Thailand in 2012 - Some personal thoughts (Part 2)

Originally published at Siam Voices on December 29, 2012 This is the second and final part of the Siam Voices year-in-review. Yesterday in part 1, we looked at the year of prime minister's government, that of the opposition and the prevailing impunity over the 2010 crackdown.

Lese majeste: Cowardice in the face of first victim

One topic we expected to continue to play a role in 2012 is the draconian lèse majesté law and its unjust application to crack down on alleged dissent voices. And in many ways - despite the release of Thai-American Joe Gordon and an 'only' suspended sentence against Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn for not deleting monarchy-insulting web comments quickly enough - it unfortunately still made headlines for the wrong reasons.

The death of Amphon "Akong" Tangnoppakul marked what could be argued the first victim of lèse majesté. The 64-year-old retiree was serving a 20 year sentence for allegedly sending four defamatory text messages to the personal secretary of Abhisit Vejjajiva (despite inconclusive evidence). Having repeatedly being denied bail and suffering bad health, Akong died in detention on May 8. Obviously, his death sparked universal condemnation against the law - almost: Thailand politicians showed little sympathy and interest to do something about the arbitrary law, with Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra insisting not to do anything to change Article 112 of the Criminal Code.

Up until this point, the heated discussion about how to amend or if not abolish the law altogether was ongoing. Leading this debate was the Nitirat group, a collective of reformist law academics from Thammasat University, amidst considerable uproar. And it was that university that had a reputation for being one of the more liberal institutions in this country that was struggling and battling with itself, which led to one of the most astonishing sights of this year: of all people, journalism students (!) were seen protesting against Nitirat and the reform of the lèse majesté law by saying “Don’t use knowledge to distort morality!”

The chances that the law will be somehow changed (or even just remotely touched by politicians) remain slim as two incidents have shown that it is untouchable: the Constitutional Court rejected a petition by Somyot Pruksakasemsuk and Ekachai Hongkangwan, both currently on trial for lèse majesté, as it does not see the constitutional right to free speech being violated by Article 112 of the Criminal Code. In another story, a bill petition proposing to amend the law - signed by over 30,000 - was dismissed by the speaker of the parliament.

Meanwhile earlier this week, a former stockbroker has been sentenced to four years in prison under the equally flawed Computer Crimes Act for spreading "false information".

Emerging neighbors: Thailand's geo-political opportunities and blunders

This past year showed the rapid rise of neighboring Myanmar, as the country carefully progresses economically and politically - despite the unmasking of the ugly side of the Burmese pro-democracy movement regarding the genocide against the Rohingya - and other countries of course are in a gold rush mood, as they see new investment opportunities and also to grow their regional influence.

Thailand was one of the few countries that already did business with its neighbor before the change and the upcoming industrial area and deep sea port in Dawei on Myanmar's west coast is the biggest of them. But we reported at the beginning of this year that the mega-project ran into some problems and also caused the Thai government to reconsider their commitment. However, after a visit by Prime Minister Yingluck to Myanmar it seems to be on track again.

A different story shows how Thailand has lost some regional credibility: When NASA planned to use the Thai naval airbase in U-Tapao for atmospheric research study, the opposition Democrat Party drummed up nationalistic outrage and tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists came out crawling again - conveniently forgetting that...

Officials have noted that the Democrats, now opposed to the NASA initiative, approved the program while in power in 2010 and that it would not entail the use of military aircraft.

"Baseless controversy over Thailand's U-Tapao", Asia Times One, June 22, 2012

It was petty domestic political squabbles that eventually led the annoyed NASA to kill the project and gave Thailand a huge slap to the face geo-politically for not being able to sort itself out.

While the prime minister was busy traveling the world this year to bolster economical ties (read our exclusive report on her visit to Germany and France here), Thailand needs to take charge in the ASEAN region (and without looking down on its neighbors), if it doesn't want to loose relevancy.

The exploits of "ThaiMiniCult" in 2012: Mammophobia!

Of course it wouldn't be Siam Voices if we wouldn't monitor the self-proclaimed cultural heralds of everything “Thai”-ness - or in short "ThaiMiniCult". And while this year they have been noticeably less outraged in quantity, there were still instances when we could only shake our heads.

There was for example the ThaiMiniCult that was rumored (and thank god it was only a rumor) to order that "100 per cent males" shouldn't play transgender roles on TV. Or some arbitrary survey that blames Facebook for teen pregnancies, only to find out that it was lazy journalism that caused that headline, while the real problem of nearly non-existing sexual education is being swept under the carpet. Or the MP that was caught looking up some naughty pictures on his phone in parliament.

But probably the most noticeable media outrage (and also the most-clicked Siam Voices story of 2012) was the 'controversy' over the literally bare-breasted painting performance on the TV show "Thailand's Got Talent" that caused one of the judges to throw a sanctimonious tantrum on national TV and a moral witch-hunt. In the end, it turns out that the producers have "hired" her for a staged controversy. However, given how Thais reacted (or claimed to react) to this brouhaha, it was in many ways revealing.

What else happened this year? (in no particular order)

- The four-part series on Thai Education Failures by our regular Siam Voices contributor Kaewmala is a must-read! Be it ridiculous O-Net questions, questionable standardization, our poor international performance and lacking English proficiencies - our archaic education system is in dire need of change! And what does the Pheu Thai government do? Give away free tablets...!

- A rape case in Krabi, the disgusting denial by the Thai tourism minister in order to 'protect' the image and a father's creative plea for justice.

- Thais being outraged by five tourist douchebags cutting down a tree while most population doesn't give a damn about their own environmental lifestyle and willingly plastic-bags everything...!

- Thais being outraged at Lady Gaga for tweeting the intention of buying a fake Rolex while most of the population otherwise willingly ignores the countless counterfeit markets, and after campaigns by outraged religious groups in the Philippines and Indonesia to ban her concerts, looking rather silly and childish...!

- The Thai senator who accidentally shot his wife...or secretary...or cousin...with an uzi...or not...!

- In upside-down world news this year: The reactionary right-wing ASTV/Manager (media outlet of the anti-democratic yellow shirts) accuses the blatantly anti-Thaksin The Nation (an attempt of a newspaper) of being pro-Thaksin - mind blown!

- "Double, double toil and trouble;" - Thailand's movie adaptation of Shakespeare's "Macbeth" gets banned, but not for the depiction of regicide, rather for the depiction of another "Dear Leader" and the disparagement of his followers.

