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.
Thai Studies, Harvard University and the problem with political lobbyists
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 26, 2014 It is an unfortunate reality that many areas of study at universities across the world will never have the same draw than others. Very often, the more exotic the area, the less attractive it is for most prospective students.
There can, however, be certain benefits to taking the road less traveled. With (theoretically) smaller student to faculty ratios and (theoretically) a broader range of topics to cover, the more exotic subjects provide students with an opportunity to study something that is substantially less crowded than, say, law, economics or medicine, engage in cultural and academic exchanges with foreign cultures, and maybe even become a rare expert in that area.
Despite being often ridiculed as such an exotic fringe subject (or as the Germans say an ”Orchideenfach”, comparing it to an orchid flower - small, expensive and useless according to some) by the general public, Thai Studies at foreign universities actually have a tradition going back several decades. Cornell University was the first in the United States to open a Thai Studies center in 1947. Formal Thai-language education in Germany dates back to the 1930s. Today, a number of Thai Studies programs with vastly different specializations are being offered at universities worldwide.
One of the institutions that may, or may not, be added to this list is Harvard University in the United States, considered to be one of the elite universities in the world. That is the wish of Michael Herzfeld, professor of anthropology at Harvard and a key figure behind the initiative to establish a Thai Studies program there.
In 2012, the first seeds were sown:
On April 18, Thai Studies at Harvard was launched with an inaugural lecture on "Thailand at Harvard." (…)
The targeted $6 million in funds will enable the programme to provide Thai language instruction; fund a chair (professorship) of Thai studies; and host seminars, workshops, lectures, and a film series focusing on Thailand. (…)
Prof Herzfeld emphasised it was crucial to establish a Thai programme in perpetuity at Harvard. He maintains the only way to do so was to create a dedicated professorship and a dedicated programme of Thai language instruction, and seminars and lectures on Thailand across the entire university. These facilities would provide resources for people in the community who have interests in working in, or doing research about Thailand.
According to the plan, the chair of Thai studies would be open to researchers on Thailand from any academic discipline. This would be a tenured position for a senior professor and would have a title that includes the name of the chair. The incumbent could be of any nationality.
”Harvard plans to launch Thai studies initiative”, The Nation, May 21, 2012
Last week, The Harvard Crimson - a student-run college newspaper - published an article by Harvard alumni Ilya Garger that focuses on the current state of the Thai Studies efforts, in particular its financing and its supporters:
(…) Harvard is collaborating with key supporters of the recent coup to create a permanent Thai Studies program at the university. These individuals, most prominently former Foreign Ministers Surin Pitsuwan and Surakiart Satirathai, have spearheaded a campaign to raise $6 million for the program, which they have characterized as a means of promoting Thailand’s monarchy and national interests. Professor Michael Herzfeld, who is leading the initiative, wrote in an emailed statement to me that the program would not be tied to specific political interests and Harvard conducts due diligence on its donors. (…)
(…) At a fundraising event I attended in Bangkok last August, Surakiart declared that the Thai Studies at Harvard was intended as “a program to honor the King.” (…)
(…) Surin used the word “beachhead” to describe the envisioned role of the Thai Studies program. (…) Surin announced donations from several tycoons, and said he was seeking funding for the program from the King’s Crown Property Bureau, which manages the monarch’s wealth of more than $30 billion.
The Thai Studies program’s proponents at Harvard include well-intentioned and politically astute individuals who are aware that the some of the money being raised comes with an agenda. Michael Herzfeld in particular has a strong record of standing up for academic freedom. Harvard must ensure that the program is funded and run transparently, and that it is not co-opted by coup apologists (…)
”Troubles with Thai Studies”, by Ilya Garger, The Harvard Crimson, August 18, 2014
The article also elaborates on Harvard University’s ties to members of the Thai royal family. That is likely the reason why the article and the allegations made in it got even more attention when it was taken off The Harvard Crimson’s website last Wednesday because of ”concerns about the personal safety of its author” during his stay in Thailand at the time of publishing.
”The fact that we were compelled to temporarily remove the piece certainly was surprising,” said Crimson president Sam Weinstock in an email reply to Asian Correspondent. "We avoid removing content from our website in all but extremely exceptional circumstances.” Weinstock also added that he is not aware if a similar situation has occurred before at the college newspaper.
Indeed, given the tone and sensitive issues raised in the article, the author might well have put himself in the crosshairs. An apparent death threat was made against Garger by a Los Angeles-based Thai national on Facebook, but that reportedly happened after the removal of the critical article and also not on the Facebook pages of anybody directly involved.
A day later the article was put back up on the Crimson website with a note that the author Ilya Garger had left Thailand. The Hong Kong-based founder of a business research service told Asian Correspondent that the request to temporarily remove his article from The Harvard Crimson’s website ”wasn’t in response to any individual threat. (…) No one has personally contacted me with any threats, ” but admitted that the response to his article was ”stronger than expected.”
Garger added that the Thai Studies initiative at Harvard has progressed as far as it is has ”because relatively few people knew about it.” While lauding Prof. Herzfeld in his article for his strong standing for academic freedom, Garger thinks Herzfeld made ”too many concessions in exchange for donations. (…) I wrote the article because I think that with more scrutiny, this program will be carried out in a more responsible way.”
In the aforementioned article, two Thai politicians are named the main campaigners raising the estimated $6m for the Thai Studies program. One is Surakiart Sathirathai, former deputy prime minister under Thaksin Shinawatra, with whom he split after the military coup of 2006. The other man is Surin Pitsuwan, former foreign minister under Chuan Leekpai and 2013 ASEAN secretary-general. The latter publicly supported the anti-government protests (at least in their early stages) that preluded the military coup of May 22.
Both Harvard alumni, Surakiart and Surin invited members of the Harvard Club of Thailand for a fundraiser evening in August last year. The event, which was attended by high-ranking members of the Democrat Party (as shown in a ThaiPBS news report), held a reception for Michael Herzfeld and Jay Rosengard of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
In the invitation seen by Asian Correspondent, Mr. Surakiart and Mr. Surin called for a permanent Thai Studies program ”for the benefits of our own Thai people,” but also ”Harvard scholars and students to learn Thai, to study our rich history and our proud culture” in order ”to offer solutions to our issues of the day within a larger global context, to help increase competitiveness of our human resources, to raise our profile and that of our products and services, among others.”
The event also highlighted the need for scholarships and fellowships to Harvard University are for Thai students ”less privileged than us” and a need for Thai professors ”hold prominent teaching and research positions” at the Thai Studies program at Harvard.
Herzfeld declined to respond to Asian Correspondent’s questions about the Crimson article, and also more general questions about the current progress of the Thai Studies initiative. Instead, we were referred to a Harvard spokesman, who issued a statement saying that ”faculty searches and appointments are conducted independently, and faculty members determine and pursue their own research interests and teaching” whenever donations are accepted.
The involvement of Thai politicians and apparent supporters of Thailand’s recent military coup shows the difficult relationship between academia and politics, especially when it comes to fundraising. It remains to be seen that due diligence will be conducted in the creation of a Thai Studies program at one of the top ranked universities in the world, and whether the initiative will spawn a multi-disciplinary and critical program that upholds academic freedom or it becomes solely a training ground for Thailand’s political elites.
Thailand junta reactivates 'cyber scout' program to curb online dissent
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 7, 2014 In late 2010, the Thai Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (MICT) launched the so-called 'cyber scout' program aimed to recruit students and young people to monitor online content that could be deemed potentially offensive, especially to Thailand's monarchy. Now, the military junta is re-introducing the project.
Its originally stated objectives were:
Objectives of the project
1. To create a Cyber Scout volunteer network [...] that observes [...] [online] behavior that is deemed a threat to national security and to defend and protect the royal institution.
2. To collect the work of the Cyber Scout volunteers.
3. To set up a network of Cyber Scout volunteers to contact.
4. To promote the moral and ethics with the help of the volunteers, to ensure the correct behavior, build reconciliation and awareness towards the use of information with regard to morality and safety of individuals in society.
5. To promote and support to various sectors of society to careful and responsible usage of information technology. [...]
Taken from: "Cyber Scout Seminar Schedule, December 20-21", Ministry of Justice Thailand, ca. December 2010
That year, the government of then Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva blocked a record 45,357 URLs under the 2007 Computer Crimes Act, according to a study by Thammasat University. Of these, 39,115 were blocked because they were deemed offensive to the monarchy - lèse majesté - a criminal offense punishable by up to 15 years in prison. This marked a significant crackdown on alleged anti-monarchy dissent, especially after the bloody dispersal of the anti-government red shirt protests earlier in 2010.
A couple of months later, we got to see a glimpse of the inner workings of the project when one 'cyber scout' spoke to AFP:
He explained that if he finds comments deemed offensive to the king he plans to contact the person who posted them to first to warn them and give them a chance to change their views, before informing officials. “Not many people know about the project. They may think they’re talking to a friend because I don’t tell them I’m a cyber scout,” he said. “I feel I am doing an important job. I can give back to the country.”
“Thai ‘cyber scouts’ patrol web for royal insults“, Agence France-Presse, May 11, 2011
It was clear that the government back then was trying to introduce an online society of snitchers against a perceived threat - not unlike the namesake Village Scouts back in the 1970s that were battling against communist threats, both real and perceived. Eventually, the 'cyber scout'-project vanished into obscurity.
Fast forward four years, a change of government, a few protests, one major (enforced) political deadlock and a military coup later. The military junta is now reviving the 'cyber scout'-initiative, according to the Thai government news outlet:
กระทรวงไอซีที เตรียมลงนามความร่วมมือสถานศึกษา 200 แห่ง สร้างแกนนำลูกเสือไซเบอร์ให้กับเด็กนักเรียน อาจารย์และบุคคลากรในสถานศึกษา ช่วยกันสอดส่องดูแลภัยอันตรายและเฝ้าระวังข้อมูลข่าวสารที่เป็นภัยออนไลน์ทุกประเภท
The Ministry of Information and Communications Technology is making preparation for a cooperation with 200 schools in order to create 'Tiger Cyber Scouts' so that students, teachers and school personnel help monitor all kinds of dangerous information online.
