Military Saksith Saiyasombut Military Saksith Saiyasombut

Tongue-Thai'ed! Part XV: Of causality and casualties - Dr. Pornthip and the GT200

Originally published at Siam Voices on July 25, 2012 “Tongue-Thai’ed!” encapsulates the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures – in short: everything we hear that makes us go “Huh?!”. Check out all past entries here.

The renewed controversy over the fraudulent bomb-detecting GT200 has revealed the reaffirmed faith in the bogus devise by Thailand's top ranking military officers after their admission that it is still in use. This revelation was also accompanied by its unashamed endorsement by the army chief, supreme commander and the defense minister (who was the one responsible for the purchase during his time in the air force), absolutely disregarding multiple scientific tests that have proven the ineffectiveness of what is essentially an empty plastic shell with a dowsing rod.

Another very prominent defender of the GT200 is scientist Dr. Pornthip, a forensic scientist who is well known for her flashy hair styles. She had already fallen from grace when she defended the bogus bomb-sniffer right after it failed government tests (out of 20 tests, it only worked 4 times!) in early 2010.

Now, she has come out again with these stunning statements defending the device:

The head of the the Justice Ministry's Central Institute of Forensic Science believes bomb attacks in the deep South have increased as a result of the CIFS's decision to stop using the GT200 bomb detector. (...)

She also said there were too many variables involved when using the GT200 for it to be infallible. Khunying Pornthip said there have been more frequent bomb attacks in the South since then.

"'More attacks' since GT200 phased out", Bangkok Post, July 24, 2012

She still seems to ignore that there's only one solid variable concerning the GT200: it doesn't work at all! What Dr. Pornthip should know is that there's a difference between causality and casualty when it comes to understanding the role of this bogus bomb-sniffing gadget: the former requires a cause for an effect, the latter is the result of ignoring the cause.

If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Siam Voices Saksith Saiyasombut Siam Voices Saksith Saiyasombut

Yingluck's European tour: Strictly business as usual

Originally published at Siam Voices on July 23, 2012

Thailand's Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra visited Germany and France last week, her first visit to Europe since she took office a year ago. While the trip was primarily aimed at improving economic ties and regaining confidence among investors from the two most important economies in the European Union for the Thai government, other issues, such as the still unstable political situation and the continuously deteriorating freedom of speech, were mentioned in passing at best.

Over the course of five days, Yingluck completed a packed itinerary with lots of meetings and shaking hands with government officials, dignitaries and business representatives. She was accompanied by her entourage, including Foreign Minister Surapong Towijakchaikul,  and Suranand Vejjajiva, who know works for the government as her secretary-general. She also had 73 Thai private sector representatives in tow, underlining the main emphasis of this trip.

The first destination was the German capital Berlin, where she met with Chancellor Angela Merkel who greeted her with customary military honors at the Chancellery  for a working lunch and a joint press conference - which was pretty much the only chance for the German press to see her. Not much was reported about it - despite the fact it is the first visit by a Thai Prime Minister to Germany since 1995 and the German-Thai diplomatic relations are celebrating their 150th anniversary, as emphasized by both leaders. That said, the German media generally pays little attention to Southeast Asia (unless it is about Burma and involves Aung San Suu Kyi),

And so the official website of the Chancellery was the only outlet where interested followers could see the full press conference, which is available in German only. In the 17 minutes long presser, the German leader outlined the economic ties between the two countries pointing out that Germany is the "most important economical partner in the EU" and with about "600 German companies" already in the Kingdom, not to mention a popular tourist destination. The most important and interesting issue during this press conference and the meeting in general was the call to speed up the process for an ASEAN-EU free trade agreement, something Merkel has been advocating for some time already.

Prime Minister Yingluck said the two leaders have "trust in each other" and that the two countries will expand their relations "on all issues" including democratization, rule of law and human rights - which was pretty much one of the very few times these three words have been mentioned publicly during this trip. In general, nothing much else was talked about and the interest by the German press was virtually non-existent, as there was only one question directed to Yingluck by a Thai journalist and the other German colleagues asking Chancellor Merkel about the Euro crisis and the situation in Syria - and also a female reporter gushing over the apparent women power present at the stage (we talked about Yingluck and the issue with feminism before here and here).

And with that there was subsequently very much nothing reported in the German media outlets and the rest of Yingluck's stay in Germany can only be reconstructed via the official Flickr account of the Prime Minister (a great source for press photos licensed under Creative Commons btw!). Nevertheless, some interesting notes can be made from them: from giving a speech to a business forum, meeting with German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, and meeting Thai citizens in Germany at the Thai Embassy and also at a Thai Buddhist temple during a short sojourn to Munich.

Yingluck also met with a group of German MPs dubbed the "Friends of Thailand" consisting of the German-ASEAN parliamentary group. But the picture also shows another familiar face: the grey-haired man left from the table with the water bottles is Michael Glos, MP of the conservative Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU), who has been to Thailand earlier this year. Glos also belongs to a group of conservative MPs that have lobbied at the Foreign Ministry to revoke the entry ban of former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra last year and have been campaigning for a policy change towards Thailand with "Thaksin as a strong figure" (we reported).

On Thursday, Yingluck traveled to France to do essentially the same: meeting with President François Hollande to talk about economy and ASEAN and meeting with business representatives to drum the roll for French investors. However the small difference was the slightly higher media coverage in France: the Prime Minister gave interviews to Le Figaro - where she was also asked about the role of the non-democratic military, her usual denial over changing anything about lèse majesté and her rejection over the notion that she's the puppet of her bigger brother - and a TV interview with France 24, recorded before her departure.

The trip ended on Sunday and a pleased Prime Minister announced on her own TV show that it was a good opportunity to build trust and goodwill towards Thailand and its economy. For the two European heavyweights, ASEAN is likely to be a majore economic partner in the not-so-distant future as both sides have strong interest in a free-trade agreement. However, the question remains about Thailand's role because, contrary to what Yingluck told Merkel and Hollande, the political outlook for the Kingdom looks less than stable and still could drive investors away to regional neighbors, despite all the efforts to mask a long-simmering political crisis as a short-term problem. For the economic and political future, Thailands needs strong partners like the EU, but do these strong countries equally need Thailand that much?

Read More
Military Saksith Saiyasombut Military Saksith Saiyasombut

Thai army still uses fraudulent bomb-sniffing GT200 device

Originally published at Siam Voices on July 22, 2012 Last week we reported on the reaffirmed faith for the GT200 bomb-sniffing device by Thai army chief Gerneral Prayuth Chan-ocha, despite having been proven bogus numerous times for years. But scientific evidence has not deterred Thailand's armed forces and several other government agencies from continuing to use an overpriced piece of plastic with a dowsing rod at the end that is less reliable in detecting explosives or other substances than a simple coin flip (we're talking about less than a random chance!)  - and probably as effective as this 'upgrade' with 'locally sourced materials' crafted by 'Thai ingenuity' as depicted in this Thai viral video from 2010 mocking the original dowsing-rod at the height of its controversy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZBDA4uqoOE&w=640&h=385

After the devastating results of the scientific tests ordered by administration of the then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva in early 2010 - a substantial loss of face for many officials involved - and despite foreign media coverage criticizing the device (spearheaded by the BBC "Newsnight" program, literally taking apart the gadget and highlighting the dirty business behind it), the controversy unsurprisingly died down in the following months and years with hardly any inquiries or consequences.

The hot issue was brought up again this month when the UK-based distributor of the ADE-651, a device that has been mostly sold in the Middle East and that is essentially the same to the GT200 or the equally bogus Alpha 6, has been charged for fraud. This also has turned the spotlight on the Thai army and whether or not anything has changed in the past two years. The result is sobering, yet unsurprising, as the Bangkok Post has found out:

Military personnel in the southernmost provinces will keep using the controversial GT200 bomb detectors until they are replaced with other instruments.

Supreme Commander Thanasak Patimaprakorn said yesterday he had seen the effectiveness of GT200 detectors in finding explosives. He said during testing before buying, the equipment was found to be effective.

"I did not mention if the equipment is worthy or not but I'm saying that the procurement of the equipment was done carefully," he said.

Army sources said most of the 757 GT200 detectors which were bought by the army remain operational, "except those that are out of order".

"The GT200 detectors are now used as supporting equipment for operations, not the main ones. But the army has never ordered anyone to stop using them," the source said. "It's better to use the GT200 than to have nothing."

"Soldiers continue to use GT200 in South", Bangkok Post, July 21, 2012

We have already covered the stunning reaffirmed faith by army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha into the bogus GT200 and confirmed its usage in the deeply troubled Southern border regions - here's his endorsement again:

“I affirm that the device is still effective. Other armed forces are also using it,” the army chief said. (…) The army chief said the GT200 has proven to be effective in the army’s operations in the past. But he would respect any scientific test if it proves otherwise.

"Use of GT200 'will continue'", Bangkok Post, July 14, 2012

As mentioned earlier, there are at least 13 government agencies utilizing the bomb-detecting bogus dowsing-rod as well, including the Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFC) - headed by the nationally well-known forensic scientist Pornthip Rojanasunand, who has lost nearly all credibility as the national proponent for scientific evidence by backing the GT200 even after the proven ineffectiveness. Now it seems, according the aforementioned Bangkok Post report above, that her agency and the Office of the Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) have dropped the its usage.

Also, the Department of Special Investigations* (DSI) has started to investigate the procurement process of the about 1,000 devices on behalf of complaints received by the ONCB and other agencies - the CIFC has not filed a complaint according to Pornthip, as their procurement process has been found ok by the Office of the Auditor-General. So far, it has found out that the products were "overpriced and ineffective and bidding contests for their procurement might have been rigged." It will also consider to take legal action against the UK-based manufacturer and seller of the GT200.

In a related development, Defense Minister Sukumpol Suwanatat was yet another one to state his unbroken faith into the bogus device (with Prayuth and Supreme Commander Thanasak Patimaprakorn the other two) while totally disregarding solid evidence saying otherwise and at the same time also (perhaps unwittingly) revealing where this stern insistence comes from:

"Many bombs were found using the GT200 detectors but if the findings say otherwise we'll have to see who's lying," ACM Sukumpol said. "Today if we don't use the GT200 what other detectors will we use? The Defence Ministry and I continue to look for alternative devices when travelling abroad," he said. (...)

The minister said the air force was the first to procure the GT200 detectors when he was the air force chief-of-staff. The detectors were tested in front of army commanders.

"Defence minister insists GT200 works", Bangkok Post, July 19, 2012

To repeat again what I said last week: we're talking about an empty plastic shell with a dowsing-rod that is supposed to detect explosive substances and drugs, for which the Thai army and government agencies have spent millions of Baht, only for its uselessness - unfortunately many times literally - to blow up in their faces.

The evidence is more than two years old now and overwhelmingly rock-solid. Its reputation is being questioned worldwide and the UK has banned the export of this deceptively dangerous tool, that has probably cost numerous lives instead of saving them. Meanwhile, the situation in the deep South remains dangerous as yet another bomb explosion occurred on Saturday in Narathiwat province, injuring eight civilians.

*What needs to be mentioned as well is that the DSI acts according to whichever direction the political wind is blowing, as the inquiries into the deaths of the 2010 protests pre- and post-election have shown.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and also on his public Facebook page here.

Read More
Media Saksith Saiyasombut Media Saksith Saiyasombut

Thai Mental Health Dept: 'No more than 2 hours of political news to avoid stress'

By Saksith Saiyasombut

On the Friday the 13th, when the Constitutional Court was about to deliver the verdict against the Thai government and their proposals to amend the constitution that was feared to throw the country into yet another political crisis, the Mental Health Department of the Public Health Ministry recommended all Thais "not to follow political news for more than two hours in a sitting" to avoid being stressed out or even turning agressive in process amidst ongoing political conflict.