- Three Iranian terrorists literally blowing up their cover on Valentine's Day in the middle of Bangkok after a warning by the United States Embassy and the immediate arrest of a Hezbollah suspect a month before that and the tweeting motorcycle taxi driver that got the scoop of his lifetime. And deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung as the spiritual successor of the former Iraqi information minister by saying that there's "absolutely no terrorism" in the kingdom.

- Deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung as our new regular contributor to the "Tongue-Thai’ed!"-segments and coming up with the most creative name for the new command center in the South!

- The tsunami scare in April and the failure of Thai TV to inform the public because of a royal cremation ceremony.

- The Dhammakāya Movement's newest revelation: the afterlife of Apple's Steve Jobs...!

- The visit of US President Barack Obama to Thailand, and his meeting with Yingluck Shinwatra and half of the internet not able to be mature about it.

- The Bangkok Futsal Arena fiasco, as the city has failed to construct a purposed-built arena in time for FIFA Futsal World Cup and thus embarrassing themselves on a world stage.

- The return of the fraudulent bomb-sniffing device also known as the GT200, essentially a horrendously overpriced empty plastic shell with a dowsing rod. It's ineffectiveness has been proven since 2010, but it has emerged that the bogus device is still in use by the armed forces for the simple reason that there's "no alternative" but to keep on using it until there's a replacement, while soldiers are unnecessarily risking their lives more than they should because of this fraud, whose UK manufacturer has been charged this year.

- Thailand has FINALLY reached the early 21st century with the arrival of real 3G network coverage after an eternal farce and one last court decision - while neighboring Laos is preparing for 4G already...!

- And last, but not least: The still undisputed, most coherent article by The Nation - EVER!

I’d like to thank my co-writers and editors at Siam Voices and Asian Correspondent for their contributions and work this year, and YOU, the readers, for the support, feedback, criticism, links and retweets! Here’s to an eventful, exciting 2013 that brings us news, changes, developments to discuss and report for all the right reasons! Happy New Year!

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

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

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

Blurb down here or on the Facebook event page.

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

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

The event is funded by the European Union (EU)

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

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

08.30 – 09.00 am Registration and Coffee

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

09.20 – 10.45 am: Speakers

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

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

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

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

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

10.45 – 1.30 am: Q & A, Discussion

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.

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

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

The Nation reported on Tuesday:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thai webmaster Chiranuch found guilty, but avoids jail term

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks for following the live-blog!

12.00 h: First comment by Chiranuch:

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

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

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

10.50 น.ที่ศาลอาญารัชดา ห้องพิจารณาคดีที่ 704 ศาลพิพากษา จีรานุช ผอ.ประชาไท ความผิดพรบ.คอมฯ ม.14 และ15 จำคุก instagr.am/p/LPJu0OSzbt/

— Tewarit Maneechai (@Bus_Te) May 30, 2012

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prachatai's dir was on trial from 10 comments posted on PCT. Judge says she's guilty from one of the 10 mess left 20 days on the webboard.

— iLaw Club (@iLawclub) May 30, 2012

Judges says another 9 comments left between 1-10 days before being removed means she didn't intend to leave them there. #freejiew

— iLaw Club (@iLawclub) May 30, 2012

11.06 h: First reactions:

Today's event underscores irony that #Burma now probably has more freedom of speech than #Thailand. #assk #Jiewverdict

— AndrewBuncombe (@AndrewBuncombe) May 30, 2012

So, the guilty verdict to send the message to everyone else…**watch out**. And the suspended sentence to defuse any human rights criticism?

— Dave Oliver (@daveoli) May 30, 2012

Speaking as a webmaster & forum owner in Thailand, I live in a daily atmosphere of fear. Worried that I will be jailed for what others write

— Richard Barrow (@RichardBarrow) May 30, 2012

Sad day for Internet freedom in Thailand. The verdict means owners of Facebook, YouTube etc. are liable under Thai law too :-/ #freejiew

— สฤณี อาชวานันทกุล (@Fringer) May 30, 2012

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

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

10.48 h: This is now getting crucial:

7 expectation d intermediary take down comments immediately isn't fair. But, still defendant r responsible for illegal comments #freejiew

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

10.41 h:

4. At that time, Prachatai webboard had about 2-30,000 users, 300 new topics each day. The [problematic] topic is No. 1.2 million

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

5. Plaintiff told defendant to deletecomments but wasn't clear when+how plaintiff made notice to d defendant-before/after comments deleted

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

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

3 Court: Defendant said after coup, webboard users increased by 10 times. Accordingly, defendant step up measures in overseeing webboard.

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

10.30 h: 

2 Court: Regarding wheather defendant *supported* content to be posted, Court regards defendant as ISP as defined in CCA #freejiew

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

10.29 h:

Summary: Content is considered illegal. Defendant is considered a service provider. Now is abt if she should liable in this case? #freejiew

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

1 Court: the msgs deemed violation of CCA Article 14 (3). But the plaintiff didn't accuse the defendant for creating content #freejiew

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

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

ศาล: ข้อความดังกล่าวศาลเห็นว่า ผิดตามมาตรา 14(3) ตามพ.ร.บ.คอมพ์ แต่ไม่พบว่าโจทก์บรรยายว่าจำเลยเป็นผู้นำเข้าข้อมูล (ต่อ) #freejiew

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

ศาล: ปัญหาว่าจำเลยเป็นผู้สนับสนุนการนำเข้าข้อมูลหรือไม่นั้น ศาลเห็นว่าจำเลยถือเป็นผู้ให้บริการตามพรบ. (ต่อ)#freejiew

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

Translation is following now...!

10.17 h: 

Start reading the verdict. The plaintiff is not presented. Room 704. #freejiew

— เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (@thainetizen) May 30, 2012

10.05 h: Good point!

A guilty verdict could mean the death of user-gen. content in #thailand. Like hanging "digital entrepreneurs keep out" sign at the airport.

— Andreas (@anho) May 30, 2012

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

9.56 h:

Court officials requested all phones or tablets off and no photos allowed during today's hearing #freejiew

— Amy Kunrojpanya (@AKunrojpanya) May 30, 2012

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

9.52 h: Meanwhile in the courtroom...

A lot of Thai/int'l observers in @jiew's verdict still. They're changing to a bigger court room.