นาง เมธินี เทพมณี ปลัดกระทรวง เทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศและการสื่อสาร เปิดเผยว่า วันที่ 26 – 29 สิงหาคมนี้ กระทรวงไอซีทีจะลงนามบันทึกข้อตกลงความร่วมมือกับสถานศึกษาทั่วประเทศ (...) เพื่อทำหน้าที่สร้างความรู้ ความเข้าใจ และความตระหนักในการใช้ ICT อย่างสร้างสรรค์ มีคุณธรรมจริยธรรม มีวิจารณญาน (...)
Ms. Manthinee Thepmanee, permanent secretary at the MICT said that between August 26 - 29, the MICT will sign cooperations with 200 schools nationwide (...) in order to build knowledge, understanding and raise awareness of using information and communication technology constructively, with moral and ethical judgement (...)
เพื่อที่จะช่วยกันสอดส่องดูแลภัยอันตราย และเฝ้าระวังข้อมูลข่าวสารที่เป็นภัยต่อสถาบัน รวมถึงความมั่นคงของประเทศ (...) และใช้งานข้อมูลข่าวสารบนโลกออนไลน์อย่างเหมาะสม และสร้างสรรค์ตั้งแต่รุ่นเยาวชน ตลอดจนเพื่อเป็นเครือข่ายขยายผลการใช้งานเทคโนโลยีอย่างถูกวิธี
[The objectives are] to jointly observe threats and monitor informations that are dangerous to the [monarchy] institution [and] national security, (...) to handle online information appropriately, as well as to incite to youth [with that knowledge] so that they will use technology the right way.
เนื่องจาก ภัยคุกคามจากเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศและการสื่อในปัจจุบัน โดยเฉพาะอินเทอร์เน็ต ทั้งการให้หรือรับข้อมูลข่าวสารที่บิดเบือน การเผยแพร่ และเข้าถึงข้อมูลที่มีลักษณะหมิ่นเหม่ต่อการหมิ่นสถาบันเบื้องสูง การเผยแพร่ภาพลามก อนาจาร ถือเป็นเรื่องสำคัญที่ผู้ใช้งาน และสังคมออนไลน์จำเป็นจะต้องให้ความสำคัญในการคัดกรองหรือเลือกที่จะเข้าถึง
Apart from the dangers coming from information technology and media today - especially from the internet - that receives or transmits information that distorts, circulates and gives access to information of defaming character to the higher [royal] institution, the circulation of pornography is another important issue that our staff and the online community should be monitoring and regulating access [more].
"ไอซีที เตรียมลงนามความร่วมมือสถานศึกษา 200 แห่ง สร้างแกนนำลูกเสือไซเบอร์ให้ช่วยกันสอดส่องดูแลภัยอันตรายและเฝ้าระวังข้อมูลข่าวสารที่เป็นภัยออนไลน์ทุกประเภท", National News Bureau of Thailand, August 6, 2014 - translation by me
This reads almost like carbon copy of the original 'cyber scout'-project from four years ago - with the notable difference that there is a military junta now in charge of Thailand and it has repeatedly shown in the past months that it will not tolerate criticism or dissent, as it has imposed strict censorship measures on the media and warned social media users against posting or sharing anti-coup messages. Reportedly over 200 websites have been blocked since the coup and recently the junta has bizarrely banned the sale of a computer game where you can play the role of a military junta.
Previously, the Royal Thai National Police offered 500 Baht ($15) to anyone providing information on anti-coup protesters and now, more worryingly, the military junta is reinstating state-sponsored cyber vigilantism, especially towards lèse majesté-related cases, while teaching school children early on what the junta thinks is right or wrong.
Why has Thailand banned the Tropico 5 video game?
Originally posted at Siam Voices on August 6, 2014
Ever since the military coup of May 22, 2014 the junta that is ruling Thailand has imposed strict censorship measures on the media and has shown repeatedly that it will not tolerate criticism. Journalists, if they have been temporary detained or reprimanded, have toned their reports down and partisan satellite channels (read: those of political parties) are still off air. The same heavy hand also extends to online and social media, where hundreds of websites have been blocked that carry anti-coup and anti-monarchy contents.
Now, the junta's censorship measures have taken their strangest turn so far:
Censors under Thailand's military junta have banned a city-building simulation computer game, saying it could hurt the country's security, a video game distributor said Monday.
The film and video censorship office blocked sales of "Tropico 5" because they feared "some part of its content might affect peace and order in the country," New Era Thailand marketing manager Nonglak Sahavattanapong said.
She said the office, part of the Culture Ministry's cultural promotion department, did not provide any further explanation in a written statement received by the distributor on Monday.
"Thailand's Censor Bans 'Tropico 5' Computer Game", Associated Press, August 4, 2014
In the fifth installment of the popular strategy and world-building PC game series "Tropico", the player takes the role of a leader in charge of a tropical island in the Caribbean spanning several decades and can either be a benevolent dictator caring for its population or a despot ruling with an iron fist (or anything in between) while trying to keep an eye on the nation's economics, education, foreign relations, military, personal wealth and everything else that's needs to be looked at. In short, the player is in charge of a banana republic and can do what he or she pleases, as long as he or she doesn't get overthrown in a revolution.
The ban by Thailand's junta was quickly picked up in the international media, including major video game news sites such as IGN, Kotaku, Polygon and Eurogamer. Also the game's publisher Kalypso Media stated in a press release:
"We are disappointed to hear that Tropico 5 will not be released in Thailand," commented Simon Hellwig, Global Managing Director Kalypso Media Group. ‘Tropico 3 and 4 both enjoyed successful releases in the country and although the Tropico brand does have a realistic political element to it, the scenarios and content are all delivered with a certain trademark tongue-in-cheek humor.’
Stefan Marcinek, Global Managing Director, Kalypso Media Group added ‘Our distributor has been working hard to gain approval for the release, but it seems that the Board of Film and Video Censors deem some of the content too controversial for their consumers. This does sound like it could have come from one of El Presidente’s own edicts from the game.’
Kalypso Media did release a DLC pack titled ‘Junta’ for Tropico 4 in 2011 which challenges players to turn the island into a militaristic society, something Thailand experienced in May this year when a real-life coups d’état saw the elected government ousted by a military takeover.
Press Release: "Tropico 5 Refused Retail Release in Thailand", Kalypso Media, August 4, 2014
Even the fictional "El Presidente" from the game himself tweeted in disbelief that "real life seems to be better than any parody" and a day later gave away copies the aforementioned 'Junta'-add-on pack for the (as of now still available) predecessor.
So, why was 'Tropico 5' banned from retail (as it is likely still available for purchase online) in Thailand?
On Tuesday, the Thai Ministry of Culture - or as we always call them #ThaiMiniCult - revealed further details of the ban:
Cultural Promotion Department chief Chai Nakhonchai said a subcommittee of the Video and Film Office had examined the game and voted 5-1 to ban it, with two abstentions.
He said the prohibition under the Film and Video Act 2008 was because the game allowed players the freedom to name the country and its leader or king as they pleased, and therefore the content was deemed offensive to the Thai monarchy and might affect national security and the country's dignity.
Chai also cited the report as saying that the game had many scenes in an era of "imperialism", which was a compulsory level for all players to go through in order to pass to other eras, and these scenes tended to mock the monarchy institution. Hence it was deemed to violate all previous constitutions of Thailand.
"Banned game found offensive to monarchy", The Nation, August 6, 2014
Where do I start...? First, the feature at the beginning of the game where you can create and customize your own "El Presidente" and name the island you'll rule is indeed a tool where players can let their fantasies run wild. But there has been no substantial evidence whatsoever that this feature has been used to emulate or mock Thailand and its monarchy. Second, the game takes you through several eras from the "Colonial Era" through "The World Wars" to "Modern Times" - but there's no so-called "Imperial Era" as claimed by ThaiMiniCult and there does not seem to be any reference to Thailand and its monarchy whatsoever.
In fact, the whole game franchise is a parody of a stereotypical Latin American banana republic and other historical figures that have meddled there. That has been the case in the previous four games, but the fifth one is apparently too much for the ThaiMiniCult to handle. At this point, the censorship seems already baseless and frivolous - if it wasn't for this cherry on top:
"Playing a game is different from watching a movie, as this game allows all players to express their beliefs without fear of law, so it is inappropriate to distribute such a game, especially during the current situation," he said.
"Banned game found offensive to monarchy", The Nation, August 6, 2014
Putting aside the debate over behavioral effects and escapism in video games (this is still a political blog, after all), the ThaiMiniCult seems to horribly misjudge fact from fiction and what people can potentially create with it. By invoking the ever-sensitive issue of the monarchy the censors are using a theme under which they can easily ban things - but on the other hand neither the developers nor the players probably had originally that in mind and are probably hearing it for the first time!
In other words, the ThaiMiniCult (and by extension the Thai military junta) does not want you to play a video game where you can play a military junta and have free choice about how you govern your fictitious country, since that can apparently already be deemed a political statement, no matter what choices you make in that game.
Well, there's still the classic board game "Junta!" out there to play...
Thailand: Did Pheu Thai 'hire motorcycle taxis' during the 2010 protests?
Originally published at Siam Voices on July 8, 2014 Claudio Sopranzetti is an Italian post-doctorate student at Oxford University best known for his research on Bangkok's motorcycle taxis. This handy (and at times only) mode of transportation through the often jammed streets of the Thai capital is hard to miss thanks to the drivers' bright orange vests seen waiting at the end of almost every alley and street. Apart from bringing people from one point to another, they're also hired as couriers and for other errands. In short: without them, a lot of things would happen much slower in Bangkok.
Sopranzetti's research resulted in the PhD dissertation "The Owners of the Map - Motorcycle Taxi Drivers, Mobility, and Politics in Bangkok" at Harvard University in which he draws up a fascinating ethnography of the riders, most of whom come from upcountry. He also credits them with a growing political participation and thus growing influence over the years, as evident most recently in the 2010 red shirt protests.
