the website Protect The King was suddenly replaced by something completely different, where in reality the government simply forgot to renew the domain. Or when he smelled yet another foreign conspiracy and demanded from The Times (UK) to hand over the recordings from an interview with Thaksin. Or when he launched a bizarre and wasteful campaign urging all Thais to publicly sing the National Anthem.
As you can see, Sathit did quite a lot during his term. However, the pinnacle of his work happened at one of the MCOT radio stations, where one of the hosts actually dared to conduct a phone interview with Thaksin. Unsurprisingly, this was met with a lot of criticism including from Sathit himself who tweeted* his initial bewilderment and demanded a clarification by the MCOT management, as usual suspecting a hidden agenda. In the end the radio host quit in frustration after Sathit's overreaction.
So it comes as no surprise that Sathit Wongnongtoey would spearhead a media monitoring group to scan Thailand's news outlets for headlines and talking points that do not fit their opinion. But it is exactly this behavior, manifested by a history of knee-jerk media interferences, that exposes a deep reactionary hawkish stance which only allows one single narrative and disregards the existence of others.
*Side note: Back then in September 2009, I wrote a series of tweets commenting and highlighting Sathit's overreaction but was unable to find them, despite using a whole bunch of tools. If anyone know how one can access very old tweets from way back, please let me know. Thanks!
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.
Thai webmaster Chiranuch found guilty, but avoids jail term
Originally published at Siam Voices on May 30, 2012 Thai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn was found guilty this morning of not deleting lèse majesté comments on the now defunct web board of the Thai news website Prachatai quickly enough - she was sentenced to 1 year in prison, which was then reduced to an 8-month SUSPENDED sentence and a THB20,000 (US$630) fine.
In its verdict, the court states that Chiranuch has failed to delete one comment for 20 days, whereas the other nine objected comments were deleted within 10 days, thus violating against Article 14 and 15 of the 2007 Computer Crimes Act which punishes “false data” that damages a third party, causes public panic or undermines the country’s security and “any service provider intentionally supporting” the said offenses, respectively - despite the fact that the court also states that the expectation to pre-emptively delete illegal comments was "unfair".
Below is a full live timeline of the morning's events…
Today at 10.00 AM (Bangkok time) the Thai Criminal Court will give its verdict against Chiranuch “Jiew” Premchaiporn, the webmaster of the news website Prachatai. Chiranuch is being prosecuted for failing to delete 10 comments made by others that are deemed insulting to the monarchy not quickly enough. She has been arrested in 2009 and again in 2011, while the website itself has been hit by numerous takedown orders and blocked repeatedly by authorities.
If that paragraph above sounds familiar to you - it should be: these are exactly the same words from the live-blog from the original verdict date one month ago. However, just mere 10 minutes before it was about to start, the court decided to postpone the verdict, since it needed more time "due to the complexity of the case".
A lot has happened since then, most notably the death of lèse majesté-victim Amphon 'Uncle SMS' Tangnoppakul in prison and the lèse majesté complaint lodged against Prachatai columnist Pravit Rojanaphruk. In light of these events, Chiranuch's case could be an even more unprecedented moment that could really determine Thailand's (dis-)regard for freedom of speech.
I’ll live-blog and comment the verdict here and also try to gather as many as reactions as possible. Also, be sure to follow me on Twitter @Saksith for up-to-the minute updates.
+++NOTE: All times are local Bangkok time (GMT +7)+++
12.13 h: That wraps up our live-blog. Today's verdict is a clear sign by the Thai state that freedom of expression doesn't really exist here. Besides directly cracking down on content that is deemed insulting, defaming to the monarchy or just simply not according to a dominant national narrative, the verdict also underlines the requirement to its citizen to self-censor to satisfy a pre-emptive obedience.
Today's verdict also against the freedom of expression online, as all platforms that provide a place to express opinions are held liable for the view expressed by others, thus practically putting a brake on any free discussion. Also, virtually all social media tools like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and any ISP are also being the target as their owners theoretically under Thai law are held responsible, too.
This is a huge blow for internet freedom as the Thai authorities and its laws are still far from being up to date, as the latter are too ambiguiously worded and leave roo much room for misuse. Even though Chiranuch walks away free today, this verdict is a warning shot to everybody who dares to push the very limiting boundaries of what can be said in Thailand
Thanks for following the live-blog!
12.00 h: First comment by Chiranuch:
"I expected to be acquitted, but I found the judge's verdict logical and reasonable," a smiling Chiranuch told reporters. "However, I still think the verdict will have an impact on self-censorship."
"Thai webmaster sentenced in free speech case", Associated Press, May 30, 2012
11.32 h: A picture of Chiranuch shortly after the verdict was read:
10.50 น.ที่ศาลอาญารัชดา ห้องพิจารณาคดีที่ 704 ศาลพิพากษา จีรานุช ผอ.ประชาไท ความผิดพรบ.คอมฯ ม.14 และ15 จำคุก instagr.am/p/LPJu0OSzbt/
— Tewarit Maneechai (@Bus_Te) May 30, 2012
11.18 h: First wire news story on the verdict by AP:
BANGKOK (AP) - A Thai court has sentenced a local webmaster to an eight-month suspended sentence for failing to act quickly enough to remove Internet posts deemed insulting to Thailand's royalty.
Chiranuch Premchaiporn faced up to 20 years in prison for 10 comments posted on her Prachatai website, a popular political Internet newspaper.
The case was seen as a test of freedom of expression in Thailand. She was the first webmaster prosecuted under tough cyber laws enacted after a 2006 coup.
New York-based Human Rights Watch has said prosecuting her sent "a chilling message to webmasters and Internet companies."
"Thai webmaster sentenced in free speech case", Associated Press, May 30, 2012
11.16 h: This here was the basis for the reasoning of the verdict:
Prachatai's dir was on trial from 10 comments posted on PCT. Judge says she's guilty from one of the 10 mess left 20 days on the webboard.
— iLaw Club (@iLawclub) May 30, 2012
Judges says another 9 comments left between 1-10 days before being removed means she didn't intend to leave them there. #freejiew
— iLaw Club (@iLawclub) May 30, 2012
11.06 h: First reactions:
Today's event underscores irony that #Burma now probably has more freedom of speech than #Thailand. #assk #Jiewverdict
— AndrewBuncombe (@AndrewBuncombe) May 30, 2012
So, the guilty verdict to send the message to everyone else…**watch out**. And the suspended sentence to defuse any human rights criticism?
— Dave Oliver (@daveoli) May 30, 2012
Speaking as a webmaster & forum owner in Thailand, I live in a daily atmosphere of fear. Worried that I will be jailed for what others write
— Richard Barrow (@RichardBarrow) May 30, 2012
Sad day for Internet freedom in Thailand. The verdict means owners of Facebook, YouTube etc. are liable under Thai law too :-/ #freejiew
— สฤณี อาชวานันทกุล (@Fringer) May 30, 2012
10.56 h: Summary: The Criminal Court still finds Chiranuch to be guilty, even though it has stated that the expectation to pre-emptively delete illegal comments to be "unfair" - but for the court they're still illegal, and measured by the fact that it took more than 10 days to delete one of them, the court finds her guilty. Very foul compromise!
10.52 h: BREAKING: Thai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn found guilty for not deleting lèse majesté comments not quickly enough - sentenced for 1 year prison, then reduced to an 8 months SUSPENDED prison term and THB 20,000 fine.