นพ.ยงยุทธ วงศ์ภิรมย์ศานติ์ หัวหน้าทีมโฆษกกรมสุขภาพจิต และนายกสมาคมจิตแพทย์แห่งประเทศไทย กล่าวว่า ระหว่างรอฟังคำวินิจฉัยของศาลรัฐธรรมนูญ  (...) แต่ต้องยอมรับว่ากรณีที่เกิดขึ้นประชาชนต่างมีความตื่นตัวทางการเมืองมากขึ้น ถือเป็นรากฐานสำคัญของการพัฒนาประเทศ แต่ทั้งนี้คงไม่สามารถคาดการณ์ได้ว่าจะเกิดอะไรขึ้นในอนาคต แต่เชื่อว่าประชาชนส่วนใหญ่ไม่ต้องการให้เกิดความรุนแรง ซึ่งการคาดการณ์ความรุนแรงที่จะเกิดขึ้นยิ่งทำให้วิตกกังวลและเครียด อาจส่งผลให้เกิดโรคเครียดทางการเมืองได้ (Political Stress Syndrome : PSS)

Yongyuth Wongpiromsan MD, head spokesman of the Mental Health Department and president of the Psychiatric Association of Thailand says that in anticipation of the verdict by the Constitutional Court, (...) but we have to accept that the people have increased political awareness which can be considered as an important foundation of the national progress. However, we cannot predict what will happen in the future but we believe that the majority of the people do not want violence. Thus, [reports about] expecting an outbreak of violence can cause anxiety and stress, which could result in Political Stress Syndrome (PSS)

"กรมสุขภาพจิต เตือนประชาชนระวังเครียดการเมือง", MCOT, July 13, 2012 - translation by me

Furthermore, the press release included a list of symptoms that could come with PSS, both physical (irregular breathing, abdominal pain and all sorts of other aches) and psychological (disenchantment, insomnia, anxiety and anger). Should one be unsure about his or her mental condition, he or she can take a test to measure if somebody has PSS or not and, when appropriate, seek counseling. The questions are:

1) "Do you feel anxiety when expressing political opinions?", 2) "Do you feel hopelessness regarding the current political situation?", 3) "Do political news make you feel easily upset or angry?", 4) "The political situation keeps you awake at night?", 5) "Are you unfocused at your job or daily activities when thinking about politics?" 6) "Politics causes fights and arguments with others" 7) "Are you feeling afraid when following political news" 8) "Are you repeatedly thinking about the political situation"

Now, given Thailand's recent history it would certainly not be a new phenomenon. Actually, it was coined by the same department right at the beginning of this political crisis back in 2006:

One-fourth of Thais are likely to develop political stress syndrome (PSS) - a new mental ailment triggered by fierce political tension, Mental Health Department chief said yesterday. (...) "The risk group includes politicians, protesters and supporters of the government, news addicts, and people with mental health problems," said M.L. Somchai Chakrabhand.

The PSS, he said, was a new medical term developed by the department after studying the linkage between political tensions and people's mental health.

''Psychiatrists are afraid that people with accumulated PSS symptoms will resort to violent means to break the political dead end because they feel that a peaceful movement is not a solution to the impasse,'' he said. M.L. Somchai said it was the first time the department detected this kind of mental illness in the country.

"Crisis triggers 'political stress syndrome'", Bangkok Post, circa March 17, 2006 - found here

In conclusion, Yongyuth gives his advice on how to deal with PSS and also how everybody can contribute responsibly to reduce widespread political anxiety.

อย่างไรก็ตามการสื่อสารในเครือข่าย Internet ควรลดความรุนแรงในการแสดงอารมณ์และความคิดเห็นการแสดงออก (...) แต่จะส่งผลกระทบให้เกิดบรรยากาศของสังคมที่รุนแรงมากขึ้น ดังนั้น การสื่อสารในเครือข่ายฯ นี้ ควรเพิ่มความระมัดระวังในการออกความคิดเห็น ไม่ส่งต่อความคิดเห็นที่รุนแรงออกไป รวมทั้งช่วยกันตักเตือนการแสดงออกที่รุนแรง ซึ่งทุกคนสามารถช่วยให้สังคมไทยผ่านวิกฤติครั้งนี้ไปได้ ด้วยการแสดงออกอย่างสร้างสรรค์ แก้ไขความขัดแย้งโดยไม่ใช้ความรุนแรง ไม่สร้างความโกรธ ความเกลียดชัง ลดการเผชิญหน้า และร่วมกันหาทางออกให้กับประเทศ.

Nevertheless, when exchanging views on the internet, the intensity of the emotions and opinions expressed should be reduced (...) that can have a negative impact on the social mood, which would increase [the chance of] violence. Thus, these kind of online discussions should be more careful in their expression of opinions, they should not spread agressive views and help reminding those who do, so that everyone can help the Thai society to overcome this crisis by being constructive, by bridging the divide without violence, anger, hatred, confrontation in order to find a solution for the country together.

"กรมสุขภาพจิต เตือนประชาชนระวังเครียดการเมือง", MCOT, July 13, 2012 - translation by me

First off, PSS is not an officially recognized syndrome, rather it is a coined term to describe the accompanying side effects of a growing political consciousness (which has been acknowledged as a good thing above), where people do take interest in the political decision-making that has an influence on them and thus in return demand to have a say in that.

Also, the recent years have shown that there are more and more competing narratives about the recent history of Thailand and the directions this country should take in the coming years. Never before have important, but previously taboo issues (such as the often-mentioned lèse-majesté law) been debated so openly (as far as it is legally possible) in the public domain. Sure, it can get messy, sometimes downright nasty. But it is also a chance to show that there is no more only one single sovereign authority that defines things anymore!

Be it from the press - who should do their duty and, while optionally opinionated, report truthful (and not just "20 per cent" of it "when you read The Nation and Bangkok Post", as Thitinan remarked) - or from a fellow man, what is important is a tolerance to opinions and expressions that they do not agree with - a fundamental necessity in a democratic society.

However, sometimes emotions do outweigh reason and opposite opinions are viscerally condemned. Many political issues have deteriorated into short-tempered, easily trigged shouting matches - also by our law-makers - or have been taken to the streets in an apparent failure of the democratic institutions instead of a level-headed, fact-based approach. Critical thinking and the tolerance for inconvenient views are skills not necessarily paramount on the things to be taught in school and that lack now is being exposed in the most extreme fashion.

Nevertheless, at one point things can be overwhelming, tiredness and frustration can occur. Especially when things hardly change (like with lèse-majesté) or just simply a general anxiety (something I tried to explain during the flood crisis last year) that this simmering political crisis is always close to boil over again! In these moments, you can't help but take a break or reduce the daily news intake.

P.S: This warning probably comes a little bit too late for us journalists and regular readers to this and similar websites...!

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and also on his public Facebook page here.

Read More
Military Saksith Saiyasombut Military Saksith Saiyasombut

Thai army reaffirms usage of GT200-dowsing rod for bomb detection

Originally published at Siam Voices on July 14, 2012 Thailand's army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha has reaffirmed that the Royal Thai Army will keep on using the controversial GT200, a bogus device that is supposed to detect explosive materials among other substances. The device, effectively nothing more than an empty plastic shell with a dowsing rod, has been proven ineffective numerous times and the UK-based manufacturer has now been charged for fraud. Despite this, the GT200 has been spotted being still used by Thai soldiers at various times. Bangkok Pundit has some more background and some history on its usage in the Thai army.

The Bangkok Post has provided some soundbites by the army chief himself on the GT200 that are worth highlighting here:

Gen Prayuth yesterday said the GT200 will continue to be used by the army in the far South. (...) The GT200 has been widely used by security officers in Thailand's troubled deep South.

However*, in Krungthep Turakij he is being quoted that the 4th Army Region, which covers the troubled South of Thailand, is not using it anymore. In the border region, insurgent violence has claimed thousands of lives in the past, many of them caused by IEDs (improvised explosive devices).

เมื่อถามย้ำว่ากองทัพภาคที่ 4 ยังใช้จีที 200 หรือไม่ พล.อ.ประยุทธ์ กล่าวว่า ไม่ได้ใช้แล้ว (...) หลังจากที่เครื่องมือตรวจวัตถุระเบิดมีปัญหาทาง พล.อ.ประยุทธ์ ก็สั่งการไม่กำลังพลในกองทัพภาคที่ 4 ใช้งานเพราะเกรงว่ากำลังพลจะไม่ปลอดภัย และขณะนี้ จีที 200 ถูกเก็บไว้ในกองทัพภาคที่ 4

When asked about whether or not the 4th Army Region is still using the GT200, General Prayuth says it is not being used anymore. (...) After the bomb-detecting devices have been found problematic, General Prayuth has ordered personnel in the 4th Army Region not to use it because it was deemed unsafe and the GT200 devices have been stored in the 4th Army Region.

"'ประยุทธ์'แจงทบ.ไม่ได้ใช้'จีที200'แล้ว", Krungthep Turakij, July 13, 2012

Nevertheless, Prayuth still somehow has faith in these dowsing rods:

"I affirm that the device is still effective. Other armed forces are also using it," the army chief said. (...) The army chief said the GT200 has proven to be effective in the army's operations in the past. But he would respect any scientific test if it proves otherwise.

Where was Prayuth in 2009 when the Abhisit administration has ordered a scientific test? The results were devastating: out of 20 tests, the device only 'worked' 4 times - probably as accurate and reliable as a flip of a coin! But then again, he may have been believing the words of Pornthip Rojanasunand.

Pronthip has been for a very long time the nationwide esteemed forensic expert, educating the country about the importance of scientific evidence and a nearly ubiquitous appearance in any media coverage of murder and other crime cases. However, she has been defending the GT200 with her continuous faith in the bogus device and insisting to still use it, even after the failed tests - killing off every credibility she had as a forensic scientist. (And to answer BP's question in his post whether or not Pornthip has less media appearances these days: yes, definitely!)

It was just a matter of time when this issue of the bogus GT200 would pop up again as nothing really happened after the official government tests and despite the continuous investigation against the manufacturer by the BBC. Apart from the usual questions surrounding nebulous army procurements - this lot of about 1,000 plastic dowsing rods has cost somewhere between 700m - 800m Baht ($221m - $252m), while the real cost for it has been hardly 1000 Baht ($30) a piece - this also raises the questions about whether or not the Thai armed forces (at that time under the command of General Anupong Paochinda) will file charges against the fraudulent manufacturer.

Prayuth has thrown that responsibility to the government, while he should be reminded that he is responsible for the well-being of the soldiers that are apparently still using the bogus GT200 to detect bombs. Whether or not the army chief  is also ready to fully convince the public of the effectiveness of this dowsing rod by personally using one in real-life circumstances has not been reported.

*What wonders me is that the Bangkok Post's military correspondent Wassana Nanuam failed to mention the South's 4th Region Army's non-usage of the GT200 and actually wrote the complete opposite...?

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and also on his public Facebook page here.

Read More
Sports Saksith Saiyasombut Sports Saksith Saiyasombut

Thailand on track to host Formula 1 GP in 2014?

Originally published at Siam Voices on June 22, 2012

In March we reported about the early moves for a potential Formula 1 race in Thailand, and the costs and the chances. To recap: The Ministry of Tourism and Sports announced it is campaigning for a Formula 1 Grand Prix of Thailand in 2014, with the backing of corporate heavyweights Red Bull and Singha Beer.

Chalerm Yoovidhya - who is inheriting Krating Daeng (the original Red Bull) from his recently deceased father Chaleo - is the co-owner of the championship-winning Red Bull Racing team, the other being Austrian Dietrich Mateschitz who made Red Bull (the fizzy one) a world-wide brand. Mateschitz and Chaleo held 49 per cent each in shares, with Chalerm previously holding 2 per cent acting the wedge between them. Now that Chalerm seems most likely gets his father's shares, it is likely that Chalerm may try to increase his influence over the Red Bull operations. Both Chalerm and the Singha Beer corporation are well-connected to the decision makers in Thailand, most notably to the opposition Democrat Party.