Here's an Al Jazeera English report from 2010 shortly after the protests with soundbites from Sopranzetti summarizing his findings:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwy6jGt5Aps&w=600&h=338]
Last Monday, he held a talk at Chulalongkorn University on the same topic and this is how The Nation summarized it:
Motorcycle taxis played a big part in the 2010 red-shirt protests, a Chulalongkorn University (CU) seminar was told Monday.
Claudio Sopranzetti, a post-doctorate student at Oxford University, said the Pheu Thai Party had hired the motorbike taxis because they knew about Bangkok streets and alley-ways and could easily transport people to different parts of the city. Sopranzetti also pointed out that this gave rise to a red-shirt motorbike taxis group.
-"Motorbike taxis played a big part in 2010", The Nation, July 7, 2014
[UPDATE, July 9, 2014: It appears that The Nation has quietly removed the article, hence why the link above will lead you to their front page.]
Somehow the main conclusion of The Nation (that's pretty much the whole article) is the notion that the motorcycle taxis that supported the red shirts back then must have been bought by the then-opposition Pheu Thai Party, a persistent accusation until today. While there are overlapping interests among all three groups, it doesn't automatically mean they're one and the same as The Nation suggests here.
Unsurprisingly, Sopranzetti himself strongly disagrees with the report:
This is how news are made up in contemporary Thailand, I can understand censorship but this is something different. I have never said that "Phua Thai had hired the motorbike taxis" to join the Red Shirts. The drivers who supported the movement did it because of their own ideology, belief in democracy, and hate for double standard and inequality. The nation should be ashamed of calling itself a newspaper. They do not report news, they fabricate them.
-Facebook post by Claudio Sopranzetti, July 8, 2014
Indeed the political participation of the motorcycle taxis during the various political protests in the past isn't really because of financial reasons, other than for the provided services. On this issue Sopranzetti said in an interview with New Mandala in 2010:
Arnaud Dubus: It was said that some of them get a small amount of money to participate in the demonstration?
Claudio Sopranzetti: It is true for those working as guards. The issue of payment for demonstrations is a tricky one. This money is seen as used to pay for a service, in the sense that guards would be paid to be guards, for doing the job. But receiving money to join the demonstration, it seems really odd. 200 baht is probably less than their daily average income. A motorcycle taxi who is in a good spot is making 400-500 baht per day, which converts to 10,000 to 15,000 baht a month. It is a fair amount of money. A university professor told me: they make more money than I do.
-"Interview with Claudio Sopranzetti: The politics of motorcycle taxis", New Mandala, July 21, 2010
Talking to Asian Correspondent via email, Sopranzeitti also voiced his displeasure over The Nation's coverage of his seminar: "It is really an embarrassing bending of reality to fit a prejudice they have. I am just sad they [The Nation] used me for this."
In related news, the military junta has briefly toyed with the idea of changing the orange vests and instead hand out new ones colored green. Also, registration would opened up for all and done by the Department of Land Transportation, as opposed to the Bangkok Metropolitan Authority in the past, who distributed a limited number of vests, but also for free.
The junta claims that this limitation is the reason is why the free vests are sold on by local mafia gangs for a large amount of money - something the original policy introduced in 2003 under prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra was supposed to have solved. Nevertheless, unregistered motorcycle taxis run by local mafias would operate with these bought vests.
The new plan for unlimited registration of new taxis has raised some concerns about over-supply, to which a military official said that it would balance itself out. In the end, the junta decided to stick with orange for the new motorcycle vests, because the color is "more familiar." There are some things even the junta can't change that easily.
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.
On 'happiness' and Thai opinion polls after the military coup
Originally published at Siam Voices on June 24, 2014 We here at Siam Voices usually do not cover Thai opinion polls for two reasons: first, there are too many of them out there on a weekly basis by the major survey institutes (ABAC, NIDA and Suan Dusit) alone, and second, they're mostly crap! The main problems with Thai opinion polls are the wording of the questions and a rather small sample size of the people being surveyed. There have been several examples in the past that at least raised some eyebrows about the questions asked and the results that come out of that - see a few of Bangkok Pundit's numerous posts here, here and here.
After the military coup last month at the height of a prolonged political crisis with street protests and a (man-made) political impasse, the first several opinion surveys are saying that the general mood has improved - despite heavy-handed and draconian measures such as media censorship and detentions by the military junta and a "happiness campaign" to win back the hearts and minds it those it had intimidated.
Let's start with Suan Dusit Rajabhat University's June 15 survey, ranking the top 10 things that made 1,634 respondents the most happy about the military coup (paraphrased):
- No more political protests - 93.09%
- Situation is safer - 87.12%
- Reduced cost of living, fixed fuel and gas prices - 85.99%
- Rice farmers are getting paid - 84.29%
- Fixing the economy - 80.24%
- Battling corruption - 77.32%
- Commitment of junta's work - 73.53%
- Soldiers ensuring a safer daily life - 73.14%
- Increased arrests of criminals - 71.96%
- Free stuff by the junta (World Cup free-TV coverage, concerts, movie tickets etc.) 71.31%
"ความสุขที่ประชาชนได้รับ จาก คสช.", Suan Dusit Poll, June 15, 2014 - (PDF)
None of the previous Suan Dusit surveys (among them titled "Top 10 things Thais think should be reformed" and "What the junta needs to say to convince you") have actually asked if the respondents are actually happy with the military coup. That was remedied in the most recent poll by them on June 22, on the one-month anniversary of the coup.
The National Council for Peace and Order, as the junta is known, scored an approval rating of 8.82 out of 10 points in a poll of 1,600 people conducted by Suan Dusit Rajabhat University and released Sunday.
Those surveyed cited the junta’s ability to quickly implement short-term measures needed to restore stability and economic confidence, as the main reasons for their positive reviews.
The majority of the people polled said they were satisfied with the absence of the protests and political violence that began at the start of the year and escalated until the military took charge of the government on May 22.
About 65% of respondents said they wanted the military to remain in charge of the country to complete its measures to eradicate corruption and speed up economic and political reforms.
"Thai Junta Scores High Approval Rating, Despite Concerns", Wall Street Journal, June 23, 2014
To be precise, they asked 1,614 people in the final question:
5. How satisfied are you with the junta's governing after one month?
- 50.84%: Very satisfied, because situation is peaceful, order has been restored, problems being solved swiftly etc.
- 39.57%: Somewhat satisfied, because security has improved etc.
- 5.27%: Not satisfied, because it's only a short-term solution, there're still conflicting news etc.
- 4.32%: Not satisfied at all, because it's undemocratic, rights are being restricted, no freedom etc.
"ประเมินผลงาน 1 เดือน คสช. ประเมินผลงาน 1 เดือน คสช.", Suan Dusit Poll, June 22, 2014 - (PDF)
However, in a previous question in the same survey 37.98 per cent of respondents also said that "there're still people not accepting and protesting the coup that say their rights are being restricted" as an actual problem.
Another head-scratching survey result was carried out by the National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA) - whose political impartiality is questionable, since NIDA-associated personnel were involved in the anti-government protests - which found this...
The Nida Poll was carried out on June 20-21 on 1,259 people all over the country to gauge their opinion on who the NCPO should nominate for prime minister. Most of the respondents, 41.30%, said the NCPO should nominate Gen Prayuth, the army and NCPO chief, for the post.
This was followed by 8.5% for two-time former prime minister Anand Panyarachun, 2.38% for former Asean secretary-general Surin Pitsuwan, 1.43% for former finance minister MR Pridiyathorn Devakula and 1.19% for former deputy prime minister Somkid Jatusripitak.
"Most Thais want Prayuth as PM", Bangkok Post, June 22, 2014
It found 5.24 per cent suggested former prime ministers Thaksin Shinawatra, Yingluck Shinawatra, Abhisit Vejjajiva, Chuan Leekpai, Gen. Surayud Chulanont among other politicians and senior military figures. That leaves a significant 26.5 per cent that had no answer at all, while 10.33 per cent said nobody's apt for the post - that's hardly an overwhelming "majority" as the Bangkok Post has titled it.
And finally, in the wake of the junta organizing free screening of the fifth installment of the nationalistic, dramatized biopic series of the 16th-century King Naresuan, the ABAC Poll of the Assumption University:
The opinion survey was carried out on June 15 and 16, involving 424 people who went to see the free screenings of the movie on Sunday.
Nearly all respondents, 95.3% to be exact, said they came away happier after seeing the film. However, 5.4% said they were only moderately happy with it, while 0.9% said they were no happier.
"Thais cheered up by Naresuan movie", Bangkok Post, June 17, 2014
That sentiment was also echoed by the so-called "Thai Researchers in Community Happiness Association" (whose name apparently is mangled in translation) whose majority (93.7 per cent) of 424 Bangkok-based moviegoers were "happy" to have seen the movie - what else would an institution with that name have found out? Just to be clear, a sample of only 424 people are overwhelmingly positive about a movie they have seen for free!
All these surveys prove the main problems with Thai opinion polls - a small sample group and the wording of the questions and possible answers - still exist. This is especially true in the post-coup environment, where criticism of the military is difficult at best and public dissent not tolerated. It is unlikely that the positive-sounding poll results reflect the complete picture - which also explains why the deputy national police chief can claim that "90 per cent of various opinion polls support" the junta's work.
Only a real, all-encompassing method to hear out the opinion of a large section of the population could bring in a clearer picture like, you know, a referendum, or an election...!
World Cup fever in Thailand, brought to you by the military junta
Originally posted at Siam Voices on June 12, 2014
[Author's note: Due to the military coup of May 22, 2014 and subsequent censorship measures we have placed certain restrictions on what we publish. Please also read Bangkok Pundit's post on that subject. We hope to return to full and free reporting and commentary in the near future.]
If you're in Thailand and want to watch the FIFA World Cup in Brazil on television, chances are you could get confused by the TV broadcasting rights situation. But fear no more: Thailand's military junta is trying to ensure that everyone can see football's biggest tournament.