10.48 h: This is now getting crucial:
7 expectation d intermediary take down comments immediately isn't fair. But, still defendant r responsible for illegal comments #freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
10.41 h:
4. At that time, Prachatai webboard had about 2-30,000 users, 300 new topics each day. The [problematic] topic is No. 1.2 million
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
5. Plaintiff told defendant to deletecomments but wasn't clear when+how plaintiff made notice to d defendant-before/after comments deleted
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
10.35 h: Basically the court now is giving a summary of the case:
3 Court: Defendant said after coup, webboard users increased by 10 times. Accordingly, defendant step up measures in overseeing webboard.
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
10.30 h:
2 Court: Regarding wheather defendant *supported* content to be posted, Court regards defendant as ISP as defined in CCA #freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
10.29 h:
Summary: Content is considered illegal. Defendant is considered a service provider. Now is abt if she should liable in this case? #freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
1 Court: the msgs deemed violation of CCA Article 14 (3). But the plaintiff didn't accuse the defendant for creating content #freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
10.26 h: Thai Netizen Network has the first tweets from the reading
ศาล: ข้อความดังกล่าวศาลเห็นว่า ผิดตามมาตรา 14(3) ตามพ.ร.บ.คอมพ์ แต่ไม่พบว่าโจทก์บรรยายว่าจำเลยเป็นผู้นำเข้าข้อมูล (ต่อ) #freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
ศาล: ปัญหาว่าจำเลยเป็นผู้สนับสนุนการนำเข้าข้อมูลหรือไม่นั้น ศาลเห็นว่าจำเลยถือเป็นผู้ให้บริการตามพรบ. (ต่อ)#freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
Translation is following now...!
10.17 h:
Start reading the verdict. The plaintiff is not presented. Room 704. #freejiew
— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012
10.05 h: Good point!
A guilty verdict could mean the death of user-gen. content in #thailand. Like hanging "digital entrepreneurs keep out" sign at the airport.
— Andreas (@anho) May 30, 2012
10.01 h: The hearing on the verdict should be under way now...!
9.56 h:
Court officials requested all phones or tablets off and no photos allowed during today's hearing #freejiew
— Amy Kunrojpanya (@AKunrojpanya) May 30, 2012
This is standard court procedure, I'm sure we'll still get the news quickly enough.
9.52 h: Meanwhile in the courtroom...
A lot of Thai/int'l observers in @jiew's verdict still. They're changing to a bigger court room.
— Thanyarat Doksone (@8td) May 30, 2012
Standing room only. Verdict hearing moved to bigger room (#704) to accommodate the crowds #freejiew
— Amy Kunrojpanya (@AKunrojpanya) May 30, 2012
9.50 h: Bangkok Pundit has turned on his crystal ball:
1. Time for prediction. @jiew will not get a jail sentence today. AFAIK, evidence presented at trial that she had deleted comments in past
— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012
2. that would be deemed LM without prompting & there was no specific warning/notice given to Jiew or Prachatai abt comments. This won't mean
— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012
3. that intermediary liability is no longer an issue; just facts of this case (+ also high profile nature) means J has not broken the law
— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012
4. That is not 100% confident prediction; just think it is much more likely than a custodial sentence.
— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012
Here's hoping...
9.45 h: Here's a news report by Al Jazeera's Wayne Hay on Chiranuch's verdict, with a wider focus on lèse majesté as well:
9.40 h: From Google's Amy Kunrojpanya:
Full house in Room 911 at Thai Criminal Court as we wait to hear today's verdict #freejiew
— Amy Kunrojpanya (@AKunrojpanya) May 30, 2012
9.35 h: On my Twitter timeline and in general, there're quite noticeably less #freejiew tweets...
9.30 h: It is indeed a considerably big news day in Thailand, with the historical visit by Myanmar's democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, the end of the ban for the 111 Thai Rak Thai Party politicians and also a return of the yellow shirted PAD to the streets to protest the reconciliation bill. However, I'm pretty sure that a negative verdict could overshadow all of these within a heartbeat.
9.20 h: On Twitter, I asked Thanyarat Doksone from AP, who's at the Criminal Court in Bangkok whether there are more or less media covering the verdict. Her answer is not surprising:
@Saksith Less than a month ago, esp. the int'l media. Guess because of #ASSK coverage.
— Thanyarat Doksone (@8td) May 30, 2012
9.20 h: In the evening of the original verdict date, Prachatai has published an open letter by Chiranuch. Here's an excerpt:
Dear All,
I write to you to share my thoughts before the verdict will be read in the next 7 hours. Although I still don’t know any answer for my life, I wish we can win the case but I should prepare for unexpected results too. Many of you asked how do I feel as the verdict is approaching. Honestly, there were mixed feelings. On the one hand, I’m glad that I’m able to get some guide of my future, it might be better than never known. (…)
“Chiranuch’s letter prior to the verdict“, Prachatai, April 30, 2012
9.15 h: However, her case also highlights the problematic application of the laws mentioned – especially Article 112 since anybody can file it from anywhere. Chiranuch herself was arrested again in 2011 after a man in Northeastern Khon Kaen filed a complaint against herand was dragged to that town on the spot shortly she arrived at Suvarnabhumi airport in Bangkok – ironically after she came back from a panel on internet freedom in Hungary…!
Also of note here is that often times the CCA is being used in conjunction with Article 112, which has been used numerous times to curb freedom of speech online.
9.05 h: It’s important to stress out that Chiranuch is NOT charged under Art. #112 #LM, but Art. 15 of the CCA which punishes “any service provider intentionally supporting” for violations made against Art. 14 for “false data” that damages ”false data” that damages a third party, causes public panic or undermines the country’s security – whatever that is supposed to mean…!
9.00 h: Good Morning and welcome to the live-blog! Here's a recap about Chiranuch's case:
This case highlights the ambiguous legal foundation: Article 14 of the Computer Crime Act (CCA), which punishes “false data” that damages a third party, causes public panic or undermines the country’s security, while the webmaster herself is being charged under Article 15, which punishes “any service provider intentionally supporting” the said offenses. These violations would be punished by five years of imprisonment – for each offense – theoretically tallying up to a total 50 years, but legally ‘only’ a maximum of 20.
Since the alleged comments are regarded as lèse majesté, this case also shines a light on the infamously draconian Article 112 of the Penal Code. All these articles leave (intentionally or not) wide room for interpretation and thus, as seen countless times in recent years, rampant misuse. More details can be read in this factsheet by Thai Netizen Network and here at iLaw.
Despite the numerous cases and victims who have been actually charged under lèse majesté, this case is being regarded as crucial since it not only highlights the vague legal interpretation of the law made possible by the ambiguous wording and highlights the challenges against a (perceived) decrease of freedom of speech, but since these comments were not made by her, her thoughts and intentions are on trial, only because she did not delete these comments quickly enough!
2011 - Some Personal Thoughts
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 31, 2011 2011 is history and looking back on Thailand this past year, it has been yet another eventful year that brought some answers, but many more questions to the wide-spread problems that continues to plague the country in many aspects. However, 2011 brought many chances and changes, shed light on issues and topics left in the dark before, voices echoed by many and opinions uttered by a few, whether you agree with them or not.
This is a (definitely incomplete) list of these stories that happened in 2011...