— Thanyarat Doksone (@8td) May 30, 2012

Standing room only. Verdict hearing moved to bigger room (#704) to accommodate the crowds #freejiew

— Amy Kunrojpanya (@AKunrojpanya) May 30, 2012

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

1. Time for prediction. @jiew will not get a jail sentence today. AFAIK, evidence presented at trial that she had deleted comments in past

— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012

2. that would be deemed LM without prompting & there was no specific warning/notice given to Jiew or Prachatai abt comments. This won't mean

— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012

3. that intermediary liability is no longer an issue; just facts of this case (+ also high profile nature) means J has not broken the law

— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012

4. That is not 100% confident prediction; just think it is much more likely than a custodial sentence.

— bangkokpundit (@bangkokpundit) May 30, 2012

Here's hoping...

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

9.40 h: From Google's Amy Kunrojpanya:

Full house in Room 911 at Thai Criminal Court as we wait to hear today's verdict #freejiew

— Amy Kunrojpanya (@AKunrojpanya) May 30, 2012

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

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

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

@Saksith Less than a month ago, esp. the int'l media. Guess because of #ASSK coverage.

— Thanyarat Doksone (@8td) May 30, 2012

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

Dear All,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Thai "Macbeth" movie banned over fears it causes 'disunity'

Originally published at Asian Correspondent on April 4, 2012

"Fair is foul, and foul is fair."
(Three Witches, Act I, Scene I)

The Tragedy of Macbeth is a famous play by William Shakespeare that tells the story of a man and a woman on their bloody path to the throne of Scotland and their violent downfall, driven by arrogance, paranoia and death. The 400-year-old story has been adapted and re-interpreted countless times, even spanning movie versions from Japan and more recently from India.

A Thai adaptation named "Shakespeare must die" (เชคสเปียร์ต้องตาย) has also been produced — touted by its directors Ing K. and Manit Sriwanichpoom as the first from the kingdom — set to be released later this year.

Set in an alternate Thailand ruled by a "superstitious, megalomaniacal and murderous dictator," a theater group plays their adaptation of Macbeth. As it can be seen by the trailer below, the movie's themes borrow heavily from the volatile current political climate, with street protests and burning effigies (but also notably a visual reference to the Thammasat Massacre).

The official movie trailer of "Shakespeare Must Die". The feature film from Ing K and Manit Sriwanichpoom. Shakespeare Must Die (เชคสเปียร์ต้องตาย), an adaptation of Macbeth, has become the second film to be banned from commercial release by the Thai Film Board under the Film Act of 2008.

However, this will not happen, according to the producer's press release:

This afternoon the Thai Film Censorship Board, under the Department of Cultural Promotion, Ministry of Culture, ruled to ban ‘Shakespeare Must Die’, the first Thai Shakespearean film, a horror movie adaptation of William Shakespeare’s ‘Macbeth’.

To quote the Record of Film Inspection (see scanned attachment): “the Board deems that the film Shakespeare Must Die has content that causes divisiveness among the people of the nation, according to Ministerial Regulations stipulating types of film, BE 2552 [AD 2009], Article 7 (3).

Press release by Manit Sriwanichpoom, Producer "Shakespeare Must Die", April 3, 2012

It is the second movie (the first one was 2010's "Insect in the Backyard") to be banned from commercial release under the Thai Film Act of 2008. According to Matichon, the board was about to determine the age rating for the movie. However, it did not reach a consensus and asked the directors to edit or cut some scenes. The director duo refused and thus the board decided to ban it.

"Those he commands move only in command, / Nothing in love (...)"
(Angus, Act V, Scene II)

What is noteworthy is that the movie got financial support from several government initiatives and funds (as seen in the last seconds of the trailer), namely the Thai Khem Khaeng Initiative, the Creative Thailand Project under the previous Abhisit administration, the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture and the now-defunct Ministry of Culture’s film fund. Surely, all these organizations must have been submitted with a pitch for the movie and a rough outline of the synopsis.

The producer continues:

It seems strange that the cultural ministry would ban Shakespeare, in the form of a film that the ministry itself had funded. It’s as if we’re actually living under a real live Macbeth. There are cinematic versions of Macbeth from all over the world—India, Japan, Taiwan, you name it. This is the first Thai Shakespearean film and, for reasons of national security, it is deemed too dangerous for Thai people to see!

Press release by Manit Sriwanichpoom, Producer "Shakespeare Must Die", April 3, 2012

"Make all our trumpets speak; give them all breath, Those clamorous harbingers of blood and death."
(Macduff, Act V, Scene VI)

According to director Ing K.*, the production has been plagued by many problems, most notably during the 2010 red shirt protests:

Our cast and crew motto was: Fight Fear with Art; Make Art with Love. It’s not an easy one to live by but very inspiring. (...) We needed a brave set motto, since in the making of the film we faced literal hell fire (red shirt occupation and riots in 2010 which closed down the filming for two weeks, made it a hassle for everyone to get to work, especially Lady Macduff who was daily and nightly harassed by red shirt guards so that she had to move, and once on 28th April stranded us in Rangsit when the highway back to Bangkok was cut off when violence broke out and a soldier was shot dead by a sniper) and literal high water (postproduction interrupted by the flood of 2011).

Director’s Statement by Ing K., co-director "Shakespeare Must Die", March 13, 2012

This might also have colored the director's bias against the red shirts who describes them as "violent, unreasoning, fanatical morons (...), courtesy of the alchemical spin of the Thaksin machine."

She also reveals that he has shot actual footage of the May 19 crackdown on the red shirts, in particular the burnings of Central World and other buildings that have been edited into the movie - which is reportedly one of the scenes objected by the film board, fearing that the viewers would be too stupid have difficulties to distinguish fiction from reality.

But may be it could have also been the end that was very contentious (spoiler warning!):

In the world of the theatre, the tragedy ends with their deaths, but in the real world of the film, the tragedy begins as Dear Leader’s fanatical followers burst into the playhouse and, enraged by this perceived affront to their idol, massacre everyone present. Amidst sounds of cheering, the play’s director is hanged;

Synopsis of "Shakespeare Must Die"

This scene is a thinly veiled reference to the various personality focused cults in the Thai political history and their potentially violent consequences as seen most recently by the controversy over the Nirirat group and the threats made against them.

"When our action do not, / Our fears do make us traitors"
(Lady Macduff, Act IV, Scene II)

Art has been always been used to reflect and comment on society in various ways, sometimes exaggerated, sometimes painfully accurate. This little art project dared to paint the Thai political crisis with a broad brush and with the story of Macbeth, the creators are re-telling one of the most important stories about the striving for power, the paranoia of holding on to it and the downward spiral madness when it is unchallenged and out of control.

This movie might have not been the best to tell this, but with the commercial ban this project gets more attention than its creators would have ever imagined. Thus, it is unsurprising is the reason that the movie causes "divisiveness among the people of the nation" - a non-sense, empty urge for national 'unity' at all costs that has been far too often said in this political crisis, while being completely oblivious that the key to move forward is the co-existence of different views and idea(l)s.