In the summer of 2012, many Thai football fans were caught off guard when they heard that they weren't able to watch the EURO 2012 through their True Vision cable subscriptions, since the broadcasting rights - although matches were aired on the country's free TV channels - belonged to another corporation and thus couldn't be re-broadcasted on another platform, despite last-minute attempts to remedy that. So, if people didn't want to watch the Euro via the conventional rabbit ears antennas, they had to buy another set-up box.
It seemed like things were about to repeat themselves for this year's World Cup, as there was yet another squabble over who gets to air what matches. The broadcast rights for the FIFA World Cups in 2010 and 2014 were bought exclusively by media conglomerate RS Public Company Limited in 2005. Initially, you'd have to buy another set-up box in order to watch all 64 matches on a dedicated channel.
However - with some degree of foresight and with the 2012 fiasco in mind - RS also sub-licensed all matches to other providers like PSI via satellite and True Vision on cable. Only 22 matches, including today's opening game (3am Friday, Thai time) and the final were to be broadcast on the terrestrial, army-owned Channel 7.
That's not enough according to the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC). In 2012, the NBTC issued a rule that certain sports events have to be aired on free TV regardless of the rights owner and its intended media platforms, taking a cue from similar regulations elsewhere as in the UK. These seven sport events are: the SEA Games, the Asian Games, the Olympic Games and their Paralympic counterparts, and the FIFA World Cup.
Already back then there was trouble brewing: RS argues since they have bought the rights in 2005 the NBTC 2012 ruling doesn't apply yet. But the NBTC insists that the ruling also covers the 2014 FIFA World Cup and thus RS must provide free coverage for all.
RS argues that it would have a negative impact on its business considering how fiercely competitive the Thai market for football broadcasting rights is. The European top leagues are split among different providers and in 2013 Cable Thai Holdings (CTH) managed to snatch the rights for the dominantly popular English Premier League from True Vision for an estimated sum of $320m for three seasons, becoming the worldwide record buyer.
It is not known how much RS has spent for the broadcast license for the 2014 FIFA World Cup. According to an economy news report from November 2006 (PDF), a source said that RS "paid $20m" while also complaining that previous Thai license holders only paid less than half the sum. When comparing to other countries - Germany's TV deal is estimated at $180m - this seems very low. On the other hand, RS was reportedly expecting 700m Baht - or $21.5m - in revenue and sponsorships.
(By the way, the world governing football organization FIFA is excepted to make $4bn in TV rights and marketing from this World Cup.)
In late March, the Central Administrative Court ruled in favor of RS arguing that the "must air" regulation can not be applied to the 2005 rights purchase retroactively. The NBTC appealed the ruling and RS subsequently threatened to black out the broadcast of some matches in order to "prevent further damages to its business," according to a lawyer representing RS. The NBTC argues that Thais have able to watch the World Cup free of additional charges since 1970 and only football fans in Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore have to pay to watch the World Cup in Asia.
Then the Supreme Administrative Court ruled on Wednesday...
The Supreme Administrative Court on Wednesday ruled in RS Plc's favour in a case where the national telecom regulator tried to force the company to broadcast all 64 World Cup 2014 matches on free TV.
"Court rules in RS's favor", Bangkok Post, June 11, 2014
So everything is back to normal - 22 matches on free TV, all matches are paid content - right? Well, not quite...
Thailand's military junta, which promised to "return happiness to the people" after last month's coup, asked regulatory officials on Wednesday to find a way to allow the country's many soccer fans to watch the entire World Cup for free.
The junta contacted the chairman of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission, the country's broadcast regulator, and asked him "to seek ways to return happiness to the people through viewing all of the 64 World Cup matches on free-to-air channels," NBTC secretary-general Takorn Tanthasit told a news conference.
"Thai junta to 'return happiness' through World Cup", Associated Press, June 11, 2014
That's right! In its newly announced quest to "return happiness to the Thai people" the military junta is now trying to bring ultimate joy to nearly all Thais by making the World Cup watchable for everyone, by trying to end a contractual and regulatory deadlock singlehandedly solely for the benefit of the Thai football fans, no matter how much that's going to cost.
And after some promising signs on Wednesday, it looked to be a done deal on Thursday morning, even before the official press conference, according to The Nation:
In a bid to live up to its motto of "Bringing happiness back to Thai people", the junta yesterday managed to pull off a deal for the live telecast of all World Cup 2014 matches on free TV, which will bring joy to 22 million households. (...)
TV5 [army owned] will televise 38 matches on top of 22 live matches on Channel 7 [also army-owned] under a contract between RS and Channel 7, a junta source said.
A press conference titled "TV5 returns happiness to Thai people to join the World Cup spirit" will be held today at Army's TV5 headquarters. Representatives from the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC), TV5, broadcast rights holder RS, and sponsors will speak on their collaboration, NCPO spokesman Winthai Suvari said. (...)
A source said RS had sought Bt700 million [$21.5m] compensation from the NBTC, claiming the firm will lose the opportunity to sell about 1 million of its set-top boxes for the World Cup. RS has already sold 300,000 boxes.
The NBTC is looking at the possibility of tapping into the Research and Development Fund for Broadcasting and Telecommunications Services to compensate RS, but it could risk violating its regulation. The fund is valued at more than Bt20 billion [$615m].
"Free World Cup telecast", The Nation, June 12, 2014
However, Thai PBS reported on Thursday that the junta has denied ordering the NBTC to compensate RS for any loss in revenues, and that the broadcasting of all matches on terrestrial television in not a done deal:
The National Council for Peace and Order today denied that it has ordered the National Broadcasting and Telecommunication Commission to compensate RS Plc 700 million [$21.5m] baht if all World Cup matches are to be aired live on free TV channels. (…)
He said efforts are being made to enable the live broadcast if the channel via the research fund could not be done.
It could be in the form of sponsors from the private sector and from helpful people to make the broadcast of all matches on free channels, he said.
"Junta denies ordering NBTC to absorb RS broadcast right loss", Thai PBS, June 12, 2014
No word yet on whether or not this proposed unorthodox solution could be a breach with RS's contract with FIFA or if is this was a last-minute sub-licensing deal.
In any case, Thai football fans can tonight start watching the World Cup at ungodly late hours (kick-off for the opener is at 3am, Friday local time) from a variety of content providers with full happiness - and hopefully also free of charge soon.
Now, about that curfew that is still imposed in Bangkok...!
UPDATE [June 12, 2014]:
In post-coup Thailand, junta mandates ‘happiness’ and ‘reconciliation’
Originally published at Siam Voices on June 10, 2014 [Author's note: Due to the military coup of May 22, 2014 and subsequent censorship measures we have placed certain restrictions on what we publish. Please also read Bangkok Pundit's post on that subject. We hope to return to full and free reporting and commentary in the near future.]
To bring back love, how long will it take? Please, will you wait? We will move beyond disputes We will do what we promised. We are asking for a little more time.
These words accompanied by the soft melody of synthesized strings could be mistaken for the lines of any other contemporary Thai pop ballad. However, going back a few seconds shows that this song tackles an entirely different theme with a certain schmalz:
Today the nation is facing menacing danger The flames are rising Let us be the ones who step in, before it is too late
The lyrics belong to the song ”Returning Happiness to Thailand” (in Thai: ”คืนความสุขให้ประเทศไทย”) and is claimed to be written by army chief and junta leader General Prayuth Chan-ocha himself in just ”one hour”, but it’s still ”a message from his heart,” according to local media reports.
The song is just one part the military's campaign to win back the hearts and minds of the Thai people after it launched a coup d’ètat on May 22, seizing absolute power, largely censoring media, detaining hundreds of people - many of them members of the toppled government, their supporters and outspoken academics and journalists - and generally cracking down on any criticism of the coup.
National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), as the junta calls itself, launched its reconciliation efforts last week in Bangkok with a street fair:
At a junta-sponsored event on Wednesday in Bangkok — part concert, part street fair — an army truck operating as a mobile kitchen dished out thousands of free "Happy Omelets and Rice." Doctors from a military hospital gave out free medicine and checked blood pressure. A line of soldiers with shields and face paint stood ready for crowds to snap selfies.
The event drew mostly residents who supported the takeover, and it took place at a roundabout where just a few days earlier soldiers in riot gear had faced off against hundreds of anti-junta protesters. (…)
”Cheer up, Thailand! Junta aims to return happiness”, Associated Press, June 7, 2014
If the first two weeks since the power seizure were about ‘shock and awe’ (especially in the provinces whose population supported and elected the toppled government), the efforts since then are focusing on what the junta sees as the most pressing issues, but doing so with a benevolent appearance.
Apart from the street fairs, the junta is also paying back rice farmers what they are owed from the Yingluck Shinawatra government's ill-fated rice pledging scheme, and other populist measures like fixing fuel prices and protection from loan sharks. Furthermore, it is currently reviewing the big-investment projects of the previous, looking what it can salvage as its own policy.
Another main point of the junta’s efforts are the so-called ”reconciliation centers” that are being set up across the country. The general concept of these ”reconciliation centers” are to create a space where people and groups with opposite political viewpoints (think red shirts vs yellow shirts) are brought together to the table with the military acting as the self-appointed mediator.
The organization tasked to oversee these centers is the Internal Security Operation Command (ISOC), a body that has been around for a few decades, as David Streckfuss explains:
The military's Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC), set up 50 years ago to ostensibly root out communists, has now been charged with helping parties separated by the political divide to "dissolve their differences” at “reform centers."
”Thailand's Military Is Forcing People to Stop Worrying and Love the Coup”, by David Streckfuss, VICE NEWS, June 3, 2014
It’s not only ISOC’s involvement that makes critics skeptical of these centers, but also its links with history:
"I think the army tried to apply the techniques and concepts from the Cold War era during which they fought with the Communist Party of Thailand,” said Kan Yuenyong of the Siam Intelligence Unit.
“They apply concepts like the Karunyathep Centre which is like a re-education centre, and then after the program they can get back to the society as normal people."
Karunyathep centre was set up in the 1970s, as part of the military's soft approach towards Communist party members. Captured communists would be sent to the re-education camps to be taught about democratic values before being released.