Lèse majesté sees December surge
Let's start off with the most recent topic that has unfortunately brought Thailand into the world headlines for all the wrong reasons again and that is none other than the problematic issue of lèse majesté that is gripping freedom of speech. The whole month of December was filled with stories about high-profile cases and countless victims of this draconian law, the discussion to amend it and the (irrational) defenders of this law and the institution that is meant to be protected by it.
The recent surge of lèse majesté began in late November with the dubious sentence against Ampon "Uncle SMS" Tangnoppakul, despite doubtful evidence. The 62-year old grandfather is now being jailed for 20 years, five years for each alleged SMS sent. On December 8 the Thai-born US citizen was sentenced to two and a half years prison for posting translated parts of a banned biography on the King. On December 15 'Da Torpedo', despite winning an appeal resulting in a restart of her trial, was punished to 15 years prison for alleged remarks made in 2008. These are just a few cases that happened in November and December compared to the countless other (partly ongoing or pending) cases over the past 12 months.
But the surge was also accompanied with growing and publicly displayed concern by the European Union, the United Nations and the United States Embassy in Bangkok over the increasing blatant usage of the lèse majesté law, only with the latter to be flooded with irrational, angry hate speeches and also the venue for a protest by royalists in mid-December (and also in a nearly instant iconic display of royal foolishness, the protesters are wearing Guy Fawkes masks, most likely inspired by the #Occupy-movement, but totally oblivious to its historical roots). It was not the first time this year that this issue got attention from the international community, as seen in October.
The government of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra was elected into office last July (see below), and while she would have liked to see some change on the application of the law, not to the law itself though, the new ICT minister has vowed to exploit this to the fullest. He was only to be topped by deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung a few months later, who went into full combat mode and declared war on lèse majesté web content with a THB400m ($12,6m) strong war chest, right after a meeting with the military's top brasses. The hopes of many supporters of the Pheu Thai Party, especially the red shirts, are at latest by now fully gone, as this government already has a tainted record on this issue.
But there was also an important protest by opponents of lèse majesté - the "Fearlessness Walk" shows that this issue can no longer be ignored and the consequences of its enforcement are doing exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do. It is drawing attention to the ambiguous nature of Article 112 of the criminal code (as well as the Computer Crimes Act), it is drawing attention to the signs of changing times and those who refuse to see them, and ultimately it will draw more opposition - we will (unfortunately) hear more about this issue in 2012!
(Non-)Culture: Baring the unbearable and monopolizing "Thai"-ness
While we're on the subject on being subjected to the anachronistic ideas of a few, there were several stories in 2011 in the realms of culture that were disconcerting, to say the least. It wasn't so much the incidents themselves rather the reactions by those self-proclaimed cultural heralds of everything "Thai"-ness - a phrase I've been using too often in each of those stories: three girls dancing topless on Songkran, the then-culture minister calls for a crackdown on them as if they have attacked everything "Thai"-ness stands for. A few months later the same culture minister suddenly notices that infidels foreigners are getting Buddhist tattoos and calls for a ban (and back paddles after some considerable uproar). Shortly after his ministry senselessly attempts to crack down on a senseless internet meme because it's "inappropriate" and "not constructive". Later this year a rather curious guide for parents was published on their website. And finally a singer's rather raunchy video gets a ton of hits online and a sanctimonious scolding on national TV.
See a pattern here? The selective outcry borders on ridiculousness and fuels Thailand’s National Knee-Jerk Outrage Machine (“กลไกสร้างปฏิกิริยาอย่างไร้ความยั้งคิดแห่งประเทศไทย”, trademark pending), claims to uphold the only valid definition of "Thai"-ness, that isn't even fully spelled out yet, while they have not noticed that the world beyond their minds has moved on and come up with new and different definitions of what else Thailand could be. The problem is that these cultural heralds, by political office or class, claim monopoly on this. Everyone below their wage level is not entitled to even think about it. And if something doesn't fit their point of view, as guest contributor Kaewmala put it brilliantly, "Only taboo when it's inconvenient!"
The 2011 General Elections
Will he or will he not? In the end, Abhisit Vejjajiva did dissolve parliament and paved the way for early elections in May and also set off quite a short campaign season, which not only saw a few strange election posters and illustrious characters running for office, but it also saw the emergence of Yingluck Shinawatra as the lucky draw for PM candidate of the opposition Pheu Thai Party. After much skyping to Dubai discussion within the party, the sister of Thaksin was chosen to run and it turned out to be the best pick.
The Democrat Party were banking heavily on negative campaigning (a precursor to the upcoming, inevitable Thaksin-phobia in 2012), which reached its climax in the last days with their rally at Rajaprasong, the same venue where the red shirts protested a year ago. In this event, then-deputy prime minister Suthep Thuangsuban claimed to give the "full truth" on what really happened during the violent crackdown of May 19, 2010. What followed were hours of fear-mongering in case of a Pheu Thai win and an incident that almost caused a major misunderstanding:
The big screens flanking the stage on the left and the right are bearing a gruesome view. Footage of at times badly injured people from last year’s rally are being shown when suddenly at the sight of blood people started cheering – as it turns out, not for the brutally killed victims of the anti-governments protests of 2010, but for a woman with an Abhisit cut-out mask waving to the crowd behind her.
"Thailand’s Democrat Party rally: Reclaiming (the truth about) Rajaprasong", Siam Voices, June 24, 2011
The last days of the campaign were spent outside of Bangkok, for example Pheu Thai in Nakhon Ratchasima before the big day. On Sunday, July 3, election day of course meant a full-day-marathon for a journalist. Not only did it mean covering as many polling stations around town as humanly possible, not only to crunch the numbers of exit polls (which turned out to be total BS!), but also of course running the live-blog at Siam Voices. In the end, it went very quickly: Abhisit conceded, Yingluck smiled and at a lunch meeting later there was already a new five-party coalition.
The worst floods in decades: a deluge of irrationality
790.
This is the current death toll of the what has been described as the "worst floods in decades". Floods are an annual occurrence in Thailand during the rainy season. When the water was sweeping through Chiang Mai already back in late September, this natural disaster was somehow going to be different. But it took some considerable time, despite the unprecedented damage it has created in Ayutthaya to the ancient temples and the vital industrial parks, until the capital was drowned in fear of what was to come.
It was curious to observe that those who were least likely to be affected (read: central Bangkok) were losing their nerves the most. Back in November I attempted to explore one possible reason:
One of the real reasons why the people of the city react the way they did though is this: After a military coup, countless violent political protests and sieges of airports, government buildings and public roads, this city has a sense of anxiety not unlike New York after the 9/11 terrorist attacks: a sense of being constantly under siege by something or somebody that separates Bangkok from the rest of the country even more. An incident at Klong Sam Wa Sluice Gate (we reported) is a perfect example of the conflict between inside and outside Bangkok in miniature form.
"The Thai floods and the geographics of perception – Part 2: Certain fear of uncertainty", Siam Voices, November 23, 2011
On an anecdotal note I remember people around me hoarding bottled water, moving their belongings upstairs and barricading their houses waist-high - while I can understand these precautions, I was astonished to say the least when I started to read social media updates that accuse the government so much so to the point of deliberately drowning the people of Bangkok and other outlandish conspiracy theories, including the now ubiquitous "blame it on foreign media"-card.