*UPDATE: A reader has pointed out this profile on co-director Ing K. and her past work - least to say, she's somewhat of an enfant terrible in the Thai movie scene...!

Foul-mouthed chat app has Thai Cultural Heralds up in arms

Originally published at Siam Voices on February 6, 2012

We thought we would hear less of Thailand’s National Knee-Jerk Outrage Machine (“กลไกสร้างปฏิกิริยาอย่างไร้ความยั้งคิดแห่งประเทศไทย”, trademark pending), also known as the Thai Cultural Heralds or ThaiMiniCult, now that that there's someone new in charge at the Ministry of Culture. But apparently it was just a matter of time, and now they're back to bemoan the perceived fall of whatever they call "Thai-ness":

The Culture Ministry is concerned about young people using the Simsimi artificial intelligence conversation program as it uses impolite and rude words.

Culture Surveillance Bureau chief Ladda Thangsupachai said on Thursday the Simsimi application is popular among smartphone users at this time and many swear words have been used in the chatting bot.

"Culture alarmed about Simsimi app", Bangkok Post, February 2, 2012

The Simsimi app in question is a multilingual chat bot by a South Korean company that gradually learns new words and phrases from its users. Simply put, the more people use it, the better it 'speaks' back to you. However, it appears that many Thai users have not taken the 'learning' part very seriously and instead taught it some naughty Thai words instead. "So what?" you may think, considering this app has been around since 2002. Why the outrage now? Well, let's see how outraged they are first:

The Simsimi artificial intelligence conversation program is causing social degeneration and creating gaps between members of the family, Culture Minister Sukumol Khunploem said Friday. (...)

"I personally think that the program reflects social problems that are very worrying. Instead of talking to or interacting with friends, people today talk to themselves and normal people don't do that.

"Many young people are using this type of program and this shows the decline in the closeness of the family ties and human interaction," said Mrs Sukumol.

"Culture blasts Simsimi app as 'not normal'", Bangkok Post, February 3, 2012

Users of the SimSimi "chat robot" application who post texts deemed libellous to other persons online face prosecution, even if the offensive remarks are generated by the program, said Thailand's Information and Communications Technology Minister Gp Captain Anudith Nakornthap.

"We will monitor the online world and take action against offenders," he said. He called on people to alert the ICT Ministry if they find libellous messages online.

"Thai gov't issues libel warning for users of chat robot", The Nation via Asian News Network, February 4, 2012

WOW! Only the Nitirat group gets so much hate at the moment! Kidding aside, it speaks volume how MICT minister Anudith has reacted to this whole selective outrage (over a chat AI, mind you!) if people post the results when they enter the name of somebody (e.g. a politician) - by simply dropping the legal hammer on them! The developers of the app have reportedly complied with the Thai authorities and agreed to remove the offensive words and phrases from it.

And about the culture minister blaming the social deterioration on a simple mobile app - aren't the problems far more deeper rooted like, um, education and a deeply anachronistic, monolithic perception of 'Thai-ness'? Nah, that's probably too complicated for an explanation and also too complicated to fix (let alone too expensive) - instead have an easy scapegoat to show that the ministry is actually doing something!

Also, how likely is it that such an app can be such detrimental to Thai society:

Amornwit Nakhonthap, an associate professor at Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Education, said Simsimi was only a fad. Though the language used might be rude sometimes, there were many young people who knew the appropriate usage for such language, he said.

"Simsimi robot app too rude for some parents", The Nation, February 3, 2012

Now that's some level-headed commentary right there, absolutely rational and not over-hyping... wait, there's more...?

He urged the authorities to supervise the Internet by blocking and screening inappropriate content.

"Simsimi robot app too rude for some parents", The Nation, February 3, 2012

D'oh! I praised too soon...!

P.S.: I love how those headlines attribute the concerns to the WHOLE Thai culture!

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.

Thammasat University split as it debates for and against Nitirat

By Saksith Saiyasombut

The debates over the Nitirat group's proposals to amend the constitution and the lèse majesté law have become considerably heated and in parts downright ugly over the past weeks. Thammasat University became the venue and the center of controversy as most of the lectures of the group (consisting of 7 Thammasat law lectures) have taken place at that university and lately been banned by the administration, fearing that the university could be "mistaken to organize these events" or even seen to "agree with the movement".

The ban from the camps of "any activities related to the lese majeste law" has cast a large shadow over the university's stance on academic freedom. Ever since then, there are signs that its students and alumni are taking a stand for and against the ban and for and against the proposals of the Nitirat group themselves.

Tuesday was exemplary for this divide as two different groups were rallying on two different campuses of the university:

More than 200 current and former student members of the Journalism and Mass Communication Faculty staged a rally against Nitirat at the Tha Phrachan campus. Students and lecturers from other faculties and supporters joined in the demonstration.

They were countered by a group of students who gathered at Thammasat's Rangsit campus in Pathum Thani who oppose the ban on Nitirat. The group will hold a rally at Tha Phrachan campus on Sunday. (...) about 10 students came out to oppose the ban, saying it restricted freedom of speech.

"Nitirat ban splits student body", Bangkok Post, February 2, 2012

First off, let me express my astonishment that of all people, journalists and those striving to become one, should know better than anyone how important the subject of lèse majesté is and how threatening it is to their creed - the more mind-boggling and revealing it is to see these people rallying with posters (see above) like "Journalism [Faculty] against Nitirat", "Nitirat is not Thammasat, Thammasat is not Nitirat" and "Don't let knowledge distort morality!"

They called during a rally for members of the Thammsat community to oppose Nitirat's proposal for the amendment of Section 112 of the Criminal Code, for the university to launch a legal and disciplinary investigation of the seven law lecturers, for the mass media to exercise discretion in presenting information on the proposed amendment, and for people in all walks of life to oppose any move deemed insulting to the monarchy.

"Journalism students oppose Nitirat", Bangkok Post , February 2, 2012

Following the Thai Journalists Association welcoming (last sentence) last week's decision by Twitter to filter out tweets on a country-by-country basis (and Thailand rushing to endorse it), today's protest by journalism students against amendments to the ambiguous, but draconian lèse majesté law is a declaration of moral bankruptcy by Thailand's journalism.