Now it seems that plans for a potential Formula 1 race have been given a minor boost, if the words by those involved are anything to go by:

"Our discussions with (Formula One CEO) Bernie Ecclestone have gone smoothly. We expect to get rights to host a grand prix from 2014 onwards. The race might be held at night to accommodate viewers in Europe and help earn more in sponsorship.

"Chalerm Yoovidhya, Red Bull team owner, is helping negotiate the hosting fee, which is likely to be about Bt1.2 billion [$37m], compared to the Bt2 billion [$62m] China paid.

"The cost of building a new F1 venue to accommodate 100,000 spectators will be about Bt100 million [$3.1m]. We need to finalise the budget before we propose it to the cabinet. We expect the overall budget for hosting an F1 race to be around Bt5 billion [$157m]," said Kanokphand [Chulakasem, Sports Authority of Thailand governor].

"Vettel, Schumacher in Thai grand prix preview", The Nation, June 12, 2012

So, there are a few interesting aspects here. First off, this deal is not done yet. Nevertheless, the organizers have already come up with a plans and most off all a budget - which seem to vastly differ to what has been said before:

Ministry of Tourism and Sports spokesperson, Watchara Kannikar (…) added: “Initially, the budget was Bt10 billion [$314m]. However, it is possible that the cost will triple.”

“Chumpol catches F1 fever“, TTR Weekly, March 14, 2012

How they have miraculously halved the initial budget for the Grand Prix is beyond me - even with the heavy financial backing of Red Bull, Singha and also maybe state-owned oil company PTT.

Second, there's still no word about the venue of the race. The ultimate dream for many involved would be a street circuit in the middle of Bangkok on Rajdamnoen Avenue, which saw a demo run by a Red Bull F1 car back in 2010 - although this would be logistical nightmare, as it would probably lock down the area for weeks before, during and after the event. And financially, to compare with the other two most recently added temporary street circuits: The European Grand Prix in the port of Valencia is said to cost €21m or $26m per year and the night race in Singapore reportedly costs $120m.

Another possibility would be to either overhaul the only existing racing circuit in Thailand (Bira Circuit near Pattaya) certified by the world motorsports governing body FIA up to international standards or to build an entirely new one. No word on where this one would be built was uttered either. And again to give some financial benchmarks of the most recently added events: the Korean International Circuit was built in 2010 for reportedly $270m ($77m for track itself), last year saw the construction of the Buddh International Circuit in India including a whole sports complex for $820m and currently the Circuit of the Americas in Austin, Texas is being built with investors and the state chipping in a total of $500m for the return of the United States Grand Prix later this year.

And as mentioned before, just because there were good talks, doesn't mean that there will be a race! Furthermore, the silly season of the F1 circuits for the next few years needs to be taken into account: many current races are either on the edge or were already taken off the schedule for next year. Some other circuits are already forced to alternate with another event in order to save costs, while other events are coming, such as a street race in New Jersey next year and yet another new circuit in Russia for 2014, while there are rumors of Argentina making a return among others. What could help Thailand to get a spot on the F1 calendar is the rumor that the already extensive schedule might be increased from 20 to 23 races in 2013.

Despite all the uncertainty as to whether or not a Thai Grand Prix will take place, the organizers have already secured another motorsports event to warm up the Thais for potential F1 race: The Race of Champions, an invitational exhibition tournament at the end of the year where race champions (and other all-stars) from different disciplines and championships race head-to-head in identical cars, will be held this year in Bangkok's Rajamangala Stadium. This is the second time the event has come to Asia after 2009's event took place in Beijing, which bizarrely took place in the middle of the week. Hopefully, this year will be better attended at a viewer-friendlier time of the week and maybe it could spark a sizable interest among Thais - and then the country might actually have its first ever Formula 1 Grand Prix after all, especially since the one planned in 1939 did not take place.

Read More
Academia, Media Saksith Saiyasombut Academia, Media Saksith Saiyasombut

Public seminar on ‘Democracy and Freedom of Expression’ in Ubon Ratchathani

By Saksith Saiyasombut There were a few events and discussion panels on freedom of speech and how the lèse majesté laws is heavily contributing to the continuous deterioration of that in Thailand in recent years. There was the panel discussion with Sulak, Pravit, Marshall and Anderson hosted by Siam Voices contributor Lisa Gardner, then at the FCCT (where the former event was initially supposed to take place) held an event with Professor Tongchai Winichakul and Professor Andrew Walker earlier this week. Also, Al Jazeera English devoted a whole episode of their weekly "101 East" program on Thailand's draconian Article 112 (lèse majesté), including a panel talk with Sulak, a hapless Panitan Wattanayagorn (government spokesperson under Abhisit and now back being an academic) and the dimwitted statements of Dr. Tul Sitthisomwong (leader of the reactionary, pro-112 multi color shirts).

On this coming Friday there's another public event, that discusses all of the above. However, this time it is a little bit different: First off it takes place in Ubon Ratchathani, and secondly it widens the scope not only on lèse majesté, but also on whether or not democratic values, human rights and personal freedom are actually compatible with Thai culture. The speakers are well-known to regular observers and readers:  Thitinan Pongsudhirak, one of the most quoted academic on Thai politics, Prachatai's Chiranuch "Jiew" Premchaiporn, Preut Taotawin and Pavin Chachavalpongpun, currently one of the most active academics and also a staunch activist against 112 - not without consequences. The even is hosted by Dr. Titipol Phakdeewanich, academic and Bangkok Post contributor.

Blurb down here or on the Facebook event page.

A Public Seminar: ‘Democracy and Freedom of Expression’ (in Thai only)

Friday the 22nd of June 2012, from 9.00 am – 1.30 pm Faculty of Political Science, Ubon Ratchathani University

The event is funded by the European Union (EU)

The seminar aims to promote a better understanding of the ways in which democracy, freedom of speech, and human rights are interconnected and cannot be separated if there is to be effective and tangible progress in this regard. The dialogue on this topic will aim towards a clear understanding of the importance of long-term goals in providing a sense of direction and purpose in relation to the promotion of the levels of both political participation and political awareness of the Thai population.

Since the 2006 coup d'état, we have continued to observe the problem of having human rights being more properly respected in a country, which has developed increasingly entrenched colour-code politics. Furthermore, the debate over the reform of ‘Article 112’ has become highly politicised, which has acted to distract from the key principle of promoting human rights.

08.30 – 09.00 am Registration and Coffee

09.00 – 09.20 am Welcoming remarks: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Chaiyan Ratchakul, Dean of the Faculty of Political Science, Ubon Ratchathani University

09.20 – 10.45 am: Speakers

"The importance of freedom of expression in a democratic society" Dr. Thitinan Pongsudhirak, Director of the Institute of Security and International Studies, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University

"Freedom of the media in Thailand: challenges and prospects" Ms. Chiranuch Premchaiporn, Director of Prachatai

"Freedom of Expression: Does it exist in Thailand?" Dr. Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Associate Professor at the Centre for South-east Asian Studies, Kyoto University, Japan

"Grassroots perspectives on freedom of expression and democracy in Thailand" Assistant Professor. Preut Taotawin, Lecturer at the Faculty of Liberal Arts, Ubon ratchathani University

Moderator Dr. Titipol Phakdeewanich, Faculty of Political Science, Ubon Ratchathani University

10.45 – 1.30 am: Q & A, Discussion

Read More
Interview, Media Saksith Saiyasombut Interview, Media Saksith Saiyasombut

On '100% Thai manliness' and the reality of LBGT in Thailand

Originally published at Siam Voices on June 7, 2012 On Wednesday, a rather confusing headline made the rounds when a Thai actor told that the country's Ministry of Culture (or as we call it here "ThaiMiniCult") ordered TV executives to ensure that "100 per cent male" actors should not play transgender roles on TV. Naturally, such a bold statement caused at least befuddlement and at most outrage among many people, given their track record in the past especially when it comes to the bare naked truth of sexuality.

However, soon after the news broke the actor in question went on record denying that he ever said the Ministry of Culture issued the order and that it was rather some pooyai (someone in high position, presumably a high ranking official) who asked him not to play transgender roles as he wished to see real transgender actors play their own roles. The permanent secretary of the Ministry of Culture also came out to deny that anyone in his office or their culture watch center ever issued any such ban.

I sat down with Siam Voices contributor Kaewmala to talk about this yet another strange news story involving ThaiMiniCult.

Saksith Saiyasombut: Well,  for a short moment there we thought the Thai Ministry of Culture came out with yet another stunning statement about banning "100 per cent manly" TV actors from playing transgender roles. What do you make of that?

Kaewmala: Probably like most people, my first reaction was "whadda...!!" There are times I wish I could really understand our Ministry of Culture, but other times the idea of knowing exactly what they think frightens me. We were quick to jump in to join the mocking of MiniCult because it's fun. In this case, we should give MiniCult the benefit of the doubt and take the actor's and the MiniCult boss's words for it that MiniCult didn't really issue a ban. (For my part, after having had a quick swipe at them, in an act to ask for forgiveness I mentally lit an incense stick and prostrated once to MiniCult. Just to show fair is fair, you know. They would appreciate that if they knew I prostrated appropriately in Thai style.)

In any case, the idea of “100% manliness” intrigues me. Whoever came up with that concept, I wonder if they used a scale, a measurement tool of some kind, to gauge the actor's manliness? In my (very) heterosexual female eyes, Mick does look quite manly (and handsome to boot) but I’d be hard-pressed to say his manliness is at 100%, 96.50% or 87.46%. I admit my masculinity radar isn’t quite accurate to the decimal point. Sometimes, I even find myself making mistakes; a man who looks so manly - actually those who look so super, hyper-manly - tend to be, um, not in the women’s way, you know.

Saksith Saiyasombut: Traditional theater performances from around the world always had females roles played by men, is there anything similar in 'traditional' Thai culture?

Kaewmala: Have you ever seen Thai Li-ke? The theatrical performance where performers, male or female (100% or otherwise), are painted like in the Japanese Kabuki. The Li-ke heroes such as Lord Rama in Ramayana have white-painted faces, red-painted lips, arching eyebrows and so forth. The audience isn’t confused about their sexuality, I imagine. They know the roles they play are the roles on stage. Whatever sexual orientation or gender identity they might have off-stage is another thing, and people don’t really care.

In the old Siamese royal court, there used to be a tradition of female roles being played by boys or men. My knowledge about Thai classical theater performance is rather limited, so I can’t give you any deep insight on that.

Saksith Saiyasombut: Is Thai 'manliness' in any danger that it would need protection? And from what?

Kaewmala: Why would Thai men’s manliness need protection? I think it takes a straight man who is very secure of his sexuality to play a gender-bending role. Men who are secure about their sexuality are very sexy, irresistible even, to females (or other sexes) attracted to masculine men (Like a man who is a feminist is sexy to many women). And also, why assume that manliness is the exclusive domain of straight men? Many gay men are very manly. Men who want to play a katoey role wouldn't easily turn into a real katoey, if that's what some people fear.

Although there isn't really a need to protect Thai manliness, I think we can guess a little at the rationale of the pooyai who asked the actor not to play the katoey role. He is said to have given the reason that he wished the real katoeys to play the roles, which is really thoughtful, if  true.  A few questions arise, however. Does the pooyai want to save the job opportunity for the real transgender/transsexual people? Or does he want to preserve the purity of Thai manliness? Or a bit of both? We don't know enough about the pooyai to speculate whether he's a liberal progressive or a conservative by making such a request to the actor. But in general, a liberal progressive person is unlikely to intervene in other people's affairs, but there's no hard and fast rule on that either. My guess would be that he's more likely a conservative.