There's no doubt that this natural disaster has not only shown the worst in people, but also it's helpful and charitable side (not only towards humans exclusively). During my work reporting from the floods for foreign news crews (hence there weren't many posts on Siam Voices), I admired the apparent resilience and defiance I saw from many victims of the floods - some of which are now struggling with rebuilding their lost existence. And a lot of clean-up will be needed to be done, both literally as well as politically, in order to prevent such a disaster from happening again!
What else happened in 2011? (in no particular order)
- Then-prime minister Abhisit urging then-president of Egypt Honsi Mubarak to respect the will of the people - while being totally oblivious that he exactly did not do that a year ago because, well, "They ran into the bullets" themselves!
- Half a dozen Thais walking through the border region with Cambodia and surprised that they're being arrested, in an arbitrary way to dispute the border demarcations between the two countries. This ongoing conflict, largely fueled by the ever-shrinking PAD, sparked into a brief armed battle. Two of the strollers are still sitting in a Cambodian prison.
- The one-year-anniversary of the crackdown of May 19 and my personal thoughts on this.
- The somehow strangely toned-down five-year-anniversary of the 2006 coup.
- Army chef General Prayuth Chan-ocha going completely berserk at the press.
- The fact that Thailand got its first female prime minister and the (un)surprisingly muted reactions by Thailand's feminists.
- The saga of the impounded Thai plane on German ground, the curious case study on how Thai media reported it, the juristic mud-slinging, and how this mess was eventually solved. Which brings us to...
- The German government allowing Thaksin back into Germany, after heavy campaigning by a bunch of conservative German MPs. Still boggles my mind...!
- And while we're on topic, we are saying good-bye to a regular contributor of outrageous quotes - no one has been so focused to do a different job than written his business card than Thaksin-hunter and former foreign minister in disguise Kasit Piromya!
I'd like to thank my colleagues at Siam Voices for building a diverse and opinionated collective, our editor who keeps everything in check and YOU, the readers! THANK YOU for the support, feedback, criticism, links and retweets!
Here's to an eventful, exciting 2012 that brings us news, changes, developments to discuss for all the right reasons! Happy New Year!
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist based in Hamburg, Germany again (*sigh*). He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
Video: 'Challenging the Sovereign Narrative' - (Social) Media in the Thai Political Crisis
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 23, 2011 (Note: This post was supposed to be up much, much earlier but was pushed back due to the floods and the re-relocation of the author back to Germany. Apologies to all involved for the momentous delay!)
Back in late September I was invited to hold a talk at Payap University in Chiang Mai and I chose to talk about a (social) media topic with the focus on the the 2010 anti-government Red Shirts' Protests, the knee-jerk demonizing of foreign media and what role social media played in this, if at all.
The talk is about 45 minutes long and includes 15 minutes of Q&A. The original full abstract can be found below the video.
Again, thanks to the people at Payap University for the invitation and organizing the event, especially Adam Dedman, Jessica Loh and Paul Chambers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzrtubI8cZM
“Challenging the Sovereign Narrative – Media Perceptions of the Thai Political Crisis and the (missing) Role of Social Media”
Speaker: Saksith Saiyasombut
When: Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 5-6pm
Place: Room 317, Pentecost Building, Mae Khao main campus, Payap University
The Kingdom of Thailand rarely pops up on the global news landscape and if so, then it is mostly for a so-called ‘soft’ story. In recent years though, political struggles, often escalating in violent protests on the streets of Bangkok, have dominated the airwaves of the international media outlets, only to disappear shortly after the protests have ended. With the Thai political crisis dragging on for several years now, reporters are struggling to properly report and explain the situation without simplifying this to just a color-coded conflict between two opposing groups. In particular, the anti-government Red Shirt protests of 2010 were a watershed moment for how Thailand and its political crisis are regarded, with many Thais objecting to the foreign media’s coverage, as much as to openly vilify the international TV news networks. On the other hand, the domestic media have failed in its role to objectively explain and provide context to the political developments of recent years.
The more important issue is the rise of social media to counter a sovereign narrative of the mainstream and state media – however, Thailand has yet to see a grassroots revolution fueled by the Internet. Nevertheless, online services like Twitter and Facebook provide Thais a way to read and express alternative viewpoints and also a platform to fill the journalistic void left by other media outlets, but are threatened by the country’s ambiguously written Computer Crimes Act and lèse majesté law.
This talk looks at the perceptions of the international and domestic media of the Thai political crisis and why this struggle has not translated into an online uprising yet and aims to examine opportunities for “filling in the blanks” left by the mainstream media.
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai political blogger and journalist. He wrote for his hometown newspapers Weser Kurier and Weser Report in Bremen, Germany, before working as an editorial assistant for Asia News Network and contributing reporter at The Nation. He started blogging about Thai politics on his personal website www.saiyasombut.com in early 2010 and since September 2010, Saksith now writes for Siam Voices, a collaborative blog on Thai current affairs on the regional blog and news network Asian Correspondent. He is also currently a graduate student of Southeast Asian Studies at the University of Hamburg, Germany.
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and also on his public Facebook page here.
Announcing: Talk at Payap University on September 27, 2011
This is an open event, anyone is invited to come and you can RSVP on the Facebook event page. Also, you have any suggestions and hints for material, links, videos etc. send me an email, tweet or post on my Facebook page.
"Challenging the Sovereign Narrative - Media Perceptions of the Thai Political Crisis and the (missing) Role of Social Media"
Speaker: Saksith Saiyasombut
When: Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 5-6pm
Place: Room 317, Pentecost Building, Mae Khao main campus, Payap University
The Kingdom of Thailand rarely pops up on the global news landscape and if so, then it is mostly for a so-called ‘soft’ story. In recent years though, political struggles, often escalating in violent protests on the streets of Bangkok, have dominated the airwaves of the international media outlets, only to disappear shortly after the protests have ended. With the Thai political crisis dragging on for several years now, reporters are struggling to properly report and explain the situation without simplifying this to just a color-coded conflict between two opposing groups. In particular, the anti-government Red Shirt protests of 2010 were a watershed moment for how Thailand and its political crisis are regarded, with many Thais objecting to the foreign media's coverage, as much as to openly vilify the international TV news networks. On the other hand, the domestic media have failed in its role to objectively explain and provide context to the political developments of recent years.
The more important issue is the rise of social media to counter a sovereign narrative of the mainstream and state media - however, Thailand has yet to see a grassroots revolution fueled by the Internet. Nevertheless, online services like Twitter and Facebook provide Thais a way to read and express alternative viewpoints and also a platform to fill the journalistic void left by other media outlets, but are threatened by the country’s ambiguously written Computer Crimes Act and lèse majesté law.
This talk looks at the perceptions of the international and domestic media of the Thai political crisis and why this struggle has not translated into an online uprising yet and aims to examine opportunities for "filling in the blanks" left by the mainstream media.
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai political blogger and journalist. He wrote for his hometown newspapers Weser Kurier and Weser Report in Bremen, Germany, before working as an editorial assistant for Asia News Network and contributing reporter at The Nation. He started blogging about Thai politics on his personal website www.saiyasombut.com in early 2010 and since September 2010, Saksith now writes for Siam Voices, a collaborative blog on Thai current affairs on the regional blog and news network Asian Correspondent. He is also currently a graduate student of Southeast Asian Studies at the University of Hamburg, Germany.