For Thammasat University, considering its history and that it was once considered to be a beacon of liberal thinking, human rights and democratic freedom in Thailand, it is a dangerous walk on the tight rope. While its rector has given refuge to a young girl called "Kanthoop", who has been over the years witch-hunted by ultra-royalists and has to face a lèse majesté complaint, the university is risking to lose all its liberal credibility with the ban of the Nitirat group. In general this debate will test the ability of all Thais to listen and at least acknowledge opposing views and uncomfortable opinions - the outcome is yet to be expected.

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.

No #outrage as Thailand adopts Twitter’s censorship policy

Originally published at Siam Voices on January 31, 2012

Last week, the micro-blogging website Twitter announced an implementation that gives them the possibility to withhold certain tweets to be viewable from certain countries, if legally required to do so. The backlash was expected and came in swiftly with countless of users express their #outrage. While some see an actual improvement in Twitter's new policy as they make the process transparent in contrast to previously just deleting the offending tweeting.

Of course many are fearing that this move will enable governments to curtail freedom of speech by requesting Twitter to blank out unwanted tweets that is going against a sovereign narrative and thus rendering campaigns of minority voices on the social media service, that has been often attributed to be a vital tool in the Arab Spring, ineffective.

One of these countries is of course Thailand, where freedom of speech has been steadily on the decline over the past few years and recents months have seen an intense and emotional debate of the Kingdom's ambiguous, but yet draconian lèse majesté law. While groups demanding a reform or the complete removal of Article 112 of the Criminal Code are battling with hardcore royalists and other opportunists, who are of course still upholding the notion that the royal institution needs to be protected above all else, the government of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra are maintaining their past stance and denying any move to amend the law whatsoever.

On Monday the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT), in order not to be outdone by anyone, has come to endorse Twitter's new policy:

ICT permanent secretary Jeerawan Boonperm said Twitter's move to censor or block content regarded as offensive in particular countries was a "welcome development".

The ICT Ministry will contact Twitter shortly to discuss ways in which they could collaborate, she said.

Mrs Jeerawan added the ICT already receives "good cooperation" from companies such as Google and Facebook in ensuring that Thai laws are respected.

"ICT to lay down law on Twitter accounts", Bangkok Post, January 30, 2012  via TheNextWeb

Just in case you have missed it: Thailand is the FIRST government on this Earth to embrace Twitter's new censorship policy! They have even beaten the Chinese, who of course made their own spin on this! This of course has drawn in the attention of the international media, as it also inevitably draws attention to the lèse majesté laws, which is slowly becoming synonymous for the Southeast Asian country.

What this whole controversy also shows is that Twitter, while a significant web service in today's internet culture, is still a private corporation that is there to make a profit and expand in foreign markets, such as China. It is a ride on a razor's edge between financial interests and the interests of it's users - something that other web companies like Google and Yahoo have attempted by appeasing to the local laws and eventually damaging their reputation in the end.

In the case of Thailand, Twitter is yet another frontline in the seemingly never-ending battle for freedom of expression online against a force that is curtailing the diversity of views and opinions in order to protect their sole, valid sovereign narrative of a Kingdom that is getting into world's spotlight more and more for all the wrong reasons.

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.

2011 - Some Personal Thoughts

Originally published at Siam Voices on December 31, 2011 2011 is history and looking back on Thailand this past year, it has been yet another eventful year that brought some answers, but many more questions to the wide-spread problems that continues to plague the country in many aspects. However, 2011 brought many chances and changes, shed light on issues and topics left in the dark before, voices echoed by many and opinions uttered by a few, whether you agree with them or not.

This is a (definitely incomplete) list of these stories that happened in 2011...

Lèse majesté sees December surge

Let's start off with the most recent topic that has unfortunately brought Thailand into the world headlines for all the wrong reasons again and that is none other than the problematic issue of lèse majesté that is gripping freedom of speech. The whole month of December was filled with stories about high-profile cases and countless victims of this draconian law, the discussion to amend it and the (irrational) defenders of this law and the institution that is meant to be protected by it.

The recent surge of lèse majesté began in late November with the dubious sentence against Ampon "Uncle SMS" Tangnoppakul, despite doubtful evidence. The 62-year old grandfather is now being jailed for 20 years, five years for each alleged SMS sent. On December 8 the Thai-born US citizen was  sentenced to two and a half years prison for posting translated parts of a banned biography on the King. On December 15 'Da Torpedo', despite winning an appeal resulting in a restart of her trial, was punished to 15 years prison for alleged remarks made in 2008. These are just a few cases that happened in November and December compared to the countless other (partly ongoing or pending) cases over the past 12 months.

But the surge was also accompanied with growing and publicly displayed concern by the European Union, the United Nations and the United States Embassy in Bangkok over the increasing blatant usage of the lèse majesté law, only with the latter to be flooded with irrational, angry hate speeches and also the venue for a protest by royalists in mid-December (and also in a nearly instant iconic display of royal foolishness, the protesters are wearing Guy Fawkes masks, most likely inspired by the #Occupy-movement, but totally oblivious to its historical roots). It was not the first time this year that this issue got attention from the international community, as seen in October.

The government of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra was elected into office last July (see below), and while she would have liked to see some change on the application of the law, not to the law itself though, the new ICT minister has vowed to exploit this to the fullest. He was only to be topped by deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung a few months later, who went into full combat mode and declared war on lèse majesté web content with a THB400m ($12,6m) strong war chest, right after a meeting with the military's top brasses. The hopes of many supporters of the Pheu Thai Party, especially the red shirts, are at latest by now fully gone, as this government already has a tainted record on this issue.

But there was also an important protest by opponents of lèse majesté - the "Fearlessness Walk" shows that this issue can no longer be ignored and the consequences of its enforcement are doing exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do. It is drawing attention to the ambiguous nature of Article 112 of the criminal code (as well as the Computer Crimes Act), it is drawing attention to the signs of changing times and those who refuse to see them, and ultimately it will draw more opposition - we will (unfortunately) hear more about this issue in 2012!

(Non-)Culture: Baring the unbearable and monopolizing "Thai"-ness

While we're on the subject on being subjected to the anachronistic ideas of a few, there were several stories in 2011 in the realms of culture that were disconcerting, to say the least. It wasn't so much the incidents themselves rather the reactions by those self-proclaimed cultural heralds of everything "Thai"-ness - a phrase I've been using too often in each of those stories: three girls dancing topless on Songkran, the then-culture minister calls for a crackdown on them as if they have attacked everything "Thai"-ness stands for. A few months later the same culture minister suddenly notices that infidels foreigners are getting Buddhist tattoos and calls for a ban (and back paddles after some considerable uproar). Shortly after his ministry senselessly attempts to crack down on a senseless internet meme because it's "inappropriate" and "not constructive". Later this year a rather curious guide for parents was published on their website. And finally a singer's rather raunchy video gets a ton of hits online and a sanctimonious scolding on national TV.