However, the military maintains that the reconciliation centers will operate in today's context and that this time, participation will be voluntary. "The concept might be quite similar but the implementation is different, we understand the context of the current situation,” said Colonel Weerachon.
”Speculation, unease over Thai reconciliation centres”, by Arglit Boonyai, Channel NewsAsia, June 5, 2014
Whether or not these centers will bring reconciliation remains to be seen. A recent 'peace ceremony' in Nakhon Ratchasima is nevertheless being hailed as an "unprecedented" success.
With the military junta slowly taking shape and setting its goals, much depends on how heavy-handed its actions will be against those that do not support the coup. Especially in the age of social media, the traditional methods of the junta to sooth the dissent are becoming less effective and prolonged restrictions on free expression and political gatherings could further de-legitimize the military rule.
To put it in the words of aforementioned song by the junta: "What danger is the nation really facing?"
Thai junta faces uphill battle to control social media
Originally published at Siam Voices on June 4, 2014 [Author's note: Due to the military coup of May 22, 2014 and subsequent censorship measures we have placed certain restrictions on what we publish. Please also read Bangkok Pundit's post on that subject. We hope to return to full and free reporting and commentary in the near future.]
And suddenly the progress bar wouldn't stop loading. Thai online users were stumped last Wednesday afternoon when they couldn't access Facebook, prompting a swift outcry on other social networks such as Twitter. While the lockout only lasted less than an hour, it was a chilling reminder of the censorship situation in a post-coup Thailand that also extends online.
After the Thai military's declaration of martial law that resulted in the coup d'état of May 22, the junta set up measures that restrict media outlets from criticizing the coup and the newly-established National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). Numerous domestic and satellite TV channels temporarily stopped broadcasting and international news channels were blocked until Tuesday of last week.
With traditional news media either being censored or exercising self-censorship, many Thais have turned to social media for updates and commentary on the latest developments - and also for organizing anti-coup protests that have popped up on a regular basis. That explains why the junta is strictly monitoring online traffic and has strongly advised online users against sharing what it considers "wrongful" information that may "incite unrest".
Immediately after the coup, the NCPO summoned representatives of all Thai internet service providers (ISPs) and told them to block all online content that could be seen critical to the coup. As of writing, hundreds of websites have been rendered inaccessible from Thailand without specific tools to circumvent online restrictions. Also, Facebook profiles of Thai pro-democracy and anti-coup activists have disappeared without notice - leaving us to speculate that they were either deactivated by their owners as a precaution or taken down for other reasons.
The Facebook outage was just the most visible episode of the Thai officials flexing their muscles - even though it wasn't entirely clear which authority was responsible for that:
A senior ICT ministry official confirmed the site had been blocked to thwart the spread of online criticism of the military in the wake of a May 22 coup.
"We have blocked Facebook temporarily and tomorrow we will call a meeting with other social media, like Twitter and Instagram, to ask for cooperation from them," Surachai Srisaracam, permanent secretary of the Information and Communications Technology Ministry, told Reuters. (...)
"We have no policy to block Facebook and we have assigned the ICT ministry to set up a supervisory committee to follow social media and investigate and solve problems," said Sirichan Ngathong, spokeswoman for the military council.
"There's been some technical problems with the internet gateway," she said, adding that the authorities were working with internet service providers to fix the problem urgently.
"Thai ministry sparks alarm with brief block of Facebook", May 28, 2014
The aforementioned meeting with representatives from the companies behind social networks and instant messaging apps never materialized. The calls by the Thai Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) were left unanswered, prompting MICT officials to seek a meeting with Facebook, Google and others in Singapore.
However, earlier this week...
Thailand's junta now says the trip is off. "At this point, things look fine, so there is no need to make any trip now," Maj. Gen. Pisit Paoin, adviser to the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology's permanent secretary, told The Wall Street Journal late Sunday.
Asked on Monday to elaborate on the junta's approach to social-media censorship, Maj. Gen. Pisit reiterated that the trip is off but said he was unable to discuss how leaders intend to work with large Internet companies.
"Thai Junta Says Facebook, Google Meetings Called Off", Wall Street Journal, June 2, 2014
Some of those alternative ideas have been revealed later that day in local media:
The Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) is proposing a plan to build a state-owned Facebook-like social networking site called Thailand Social Network. (...)
The plan includes building a state-owned nation internet gateway (...)
In the plan, initiated by the military junta, private Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will have to connect to the state-owned ISP TOT, so that it will be easier for the authorities to block websites and prevent terrorism, he said, adding that MICT will oversee the national gateway.
"Thai authorities to build state-owned social network site", Prachatai English, June 2, 2014
Aside from the very ambitious task of creating a new national social network to compete with the massive 26 million-strong user base Facebook has in Thailand - a similar venture by the Vietnamese government simply couldn't keep up - the MICT has been longing for bigger control of the online traffic flow for some time, as the statements by MICT officials at a conference shortly before the coup show.
Freedom of expression online in Thailand has long been an issue for authorities and is being challenged even more since the coup. On the other hand the military junta is facing an uphill battle dealing not only with new technology that didn't exist during previous coups, but also with the way that people are communicating online.
Thailand's media under martial law: Controlling the narrative
Originally published at Siam Voices on May 22, 2014 Martial law gives the Thai military wide-reaching powers, including controlling the media. After its declaration early Tuesday morning a lot of the focus has been on the press and what they are or aren't allowed to say. But has it been really effective and does it still make sense in the age of social media?
They turned up in the middle of the night. Olive-green trucks and humvees popped up on the parking lots and soldiers entered the buildings of Thailand's various free-TV stations shortly after the Kingdom's military has declared martial law on Tuesday at 3am.
04.46 เนชั่นทีวี บางนา #nationtv pic.twitter.com/QtINse49yt
— เอม นภพัฒน์จักษ์ (@noppatjak) May 19, 2014
All free-to-air (FTA) TV stations (the privately-owned Channel 3, the public ThaiPBS, the partly state-owned MCOT, the fully state-owned NBT and the army-owned Channel 5 and 7) were ordered to comply with the military by broadcasting its announcements on demand. Initially it seemed little had changed. normal programming continued, only a ticker on army-owned Channel 5 informed viewers of the declaration martial law.
It would take hours before army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha would appear on all television channels at 6.30am to explain his move - "groups with ill-will are creating a violent situation" - and say that he "intends to bring peace to the beloved country of all Thais as soon as possible". He insisted that "this is not a coup d'état" and urged people "to carry with their daily activities as usual."
However, for many Thai journalists the situation was everything but usual. Not only did the martial law put Thailand in a different legal and political situation with far-reaching consequences that would have to be explained to the public, but the media itself was specifically targeted right off the bat with the very first order by the military, also broadcasted on all free-TV channels:
Order No 1 is regarding the broadcast of community radio stations, television broadcasters (satellite and cable), and radio stations and orders them to suspend broadcasting when they are contacted ( ห้ถ่ายทอด ออกรายการจากสถานีวิทยุโทรทัศน์กองทัพบกเมื่อได้รับการประสาน). This is order that there is broadcast of news to the people that is correct/right ( เพื่อให้การเผยแพร่ข่าวสารไปสู่ประชาชนเป็นไปด้วยความถูกต้อง)
(Taken from Bangkok Pundit's blog post detailing all 12 martial law orders.)
Over the course of the day and with more and more orders being announced, it became clear that one of the main objects of the military is to control the media, evident with Order No. 3:
Order No. 3 prohibits media from presenting news that affects peace-keeping of officials ( ห้ามสื่อเสนอข่าวกระทบการรักษาความสงบเรียบร้อยของเจ้าหน้าที่) states that all media entities including online who have the intention to distort, incite, or create disorder or have messages that will make the people to be suspicious [or] to misunderstand and that affects peace-keeping of officials( ที่มีเจตนาบิดเบือน ปลุกระดมให้สร้างสถานการณ์ความวุ่นวาย แตกแยก หรือมีข้อความที่ทำให้ประชาชนเกิดความหวาดระแวง เข้าใจผิด และส่งผลกระทบต่อมาตรการรักษาความสงบเรียบร้อยของเจ้าหน้าที่). Also prohibits distribution of such media.
The first organizations to fall victim to the martial law were 3,000 community radio stations and also in total 14 satellite TV stations, including the protesters' media outlets such as DNN Asia Update of the red shirts and the anti-government protesters' Blue Sky Channel and ASTV/Manager, and later Voice TV (also owned by Thaksin's son) - all of them were forced to "temporarily" stop broadcasting.
ยุติการออกอากาศตามประกาศฉบับที่ 6 ของกฎอัยการศึก pic.twitter.com/3EMcIOyaSd
— Piyachat Kongthin (@Piyachat_TPBS) May 20, 2014
In the evening, as even more orders were broadcast, the military went even further in their attempts to decide what's right and what's wrong with two specific announcements that are so broad that seem impossible to police:
Order No. 9 prohibits the creating of conflict (...) 1. Prohibits the [a] owner, editors, presenters/anchors of print media and all broadcast media to [b] invite persons or groups who do have government positions now whether civil servants or academics including those in the past who are in the judiciary or justice system as well independent organizations [c] from being interviewed or giving opinion [d] that may increase the conflict, distort, or create confusion in society including that may lead to severe violence
That basically bars every expert, pundit and talking head from saying anything on air that is not the official line of the military. While that order targets a specific amount of people, the previous order is a warning shot against everybody else:
Order No. 8 requests cooperation from the online media community and states that in order to distribute news that is correct/right and without distortion and that causes misunderstanding and the situation to have more conflict to the extent that affects peace-keeping officials in bring happiness back to society quickly that requests for those who are connected with online media to suspend the provision of services that incite and creates violence, and affect the credibility and respect for law until the point it affects peace-keeping officials. If it continues, the KPCC shall suspend the service immediately including taking legal action against those who commit actions.
That is such a vague definition and can be so broadly interpreted that arbitrary prosecutions could result. The military has summoned the representatives of Internet service providers Wednesday afternoon to elaborate on ways to manage social media chatter, even though the blocking of many websites isn't as easy as the military would have liked it, especially if the offending hosting website is based abroad.