Conservatism is driven by the need to protect the sacred and to uphold the purity and sanctity of whatever is believed to be pure and sacred. Thai manliness in this case might be perceived as being in danger of being contaminated by a straight-male actor playing a transgender role, hence making it less sacred. Conservative people tend to like to keep things as they are. They don't like changes and prefer to see things in clear categories. Men as men. Women as women. Katoeys as katoeys. Mixing and crossing these set categories confuse and upset people who believe in the purity and sacredness of these categories that they want to keep separate. That's why you always hear cries how things are now "degenerated," "contaminated by foreign influences," etc.

You see, Thailand is well known for its openness to alternative sexualities and transgender people can live more or less openly here if they so choose but that doesn’t mean there aren’t prejudices against them. The state of being a transgender, transsexual, gay, tom, di, bisexual, or whatever that is not the mainstream heterosexual, is still perceived as a perversion. Mainstream Thai society still perceives them as freaks of nature. (It's like, "alright, alright, if that's what you want to be - but you aren't 100%, so stay away from us, in your place, you're so lucky we tolerate you.") And these prejudices are always looming shallow and deep in the background. Occasionally, it pops up in an advertisement, a government rule or regulation, a law, or some pooyai's mouth.

Saksith Saiyasombut: That's a good point, since Thai society has always been regarded as rather friendly towards people with different sexual orientations - especially judging by public presence of transgender people - is that really the case?

Kaewmala: Appearance can be misleading. Compared to many other societies, yes, Thai society is quite open in day-to-day treatment of people with different sexual orientations and gender identities. Thai transgender people aren’t killed or beat up because of their sexuality to the extent it happens in some other countries (though this kind of hate crimes also exists in Thailand to some extent). Instead, we have world-renowned katoey shows, arguably the best looking ladyboys on earth, and tourists the world over flock to see them in cabarets, in beauty pageant stages, etc. We have transgender people working prominently in shopping malls, in customer services, in beauty, entertainment and sex venues. But that’s pretty much where most of them are. Very few of them are in regular jobs, often not because they don’t want to, but the opportunities are limited. They are still discriminated against widely in terms of employment. Their opportunities are even officially restricted, in particular in government, police and military jobs. Military service regulations still include "katoey" as a prohibited disease and hence disqualifies anyone who is a katoey to apply for jobs in military service. Only months ago that the official branding of transgender people as “having a permanent mental disorder” on the military conscription exemption paper was finally put to stop. This paper has been the biggest obstacle for transgender people for a long time and has prevented them getting jobs, visas, doing legal transactions, etc.

In short, socially there is a fair amount of tolerance for people with different sexual identities but they are still lots of problems and unfair treatments going on based on attitudes and laws and official regulations in this country, most particularly concerning transgender people. It’s not all peaches! Things are changing gradually for the better however, like we just have the first transgender politician who won the provincial administration office in Nan. Hopefully she will bring positive changes, especially in terms of recognizing transwomen (transgender persons who have had sex change operations to become a woman) like her as legally female, so that they could have a legal identity as female, get married, and live fully as a woman, instead of legally as a man but for all practical purposes as a woman.

Saksith Saiyasombut: Ok, let's say whoever came up that "no-transgenders-played-by-straight-actors" - idea would now look very anti-transgender - but could it be possible that this initiative is meant to protect the real transgender actors from getting their jobs stolen from their non-transgender colleagues?

Kaewmala: That is possible. In the best case scenario, the idea is to protect job opportunities for transgender people in acting jobs. It would be a new thing, and seems like a very positive thing indeed. Like banning white people from painting their faces black to play black people as it happened in history in the West. What do you think is the chance of that being the case here?

For argument’s sake, if the reason is really to protect acting job opportunities for transgender people on the principle of equality and fairness, what about straight women playing lesbian, tom and dii roles? Can "100% manly" gay men play straight male and katoey roles? 

Is it supposed to be about gender equality, fair opportunity in employment, or gender-specific or sexual orientation-specific guidelines for the acting profession? And for what purpose exactly? If actors comply with pooyais' recommendations as it seems to be the case with this actor who made the news, where will this go and where will it end?

Kaewmala is a writer, a blogger and an avid twitterer. She blogs at thaiwomantalks.com and is a provocateur of Thai language, culture and politics @thai_talk. Kaewmala is the author of a book that looks at the linguistic and cultural aspects of Thai sexuality called “Sex Talk”.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Media Saksith Saiyasombut Media Saksith Saiyasombut

Thailand's Democrat Party to hawkishly monitor media like it's 2009

Originally published at Siam Voices on June 6, 2012 A media monitoring group set up by Thailand's opposition Democrat Party in order to flag news coverage deemed 'too favorable' to the current government recalls the hawkish tendencies towards state media control during their rule between 2009-2011, further fueled by the history of the leader of this media monitoring group.

The Nation reported on Tuesday:

The Democrat Party has set up a media-monitoring group to be led by Trang province MP Sathit Wongnongtoey. He urged the public to monitor changes closely at Channel 9 and television hosts such as Sorrayuth Suthasnachinda of Channel 3, as well as newspapers, for what he claims is biased reporting in favour of the Pheu Thai-led government.

Sorrayuth failed to explore the details of the national-reconciliation bills in his reporting, while Channel 9 had continually attacked the Constitution Court's order to delay the House deliberation on constitutional amendment, Sathit said. If the party finds a media organisation that is not reporting well-rounded information, it will provide that organisation with information and ask it to disseminate it, he said.

"Democrats to monitor 'pro-Pheu Thai' media coverage", The Nation, June 5, 2012

Furthermore, another Democrat MP cites the changes at MCOT, a state-owned media organization that owns dozens of radio stations and the Modernine TV channel (formerly Channel 9). Its president was sacked over 'poor performance' in October last year and replaced by  Chakrapan Yomchinda, a former MP of Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai Party. He then moved aside last May to pave the way for current president Premkamon Tinnakorn Na Ayutthaya, who reportedly has close ties to Thaksin.

The fact that this media monitoring group, established to keep an eye on any news that is not in their favor, is headed by none other than Sathit Wongnongtoey, is somehow revealing about the mindset of some, if not many, in the opposition party. During his tenure as Minister to the Office of the Prime Minister under the administration of Abhisit Vejjajiva, Sathit left a trail of knee-jerk reactions and gaffes behind him as he interfered with Thailand's media landscape.

Since the Minister to the PM's Office also oversees the state media outlets of MCOT and NBT, the government has some vital tools to get their message across the airwaves. Ever since the political crisis of recent years, these outlets have essentially become propaganda machines for whoever is government. Sathit went all out in 2009 to use this to "counter" everything by Thaksin and the red shirts, while already establishing a total disregard for media freedom early on.

During that year, he maintained his reactionary stance, as evident in several cases such as when he smelled a foreign conspiracy after rumors of the King's medical condition caused the stock market to nosedive. Or when he pledged to curb Thaksin's personal SMS exchanges. Or when he smelled another foreign conspiracy when the website Protect The King was suddenly replaced by something completely different, where in reality the government simply forgot to renew the domain. Or when he smelled yet another foreign conspiracy and demanded from The Times (UK) to hand over the recordings from an interview with Thaksin. Or when he launched a bizarre and wasteful campaign urging all Thais to publicly sing the National Anthem.

As you can see, Sathit did quite a lot during his term. However, the pinnacle of his work happened at one of the MCOT radio stations, where one of the hosts actually dared to conduct a phone interview with Thaksin. Unsurprisingly, this was met with a lot of criticism including from Sathit himself who tweeted* his initial bewilderment and demanded a clarification by the MCOT management, as usual suspecting a hidden agenda. In the end the radio host quit in frustration after Sathit's overreaction.

So it comes as no surprise that Sathit Wongnongtoey would spearhead a media monitoring group to scan Thailand's news outlets for headlines and talking points that do not fit their opinion. But it is exactly this behavior, manifested by a history of knee-jerk media interferences, that exposes a deep reactionary hawkish stance which only allows one single narrative and disregards the existence of others.

*Side note: Back then in September 2009, I wrote a series of tweets commenting and highlighting Sathit's overreaction but was unable to find them, despite using a whole bunch of tools. If anyone know how one can access very old tweets from way back, please let me know. Thanks!

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Everything else Saksith Saiyasombut Everything else Saksith Saiyasombut

Is Thai Constitutional Court's intervention unconstitutional?

Originally published at Siam Voices on June 5, 2012 Thailand's political scene has approached boiling point again over the past few days, for the first time since last year's election, as the attempts of the ruling Pheu Thai government to pass the so-called 'Reconciliation Bills' have been met with ferocious attacks in- and outside parliament. The associated proposals for amendments to the constitution are also now the subject of a review by the Constitutional Court, although the process itself is legally on shaky ground. The opponents of the of the bills say they are designed to give an amnesty for various political wrongdoings and convictions of the past six years and most of all, to pave the way for a return of exiled former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Last week's parliament sessions on the Reconciliation Bills have been bombarded with the erratic, physical and chaotic antics of the opposition Democrat Party, bringing the debates on the deliberation (not even the content!) to a grinding halt. Outside, the ultra-royalist and reactionary "People's Alliance for Democracy" (PAD), commonly known as the yellow shirts, and its affiliated groups have come out of a tentative hiatus and were besieging the roads leading to the parliament building, forcing the House to postpone all sessions indefinitely.

Now this push is also under siege from a judicial angle, as the Constitutional Court has accepted 5 petitions to review whether or not the corresponding amendment drafts to the 2007 military-installed constitution are constitutional and has ordered parliament to suspend all sessions on the bills. The petitioners were mostly MPs from the Democrat Party (surprise, surprise!). However, the way this has reached the Court is the subject of heated criticism and debate among politicians, academics, experts and other commentators.

At the center of this controversial decision by court is Article 68 of the 2007 Constitution. Here is the original passage with two unofficial translations - pay close attention to the second and third paragraph:

ส่วนที่ ๑๓ สิทธิพิทักษ์รัฐธรรมนูญ - มาตรา ๖๘ (การล้มล้างการปกครองระบอบประชาธิปไตย)

บุคคลจะใช้สิทธิและเสรีภาพตามรัฐธรรมนูญเพื่อล้มล้างการปกครองระบอบประชาธิปไตยอันมีพระมหากษัตริย์ทรงเป็นประมุขตามรัฐธรรมนูญนี้ หรือเพื่อให้ได้มาซึ่งอำนาจในการปกครองประเทศโดยวิธีการซึ่งมิได้เป็นไปตามวิถีทางที่บัญญัติไว้ในรัฐธรรมนูญนี้ มิได้

ในกรณีที่บุคคลหรือพรรคการเมืองใดกระทำการตามวรรคหนึ่ง ผู้ทราบการกระทำดังกล่าวย่อมมีสิทธิเสนอเรื่องให้อัยการสูงสุดตรวจสอบข้อเท็จจริงและยื่นคำร้องขอให้ศาลรัฐธรรมนูญวินิจฉัยสั่งการให้เลิกการกระทำดังกล่าว แต่ทั้งนี้ ไม่กระทบกระเทือนการดำเนินคดีอาญาต่อผู้กระทำการ ดังกล่าว

ในกรณีที่ศาลรัฐธรรมนูญวินิจฉัยสั่งการให้พรรคการเมืองใดเลิกกระทำการตามวรรคสองศาลรัฐธรรมนูญอาจสั่งยุบพรรคการเมืองดังกล่าวได้

ในกรณีที่ศาลรัฐธรรมนูญมีคำสั่งยุบพรรคการเมืองตามวรรคสาม ให้เพิกถอนสิทธิเลือกตั้งของหัวหน้าพรรคการเมืองและกรรมการบริหารของพรรคการเมืองที่ถูกยุบในขณะที่กระทำความผิดตามวรรคหนึ่งเป็นระยะเวลาห้าปีนับแต่วันที่ศาลรัฐธรรมนูญมีคำสั่งดังกล่าว

"รัฐธรรมนูญแห่งราชอาณาจักรไทย พุทธศักราช ๒๕๕๐", Wikisource

Part 13: Rights To Protect the Constitution

Section 68. A person is prohibited from using the rights and liberties provided in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic rule with the King as the Head of the State as provided by this Constitution; or to acquire power to rule the country by means other than is provided in the Constitution.