See a pattern here? The selective outcry borders on ridiculousness and fuels Thailand’s National Knee-Jerk Outrage Machine (“กลไกสร้างปฏิกิริยาอย่างไร้ความยั้งคิดแห่งประเทศไทย”, trademark pending), claims to uphold the only valid definition of "Thai"-ness, that isn't even fully spelled out yet, while they have not noticed that the world beyond their minds has moved on and come up with new and different definitions of what else Thailand could be. The problem is that these cultural heralds, by political office or class, claim monopoly on this. Everyone below their wage level is not entitled to even think about it. And if something doesn't fit their point of view, as guest contributor Kaewmala put it brilliantly, "Only taboo when it's inconvenient!"

The 2011 General Elections

Will he or will he not? In the end, Abhisit Vejjajiva did dissolve parliament and paved the way for early elections in May and also set off quite a short campaign season, which not only saw a few strange election posters and illustrious characters running for office, but it also saw the emergence of Yingluck Shinawatra as the lucky draw for PM candidate of the opposition Pheu Thai Party. After much skyping to Dubai discussion within the party, the sister of Thaksin was chosen to run and it turned out to be the best pick.

The Democrat Party were banking heavily on negative campaigning (a precursor to the upcoming, inevitable Thaksin-phobia in 2012), which reached its climax in the last days with their rally at Rajaprasong, the same venue where the red shirts protested a year ago. In this event, then-deputy prime minister Suthep Thuangsuban claimed to give the "full truth" on what really happened during the violent crackdown of May 19, 2010. What followed were hours of fear-mongering in case of a Pheu Thai win and an incident that almost caused a major misunderstanding:

The big screens flanking the stage on the left and the right are bearing a gruesome view. Footage of at times badly injured people from last year’s rally are being shown when suddenly at the sight of blood people started cheering – as it turns out, not for the brutally killed victims of the anti-governments protests of 2010, but for a woman with an Abhisit cut-out mask waving to the crowd behind her.

"Thailand’s Democrat Party rally: Reclaiming (the truth about) Rajaprasong", Siam Voices, June 24, 2011

The last days of the campaign were spent outside of Bangkok, for example Pheu Thai in Nakhon Ratchasima before the big day. On Sunday, July 3, election day of course meant a full-day-marathon for a journalist. Not only did it mean covering as many polling stations around town as humanly possible, not only to crunch the numbers of exit polls (which turned out to be total BS!), but also of course running the live-blog at Siam Voices. In the end, it went very quickly: Abhisit conceded, Yingluck smiled and at a lunch meeting later there was already a new five-party coalition.

The worst floods in decades: a deluge of irrationality

790.

This is the current death toll of the what has been described as the "worst floods in decades". Floods are an annual occurrence in Thailand during the rainy season. When the water was sweeping through Chiang Mai already back in late September, this natural disaster was somehow going to be different. But it took some considerable time, despite the unprecedented damage it has created in Ayutthaya to the ancient temples and the vital industrial parks, until the capital was drowned in fear of what was to come.

It was curious to observe that those who were least likely to be affected (read: central Bangkok) were losing their nerves the most. Back in November I attempted to explore one possible reason:

One of the real reasons why the people of the city react the way they did though is this: After a military coup, countless violent political protests and sieges of airports, government buildings and public roads, this city has a sense of anxiety not unlike New York after the 9/11 terrorist attacks: a sense of being constantly under siege by something or somebody that separates Bangkok from the rest of the country even more. An incident at Klong Sam Wa Sluice Gate (we reported) is a perfect example of the conflict between inside and outside Bangkok in miniature form.

"The Thai floods and the geographics of perception – Part 2: Certain fear of uncertainty", Siam Voices, November 23, 2011

On an anecdotal note I remember people around me hoarding bottled water, moving their belongings upstairs and barricading their houses waist-high - while I can understand these precautions, I was astonished to say the least when I started to read social media updates that accuse the government so much so to the point of deliberately drowning the people of Bangkok and other outlandish conspiracy theories, including the now ubiquitous "blame it on foreign media"-card.

There's no doubt that this natural disaster has not only shown the worst in people, but also it's helpful and charitable side (not only towards humans exclusively). During my work reporting from the floods for foreign news crews (hence there weren't many posts on Siam Voices), I admired the apparent resilience and defiance I saw from many victims of the floods - some of which are now struggling with rebuilding their lost existence. And a lot of clean-up will be needed to be done, both literally as well as politically, in order to prevent such a disaster from happening again!

What else happened in 2011? (in no particular order)

- Then-prime minister Abhisit urging then-president of Egypt Honsi Mubarak to respect the will of the people - while being totally oblivious that he exactly did not do that a year ago because, well, "They ran into the bullets" themselves!

- Half a dozen Thais walking through the border region with Cambodia and surprised that they're being arrested, in an arbitrary way to dispute the border demarcations between the two countries. This ongoing conflict, largely fueled by the ever-shrinking PAD, sparked into a brief armed battle. Two of the strollers are still sitting in a Cambodian prison.

- The one-year-anniversary of the crackdown of May 19 and my personal thoughts on this.

- The somehow strangely toned-down five-year-anniversary of the 2006 coup.

- Army chef General Prayuth Chan-ocha going completely berserk at the press.

- The fact that Thailand got its first female prime minister and the (un)surprisingly muted reactions by Thailand's feminists.

- The saga of the impounded Thai plane on German ground, the curious case study on how Thai media reported it, the juristic mud-slinging, and how this mess was eventually solved. Which brings us to...

- The German government allowing Thaksin back into Germany, after heavy campaigning by a bunch of conservative German MPs. Still boggles my mind...!

- And while we're on topic, we are saying good-bye to a regular contributor of outrageous quotes - no one has been so focused to do a different job than written his business card than Thaksin-hunter and former foreign minister in disguise Kasit Piromya!

I'd like to thank my colleagues at Siam Voices for building a diverse and opinionated collective, our editor who keeps everything in check and YOU, the readers! THANK YOU for the support, feedback, criticism, links and retweets!

Here's to an eventful, exciting 2012 that brings us news, changes, developments to discuss for all the right reasons! Happy New Year!

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist based in Hamburg, Germany again (*sigh*). He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.