As opposition against Thailand's lese majeste law continues, it claims another victim
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 16, 2011 Earlier this month, a 23-year old graduate from the Kasetsart University has been arrested for allegedly posting content on his blog that is deemed insulting to the monarchy - also known as lèse majesté. Prachatai and The Nation's Pravit Rojanaphruk (and unsurprisingly no one else) with the details:
The person who filed the charge was said to be a vice rector for students affairs, who reportedly said he was pressed to file the charge by the University Council and that the complaint was filed in a bid to protect the university's "reputation". (...)
The man made remarks on his blog that were allegedly offensive to the monarchy while he was a senior student at the university. These were apparently first spotted by fellow students, prachatai.com reported.
He faces charges both under the lese majeste law, which carries a maximum 15-year jail term, and the Computer Crimes Act, which has punishment of up to five years in jail.
"Student held for alleged lese majeste", The Nation, August 7, 2011
Meanwhile, Prachatai reports that he has been released on bail. This student, whose name and picture has been widely published, is another victim of Thailand's infamous Article 112 of the Criminal Code, also known as lèse majesté. In recent years, this law has been excessively abused, the number of such cases has skyrocketed from just a few cases in 2006 to almost 500 in 2010 and, in conjunction with the equally controversial 2007 Computer Crimes Act (CCA), thousands of websites have been shut down. On the other hand, due to the volatile political atmosphere in Thailand, it has enabled an excessive witch-hunt, as detailed here:
[Name of accused] was apparently 'witch hunted' by a Facebook group calling itself the Social Sanction (SS) group, according to his father. His name, photos, personal address and numbers were posted online, and he was heavily criticised by members of the SS group. (...)
Sawitree Suksri, a law lecturer at Thammasat University, described the SS group's method as "vicious" and "irrational" and a form of online violence that parallels the real-life violence in Thailand. She also noted in a signed article that the ongoing Social Sanction phenomenon appeared to have the support of the Thai authorities.
"THAILAND: Student blogger charged with lèse majesté", University World News, August 13, 2011
As charges for lèse majesté grow in numbers, so does the resistance against this law. We have previously reported about an open letter by a group of 100 young writers calling to amend this law and stop its excessive abuse. This group has now grown to 359 writers and they also have published a new open letter, key excerpt:
We hereby appeal to the Members of the Thai Parliament who are the representatives and law makers for the Thai people to take the lead in amending Article 112 of the Criminal Code. This is our call for courage to politicians, academicians, the media and intellectuals from all sectors of Thai society to awaken their conscience and to recognize that the suppression of freedom of speech and expression through the misuse of Article 112 by means of physical threats, pressing charges, lawsuits and intimidation by government officials in power or among members of the Thai public including the mass media, is a grave danger to the stability of our nation. This is of utmost national concern and in urgent need of reform.
A society will fail not as a result of diversity of opinions, nor lack of solidarity in political discourse, but a society will fail due to its inability to respect basic human rights, to allow opportunities for the public to voice their opinions, and to cherish and learn from the constructive exchange of different points of view. For our society to progress and prosper, it must develop a spirit of cooperation and cultivatean understanding of human rights, freedom and equality. The goal is for all Thais to live harmoniously under the constitutional monarchy rather than privilege those few who hold their view supreme, above and untouchable by common law and legal provisions or even the constitution which governs the nation.
"359 Thai Writers Manifesto", via Prachatai, July 25, 2011
The numerous cases show the problem about how this law is applied. In theory, anybody can file such a complaint at the police, who are obliged to investigate everyone of them, no matter how nonsensical they are. They can forward them to the prosecution and subsequently to the court which then has to decide on the very ambiguously worded law as well. Throw in the also very vague 2007 Computer Crimes Act (which was at one time planned to be replaced by an even worse new draft), then you are in a very (perhaps deliberately) unchartered legal territory - as the trail against Prachatai webmaster Chrianuch Premchaiporn has shown.
Many have laid their expectations on the new government to change something about this. But hopes for a quick solution to the problem were quickly dashed when the new prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra said that she has no intention to amend Article 112, but does not want see this law misused. Any administration even thinking publicly about reforming or changing this problem will have to face attacks by royalists who will brand them anti-monarchist, a severe accusation which is a killer argument that prevents any rational discussion about possible political and societal reforms.
Even worse, the new Minister for Communication and Technology (MICT) Captain Anudith Nakornthap of the Pheu Thai Party has gone on record declaring this:
(...) นับจากนี้ไป จะมีการกำชับให้ข้าราชการ และเจ้าหน้าที่ของกระทรวง ในทุกระดับ มีการเข้มงวดมากยิ่งขึ้น ในการกำกับดูแลปราบปรามการกระทำผิด พ.ร.บ.เกี่ยวกับคอมพิวเตอร์ และการหมิ่นสถาบันผ่านเว็บไซต์ต่างๆ โดยจะดำเนินการบังคับใช้กฎหมายอย่างเด็ดขาด
(...) from now on, the ministry's officials and staff members of every level have been urged to be more stringent in the pursuing of violations against the Computer Crimes Act and lèse majesté on websites, by enforcing the law to the fullest.
"รมว.ไอซีทีประกาศปราบเว็บหมิ่น ก่อนประเด็นลามถึงในเฟซบุ๊ก เจ้าตัวย้ำจะบังคับใช้กม.อย่างเป็นธรรม", Matichon, August 13, 2011
The new MICT minister made clear that nothing will change about the status quo, which means a continuation of the online witch-hunt, with support from a state-sponsored volunteer 'cyber-scout' network of denunciators and like-minded people who act on anticipatory obedience (see this link again for the aforementioned Social Sanction group and how students feel intimidated to speak their mind). All that in an atmosphere of when the army feels the urge to overemphasize their loyalty to the royal institution and openly threatens to crackdown on lèse majesté offenders. It sets a dangerous precedent of a black-and-white dichotomy against the Thai people, who think out of the norm.
It will be a long process until those who claim to protect the institution see that they are doing more harm than good in the long-run. One of the country's most outspoken social activist Sulak Sivaraksa was recently quoted in an foreign newspaper interview that "loyalty demands dissent. Without dissent you cannot be a free man, you see." Ironically, due to the same legal reasons as discussed here, I cannot provide a link to the source of that quote...!
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
Thai commander-in-chief's anger at media
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 2, 2011 We have featured the outspoken commander-in-chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha before, which has been a constant source for material including his, erm, shall we say unusual handling with the media. Recently, the armed forces have suffered a series of three consecutive helicopter crashes within a week which has claimed at least 17 lives in total (including a Channel 5 cameraman). The first two reportedly went down due to bad weather, while the last one suffered a technical failure. While accidents are unfortunately unavoidable, the string of tragic events that hit the rescue operations after the first crash on July 17 posed questions about the state of the army's equipment and funding despite a $5.2bn strong war chest.
The more Gen Prayuth felt the need to defend his armed forces from any criticism - in his usual manner...