Where a person or political party acts under paragraph one, the witness thereof has the right to report the matter to the Prosecutor General to investigate the facts and to submit a request to the Constitutional Court for decision to order cessation of such act without prejudice to criminal proceedings against the doer of the act.

If the Constitutional Court decides to order cessation of the said act under paragraph two, the Constitutional Court may order dissolution of that political party.

In case of order dissolution of that political party by the Constitutional Court under paragraph three, the leader of the dissolute Party and the member of the board of executive committee under paragraph one are prohibited the right of election for five years from the date of the order by the Constitutional Court.

"Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2007, B.E. 2550 (2007)", unofficial translation by IFES Thailand and the Political Section and Public Diplomacy Office of the US Embassy Bangkok. (PDF)

Part 13: Right to Protect the Constitution

Section 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

In the case where a person or a political party has committed the act under paragraph one, the person knowing of such act shall have the right to request the Prosecutor General to investigate its facts and submit a motion to the Constitutional Court for ordering cessation of such act without, however, prejudice to the institution of a criminal action against such person.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes a decision compelling the political party to cease to commit the act under paragraph two, the Constitutional Court may order the dissolution of such political party.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes the dissolution order under paragraph three, the right to vote of the President and the executive board of directors of the dissolved political party at the time the act under paragraph one has been committed shall be suspended for the period of five years as from the date the Constitutional Court makes such order.

"Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2007, B.E. 2550 (2007)", unofficial translation by the Asian Legal Information Institute

All three versions say that an Attorney General (or here a "Prosecutor General") is to be contacted by those filing a petition, who then submits this case to the Constitutional Court for review. However, so far reportedly only one petition has gone through the Attorney General, while the rest seems to have skipped him and have gone directly to the court.

This all comes down to the fine semantic details of the second paragraph: can the entire process, from receiving a petition to submitting the case to the Court, be only done by the Attorney General? Or to put it another way: can the petitioner contact the Attorney General, but also go directly to the Court to launch a motion? The Constitutional Court apparently chose the latter interpretation.

However, critics say this is a (intentional) misinterpretation and a political interference:

The Constitution Court has been accused of acting outside its jurisdiction when it ordered parliament to suspend vetting of the charter amendment bill.

The Pheu Thai Party and legal experts yesterday were gearing up for impeachment proceedings against the court's judges whom they claim violated the constitution as they had no right to take up protest petitions without a final opinion by the Office of the Attorney General. (...)

Legal expert and former senator Panas Tassaneeyanond agreed the court's order was unconstitutional. "The action can be deemed a violation of the charter as it is meddling in administrative power. I call on the public to sign a petition to impeach the judges under Section 270 of the constitution," Mr Panas wrote on his Facebook page on Friday.

He said under the principle of the supremacy of parliament, the House does not have to follow the Constitution Court's order to suspend vetting of the bill.

"Constitution Court under fire over charter bill vote", June 3, 2012

These are a few voices against the move by the Constitutional Court (e.g. political commentator Nattakorn Devakula, the Nitirat group and many, many more) but the consensus is that Article 68 has been wrongly interpreted.

The Constitutional Court itself is unimpressed by the impeachment calls and its president has clarified its decision, citing the motives of the petition ("questioning the legality of the push to amend the charter"), while ignoring the Attorney General's role in this process - but most of all being concerned that "there is no guarantee that charter provisions on the monarchy would not be amended," revealing where the priorities are for them.

The government and its coalition parties have 15 days (since this past weekend) to clarify and defend their proposed amendments to the constitution, while it is deliberating to defy the court-ordered suspension and push the bills ahead anyways (albeit in some other way) or to call it a break let things cool down over the summer recess, as suggested by Abhisit and considered by Pheu Thai.

The contents of the Reconciliation Bills, which give a blanket amnesty for all wrongdoings done by everybody in the past years while sacrificing justice for the victims of the political crisis for the sake of "national unity", need to be debated.

However, the Constitutional Court's interference into the debate that is being fought at all fronts, fears of a "judicial coup" have come up that could befall the current Pheu Thai-led government with the same fate of its previous incarnation in 2008 by yet another re-politicized institution that is not meant to be politicized.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Education Saksith Saiyasombut Education Saksith Saiyasombut

Pupils' hunger strike exposes corruption in Thai school admissions

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 31, 2012 SEE UPDATE AND CORRECTION BELOW!

A hunger strike by schoolchildren who have been barred from advancing to the upper secondary level at their Bangkok school has highlighted the ever-existing problem of corruption when it comes to parents finding a place to learn for their children in Thailand.

Last year we looked at then education minister Woravat Auapinyakul's remarks concerning the long-existing practice of tea money for school admissions. But instead of combatting this customary bribing for a better education, Woravut has suggested to make these more 'transparent' - while still enabling children from richer social backgrounds to have a more competitive edge over others.

Now, under the new education minister Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech, the victims of this common 'tradition' had enough and staged a hunger strike:

Four students of Bodindecha (Sing Singhaseni) School continued their protest at Government House for a second day yesterday, calling on school management to admit all Matthayom 3 [Grade 9] students into Matthayom 4 [Grade 10] to further their studies at the school.

[Education Minister Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech] said he believed the students were being used as a political tool by a certain group of people. He instructed the Office of Basic Education Commission to lodge a police complaint against the people he believes are behind the protest. The minister refused to name the people he suspected.

The protesting students said they finished Matthayom 3 at Bodindecha school with a GPA of over 2.0, but were not selected to continue their studies because the management had allocated some seats for new students.

"‘Politics’ behind hunger strike", Bangkok Post, May 21, 2012

Suchart's suspicions of some political conspiracy are typical of the tendency to try to solve a problem at the end, rather than at its roots. What groups does he think could be utilizing teenagers for a hunger strike? Or is he trying to deflect the attention from the bribes problem?

Nevertheless, the education ministry actually intervened:

The Education Ministry has told Bodindecha (Sing Singhaseni) School to accept 57 students it earlier rejected and ordered a probe against the director for bribery.

The move ended the hunger strike of four students outside Government House which started on Friday in an attempt to pressure the authorities.

The ministry's order came after a meeting between Pornpichit Sukannan, adviser to Education Minister Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech, and parents who suspected irregularities in the school's admission system after their children were denied seats.

"School bribe inquiry ordered", Bangkok Post, May 22, 2012

Whether or not the investigation will result in anything remains to be seen, as the Anti-Money Laundering Office has received a petition investigate another 20 school heads for bribery. At least this intervention gave the students and their parents some peace of mind to plan the next few years in school until a day later...

Office of the Basic Education Commission (Obec) secretary-general Chinnapat Bhumirat said Bodindecha (Sing Singhaseni) School has admission regulations and education management standards to uphold and cannot accept as many students as it had agreed.

The move reversed an agreement between Pornpichit Sukannan, an adviser to Education Minister Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech, and parents on Monday that the school would enrol all 57. Obec's decision follows a meeting yesterday between parents, Obec representatives and the education minister.

The decision sparked uproar from parents. One left a note in the meeting room accusing the Education Ministry of leaving the children scarred. (...) Mr Chinnapat said the agency will try its best to find places for students who miss out and called on parents to try to understand.

"School about-turn angers parents", Bangkok Post, May 23 , 2012

So, the education ministry has prematurely stormed forward with a too-simple solution that is now crumbled by an apparently very strict system.

For the families and their children the past weeks have been one single up-and-down experience, as they have been simply lucked out for betting on school grades alone to advance to upper secondary level instead of paying a bit extra. In a last-ditch move, a group of parents and schoolchildren, after having submitting a petition to prime minister Yingluck Shinatwatra, have now approached General Prem Tinsulanonda, the president of the privy council, for help.

However, even if the teenagers will get a place at Bodindecha or some other school, this still doesn't solve the problem of paying bribes for a school admission. Even worse, there have been already reports of bullying against the protesting students, who eventually got to continue attending at that school.

UPDATE: In a bizarre development on Thursday, education minister Suchart is going to sue the student protesters and their parents for "providing wrong information to the press and even burning an effigy" of him. He also stated that the whole conflict was sparked from a "misunderstanding, that their children are not allowed admission because of 'tea money'."

CORRECTION: Contrary to what is reported in the news snippets, a number of the striking children are apparently well below the required score to technically advance to upper secondary level. The corresponding sentence in the post has been struck through. Apologies to our readers!

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Media, Technology Saksith Saiyasombut Media, Technology Saksith Saiyasombut

Thai webmaster Chiranuch found guilty, but avoids jail term

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 30, 2012 Thai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn was found guilty this morning of not deleting lèse majesté comments on the now defunct web board of the Thai news website Prachatai quickly enough - she was sentenced to 1 year in prison, which was then reduced to an 8-month SUSPENDED sentence and a THB20,000 (US$630) fine.

In its verdict, the court states that Chiranuch has failed to delete one comment for 20 days, whereas the other nine objected comments were deleted within 10 days, thus violating against Article 14 and 15 of the 2007 Computer Crimes Act which punishes “false data” that damages a third party, causes public panic or undermines the country’s security and “any service provider intentionally supporting” the said offenses, respectively - despite the fact that the court also states that the expectation to pre-emptively delete illegal comments was "unfair".

Below is a full live timeline of the morning's events…

Today at 10.00 AM (Bangkok time) the Thai Criminal Court will give its verdict against Chiranuch “Jiew” Premchaiporn, the webmaster of the news website Prachatai. Chiranuch is being prosecuted for failing to delete 10 comments made by others that are deemed insulting to the monarchy not quickly enough. She has been arrested in 2009 and again in 2011, while the website itself has been hit by numerous takedown orders and blocked repeatedly by authorities.

If that paragraph above sounds familiar to you - it should be: these are exactly the same words from the live-blog from the original verdict date one month ago. However, just mere 10 minutes before it was about to start, the court decided to postpone the verdict, since it needed more time "due to the complexity of the case".

A lot has happened since then, most notably the death of lèse majesté-victim Amphon 'Uncle SMS' Tangnoppakul in prison and the  lèse majesté complaint lodged against Prachatai columnist Pravit Rojanaphruk. In light of these events, Chiranuch's case could be an even more unprecedented moment that could really determine Thailand's (dis-)regard for freedom of speech.

I’ll live-blog and comment the verdict here and also try to gather as many as reactions as possible. Also, be sure to follow me on Twitter @Saksith for up-to-the minute updates.

+++NOTE: All times are local Bangkok time (GMT +7)+++

12.13 h: That wraps up our live-blog. Today's verdict is a clear sign by the Thai state that freedom of expression doesn't really exist here. Besides directly cracking down on content that is deemed insulting, defaming to the monarchy or just simply not according to a dominant national narrative, the verdict also underlines the requirement to its citizen to self-censor to satisfy a pre-emptive obedience.

Today's verdict also against the freedom of expression online, as all platforms that provide a place to express opinions are held liable for the view expressed by others, thus practically putting a brake on any free discussion. Also, virtually all social media tools like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and any ISP are also being the target as their owners theoretically under Thai law are held responsible, too.

This is a huge blow for internet freedom as the Thai authorities and its laws are still far from being up to date, as the latter are too ambiguiously worded and leave roo much room for misuse. Even though Chiranuch walks away free today, this verdict is a warning shot to everybody who dares to push the very limiting boundaries of what can be said in Thailand

Thanks for following the live-blog!

12.00 h: First comment by Chiranuch:

"I expected to be acquitted, but I found the judge's verdict logical and reasonable," a smiling Chiranuch told reporters. "However, I still think the verdict will have an impact on self-censorship."

"Thai webmaster sentenced in free speech case", Associated Press, May 30, 2012

11.32 h: A picture of Chiranuch shortly after the verdict was read:

11.18 h: First wire news story on the verdict by AP:

BANGKOK (AP) - A Thai court has sentenced a local webmaster to an eight-month suspended sentence for failing to act quickly enough to remove Internet posts deemed insulting to Thailand's royalty.