Video: 'Challenging the Sovereign Narrative' - (Social) Media in the Thai Political Crisis

Originally published at Siam Voices on December 23, 2011 (Note: This post was supposed to be up much, much earlier but was pushed back due to the floods and the re-relocation of the author back to Germany. Apologies to all involved for the momentous delay!)

Back in late September I was invited to hold a talk at Payap University in Chiang Mai and I chose to talk about a (social) media topic with the focus on the the 2010 anti-government Red Shirts' Protests, the knee-jerk demonizing of foreign media and what role social media played in this, if at all.

The talk is about 45 minutes long and includes 15 minutes of Q&A. The original full abstract can be found below the video.

Again, thanks to the people at Payap University for the invitation and organizing the event, especially Adam Dedman, Jessica Loh and Paul Chambers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzrtubI8cZM

“Challenging the Sovereign Narrative – Media Perceptions of the Thai Political Crisis and the (missing) Role of Social Media”

Speaker: Saksith Saiyasombut

When: Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 5-6pm

Place: Room 317, Pentecost Building, Mae Khao main campus, Payap University

The Kingdom of Thailand rarely pops up on the global news landscape and if so, then it is mostly for a so-called ‘soft’ story. In recent years though, political struggles, often escalating in violent protests on the streets of Bangkok, have dominated the airwaves of the international media outlets, only to disappear shortly after the protests have ended. With the Thai political crisis dragging on for several years now, reporters are struggling to properly report and explain the situation without simplifying this to just a color-coded conflict between two opposing groups. In particular, the anti-government Red Shirt protests of 2010 were a watershed moment for how Thailand and its political crisis are regarded, with many Thais objecting to the foreign media’s coverage, as much as to openly vilify the international TV news networks. On the other hand, the domestic media have failed in its role to objectively explain and provide context to the political developments of recent years.

The more important issue is the rise of social media to counter a sovereign narrative of the mainstream and state media – however, Thailand has yet to see a grassroots revolution fueled by the Internet. Nevertheless, online services like Twitter and Facebook provide Thais a way to read and express alternative viewpoints and also a platform to  fill the journalistic void left by other media outlets, but are threatened by the country’s ambiguously written Computer Crimes Act and lèse majesté law.

This talk looks at the perceptions of the international and domestic media of the Thai political crisis and why this struggle has not translated into an online uprising yet and aims to examine opportunities for “filling in the blanks” left by the mainstream media.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai political blogger and journalist. He wrote for his hometown newspapers Weser Kurier and Weser Report in Bremen, Germany, before working as an editorial assistant for Asia News Network and contributing reporter at The Nation. He started blogging about Thai politics on his personal website  www.saiyasombut.com in early 2010 and since September 2010, Saksith now writes for Siam Voices, a collaborative blog on Thai current affairs on the regional blog and news network Asian Correspondent. He is also currently a graduate student of Southeast Asian Studies at the University of Hamburg, Germany.

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

International pressure mounts against Thailand's Lese Majeste law

Originally published at Siam Voices on October 14, 2011 The rising awareness of Thailand's draconian lèse majesté law is gaining scrutiny from the international community after several countries have questioned and criticized Article 112 of Thailand's criminal code during a Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Every four years, all members of the United Nations are required to submit a report about its human rights situation, and be questioned on it by other states. If you have the time you can watch all (and I mean ALL) hearings towards Thailand's report, go here.

Pravit Rojanaphruk wrote in The Nation:

Representatives from the United Kingdom, France and Slovenia shared the view that the lese majeste law affected freedom of expression and urged Thailand to consider this aspect of liberty. Hungary and Finland urged Thailand to invite the UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression to visit Thailand.

The representative of Norway - also a kingdom - made the most concrete suggestion, pointing out that although Norway has a lese majeste law, a charge can only be brought with the personal approval of the king in order to "avoid abuses". (...)

Other states whose representatives urged Thailand to amend the law included Switzerland, Brazil, Spain, Sweden and New Zealand. Some of these, including the Canadian representative, also raised the issue of the Computer Crimes Act, which critics say is also being used by the Thai government to curb freedom of expression.

"US mum on lese majeste law at UN rights hearing", by Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation, October 7, 2011

ARTICLE 19, an UK-based NGO advocating freedom of expression, were also present during the hearing and have caught this (and be sure to read former Siam Voices contributor Andrew Spooner's interview with ARTICLE 19's Senior Programme Officer for Asia):

Recommendations to Thailand to repeal or review the lèse-majesté law (Article 112 of Thailand’s Penal Code) and the Computer Crime Act (2007) were made by fourteen member states, including Western European countries, New Zealand, Canada, Brazil and Indonesia.

Indonesia was the only member state of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) to highlight the issue of freedom of expression in Thailand, a fellow member. It urged Thailand to carry out a comprehensive review of its laws to ensure that they fulfil the right to freedom of expression in accordance to international standards.

"Spotlight on Thailand’s Lèse-Majesté Law and Computer Crimes Act", ARTICLE 19, October 6, 2011

However, not all countries have raised their concerns towards Thailand:

The United States joined China, Syria, Singapore and Burma in not expressing any concern about the lese majeste law, (...).

"US mum on lese majeste law at UN rights hearing", by Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation, October 7, 2011

This is seemingly the first time vocal opposition against lèse majesté has been come in that quantity from the international community. British MPs lobbied for Prachatai webmaster Chinranuch Premchaiporn, whose trial continued in the past few weeks (see here), but due to the current flood situation, will continue in February 2012.

Another case mentioned during the questioning at the UPR was the trial against Joe Gordon, a Thai-born American arrested back in May for allegedly posting a link to a banned unauthorized biography of King Bhumibol Adulyadej and also allegedly translating parts of this book and later posted it on his blog. This was done while he was still in the United States, but was then arrested when he came to Thailand for medical treatment. His case started earlier this week, where Gordon pleaded guilty, in hope for a shorter sentence and eventually a royal pardon, something that has become almost standard procedure in similar cases of recent years.

Even more international criticism comes from the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, who also urged Thailand in a press release to amend its laws:

“The threat of a long prison sentence and vagueness of what kinds of expression constitute defamation, insult, or threat to the monarchy, encourage self-censorship and stifle important debates on matters of public interest, thus putting in jeopardy the right to freedom of opinion and expression,” La Rue said. “This is exacerbated by the fact that the charges can be brought by private individuals and trials are often closed to the public.” (...)

However, to prevent any abuse of this exceptional rule for purposes beyond the intended aim, any law that limits the right to freedom of expression must be clear and unambiguous regarding the specific type of expression that is prohibited, and proven to be necessary and proportionate for the intended purposes.