On Thursday morning the new body set up to monitor the Internet said it was blocking "six inappropriate websites", insisting that "this is not censorship".
Several commentators and media advocates have criticized the harsh restrictions on the media and freedom of speech, with four Thai national journalist association's asking the military to review the orders in a joint statement. The Bangkok-based Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) has correctly noted that out of the 12 orders, 5 "directly impact media freedom and freedom of expression."
While the military has somewhat seized control of the airwaves, it isn't entirely controlling the headlines in the print media as many newspapers have been at least skeptical of martial law and many front pages have also mentioned the shutdown of the 14 TV stations. As for social media, the very notion of controlling it through such drastic measures is futile.
Supinya Klangnarong, a member of the National Broadcast & Telecommunication Commission, was quoted in the New York Times that "the martial law does not cover new technology like the Internet. It’s not realistic and practical." That's hardly surprising, since the Martial Law Act the military has invoked is from 1914.
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 PM Yingluck challenged to live TV debate by protest leader Suthep
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 28, 2014 During the campaign for the 2011 general elections, then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva of the Democrat Party proposed a televised debate with his challenger Yingluck Shinawatra of the Pheu Thai Party, in the hope that the well-skilled public speaker could score some points against an at that time inexperienced and unproven politician - who ultimately declined. Since then, Pheu Thai assumed the rule, Yingluck became prime minister and Abhisit lost his manners. Furthermore, the Democrat Party has entirely given up on elections, many of its senior figures have now taken to the streets, bringing the entire political discourse to a halt.
For four months, anti-government protesters in Bangkok have done a lot - most of all disrupting the February 2 elections - in order to topple the government of Yingluck Shinawatra in their ongoing "crusade" to "eradicate" Yingluck's brother Thaksin's strong influence on Thai politics. In his regular nightly (and rabble-rousing) speeches, protest leader Suthep Thuagsuban reflects the group's uncompromising attitude and has consistently refused to negotiate with the caretaker government whatsoever (as seen here, here, here and just as recently as last Tuesday - links via Bangkok Pundit).
This stance, however, changed on Thursday:
Anti-government protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban has challenged Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to one-on-one talks broadcast live on television in a bid to end the political deadlock. (...)
"If Khun Yingluck really wants to find a solution through talks, I ask her to make an appointment for a one-on-one meeting with me in an open setting," Suthep told reporters. "The talks should be broadcast live on TV so that the people know what is going on."
"Suthep calls for live TV talks with Yingluck", The Nation, February 28, 2014
The last time a Thai government openly held talks with anti-government protesters was in 2010 when then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva met with the pro-Thaksin red shirts. While the talks were televised for everyone to see, the two-day negotiations ended in no result. But that was just three weeks into the protests and way before things really escalated. These current protests are entering their fifth month.
The timing of this apparent turnaround is noteworthy: the overall situation deteriorated with last week's attempts by the authorities to reclaim some protest sites escalating into a gunfight with protesters, killing six. Last weekend then saw attacks on rally sites in Bangkok and Trat that killed five people - four children were among the victims. Also since then, there have been reports of almost nightly gunfire and explosions near rally sites.
Politically the caretaker government is under pressure. It suffered a defeat at the hands of the judiciary last week when the Constitutional Court rejected its petition to outlaw the protests, showing remarkable indifference to the protesters' actions. Following that decision the Civil Court restricted the authorities' powers to deal with the protesters, effectively banning the dispersal of the rallies.
Caretaker-PM Yingluck herself is facing charges by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) for allegedly neglecting her duty in her implementation of the government's populist rice-pledging scheme. She did not personally show up to hear the charges and the red shirts - taking a page from the anti-government protesters' playbook - have chained up the anti-corruption agency.
PM Yingluck's reply to Suthep's live TV debate proposal:
Prime Minister Yingluck agrees to engage in a peaceful negotiation with Mr. Suthep. (...) Prime Minister asked Mr. Suthep whether he is ready to have the negotiation under the principle of the present Constitution and whether he is ready to end the protest to pave the way for the election (...) Though there is no basic principle for the negotiation process to be successful, there should at least be a common goal that both sides would initially like to attain through negotiation. If both sides continue to hold different view on the process, it would be difficult to find a common ground. (...) If each party does not show any sign of flexibility, in the end, we would not be able to find a common ground.
"Unofficial Translation of PM Yingluck’s reaction to Mr.Suthep’s announcement that is is ready to negotiate as reported in the Thai press." via Suranand Vejjajiva, February 27, 2014
Her statement is neither a flat-out rejection nor a full agreement: The protesters would have to end their rally and any proposal that is not "under the principle of the constitution" (e.g. Yingluck replaced by a 'neutral' caretaker-PM) would not be accepted by the government. And then there's the format itself:
"The talks have to have a framework though I am not sure what that framework would look like," she told reporters in the town of Chiang Mai in the north, a Thaksin stronghold. "But many parties have to be involved because I alone cannot answer on behalf of the Thai people."
"Thai PM faces negligence charges as protest leader broaches talks", Reuters, February 27, 2014
Leaving aside the previous remarks from the anti-government camp that she's incapable of making her own decisions without consulting her brother Thaksin, it appears unlikely that Yingluck would verbally go head-to-head with Suthep, who has constantly hardened his rhetoric against her - often below the belt.
But on the other hand, months of street protests resulting in 21 deaths and hundreds of injured have possibly worn out the early enthusiasm of the anti-government protesters, as seen in the shrinking attendance numbers. Suthep, who previously had an interest in escalating the protests, might be looking now at an exit strategy in these talks.
P.S.: Suthep has also challenged Chalerm Yubamrung, the labor minister who's also overseeing the security situation, to a fistfight...!
Siam Voices 2013 review – Part 5: What else happened in Thailand…?
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 31, 2013 This is the final part of our Siam Voices 2013 year in review, as we look what else made headlines in Thailand in the past 12 months - including the strange, outrageous and ridiculous. You can read the previous parts here: Part 1: Politics - Part 2: Lèse Majesté & the media - Part 3: The Rohingya - Part 4: Education and reform calls
It has become somewhat of a tradition now at the end of every year in review that we highlight all those news stories that were for various reasons not covered in the blog and mostly talked (rather more ranted) about on my Twitter feed. So without further ado, here's the definitive incomplete look back at what else happened in Thailand, from the noteworthy to the quirky and from nonsensical to downright ridiculous.
Most unexpected pro-LGBT message of the year: During the Bangkok gubernatorial race earlier this year, the main challenger to the incumbent (and later re-elected) Governor Sukhumbhand Paribatra, Pheu Thai Party's Pongsapat Pongcharoen published a campaign video with an unexpected pro-LGBT message promoting sexual diversity, mainly aimed at wooing the city's potential transgender voters. While he didn't mentioned more details how that would have been reflected in his policies, this we saw a legislative push to bring legal equality to same-sex marriages in Thailand, which would be the first country in Southeast Asia to do so. While a survey last year polled 60 per cent to be against same sex marriage, Thailand is generally known to be tolerant (but not entirely accepted) towards diverse genders and sexual orientations. A bill would have been submitted for a vote in the later months of the year, but due to the current political crisis and the dissolvement of the House, the legislation has been put on the backburner for now.
Media failures of the year: Those who are regularly following me know that I can be admittedly harsh on my colleagues in the Thai media. But apart from the small typos or mix-ups, there were three particular inexcusable cases of failures: one of them is when Daily News posted the full ID card (with photo) of a British gang-rape victim (which as taken down shortly after public backlash), and then there was Channel 3 showing the full murder of two women, but instead blurred the perpetrator's gun (as per regulation).
In both cases, the authorities also are partly to be blamed since it was them who released the pictures to the media, as they did in the case of a 12-year-old ethnic Karen girl that was kidnapped and tortured by a couple in Kamphaeng Phet province (who unsurprisingly jumped bail and are still at large) - in fact they actually stripped her almost naked to document her mutilated body after years of torture by the couple in front of the press. While they did not show her face, the media are the last line of defense for crime victims and should apply their own judgement, rather than to recite everything said by the police ad verbatim - the victims deserve better.
Media mix-up of the year: Channel 5 for running a picture of actress Meryl Streep portraying the late British prime minister Margaret Thatcher instead of the actual Iron Lady herself. However, they weren't the only ones who made such a blunder on that occasion as a Taiwanese TV station ran footage of Queen Elizabeth II during the news of Thatcher's passing. Also, (almost predictably) some people also confused actor Morgan Freeman for the late Nelson Mandela...!
The worst Thailand-related article of the year: "10 Things Americans Can Learn From Bangkok", Huffington Post, February 26, 2013. Where to start...? Nearly all 10 points in this click-bait list are either incorrect ("SkyRail", eh?), horribly wrong ("the red light districts are well regulated by police officers and social workers" - really?!) or sheer nonsensical ("packed with people for whom globalization is a watch word")! But the worst part is: it unwittingly makes a case PRO lèse majesté ("Respect Your Elders") and confuses it for quirky local folklore...!
Pseudo-science in Thai media: In June, The Nation ran a story about John Hagelin, a physicist and "1994 Ig Nobel Peace Prize winner" who proposed the Thai army to use "quantum physics and transcendental meditation let the part of brain that created negative behaviour to relax and thus cut crime and terrorist attacks" for $1 million. What they fail to mention (or to look up): 1) his theory about a correlation between "physics and consciousness" is regarded as nonsense by most physicists and 2) the Ig Nobel Prize is "a parody award presented at Harvard University" as a "veiled criticism of trivial research".
Most celestial Thai political candidate: Thoranee Ritteethamrong, Bangkok gubernatorial candidate No. 21, came in dressed as the Chinese goddess Guanyin at the candidate sign-up and held her campaign without any billboards, but with a mandate "from heaven". That got her at least 922 votes (or 0.035 per cent) on election day.