Chiranuch Premchaiporn faced up to 20 years in prison for 10 comments posted on her Prachatai website, a popular political Internet newspaper.

The case was seen as a test of freedom of expression in Thailand. She was the first webmaster prosecuted under tough cyber laws enacted after a 2006 coup.

New York-based Human Rights Watch has said prosecuting her sent "a chilling message to webmasters and Internet companies."

"Thai webmaster sentenced in free speech case", Associated Press, May 30, 2012

11.16 h: This here was the basis for the reasoning of the verdict:

11.06 h: First reactions:

10.56 h: Summary: The Criminal Court still finds Chiranuch to be guilty, even though it has stated that the expectation to pre-emptively delete illegal comments to be "unfair" - but for the court they're still illegal, and measured by the fact that it took more than 10 days to delete one of them, the court finds her guilty. Very foul compromise!

10.52 h: BREAKING: Thai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn found guilty for not deleting lèse majesté comments not quickly enough - sentenced for 1 year prison, then reduced to an 8 months SUSPENDED prison term and THB 20,000 fine.

10.48 h: This is now getting crucial:

10.41 h:

10.35 h: Basically the court now is giving a summary of the case:

10.30 h: 

10.29 h:

10.26 h: Thai Netizen Network has the first tweets from the reading

Translation is following now...!

10.17 h: 

10.05 h: Good point!

10.01 h: The hearing on the verdict should be under way now...!

9.56 h:

This is standard court procedure, I'm sure we'll still get the news quickly enough.

9.52 h: Meanwhile in the courtroom...

9.50 h: Bangkok Pundit has turned on his crystal ball:

Here's hoping...

9.45 h: Here's a news report by Al Jazeera's Wayne Hay on Chiranuch's verdict, with a wider focus on lèse majesté as well:

9.40 h: From Google's Amy Kunrojpanya:

9.35 h: On my Twitter timeline and in general, there're quite noticeably less #freejiew tweets...

9.30 h: It is indeed a considerably big news day in Thailand, with the historical visit by Myanmar's democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, the end of the ban for the 111 Thai Rak Thai Party politicians and also a return of the yellow shirted PAD to the streets to protest the reconciliation bill. However, I'm pretty sure that a negative verdict could overshadow all of these within a heartbeat.

9.20 h: On Twitter, I asked Thanyarat Doksone from AP, who's at the Criminal Court in Bangkok whether there are more or less media covering the verdict. Her answer is not surprising:

9.20 h: In the evening of the original verdict date, Prachatai has published an open letter by Chiranuch. Here's an excerpt:

Dear All,

I write to you to share my thoughts before the verdict will be read in the next 7 hours. Although I still don’t know any answer for my life, I wish we can win the case but I should prepare for unexpected results too. Many of you asked how do I feel as the verdict is approaching. Honestly, there were mixed feelings. On the one hand, I’m glad that I’m able to get some guide of my future, it might be better than never known. (…)

“Chiranuch’s letter prior to the verdict“, Prachatai, April 30, 2012

9.15 h: However, her case also highlights the problematic application of the laws mentioned – especially Article 112 since anybody can file it from anywhere. Chiranuch herself was arrested again in 2011 after a man in Northeastern Khon Kaen filed a complaint against herand was dragged to that town on the spot shortly she arrived at Suvarnabhumi airport in Bangkok – ironically after she came back from a panel on internet freedom in Hungary…!

Also of note here is that often times the CCA is being used in conjunction with Article 112, which has been used numerous times to curb freedom of speech online.

9.05 h: It’s important to stress out that Chiranuch is NOT charged under Art. #112 #LM, but Art. 15 of the CCA which punishes “any service provider intentionally supporting” for violations made against Art. 14 for “false data” that damages ”false data” that damages a third party, causes public panic or undermines the country’s security – whatever that is supposed to mean…!

9.00 h: Good Morning and welcome to the live-blog! Here's a recap about Chiranuch's case:

This case highlights the ambiguous legal foundation: Article 14 of the Computer Crime Act (CCA), which punishes “false data” that damages a third party, causes public panic or undermines the country’s security, while the webmaster herself is being charged under Article 15, which punishes “any service provider intentionally supporting” the said offenses. These violations would be punished by five years of imprisonment – for each offense – theoretically tallying up to a total 50 years, but legally ‘only’ a maximum of 20.

Since the alleged comments are regarded as lèse majesté, this case also shines a light on the infamously draconian Article 112 of the Penal Code. All these articles leave (intentionally or not) wide room for interpretation and thus, as seen countless times in recent years, rampant misuse. More details can be read in this factsheet by Thai Netizen Network and here at iLaw.

Despite the numerous cases and victims who have been actually charged under lèse majesté, this case is being regarded as crucial since it not only highlights the vague legal interpretation of the law made possible by the ambiguous wording and highlights the challenges against a (perceived) decrease of freedom of speech, but since these comments were not made by her, her thoughts and intentions are on trial, only because she did not delete these comments quickly enough!

Read More
Saksith Saiyasombut Saksith Saiyasombut

Tongue-Thai'ed! Part XIV: Sukhumbhand's second term bid as Bangkok governor - just a joke...!

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 23, 2012 “Tongue-Thai’ed!” encapsulates the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures – in short: everything we hear that makes us go “Huh?!”. Check out all past entries here.

Bangkok Governor MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra has been in office since 2009 and has already seen a lot during his tenure. Whether it was the violent red shirt protests of 2009 and 2010, or the floods of 2011. It was also Sukhumbhand who knew how to leave his personal mark on these events by standing out and going against the grain.

Bangkok Governor

During the 2010 red shirts protests, Sukhumbhand met with Thaksin in Brunei to broker a deal to end the protests, which has put him at odds with the then-government of prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his Democrat Party. And during last year's flood crisis the Bangkok governor tried to profit from the government's ham-fisted response and relief efforts by portraying himself as the savior of the inner city from the floods, even if it meant having to sacrifice the outskirts and wastie much energy to fight with government officials over the relief efforts, among other embarrassing gaffes.

Now, with the gubernatorial election up next year many are asking whether or not Sukhumbhand will run for office again. These polls could be a bellwether test for the Democrat Party's dominance over the capital. Even if there are still many months to go to January 2013, he already threw his hat into the ring:

Bangkok Governor Sukhumbhand Paribatra says he will seek a second term because he has unfinished work to accomplish. MR Sukhumband’s four-year term as head of the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) will end in January 2013. (...)

"If the Democrat Party agrees to select me as its candidate to run in the next Bangkok governor election, I will be ready to run for the post again," said MR Sukhumbhand.

Democrat spokesman Chavanond Intarakomalsut said MR Sukhumbhand’s early declaration was intended to show his intention to continue working for the people of Bangkok.

"Sukhumbhand: I'll run again", Bangkok Post, May 19, 2012

But maybe that call was a little bit too soon as the denial came quickly in the following days:

But yesterday, Sukhumbhand admitted he did not really intend to join the election and that what he said before he was a joke. He said if he intended to contest the election, he would make an official announcement in Bangkok.

Democrat Party spokesperson Chavanond Intarakomalyasut said the party hadn't discussed this issue yet. If the party announced it now, it would disrupt the governor's duties, he said.

"Re-election bid comment was a joke: Sukhumbhand", The Nation, May 22, 2012

So, Sukhumbhand jumped the gun too early into the election race and now stands at odds with his own party yet again because he couldn't wait to be officially nominated by the Democrats, even if the opposition Pheu Thai Party has yet to reveal their candidate - rumored to be either MICT minister Anudith Nakornthap or Science and Technology Minister Plodprasop Suraswadi - (yes, the one with the premature evacuation order).

But how will we know then when he's running for real then...?

If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Education, Media Saksith Saiyasombut Education, Media Saksith Saiyasombut

Thailand: 2 years after the May 19 crackdown - some personal (and very short) thoughts

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 21, 2012 On Saturday, thousands of red shirts gathered at Ratchaprasong Intersection in Bangkok to commemorate the second anniversary of the violent crackdown against the anti-government protests on May 19, 2010 by the military. Ninety-one people have lost their lives and thousands were wounded in the clashes - protesters, soldiers, civilians and journalists (notably Fabio Polenghi) are among the casualties. In the past two years there has been hardly any justice and impunity still prevails.

There seems to be a growing discontent among some red shirts over the people they initially supported. Key issues such as lèse majesté have still seen no action from the government of Yingluck Shinawatra. Many see this as a promise from the government in exchange for a shaky détente with the military that allows it to stay in power. Yingluck's brother, the exiled former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, made his regular phone-in to his supporters on Saturday, asking the crowd to put aside calls for solving social inequalities and injustice for the sake (yet again) for national reconciliation - potentially alienating the progressive, pro-democracy wing of the red shirt movement.

In contrast to 2010 and 2011, I have decided not to write a long column on the state of the nation. However, I tweeted a few concise thoughts on Saturday that have gained some response and I thought they would be worth sharing here:

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Academia, Military Saksith Saiyasombut Academia, Military Saksith Saiyasombut

Analysis: Is Thailand's military compromising for the sake of reconciliation?

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 18, 2012 The East Asia Forum recently published a column on the current political role of Thailand's military written by John Blaxland, Senior Fellow at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University with 30 years of service experience with the Australian Military and also a graduate of the Royal Thai Army Command and Staff College. In short: Dr. Blaxland has lots of military experience.

In the column, also republished in The Australian, he criticizes "the classic Western liberal tendency of painting complex situations in black-and-white terms" where the Thai military is being portrayed power-hungry, coup-happy force. Blaxland takes the 2006 military coup and its consequences as precedence for the Thai armed forces to be hesitant to stage another one, despite repeated cycles of rampant rumors.

Blaxland assumes that the military acted on their own in September 2006, although many heavily disagree with this notion. He also notes that the 2008 change of government was merely an act among political parties, not mentioning the fact that the Democrat-Bhum Jai Thai coalition was reportedly brokered in the residence of then-army chief General Anupong Paochinda and in presence of his successor and then-chief-of-staff General Prayuth Chan-ocha.

However, the key part of this column is this:

Some say that Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has had little success in pushing for greater civilian control over the military since this time. But there has been some change, most notably through the appointment of a pro-Thaksin general as defence minister. In addition, the new army chief, General Prayuth Chan-o-Cha, has avoided overstepping constitutional boundaries and has been largely compliant — despite some bluster and a perception that he would be harsher than his predecessor, General Anupong.

There are now several possible scenarios for the future. It appears the military has arrived at a point of recognition — that they have to maintain stability, particularly until the royal succession is completed. That means they may have to compromise a little — and the military has publicly shown respect for the elected government. This respect has been reciprocated through placatory actions and statements by the Yingluck administration.

"Reconsidering the role of the military in Thailand", by John Blaxland, East Asia Forum, April 26, 2012

One problem with Blaxland's assessment on Thailand's military is that he views the armed forces as a monolithic organization, while in reality it has always been factionalized between different regiments and army prep school classes - key factors when it comes to the annual reshuffles and promotions. Rivalries between these are often a source for potential inner-circle conflict, as the issue with the so-called 'watermelon soldiers' during the 2010 red shirt protests have shown. Although there are now measures being undertaken to address this issue like wide-reaching surveys and supporting promotions of officers from other classes.

But there is one major omission (deliberately or not) by Blaxland on the role of the Thai military in the political landscape: the top priority of Thailand's armed forces is to serve and protect the monarchy (see above), which has been repeatedly emphasized under current army chief Prayuth more than ever, who sees Thaksin Shinawatra and his supporters as its biggest threat.

Even before the election victory of Yingluck Shinawatra's Pheu Thai Party there have been talks between Thaksin's camp, the military and representatives of the palace to broker a deal, which is now being widely regarded as a détente between the current government and the military:

Since then Yingluck Shinawatra, Mr. Thaksin’s younger sister, has governed. Under her premiership, an uneasy truce has taken hold, but crucial steps are needed before Thailand can arrive at a genuine reconciliation among competing political factions and the military after years of protracted tumult.