ประยุทธ์ฉุนจวกนักวิชาการด่าทหารโกงโยงฮ.ตก ซัดพูดแล้วต้องรับผิดชอบ ทำทหารเสียขวัญ อัด “เอเอสทีวี-ทีวีแดง-เฟซบุ๊ควาสนา”ทำบ้านเมืองเสียหาย (...) พ้อไทยไม่ได้เป็นชาติมหาอำนาจจะได้มีฮ.ทันสมัยสูงสุด แต่ยัน ฮ.ไทยทันสมัย อาเซียนก็ใช้ โวจะอยู่เป็นผบ.หรือไม่ ไม่สนใจ แต่ทบ.ต้องอยู่ด้วยเกียรติยศ วอนนำเหตุฮ.ตกเป็นบทเรียนปรับปรุง
Prayuth has slammed military experts, who have accused [the army] of corruption in relation to the crashed helicopters, saying that those have to take responsibility [for their words] for destroying the armed forces' morale. He attacks "ASTV, red [shirts'] TV and 'Facebook Wasana'" for destroying the country. (...) He says: "Thailand is not a developed country, which can have the newest helicopters," but also insists that "Thai helicopters are up to date. Other ASEAN states are also using them." Prayuth is not interested if he stays commander-in-chief or not, but the armed forces should have honor and that the helicopter crashes should be taken as a lesson for improvements.
"ในหลวงพระราชทานน้ำหลวงอาบศพเหยื่อฮ.ตก ผบ.ทบ.จวก“เอเอสฯ-ทีวีแดง-เฟซบุ๊ควาสนา”ทำบ้านเมืองเสียหาย", Siam Rath, July 25, 2011 - translation by me
This is an unprecedented case in which a high ranking, influential army officer has explicitly singled out media outlets for criticizing, as if he were trying to point out those who have been especially naughty. But what and who is he referencing to? At the center of Prayuth's attack is Wassana Nanuam, military correspondent for the Bangkok Post, whom he bizarrely referred to only as 'Facebook Wassana' (which also doesn't make much sense in Thai as well).
Here is what Wassana wrote on her Facebook a day before:
เก้าอี้สะเทือน ฮ.ตก3 ลำซ้อนพล.อ.ประยุทธ์ โฟนอินทีวี3-ทีวีไทย ยันเครื่องขัดข้องเสียใจ อย่าตำหนิทหารขอกำลังใจเห็นใจทหารเสี่ยง สายข่าวเผยเจนเนอเรเตอร,มีปัญหา แต่ก็เอาขึ้นบิน นักบินเสียขวัญ คำถามตามมา ให้ ผบทบ.ตอบมากมาย..แต่ควรมาแก่งกระจานเยี่ยมลูกน้องบ้าง ไม่กล้านั่งฮ นั่งรถก็ได้
The chairs are shaking, three helicopters down - Gen. Prayuth phones into Channel 3, TVThai, claims technical failure and mourns [the deceased] - urges not to criticize the army, but to show sympathy and acknowledge their risks. Reports have indicated problems with the generator, but still went up anyways, the pilot has lost confidence [in the machine]. Many more questions for the commander-in-chief to answer [now], but he should visit the troops in Kaeng Krachan - if he's too afraid to take a helicopter, he can go there by car!
Facebook status update by Wassana Nanuam, July 24 at 12:49pm - translation by me
Of course, Wassana took a small swipe at Prayuth and this status update has set off a long discussion thread in the comments with now few heavily taking aim at the commander-in-chief and the armed forces. This was then later mentioned on ASTV and Manager Radio, both media outlets of the yellow shirted, ultra-nationalistic PAD, who have been fiercely criticizing the armed forces ever since the Preah Vihear temple conflict with Cambodia.
Clearly, this appears to be a case of somebody mixing up the medium with the person and its interaction possibilities. Wassana seems to share the sentiment as she wrote in her rebuttal on Facebook:
ผบ.ทบ.เปิดศึกโซเชี่ยลมีเดียตำหนิทวิตเตอร์เฟสบุ๊ควาสนา แย่มากโจมตีกองทัพเรื่องฮ...ไม่รู้ท่านอ่านเองรึเปล่า...คนอื่นแสดงความเห็นทั้งนั้น วาสนาช่วยแจงจนคนหาว่าวาสนาเข้าข้างทหารด้วยซ้ำ ทหารฝ่ายเสธ.เอาแต่เรื่องไม่ดีรายงานนาย ทีช่วยกองทัพกลับไม่รายงาน..สงสัยเห็นวาสนา เป็นผู้ชายเหมือนกันมั้ง
Commander-in-chief declared a war on social media, blames Twitter and 'Facebook Wassana'. What disgrace, criticizing the army over the helicopters... I don't know if the general has read them himself... it was all the other people expressing their opinions! I tried to explain this until they [the comments] accuse me to side with the army. The Chiefs of Staff only report about the bad news to [Prayuth], but when I try to help [explaining] them they don't. May be they think that I'm a man among those men.
Facebook status update by Wassana Nanuam, July 25 at 2:03pm - translation by me
One really wonders what Prayuth thinks about the media, old and new alike (other than closing them down). Nevertheless, a day later, he tried to justify his public erratic behavior:
พล.อ.ประยุทธ์ ยังกล่าวอีกว่า ทุกครั้งที่ตนแสดงสีหน้าอาการดุออกโทรทัศน์ เพราะต้องการแสดงให้เห็นถึงภาวะผู้นำของตนเองเท่านั้น
General Prayuth said: "Every time when I appear angry on television, it is because I only need to show my leadership [authority]"
"ผบ.ทบ.เตรียมจัดซื้อเฮลิคอปเตอร์ล็อตใหม่30ลำ", Naew Na via RYT9, July 26 - translation by me
Which probably then excuses the next nervy outburst:
"วันก่อนผมเดินทางไปร่วมพิธีรดน้ำศพของผู้เสียชีวิตที่กาญจนบุรี ซึ่งเรามีแผนการเดินทาง (...) ทั้งเดินทางด้วยรถยนต์ หรือฮ. ถ้าโดยปกติถ้าอากาศไม่ดีก็จะไม่บินขึ้น (...) แต่ไม่ใช่ว่าไปเขียนกันว่ารมว.กลาโหม ผบ.ทบ.ไม่กล้าขึ้นฮ. แต่ให้ลูกน้องขึ้นแทน ซึ่งผมไม่ได้โกรธ แต่เป็นธรรมหรือไม่"
"Yesterday, I traveled to the funeral in Kanchanaburi, for which we had plans for the travel (...) including by car or by helicopter, which normally in bad weather would not be used. (...) But it's not like in the newspapers that the Defense Minister and the Commander-in-Chief are too afraid to go on the helicopter, but let their soldiers go on it instead - I'm not angry about it, but it is not fair!"
"ถ้าไม่ตอบคำถามตนว่าใครพาดหัวข่าว ก็ไม่ต้องมาถามกันอีก ต่อไปนี้จะไม่ให้สัมภาษณ์แล้ว"
"If you don't tell me who wrote those headlines, then you should not come to me for questions, from now on I would not give any more interviews!"
"ปรากฎการณ์" ฟิวส์ขาด"ผบ.ทบ.วาทะร้อนไม่กล้าขึ้น ฮ. สื่อvsบิ๊กตู่"บทบาท"ที่แตกต่าง แต่"เจตนา"ไม่ต่าง", Matichon, July 28 - translation by me
As usual, General Prayuth talks about journalists required to take responsibility over their words and not 'destroy the country' (or at least his vision of it), while at the same time being completely oblivious about his own words and how they come across to the public eye. The commander-in-chief's relation with the press will remain a contentious one.