Most unjustified flip-out by a Thai official: There are couple of well-known public figures well-known for their temper (*cough*Prayuth*cough*), but this one takes the prize this year: Interior minister Jarupong Ruangsuwan blew his lid when an assistant village chief made headlines about his unusual birthday - February 30 - and didn't get it fixed for 53 years. Instead of showing empathy with him (after all he couldn't open up a bank account for example because of this bureaucratic mistake), Jarupong accused the low-ranked official to be a fame-seeker and should "die out of shame" he brought onto the Interior Ministry. Unfortunately, the assistant village chief resigned because of the minister's apparent lack of EQ, but at least gets to officially celebrate his birthday now on every February 1.
Worst impression on the new colleagues at the first day of the new job: After losing his position as deputy prime minister for national security and being transferred to the labor ministry in the last cabinet reshuffle, Chalerm Yubamrung was crying foul play behind this move and that didn't stop on his first day at his new job, when he reportedly "spent more than an hour complaining about his transfer" after introduced himself to his new subjects co-workers - team confidence building, it isn't.
Insensitive and oblivious moments in Thai advertisement: A Thai woman in blackface in a commercial for a whitening-drink (!) actually becoming pale-skinned? Dunkin Donuts promoting their new 'charcoal' doughnuts with a Thai woman in blackface? A cosmetics brand offering 'scholarships' for the 'fairest' student? What could go wrong? A whole lot, actually!
Best Thailand-related viral video of the year: "Never Go To Thailand" by Brian Camusat. If only the Tourism Authority of Thailand would have even nearly as much swagger as this video - but then again it wouldn't possess the irony to title it like this...!
Most unconvincing suicide case:
CHIANG RAI [PROVINCE] - An unidentified foreigner is believed to have committed suicide in a bizarre way, putting his head in a water-filled plastic bag and then sealing it with a copper wire around his neck, in a field near the Myanmar border, reports said.
"Foreigner commits bizarre 'suicide'", Bangkok Post, January 4, 2013
Yeah, right...!
Strangest robbery of the year:
A robber made off with 2,200 baht [$71] in cash from a convenience store in Phuket province on Tuesday, but minutes later returned a 10-baht coin [$0.32] before escaping a second time.
"Store robber returns 10 baht", Bangkok Post, June 18, 2013
Most ambitious promise by a Thai politician:
The Ministry of Transport is expected to improve the entire public transport system within two months as several issues, such as passengers being rejected by taxi drivers and illegal parking, remain unresolved.
"Public transport issues to be solved in 2 months", National News Bureau of Thailand, July 15, 2013
Remember when Thaksin enthusiastically pledged to "free Bangkok of traffic jams in 6 months" back in the 1990s...?
Strangest dare of the year: After persistent rumors of 'chemically tainted' packed rice (which have proven to be not true), the president of the Thai Rice Association announced whoever eats one of their products and dies because of it will get 20 million Baht...!
Best costume: Deputy-prime minister Plodprasop Suraswadi as the 13th century Lanna King Mangrai...!
(Un-)honorable mentions: Wirapol Chattigo, the defrocked monk formerly known as "Luang Phu Nenkham", embroiled in a sea of scandals starting with being filmed on a private jet plane sporting luxury items, followed by accusations of money-laundering and child molestation and reportedly at large abroad. Red Bull heir Vorayuth Yoovidhya, who is suspected to have killed a police officer in a hit-and-run case in 2012, failed to show up to hear charges in early September because he's on an "overseas trip" and still hasn't returned yet. Chalerm Yubamrung (yes, again), for saying it's okay for "police officer to ask for money during Chinese New Year" since that's "not a bribe" and for setting off a terror alert against the US consulate in Chiang Mai and then announcing the suspect "has left the country" unhindered - and all that based on a mere "sniff"...!
And now, the strangest story of the year, from the "Best intentions but poorly executed"-category:
Thai officials say a man who was high on drugs was arrested after attempting to donate methamphetamine tablets to help flood victims at a relief center. (...) [The man] told the volunteers they could sell the drugs and use the money to support the troubled families. The volunteers were actually from a civil drug suppression task force.
"Thai man arrested for giving meth to flood center", Associated Press, October 15, 2013
Final words: I’d like to thank my co-writers and editors at Siam Voices and Asian Correspondent for their contributions and hard work this year. And a special thanks to YOU, the readers, for your support, feedback and retweets! We wish you a Happy New Year 2014 - let's just hope that there'll be more stories to write about for all the right reasons...
Siam Voices 2013 review – Part 2: Lèse majesté and the media in the crossfire
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 28, 2013 Welcome to the second part of our Siam Voices 2013 year in review series. Today we highlight the state of freedom of speech, which is still endangered by the draconian lèse majesté law. We also take a look at the ongoing protests, where Thailand's media itself became the story.
As the current chaotic protests are dominating the headlines, earlier this month yet another man was found guilty of defaming Thailand's monarchy for posting two anti-monarchy messages on a web forum. Article 112 of the Criminal Code, also more commonly known as the lèse majesté law, cites that "whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years." However, this time there was also this:
The third offence was related to an attempt to insult the monarchy. The prosecutor made the accusation that evidence on the defendant’s computer showed that he had prepared to post another lèse majesté message on the web forum, but the attempt failed because of his arrest and the confiscation of his computer. He was found guilty under Articles 112 and 80 of the Criminal Code for the attempted offence and was sentenced to three years and four months in jail. Nevertheless, the judges did not give the rationale for their decision.
"Thai man found guilty of attempted lèse-majesté", Prachatai English, December 12, 2013
With the other offenses he was sentenced to a total of over 13 years in prison, but it was reduced to six years and eight months due to his plea of guilty and "beneficial testimony". It is an unprecedented and worrying ruling since for the first time somebody was convicted of "attempted lèse majesté", invoking Article 80 of the Criminal Code.
But given the lèse majesté sentencings of this past year, it is clear that things have not improved - it may have gotten even worse.
In January, a red shirt leader was sentenced to two years in prison for merely hinting at the monarchy. Later that month, veteran activist Somyot Pruksakasemsuk was found guilty of lèse majesté in a high-profile case with much international attention and followed by strong reactions. His offense: editing - not writing himself - two political essays that at best made allusions to the royal family for a now-defunct political red shirt magazine. Somyot was sentenced to 11 years even though he had already been in detention since April 2011 and been denied bail 15 times until today.
Numerous lèse majesté complaints filed this year also showed how frivolously the law is being misused: an activist targeted for distributing mock banknotes depicting Thai historical figures other than the King; a TV host filing a complaint against a student activist months after she was sitting on it; a sibling rivalry turned bitter with one brother accusing the other of insulting the King, causing him to be jailed for a year before he was acquitted; and even ex-yellow shirt leader Sondhi Limthongkul was found guilty because he quoted inflammatory remarks by somebody else. In related news, a court upheld a suspended sentence against Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn for not deleting web comments quickly enough that were deemed insulting to the monarchy.
In November, the courts added a new dimension to lèse majesté that was previously unheard of by stating that the law also applied to previous kings, thus not only arbitrarily expanding taboo topics, but also making critical, academic research into current Chakri dynasty impossible.
What is apparent is the need to openly discuss the law and how it is being misused, as ThaiPBS attempted to earlier this year. But it was met with outrage and resistance by a vocal minority, still maintaining and promoting the perception that even talking about the law is illegal, which is factually wrong and deliberate misinformation. With the current political polarization deeper than ever, even a consideration to reform the lèse majesté is now further away than ever.
Also worrying is the increased usage of 112 in combination with the Computer Crimes Act - which we have criticised numerous times before - as an effective tool to crack down online dissent. So it came as no surprise when the commander of the Technology Crime Suppression Division [TCSD] Pol. Maj-Gen Pisit Pao-in emerged as the new self-appointed chief censor, brazenly using scare tactics to curb political online rumors. Likely emboldened by the sudden public attention, he went a step further and threatened to monitor the mobile messaging app LINE, demanding the developers behind it cooperate (to which they refused). You know when you've taken it too far when even the ICT minister (not widely known as a free speech proponent either) disagreed with Pisit's audacious plans and the latter was soon forced to backpaddle.
Media in the crossfire of protesters
With the country's relapse back to street protests, so grew the news coverage of them both in the domestic and international media. With the volatile political situation the fight over the sovereign narrative was in full swing and again, those not agreeing were at the receiving end of accusations of being biased with even physical attacks against both local and foreign colleagues.
The protesters felt misrepresented especially by the foreign media and fired back in the same vitriolic manner as they did back in 2010 with a sense of hurt national pride, entitlement and superiority. However, the protesters - equipped with their own satellite TV channel and other media outlets - have so far failed to present credible non-Thai language sources to back up their claims. In a similar vein they also targeted Thai free TV stations during one of their rallies in early December. The TV channels have greatly resisted the hostile takeover attempts and the pressure to cease their broadcasts and switch to the protesters' channel.
It is said that "journalism is the first rough draft of history" and it looks like, thanks to the protesters' attitude to the media, the first drafts will be less than favorable towards them regardless of the outcome.
The Siam Voices 2013 year in review series continues tomorrow. Read all parts here: Part 1: Politics - Part 2: Lèse Majesté & the media - Part 3: The Rohingya - Part 4: Education and reform calls - Part 5: What else happened?
Thai navy sues journalists after reports on Rohingya trafficking
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 19, 2013 The Royal Thai Navy has filed defamation charges against international journalists for their reports on authorities being involved in human trafficking of ethnic Rohingya refugees. The move sends a chilling reminder to the media about the dismal state of press freedom in Thailand, the easy exploitation of flawed laws and how little outside inquiry Thailand's military tolerates.
Ever since the deadly persecution of the Rohingya people, an ethnic minority denied citizenship in Burma, in 2012 that caused tens of thousands to flee, mostly on frail and overcrowded vessels on the Andaman Sea, the plight of Rohingya refugees in Thailand has been well documented in the past 12 months*. Reports of abuse, rape, inhumane detention conditions and human trafficking have persistently accompanied the coverage of the refugees in Thailand. A deadline imposed by the Thai government to find and transfer the refugees to another country passed in July with no results and further developments being made, leaving the Rohingyas in legal limbo.