Under the current unspoken truce terms, the Yingluck government has gone out of its way not to challenge the army’s high command and to ensure the monarchy remains sacrosanct in Thailand’s hierarchical society. Challenges against the monarchy must be put down through draconian lese-majeste laws. In return, she gets to rule without the crippling street protests by colorful royalists as happened in the recent past and Mr. Thaksin has to remain in exile.

"Thitinan: From Truce to Reconciliation in Thailand", by Thitinan Pongsudhirak, Wall Street Journal, May 6, 2012

In short, the military will not intervene in the Yingluck administration and potentially also tolerate a return of Thaksin to Thailand, while the government will not try to upset the military officers by actions such as prosecuting those involved in the killings of red shirt protesters in 2010. Another key issue that will not be touched is the lèse majesté law, as Yingluck herself has repeatedly stated that her government will not amend the draconian Article 112. Even the recent death of 'Uncle SMS' in prison could not sway her, much to the dismay of her supporter base.

Blaxland also overestimates the appointment of Air Chief Marshal Sukumpol Suwannathat as the defense minister, despite his closeness to Thaksin, since there are laws that gives the military the upper hand, such as the Defence Ministry Administration Act (sic!):

Gen Prayuth is under the protection of the Defence Ministry Administration Act which has been in effect from the time Privy Councillor Gen Surayud Chulanont became prime minister after the 2006 coup. This law is specifically designed to block politicians from tampering with reshuffle decisions made by the armed forces.

The act does not give power to the defence minister in calling the shots in military appointments and promotions. Its Article 25 places leaves that task with the Defence Committee to make decisions on military reshuffles.

The panel comprises the defence minister, a deputy minister, the permanent secretary for defence, the supreme commander and the three armed forces chiefs army, air force and navy. At present there is no deputy defence minister, so the committee has only six members. At the committee's meetings, all officers to be reshuffled must have the signed approval of all panel members _ except the defence minister's; he must act as chairman of the meeting so that later, in his capacity as defence minister, he cannot make any changes to the list when it goes to the cabinet. According to the act, once the list is approved by the committee, it has to be left untouched.

"Tigers of the East secure a roaring hurrah", Bangkok Post, October 6, 2011

There are attempts at the moment to amend the Defence Ministry Administration Act by defense minister Sukampol - whether or not this will pass is an entirely different matter, let alone how the military will react on it. And in general, the current relative tranquility between the military and the civilian side is only because the lines have been clearly drawn and any overstepping of these boundaries of authority will be met with scorn.

This is a status quo that is being upheld as a necessary inconvenience (and in that regard Blaxland is right) between the two in order for a smooth royal succession - which does not mean however that all factions are not preparing quietly to be in the best position for the time after that. These are the shades of grey in the Thai political landscape that are not to be left in the pitch-black darkness.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Ethnic minorities, Immigration Saksith Saiyasombut Ethnic minorities, Immigration Saksith Saiyasombut

Thai national park head files lèse majesté complaint against NHRC

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 14, 2012 A long dispute between Thailand's National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and Kaeng Krachan National Park over the forced eviction of ethnic Karen people has escalated into a lèse majesté complaint filed by the park's head Chaiwat Limlikhit-aksorn against NHRC commissioner Niran Phithakwatchara and NHRC subcommittee members.

Prachatai reports the complaint was filed on Friday at the local police station:

Niran and the NHRC subcommittee, in response to a complaint filed by local residents, had intervened in projects, implemented by the National Park, to cut down forest vines and grow plants to feed wild elephants and other wildlife in honour of the King.

The subcommittee had resolved to order the National Park to cancel the projects and review its plan to expand the park in preparation for declaring it a world heritage site and to allow the participation of local and indigenous people for the protection of their rights.

Chaiwat accused the NHRC members of, among others, supporting the destruction of forest reserves in the National Park and lèse majesté by ordering the project to be cancelled, thereby not respecting the King’s and Queen’s addresses to government officials to protect watershed areas and to prevent illegal logging in the province.

He claimed that over 400 rai of the forest area along the border in the National Park had already been destroyed, with damage worth over 400 million baht.

"Lèse majesté complaint lodged against NHRC members", Prachatai, May 13, 2012

This is just the latest in a series of incidents in Kaeng Krachan National Park, located in Petchaburi province near the Burma border, involving Karen people, an ethnic minority group who are not regarded as Thai citizens though some of them live in the park area. The park's head Chaiwat says they are illegal immigrants who encroach on the forest ground to grow marijuana. They have also been accused of links with the drug trade and the Karen National Liberation Army amid reports of repeated harassment by park officials, border police and military forces:

According to sources that have visited Kaeng Krachan National Park and collected information, the harassment of Karen villagers has been going on for some time and became severe in May, June and July 2011, when many of the villagers’ houses and rice stores were burned and money, jewellery, fishing and agricultural tools were stolen by a group comprising National Park wardens and military forces. As a result, some of these villagers moved away and are now staying with relatives elsewhere and a number of them (allegedly around 70 people) are hiding in the forest in fear of meeting government officers, and are without sufficient food and shelter.

"Karen People forcibly expelled from the Kaeng Krachan National Park in Thailand", Forest Peoples Programme, January 31, 2012

Karen representatives have called upon the NHRC to investigate the raids against them, bringing their case to wider public attention. They are also being supported by the Lawyers Council of Thailand, who were helping to launch a civic lawsuit and demand compensation for the damages done to the villagers. More about the plight of the Karen in Kaeng Krachang can be read here and here.

The park head Chaiwat Limlikhit-aksorn is no stranger to controversy. When pro-Karen activist and former Pheu Thai Party candidate Thatkamon Ob-om was assassinated in September 2011, Chaiwat was implicated to be the one behind it. As of today, after he turned himself to the police, he is out on bail. Nevertheless, despite the revelation of the raids against the Karens, he was able to win back public approval by spearheading the rescue operations after the three military helicopters crashed in the area.

As you can see, this lèse majesté complaint is just the tip of the ice berg in a case of continuous harassment against the ethnic Karen tribe, who are still regarded with suspicion and distrust and are being treated accordingly by the Thai authorities. On the surface, it appears to be the rights of the Karen people against the conservation of wild animals, in particular elephants. But the real reason for Chaiwat lodging a lèse majesté charge against the National Human Rights Commission (the irony in itself is overbearing) is to invoke his public loyalty to the monarchy to publicly defame those who are actually trying to find a lasting solution to the problem.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Saksith Saiyasombut Saksith Saiyasombut

“Uncle SMS” death inspires hypocrisy, indifference among politicians

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 12, 2012 The death of Ampon Tangnoppakul on Monday, known as "Ah Kong" (grandpa) or "Uncle SMS" and imprisoned under the lèse majesté law for allegedly sending inflammatory text messages against the monarchy, has sparked widespread outcry, condemnation and anger — domestic and international alike. However, one group of people that have been very silent on this matter were Thailand's politicians - and if there were any statements from both sides, then they showed the hypocrisy, double standard and sheer cowardice in order to maintain an unstable status quo concerning Article 112 of the Criminal Code.

Among the first to respond when questioned about Ampon's fate and the re-ignited discussion over the lèse majesté law, was Abhisit Vejjajiva of the opposition Democrat party, who said that the death of the 62-year old grandfather "must not be exploited for political gain." He continued:

He said the government was duty-bound to explain what happened to Ampon as he was in the custodial care of the Corrections Department under the supervision of the government.

"Reds told not to exploit Ampon's death", Bangkok Post, May 10, 2012

What Abhisit completely neglects to mention is that it was during his time as prime minister that Ampon was arrested and brought to trial. What he also fails to mention is that it was his own personal secretary Somkiat Klongwattanasak who received those messages and reported them to the police — a fact that Abhisit still denies to have noticed until today, as heard recently at a FCCT event. That almost overshadows that there were no mentions of condolences or anything similar expressed by him reported in the press.

Another public figure who did actually expressed his condolences was (slightly surprisingly) army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha, but in the same breath also reminds the people of his idea(ls) of 'being a Thai':

"ประเด็นสำคัญคือ กองทัพเสียใจ ไม่ว่า ใครก็ตามก็ถือว่า เป็นคนไทย ขอให้ทุกคนสำนึกความเป็นคนไทยกันมากๆ ว่า ความเป็นคนไทยต้อง คือ ต้องเคารพกฎหมาย รักชาติ ศาสนา พระมหากษัตริย์"พล.อ.ประยุทธ์กล่าว

"The important thing is that we, the armed forces, are sorry. Whoever [he was], [he was] a Thai. I want everybody to be very aware of being a Thai. Being a Thai means to respect the law, to love the country, religion and the monarchy," said General Prayuth.

""ประยุทธ์"เตือน อย่าดึงปม"อากง"โยงสถาบัน เผยกองทัพเสียใจ ชี้ให้มองความเป็นจริง", Matichon, May 10, 2012

As the kingdom's top soldier, he sees his duty to serve and protect the monarchy from all threats against it, no matter how constructed and perceived they are. Ever since his inception, the army chief has been consistently showing loyalty to the royal institution and vowing to crack down on lèse majesté offenders - because everything else to him is apparently not Thai.

However, it was most anticipated what (if at all) prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra would say about the death of 'Uncle SMS' - it took her five days to say this:

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said yesterday she has no plans to amend Section 112 - the lese majeste law - despite an outcry over the death of a 62-year-old man jailed for the offence. (...)

"I want to reaffirm that my government's policy is to stay put," Ms Yingluck said in response to questions about possible reform of the law. I have already told groups who push for amendment that the government's urgent mission is to solve economic problems."

"PM adamant she will not reform lese majeste law", Bangkok Post, May 12, 2012

This is almost a carbon copy of her statement she did in July last year shortly after her party won the elections:

Question: “Do you have any plan to change the 112 law?”

Answer:  ”No, for me, I don’t have any idea to change the 112. I would not reform it, because it is not my policy and also this is an issue which is quite sensitive so we have to leave it to the people who have expertise to comment on that. I don’t want to see the misuse of this law regarding his majesty.”

"Will Yingluck amend Thailand’s lese majeste law?", Siam Voices, July 8, 2011

During the months following their election victory, it became clear that the new Yingluck government will NOT push for a reform of Article 112. Even worse, both the MICT minister and deputy prime minister Chalerm have vowed to crackdown even harder on alleged offenders, hinting to be part of a deal with the military not to touch this issue in exchange for a non-intervention against the government and potentially also not intervening against a potential return by Thaksin.

Nevertheless Yingluck's repeated refusal to touch the issue of lèse majesté is betraying a substantial part of her and the Pheu Thai Party's supporter base - many of which were hoping for a reform since they were the most targeted group under this law. Their loyalty has been put on the test before and a recent visit by Yingluck with Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda, regarded by many among her supporters as a nemesis, has divided opinions among the red shirts.

It appears that all sides have decided to maintain the status quo for the sake of stability. However, this stability of upholding Article 112 is not sustainable, as with each victim the opposition to this law will grow and could result in a backlash against the current government. The prisoners bear the brunt of a political battle, in which all sides could ultimately lose all their supporters.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
China, Media Saksith Saiyasombut China, Media Saksith Saiyasombut

As the New York Times implies: Does Thailand expel journalists like China?

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 10, 2012 The New York Times/International Herald Tribune wrote a blog post on Wednesday that compares two recent developments in China and Thailand, while it may or may not (unintentionally) mislead readers in the first lines:

China’s expulsion of the correspondent for Al Jazeera — a move seen as reprehensible by supporters of press freedoms and the right of dissent — has parallels in other parts of Asia.

Three of the 10 most heavily censored countries in the world are in Asia — North Korea, Uzbekistan and Myanmar, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. China and Vietnam also drew condemnation from the group, which said, “By exporting censorship techniques, China plays a particularly harmful role worldwide.”