BONUS UPDATE: Thanks to @SteveInCM on Twitter, we have now video footage of that most recent incident, including him walking off the interview and making gestures at the press. Also, I forgot to mention that Matichon headline has been aptly named "Blowing up his fuse, Commander-in-Chief spews fury, (...) media vs Big Tu [Prayuth's nickname] (...)"
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
Exclusive: ‘This is not the last straw for Thai democracy’ – Suranand Vejjajiva
Originally published at Siam Voices on July 15, 2011 This is part two of Siam Voices' exclusive interview with Suranand Vejjajiva, former Cabinet Minister under Thaksin Shinawatra, now a politicial columnist for the Bangkok Post and host of "The Commentator" on VoiceTV.
In this second installment, Suranand talks to Saksith Saiyasombut about a wide range of topics, including the fate of the red shirts, the future of the Democrat Party, our education crisis, the state of the media and Thaksin. For part one, click here.
Saksith Saiyasombut: Article 112 of the Criminal Code, the lèse majesté law, has been blamed to be partly responsible that Thailand has been downgraded by several media freedom watchdogs as for it‘s decreasing freedom of speech. Do you think a Pheu Thai government is capable to improve on this?
Suranand Vejjajiva: Oh yes, if they‘re willing to. The Democrat Party could have done it, too. The enforcement of that law, that it leaves to individual judgement, is problematic. A policeman can interpret the law differently. What the outgoing government has done is to string this law together with the Computer Crimes Act (CCA), all for political purposes. I don‘t agree with this development at all - let everyone speak their mind! To answer your question: Pheu Thai would definitely get into trouble, there‘ll be people attacking them...
...if they would tweak Article 122 or its application. But there are also other aspects they could improve on...
...they could improve the Computer Crimes Act. A lot of groups have been proposing for a change.
Exactly, even though the MICT has proposed a new draft of the CCA, which was even worse - which hasn‘t materialized yet...
...luckily...
Let‘s talk about the red shirt movement, what will happen to them now?
It‘s a good sign that the red shirt leaders are running for office and they should perform their duties as such. But the red shirts as a movement is a political phenomenon that should be studied and they should keep it up, they should improve and reform - make it a mature political movement and they will be an important political force, if they believe in protecting democracy. They have to prove themselves, too. A lot of people are accusing them for being just a vehicle for Thaksin to come back to power. Now, if they prove themselves to be just that and forget the people, then they will suffer. I don‘t wish to see that - the same can be said even for the yellow shirts! If they would have developed into a real political movement - fine!
Is it - for the lack of a better word - 'appropriate' if any of the red leaders-now-elected-MPs would get a cabinet post?
It‘s all political negotiation. For me personally, I don‘t mind because they would have to prove themselves and as long as they do not use their new power to intervene with their own cases, that‘s fine.
What about the new opposition, the Democrat Party...
...the new opposition with the old leaders? (laughs)
Well, will there be the old leaders or will there be new faces taking over, since Abhisit is now a burnt commodity?
It‘s quite a shame, but at the same Abhisit would be a liability to the Democrats for now. He‘s still very young and there‘re still ways to vindicate him - but with the 91 deaths hanging over his government, it‘s going to be hard. It‘s going to be a liability if he is still the opposition leader. The Democrats probably need a new face. But if they can‘t find one - Abhisit is still one of the strongest candidate on this side of the aisle, he has been protecting the conservatives and the establishment.
So if it‘s not going to be Abhisit, he thinks it should be someone from his fraction like (outgoing finance minister) Korn Chatikavanij or (former Bangkok governor) Apirak Kosayodhin - they have to work it out among themselves.
So it would be best to have a fresh new start with new faces?
Looking from Pheu Thai‘s point of view, it would be good if Abhisit stays! (laughs)
Speaking of new faces, how do you explain that Chuwit Kalomvisit‘s Rak Prathet Thai Party could get four seats? Was this a protest movement?
Yes, you have to give him credit. He is very energetic, he could get his message across - even though he looks crazy sometimes. And his message is easy and direct. But at the same time, a lot of people were thinking to „Vote No“, but once the PAD took that position, many people were thinking ,What am I going to do with my protest vote?‘ - they gave it to Chuwit.
Especially a lot of young people...
...especially a lot of young people who are bored of politics! Which happens in a lot of countries!
But at least in other countries there‘s a vocal part of the youth who are standing up against wrongdoings...
...and they are more organized...
...but here in Thailand, they are virtually invisible!
It‘ because of our weak education. The political consciousness and democratic principles need to be taught in school. Thai schools are still very authoritative and not bold enough to open up to let their students talk and speak [their mind]. It‘s not like the Western schools, it‘s a cultural thing that you have to develop. It hurts in a way, it makes the institutions weak, bad politicians can still remain in office - people basically don‘t really care!
Despite the fact the outgoing government has thrown more money at the problem, there are now more and more international reports indicating that the Thai education system is producing not very skilled labors and also in English proficiency we are falling behind. And then comes Pheu Thai and their most memorable education policy is „Free tablet PCs for all“...
In my opinion, giving out free tablet PCs is still better than just giving out free uniforms. Because at least the tablet PC can - if done right - open up access to information for the students, and it would also solve other problems, like printing frauds. But I agree with you, it‘s deeper than that!
It doesn‘t take gadgets to solve this problem, which are more fundamental...
...it‘s the fundamental attitude of the Ministry of Education towards education!
I‘m not very convinced there will be much change by the next government.
No, which will hurt us even more. It‘ll take a decade, it would take two or three generations to change the education system, but you have to begin somewhere. And I agree with you, if they don‘t do it now...
...we will have another lost generation?
Yes.
A weak society needs a strong media to at least uphold the pillars of society, but we don't have that as well.
We don‘t! As seen in many foreign countries, a strong public television system really helps a society to develop - we don‘t have it here. We tried to do it a lot of times, but that was no real public service television.
What I‘m trying to say is, I see a direct correlation between weak education and weak media. So there's less of a sense to challenge, criticize and openly question things that are needed to be addressed.
Well, we were just talking about the campaign. If we were in the United States or Germany, a good 90 per cent of the Thai campaign policies would have been shot down by the press, because they would been well researched with reports, graphics; arguing wether this is feasible - but you don‘t see that in Thai press, they would just ask that academic, then this academic and that‘s it! Just soundbites!
British academic Duncan McCargo wrote a book about the Thai press ("Politics & the Press in Thailand: Media Machinations"), which is 10 years old, his research is 15 years old...
...and it‘s still valid - unfortunately!
He says, among many other things, that the Thai media mostly lacks a „sense of duty to explain the political process“. Can there be change as well, even in these very solid, top-down structures?
I hope so, there are a lot of good publishing houses and newspapers. But you don‘t see any quality papers á la New York Times or you don‘t see an investigative television show. I hope the young generation will be able to use the internet more wisely. But we don‘t have a strong enough education system to create an opportunity for them to question the information they are getting, then they will be fooled like everyone else.
Getting back to politics: will this transition of power be smooth?
For the sake of the country, I‘d like to see that. Whether Pheu Thai is good or bad - give them a chance to run the country, at best for four years. If they have done well, re-elect them; if not, throw them out of the office! That‘s the simple democratic principle.
But to answer your question: I doubt it, there‘ll be a lot of challenges. Now, if the challenges come within the parliamentary system, fine. But if it‘s not, then there will be trouble.