While this story is almost exclusively covered in foreign media and mostly met with apathy in the mainstream Thai media, Phuket Wan has been regularly reporting and unearthing accounts of the mistreatment of Rohingya people, including selling to human traffickers by Thai authorities. In July, Phuket Wan was quoting from an investigative special report by the Reuters news agency that accuses certain sections of the Royal Thai Navy of actively taking part in the smuggling of Rohingya refugees.
This was followed up by Reuters with another special report in December that also carries "startling admissions" by the DSI chief Tharit Pengdit and the Deputy Commissioner General of the Royal Thai Police Maj-Gen Chatchawal Suksomjit over the existence of illegal camps in southern Thailand. In the aftermath of the coverage, both the United Nations and the United States have called on Thailand to investigate the findings of the Reuters report.
This is how the Royal Thai Navy responded to these accusations:
A captain acting on behalf of the Royal Thai Navy has accused two Phuketwan journalists of damaging the reputation of the service and of breaching the Computer Crimes Act. Two other journalists from the Reuters news agency are expected to face similar charges shortly.
The Phuketwan journalists, Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian, denied the charges and were fingerprinted when they presented themselves today at Vichit Police Station, south of Phuket City. They are due to reappear on December 24. The pair face a maximum jail term of five years and/or a fine of up to 100,000, baht
It's believed to be the first time an arm of the military in Thailand has sued journalists for criminal defamation using the controversial Computer Crimes Act. (...)
In response to presentation of the charges today, Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian issued the following statement:
(...) We are shocked to learn now that the Navy is using a controversial law to sue Phuketwan for criminal defamation. The allegations in the article are not made by Phuketwan. They are made by the highly-respected Reuters news agency, following a thorough investigation. (...)
The Rohingya have no spokesperson, no leader, but through Phuketwan's ongoing coverage, the torment of these people continues to be revealed. Their forced exodus from Burma is a great tragedy. Yet how they are treated in the seas off Thailand and in Thailand remains a constant puzzle.
We wish the Royal Thai Navy would clear its reputation by explaining precisely what is happening to the Rohingya in the Andaman Sea and in Thailand. By instead using a controversial law against us, the Navy is, we believe, acting out of character.
We can only wonder why a good organisation finds it necessary to take such unusual action instead of making a telephone call or holding a media conference.
"Navy Captain Uses Computer Crimes Act to Sue Journalists for Criminal Defamation", Phuket Wan, December 18, 2013
This is an extremely worrying development. The navy is not only using the libel law against the two journalists, but also the controversial Computer Crimes Act of 2007 (CCA). Thanks to the CCA's flawed and vague wording, it opens up the possibility for arbitrary charges against all online users to be held liable not only for their own content, but also for the content of third parties that the user is hosting. Recently, the Appeal Court upheld the suspended sentence against Chiranuch Premchaiporn, the webmaster of the news website Prachatai, for not deleting web comments deemed lèse majesté quickly enough.
Another aspect is that it also shows that allegations of human trafficking are hardly being investigated, let alone by somebody outside of the military. After allegations of human trafficking against army officers earlier this January, an inquiry found the men at no fault but they were transferred out to another region nonetheless.
Earlier this year, we blogged about the then-defence minister Sukumpol Suwanatat's "fear of too much press freedom" and this move again reflects the armed forces' self-image that is still being maintained until today: an essential part of the Thai power apparatus that is not to be questioned or criticized, especially by outsiders.
*NOTE: The plight of the Rohingya refugees will be highlighted as part of a special 2013 year-in-review series starting December 26, 2013 on Siam Voices.
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.
Tongue-Thai’ed!: Democrats' Surin and Godwin's law, again!
Originally published at Siam Voices on November 8, 2013 This is part XXIII of “Tongue-Thai’ed!”, an ongoing series where we collect the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures. Check out all past entries here.
With the anti-amnesty bill protests in full swing all week long in the capital Bangkok, the opposition Democrat Party have stepped up their game apparently also their rhetorics - but not necessarily to new heights.
Nearly all senior party members have come out to rile up the crowd led by former deputy prime minister Suthep Thuagsuban, a regular on this section. But today's “Tongue-Thai’ed!” comes from somebody else in the Democrat Party: Surin Pitsuwan is a seasoned politician with a lot of experience, especially in foreign affairs. No wonder, he was deputy foreign minister and just until recently secretary-general of ASEAN, as he came back from Jakarta to Bangkok back into the fold of his party earlier this year. Since then, he was mostly in the background but now also took to the stage of the rally at Thammasat University to show his opposition to the flawed broad amnesty bill.
Apart from saying the usual á la "Thais should stand up and reclaim their honor" and being more concrete along the lines of "This government is unacceptable for the ASEAN stage". However, there was another one that stood out while referring to an article by the Council of Foreign Relations that says the ruling Pheu Thai Party is "operating like an elected dictatorship". Here's what Noch Hautavanija (the assistant to the recently resigned party deputy Korn Chatikavanij) tweeted:
"ฮิตเลอร์ก็มาจากการเลือกตั้ง และเป็นเผด็จการ" คุณสุรินทร์
— Noch Hautavanija (@NochPH) November 7, 2013
Translation: "Hitler also came [to power] through elections and it was a dictatorship" Mr. Surin
Here we go again! After Suthep and former foreign minister Kasit, we have yet another senior figure of the Democrat Party invoking Godwin's Law when talking about the government of Thaksin Shinawatra and its associated successors and unfortunately it seems to be one of the more level-headed figures in the party. Seriously, is it now a requirement in the party to draw a Hitler comparison whenever speaking about the political rivals?
For the last time, here's why the argument the Hitler-came-to-power-through-elections-so-democracy-is-bad is just wrong:
Hitler never had more than 37 percent of the popular vote in the honest elections that occurred before he became Chancellor. (…) Unfortunately, its otherwise sound constitution contained a few fatal flaws. The German leaders also had a weak devotion to democracy, and some were actively plotting to overthrow it. Hitler furthermore enjoyed an almost unbroken string of luck in coming to power. He benefited greatly from the Great Depression, the half-senility of the president, the incompetence of his opposition, and the appearance of an unnecessary back room deal just as the Nazis were starting to lose popular appeal and votes. (source)
Sounds familiar? You can criticize the current (and the past Thaksin governments) for being arrogant (especially with the current push on the blanket amnesty bill), or even politically overbearing - but to compare it to one of the darkest periods in German history and also being factually wrong at that is not only unworthy of the name the party is bearing, but also of the international standing Surin has.
Some personal thoughts: Thai amnesty bill's wrongs do not make one right
Originally published at Siam Voices on November 4, 2013 It all happened much quicker than anybody thought. What was anticipated to last right into the weekend was done in a day and a night, and we all are still nurturing a massive political hangover.
Parliament rushed the Amnesty Bill through the second and third readings with 310 votes and an absent opposition, and now awaits confirmation in the Senate - all that amidst a flood of outcry and criticism from all sides for very different reasons. As this political crisis in Thailand has dragged on for the best part of a decade now, the political landscape has become deeply polarized.
However, the arguments of both sides show that no matter how many wrongs you make, hardly any of them make it a right.
While the ruling Pheu Thai Party initially tabled the most agreeable version of the Amnesty Bill by their MP Worachai Hema, it then did an audacious bait-and-switch as it retroactively added in the more controversial sections that ultimately transforms it into a blanket amnesty, which would cover not only political protesters, but also their leaders and other people that have been convicted .
The hubris the party showed - all that in absence of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra - with this move is reminiscent of the man that is most likely to profit from it: former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra lives in self-imposed exile since 2008, following a conviction and 2-year jail sentence for abuse of power handed down by a post-coup court that was arguably biased against him. Ever since then, he has been more than a shadow if the governments of his party's incarnations, including the current one of his sister Yingluck. While it is understandable that he is longing to return to Thailand, it can be argued that he is more effective abroad than at home, given the mountain of old and new problems he would have to face on his return.
With the blanket amnesty also absolving those responsible for the bloody crackdown on the 2010 anti-government protests, the party is betraying its loyal supporter base. The red shirts are split on this matter, as seen when 4 red shirt leaders abstained (Natthawut Saikau and Dr. Weng Tojirakarn, plus "Seh Daeng"'s daughter Khattiya and MP Worachai Hema, the bill's original sponsor), while all others followed the party line - something red shirt leader and MP Korkaew Pikulthong used to try to explain his political schizophrenia.
There have been protests against the bill before by a red shirt splinter group and they will do so again on November 10, while on the same day other red shirts will rally in favor of the bill. The red shirt movement is (once again) at a junction and has to reflect on what it actually stands for: as a force for genuine political reform - even if it means breaking away from Thaksin and the Pheu Thai Party - or forever be branded as Thaksin's mob. The crucial question is, whether the majority of the base and the leaders are capable of the former?
While conservative anti-government protesters (mainly consisting of supporters of the opposition Democrat Party) rally against the impunity that Thaksin could get away with, it is also a sign of frustration from the opposition in and outside parliament in their failed attempt to get rid what they see as "Thaksinism" from Thai politics - even if it comes at the cost of democracy.
One of their main arguments is endorsing the 2006 military coup as "patriotic" to protect the country from the "evil" Thaksin and his politics. Their vehement defense of the coup and their denial of all its consequences displays the self-righteousness in their crusade for the "good people" and their lack of self-reflection.
The decision now lies with the Senate, but it can also be expected to be challenged at the Constitutional Court - two bodies that have played their own part in the political mess that Thailand is today. It is exactly the mindset of self-serving self-righteousness and a dangerous black-and-white thinking among those political institutions and groups that are not meant to be politicized but are politicized ever since the military coup and the meddling of non-parliamentary groups.
That is also why the culture of impunity of the darkest days in Thai history (1973, 1976, 1992, 2006 etc.) still prevails and will repeat over and over again until we start to realize that it needs more than just a simple electoral majority, more than an amnesty, more than the crucifiction of a political enemy and more than just the reversal to times that once were or never were at all - all those would be the first things to make things right.