"China’s Expulsion of Journalist Has Parallels in Thailand", International Herald Tribune, May 9, 2012

The article then makes quite a jump from talking about the correspondent's expulsion from China and dives down into the numerous Thai cases showcasing the steady decline of freedom of expression: the death of 'Uncle SMS' earlier this week, Chiranuch Premchaiporn's trial, Joe Gordon's imprisonment, thousands upon thousands of websites being blocked (even though the numbers differ) and lèse majesté in general - all cases that might be familiar to most readers of this blog.

The attention by the international media on Thailand's continuous oppression against those seeking to voice their opinion freely and the dire need for legal amendments has rightfully increased again recently with the death of Amphon 'Uncle SMS' Tangnoppakul - marking the first victim of the lèse majesté law to die during imprisonment - and so did this IHT blog post, which shows that the atrocities in Thailand can be compared to those in China.

However, leading in with the story of Al Jazeera's Melissa Chan and her expulsion from China and headlining to draw parallels to Thailand may or may not lead readers to believe that this post hints that Thailand is also dealing with its foreign correspondents the same cold and cynical way as the People's Republic.

If memory serves me right, despite its tendencies, Thailand has not officially to revoke a foreign journalist's visa yet in recent years. That does not mean, however, that the Kingdom has always been kind to them. In a way, there have been a few cases in recent years that have exposed various Thai authorities putting pressure, if not even downright intimidating, foreign reporters.

In 2002, two journalists from the Far Eastern Economic Review, Shawn Crispin and Rodney Tasker, got themselves into hot water after publishing an article about possible tensions between then-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra (not the biggest fan of a critical press as well, especially if it's against him and his business ventures) and the King - which led to the issue being banned and...

Thai immigration authorities threatened to expel two foreign correspondents from the Hong Kong-based Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER) on the grounds that they endanger national security. Crispin, the magazine's bureau chief, and correspondent Tasker, who is also president of the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand, received an official notice revoking their visas dated February 22, the same day that Thai-language newspapers carried stories saying that the police had placed the two reporters on a blacklist. The magazine's publisher, Philip Revzin, and editor-in-chief, Michael Vatikiotis, were also named in the blacklist circulated to Thai media outlets. (...)

Interior Minister Purachai Piemsomboon, who must formally sign any deportation order, told reporters that it was purely an immigration issue. "This matter has nothing to do with prime minister's personal anger over FEER," Purachai told The Associated Press. "Please do not speculate that the government has ordered the police to do such kind of thing."

"Attacks on the Press 2002: Thailand", Committee to Project Journalists

Their case was probably the closest in recent years to journalists being expelled from Thailand.

Another example highlights some intimidating measures Thai authorities have taken with foreign reporters. German journalist Florian Witulski wrote a detailed blog post on his ordeal to get a work permit and a journalist visa, where the officers have asked him some uncomfortable questions:

Surprise No 1: One of the first critical questions was what my view on the monarchy was. I was clearly asked if I had problems with the King or the monarchy in general.

Surprise No 2: They were very serious in asking me why I am focusing on human rights & censorship and why I didn’t want to cover politics in my home country of Germany instead of Thailand.

After these questions were asked there was a glimpse of clarity for me when they referred to a report from the MICT (Ministry of Information & Technology) about my blog being blocked two times before. I explained to them that I was not aware of writing anything offending in regards to the monarchy (lese majeste laws). I also never changed any content after publishing to appease them and bring the blog back, and yet it never stayed blocked for long.

A file with my name on it was opened and I could not believe my ears when I heard the quotes. The official was reading out selections from my blog posts & tweets (some of them over a year old). The content was mostly about critical issues within Thai culture, the monarchy or Thai politics.

"Thai Work Permit:Lese Majeste & Hidden Observers", Vaitor.com, July 17, 2011

To add injury to insult, the immigration officers have left him out hanging to dry for weeks and weeks until he finally got his permit and visa. Several colleagues have told me that this 'practice' is not an exception.

One correspondent that eventually got chased out of Thailand actually happened without the (apparent) help of any officials or authorities. Criticized for their 'biased' coverage of the anti-government red shirt protests of 2010, CNN and their correspondent Dan Rivers have been disproportionately witch-hunted by many angry Thai netizens, spearheaded by a fault-ridden open letter that got much, much traction - especially by the folks over at The Nation...! Eventually, Rivers left Thailand and CNN have abandoned their Bangkok bureau - which could have been a source for somewhat erroneous reporting in the following years.

To answer the question that has been raised earlier and that was mistakenly implied by the IHT title whether or not Thailand has expelled foreign journalists in the same fashion as they did with Melissa Chan in China: No! However, these numerous cases show that Thai authorities always have ways to put pressure on them, not realizing that such actions will only backfire and hurt Thailand's international image even more in the process.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention the case of the BBC's Jonathan Head, who has been hit with a lèse majesté complaint and moved to Turkey in 2009. Read more about his case here.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Media Saksith Saiyasombut Media Saksith Saiyasombut

Thai parliament quarrel escalates in 'Heil Hitler' salute

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 3, 2012  After last month's public misbehavior involving a Thai MP peeking on a pornographic image on his phone (we reported), another crass misdemeanor played out for everybody to see in the Thai parliament. This time, a heated debate escalated in one MP giving the Hitler salute and screaming "Heil Hitler" at the top of his lungs on the House floor. [See vid below from 3 min mark]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kFnQ9uvsw4]

On May 2, in yet another preliminary parliament session debating the allocation of a 99-strong committee to draft amendments to the constitution, the opposition are objecting the role of the House speaker in this process, as they accuse him to have the power to pre-select 22 non-MP committee candidates (such as academics and NGOs) before the parliament decides on them.

Late into the night after 14 grueling hours, House speaker Somsak Kiartsuranont was about to wrap up the session, only to be interrupted by MP Boonyod Sukthinthai of the opposition Democrat Party:

ผู้สื่อข่าวรายงานว่า อย่างไรก็ตามก่อนที่จะมีการลงมตินั้นเกิดความวุ่นวายเล็กน้อย เมื่อนายบุญยอด สุขถิ่นไทย ส.ส.บัญชีรายชื่อ พรรคประชาธิปัตย์ได้ยกมือประท้วงว่านายสมศักดิ์ พยายามรวบรัด แต่นายสมศักดิ์ก็ไม่อนุญาตพร้อมตัดบทให้สมาชิกได้ลงมติ ทำให้นายบุญยอดตะโกนเสียงดังก้องห้องประชุมว่าจะขอประท้วงจนกว่าประธานจะได้ยิน พร้อมกับตะโกนว่า“ประธานเผด็จการ ไฮ ฮิตเลอร์”* ซึ่งนายสมศักดิ์ยังตัดบทเช่นเดิมว่าตนไม่ได้ยินพร้อมสั่งให้ลงคะแนน

Reports say that before parliament was about to decide [on a proposal], a little bit of chaos ensued when MP Boonyod Sukthinthai of the Democrat Party raised his hand to protest House speaker Somsak's hasty attempts to end [the session], but the latter refused to listen and proceeded to the voting, leading to Mr Boonyod yelling loudly that he will protest until the speaker will listen to him, as he then shouted "Heil Hitler, Mr Speaker of the dictatorship! Heil Hitler!"* - to which Mr Somsak still refuses to listen and requests the parliament to cast in their votes.

"สภาลงมติ337ต่อ50 ผ่านมาตรา291/6", Krungthep Turakij, May 2, 2012

As you can see clearly in the video above the shouting match started with the clearly annoyed Boonyod remarking that another five minutes to listen to his complaint won't hurt, since the session has been going on all day. Ignored by the speaker, the Democrat's tantrum ensues.

This arbitrary and erratic display of Godwin's law evidently shows the still volatile political climate that is being maintained, if not even increased by the parliamentary infighting over amendments to the constitution, to which the opposition fears potential abuse of power by the government (and most of all a carte blanche for Thaksin). Nevertheless, it also shows an unacceptable behavior by our elected representatives, who think that any rough measures for this political discourse is legitimate.

*NOTE: It should be noted that I was translating that part directly from the news article. However, in the video itself it could not be heard was said before the “Heil Hitlers”!

h/t to a reader

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More
Military Saksith Saiyasombut Military Saksith Saiyasombut

Tongue-Thai'ed! Part XIII: A coup (de main) for national unity

Originally published at Siam Voices on April 24, 2012 “Tongue-Thai’ed!” encapsulates the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures – in short: everything we hear that makes us go “Huh?!”. Check out all past entries here.

The General Sonthi Boonyaratglin of 2006 is very different from the Sonthi Boonyaratglin of today. The former was army chief and led the 2006 military coup that toppled the government of Thaksin Shinawatra and created one of the first pivotal moments of  the current political crisis. Sonthi has since retired from military service, hung up his uniform in exchange for a business suit, became a MP and leader of the Matubhum Party. And for some utterly inexplicable reason, he also heads the House committee on national reconciliation. When pressed to reveal who's really behind the coup,  Sonthi swore to take his secrets to the grave.

For the chairman of a committee to evaluate the roots of the political crisis and find solutions for the much heralded reconciliation (which nobody has properly defined it yet), a former army chief that led a military coup wouldn't be the first choice to my mind.

Recently though, he at least revealed the real reasons for the coup...

พล.อ.สนธิ กล่าวว่า ระบบชนชั้นถือเป็นอุปสรรคในการพัฒนาประชาธิปไตย เพราะยึดติดบุคคลมากกว่าองค์กร ขณะเดียวกันไม่ว่าใครมาเข้ามาบริหารประเทศก็จะยึดติดอยู่กับเรื่องการเมืองและเศรษฐกิจ แต่มองข้ามเรื่องความรักความสามัคคีของประชาชนในประเทศ ซึ่งความขัดแย้งของไทยมีมาตั้งแต่ปี 2475 และขัดแย้งรุนแรงสุดในปี 2549 จากการปฏิวัติรัฐประหาร แต่แท้จริงแล้วเหตุผลของการปฏิวัติ คือต้องการให้เกิดความสามัคคีเพราะเหตุหลักๆไม่มีรัฐบาลใดที่จะสร้างความเข้มแข็งในกรณีดังกล่าวนี้ จนถึงปัจจุบันนี้ก็ผ่านรัฐบาลมาแล้ว 5 ชุด ซึ่งส่วนใหญ่ก็ยังเน้นแก้ปัญหาในเรื่องเศรษฐกิจ การเมือง และการปกครอง แต่ในการพัฒนาสังคมทำน้อยมาก

General Sonthi said: "The clash of the classes is a barrier for the development of democracy because it is dependent of individuals rather than organizations. No matter who comes to serve [in the government] is only focused on politics and economy but overlook the [issue of] unity of the Thai people. Thus, divisions have existed since 1932, and the 2006 coup has caused the most - but the real reason of the coup is the need for unity because no [civil] government whatsoever has created a strong enough one. To this day, we had five governments that mostly have focussed on solving the problems in economy and politics, but very little in the development of society."

"“บิ๊กบัง” ชี้ ระบบชนชั้นเป็นอุปสรรคในการพัฒนาประชาธิปไตย", Daily News, April 20, 2012 - translation by me

Gen. Sonthi seems to get lost in his own words: On one hand, he acknowledges the severe consequences of the military coup that did more harm than good. But then on the other he still insists that it was the only legitimate way to restore national unity among all Thais! To put it in simpler terms: to restore 'democracy' they had to stage a non-democratic coup!

Nevertheless he faces strong criticism from those who are still supporting the coup, accusing him of being in cahoots with the Yingluck government to give Thaksin a clean slate for a return. It seems that the Sonthi of today is really a different one from the General Sonthi - so much so that, according to a satirical cartoon in Manager/ASTV, his 2006-self shoots himself in the head in shame of his current self.

Note: coup de main [ˈˌku də ˈmeɪn]: noun, "a sudden surprise attack, esp. one made by an army during war."

If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Read More