Is this one of the reasons why there‘ll be an intervention from an undemocratic force or is it still too early to say?
It‘s too early to say! The advantage for us right now is, after the recent events in the world, like the Arab Spring, are cautionary tales for people who try to exercise power outside the framework of democracy. But I also think that Pheu Thai‘s action in government will be important: appoint good and capable cabinet ministers, prove themselves that they are fair and transparent, no corruption cases - this would help. But if they come in and do the same thing - what I‘m scared of is that people will lose faith in democracy.
Haven‘t many people already lost their faith in the current democratic system, especially the youth?
Yes, even some of the rural people - there was a whole village that didn‘t come out to vote at all! But at the same time I think it‘s not the last straw! But if the next government does the same mistakes the Democrats did and disappoint the people, then the military would see this as an excuse to say: "Let‘s get in!" But that‘s not the solution!
Of course there‘s a dark, shadowy figure looming around this whole political crisis, it‘s of course Thaksin. Do you think Thaksin should have kept his mouth shut in the last few months?
I don‘t mind. If he feels he‘s been treated unfairly, let him say so. People talk a lot in this country. But whatever he says, he has to live with the consequences, like everyone else.
But nevertheless Yingluck got a big boost, because she‘s Thaksin‘s sister.
Yes! Thaksin is both an asset and a liability. He‘s certainly an asset - his vision, his connections, his networks, his charisma...
...his ego...
...I mean, he has the drive, to put it that way. But on the other hand he is a liability because he has so many political enemies.
The question many are asking is if Yingluck can stand on her own as a PM.
That is going to be important for the country. Yes, she is Thaksin‘s sister, she can‘t deny that. And in reality Thaksin is helping out a lot. But in a short period of time, she has been a successful campaigner. Now she has to prove, in an even shorter period time, that she can run the country. We have to give her that chance.
Will this government, and the red shirt movement as well, be capable and willing to move beyond Thaksin?
This is what they have to sit down and talk about.
Is this country able to?
Oh yes, definitely! There will be a day, where Thaksin is too old and you have to move on.
Will he come back?
I think so. He should come home, but to power? That‘s going to be another problem.
Khun Suranand, thank you very much!
Thailand: Pressure mounts to amend lese majeste law
Originally published at Siam Voices on May 26, 2011 The debate about Thailand's draconian lèse majesté law, Article 112 of the Criminal Code, gains more traction with several groups either discussing or demanding to at least amend the law, which forbids any discussion about the royal family and can be punished with up to 15 years in prison - and there's at least one discerning person who begs to differ...
First off was a panel discussion at the Foreign Correspondent Club of Thailand (FCCT) on Tuesday evening on that very subject, with veteran social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, academic David Streckfuss and Benjamin Zawacki of Amnesty International Thailand. Particularly the presence of Zawacki and his views on the law raised some high interest. More background on that at Bangkok Pundit. We will have more on the FCCT panel in the coming days.
In a separate development, the National Human Rights Council's (NHRC) sub-committee on civil and political rights has announced to look into the content of the law and how it's been used.
NHRC sub-committee chairman Niran Pitakwatchara said on Monday that the controversial use of the lese majeste law was urgently called into question, since it could be a condition leading to violence in society.
The NHRC sub-committee held its first hearing on the problem of the application of the lese majeste law last week with some 60 participants, including those being imprisoned, harassed and implicated as a result of people citing Article 112.
Dr Niran said after the four-hour-long session that the sub-committee was hopeful that in the next few months its research into the subject would be completed and a report forwarded to the government and the public for consideration.
He said the sub-committee, which included well-known human rights activists Somchai Homla-or, Jon Ungphakorn, Boonthan T. Verawongse, and Sunai Phasuk, would examine human rights abuses in the cases of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, a trade unionist and a red-shirt editor of the Voice of Thaksin, and Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a senior historian at Thammasat University [as a study platform]. (...)
"Dealing with the issue has never been an easy matter and I could not pledge how much we can do to resolve the problem as we are also surmounting internal self-adjustment difficulties within the (NHRC) office," said the chairman of the sub-committee on civil and political rights.
"NHRC to study lese majeste clause", Bangkok Post, May 23, 2011
The two cases mentioned in the article are of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, the editor of a pro-Thaksin publication and a trade unionist who most likely got arrested for collection signatures for a petition to repeal Article 112, and Thammasat historian Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a vocal critic agains the lèse majesté law, who went public saying that he has been threatened and eventually charged, possibly for the contents wrote in an open letter to Princess Chulabhorn about a recent, much discussed TV interview.
Another story dealing with this law was published earlier this week, when a group of 100 young writers joined in an open letter calling to amend the law and stop its use as a political weapon.
Signatories include wellknown youngergeneration mainstream writers such as Probed Yoon and Waning Prasertkul [sic! the whole sentence!]. In an open letter issued yesterday, they urged other writers, irrespective of their political ideology, to defend freedom of expression as a fundamental aspect of a free society.
"We believe you agree that enjoying freedom of expression and freedom of expression is a fundamental part of being writers in a democratic society, disregarding whatever genre of writing one subscribes to," part of the open letter reads. It also called on the army to stop using the monarchy institution as an excuse to crush its opponents.
"100 young writers join forces calling for change in lese majeste law", The Nation, May 21, 2011
The authors are actually named Wansing Prasertkul, Prabda Yoon - but that can happen at The Nation, especially since they misspelled the name of the son of The Nation's executive editor Suthichai Yoon! Many of these writers, including Binla Sankalakiri and Sakariya Amataya, are winners of the prestigious S.E.A. Write Award. The full open letter in Thai can be read here.
So, all in all a lot of debate about Article 112, that undoubtedly has severely damaged Thailand's freedom of speech in both the real and the online world and with very few people in power realizing that the more they stress the need to protect the royal institution from a perceived threat, the more it apparently backfires.
More staggering is how self-proclaimed herald of 'Thai-ness‘ and culture minister Niphit Intarasombat responded to this petition in Matichon, which the colleagues at Prachatai have translated:
On 22 May, Niphit Intarasombat, Minister of Culture and the Democrat Party candidate for Phatthalung, said, in response to a public call to amend the law made by a group of writers last week, that he did not see any problem with the lèse majesté law and its enforcement. (...)
‘I’ve never seen Article 112 being used as a political tool, and over 99% of politicians have no problem with the law. I’ve travelled to several countries which used to have monarchies. People there all said in unison that they regretted that they no longer had monarchs, and they wished to have them restored as head of state and a unifying figure. But Thailand still has a monarch as head of state and a unifying force, so we should have the law to protect the institution,’ he said.
"Minister of Culture sees no problem with lèse majesté law", Prachatai, May 24, 2011
So, he claims to have never seen the law being used as a political weapon? He probably isn't aware that this law actually politicizes the royal institution to a worrying extent. Second, of course why should any politician be against this law and commit career and social suicide, especially everyone since seems to overbid themselves with their loyalty (also arguably a political tool). And finally, I don't know to which former kingdoms he has traveled to and to whom he has spoken to (surely he doesn't ask the common man on a European street, does he?), but I cannot imagine that many people in France, Russia, Germany, Italy, Austria, Greece, Persia (Iran), Iraq, Mexico etc. all want their former monarchs back?
P.S.: Niphit is now the second government minister after finance minister Korn who has openly asked if a former monarchy is sad that they have no king anymore. If only the countries in question could respond...