“The Thai penal code and the Computer Crimes Act do not meet these criteria. The laws are vague and overly broad, and the harsh criminal sanctions are neither necessary nor proportionate to protect the monarchy or national security,” the expert noted.

"Thailand / Freedom of expression: UN expert recommends amendment of lèse majesté laws", Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations Human Rights Council, October 10, 2011

The special rapporteur rightfully points out the weaknesses of the laws that leave too much room for interpretation and the accused are likely to become, especially in these political times, victims of arbitrary acts by the authorities. While the Thai representatives at the hearing argue that the Thai government is "keen to prevent the misuse of the law", something that the Abhisit administration had promised but failed to deliver, and that "an ongoing debate on lese majeste law" is taking place, though failing to see how public and how thorough the debate still can not go.

Also, Thai Ambassador to the UN Sihasak Phuangketkeow says that Thai media can report and comment "freely". Again, while Thailand is still a far way from becoming the new Burma, the extent to which one can fully comment and report on the political developments in Thailand is highly limited, considering that there are more powers at play than those we elect.

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

Raunchy 'Itchy Ear' song exposes Thai sexual hypocrisy

Originally published at Siam Voices on September 29, 2011 A music video with suggestive lyrics, the singer's even more suggestive stage performance, and her moral scolding on national TV is the latest episode of yet another Thai sexual hypocrisy. Yet again, the outcry comes from those who claim to protect anything 'Thai' and lash out against everything that is allegedly not, while willfully ignoring the naked truth(s).

So, what happened? In June, a Thai band called Turbo Music uploaded a video of a performance of their song "Itchy Ear" (คันหู), which is about...

The song itself is a tale of a young lady with an itchy ear (khan huu, คันหู) that won’t go away. Packed with double-entendre (and invitations for vowel substitution), the song relates her quest for relief: she has tried a cotton-bud, but to no avail (เอาสำลี มาปั่น ก็ไม่หาย). Perhaps the itch was caused by some water getting in when she was showering washing her hair (อาบน้ำ สระหัว น้ำคงเข้า). She asks her mother for something to fix it (แม่จ๋า หายา ให้หนูหน่อย). The singer explains that when she was a child it didn’t ever itch (ตอนเด็กๆ ไม่เคยคันซักที) but it started just two or three years after she became a young woman (พอเริ่มเป็นสาว ได้แค่สองสามปี หูก็เริ่มมี อาการ คันคัน). If anyone can give her a cure, she will give them anything. She will drink it or inject it (once or twice if necessary) so long as it is good medicine (จะกินฉีด ขอให้เป็นยาดี จะลองให้ฉีด ยาสักทีสองที ถ้ายาเค้าดี หูคงหายคัน).

"คันหู : Nong Ja ahead of Democrats!", by Andrew Walker, New Mandala, September 14, 2011

But watching the performance of the 20-year-old singer Nong Ja aka Ja Turbo, it is pretty clear, even to those who didn't get the innuendos the first time around, that 'itchy ear' means something completely different:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkjbnjJlFDk

Maybe that's why the viewing figures skyrocketed within a few weeks, reaching over 15 million clicks at the time of publication. Much of the popularity could also be attributed to the almost unsurprising outrage over the raunchy pop song. The most striking example of high-profile indignation was the singer's appearance on "Woody - Born to Talk" (วู้ดดี้ - เกิดมาคุย) with Woody Militachinda on September 4. In a recent column, Pavin Chachavalpongpun describes the interview as this:

The interview was intensely discomforting. Woody acted as a typical stuck up Thai hi-so who proclaimed himself to be the defender of Thai morality. The way Woody communicated with Ja Turbo, the way he posed his questions and how he responded to her answers, all contained highly unpleasant value judgements on the part of the host. The show succeeded in unveiling a dark reality in Thai society: there remains an impenetrable barricade when it comes to "class". This barricade is responsible for the current crisis facing the country today.

Woody exercised his "class superiority" and his supposed better upbringing in an attempt to disgrace Ja Turbo, who was a guest on his show. He asked insulting questions and made offensive remarks about her. These are some of Woody's statements: "How can a song like this exist in this society?" "Is there really this type of girl, like you, in our society?" "Didn't you feel ashamed when you lifted your legs in the air?" "Is your act some kind of low-class art?" "Are there parents out there who would tolerate daughters like yourself?" "Have you ever thought for a moment that you are committing something so immoral?" "Do you consider yourself a decent entertainer?"

Woody's questions may have been harsh. But his attitude towards Ja Turbo was even more callous. It seemed that he didn't even want to breathe the same air as her let alone sit in the same room with her. He grilled her in front of Thai viewers, believing that his supercilious attitude would earn him an even higher place in a society where morality and ethics are seemingly the exclusive assets of the phu dee, or those of a "higher class".

"Hi-so hypocrites as shameless as immoral low-so entertainers", by Pavin Chachavalpongpun, The Nation, September 28, 2011

Woody wasn't really being host rather than being a smug interrogator, lecturing her about what he thinks is morality and 'Thainess' - yet another self-proclaimed cultural herald! While the music act itself is debatable, the constant attack and poorly hidden antipathy by him is not only cheap entertainment at the cost of another person, but also a deeply delusional understanding of what is appropriate and who actually decides on this.

Most of all, this is a business. It's not the first time the music industry or entertainment in general have pushed the envelope on what is dictated by others to be 'decent'. It is not the first time that sexuality has been used as a subject and this will not be the last time that someone will take offense from this. While the likes of Turbo Music are cashing in on the always reliable 'sex sells' routine, Woody cashes in by openly bashing another person and still claiming the higher ground.

This selective outcry on the public depiction of sexuality is reminiscent of an incident earlier this year in April, when three women were seen dancing topless in public during Songkran (Thai New Year). Somebody shot and uploaded the video, much to the anger of the self-proclaimed cultural heralds, especially the then culture minister who openly advocated a crackdown on them for "negatively affect Thailand's reputation" - it turns out those girls were underage. We interviewed Thai author "Kaewmala" about the causes and motives of this seemingly predictable outrage and why some Thais seem to struggle with sexuality. Among others (I recommend you to re-read the whole interview), she saw the problem as this:

Sexuality both is and isn’t taboo in Thailand. It is taboo only when it’s inconvenient or causes embarrassment (real or perceived). Thais like to think that we are a conservative and proper society when we really aren’t – at least behind closed doors. People have a delusion that Thai kids are too innocent to be contaminated by sex education, another area of inability to deal with facts. There are people who actually buy into the ideal Thai Culture line (good, grand, long-lived, sexually innocent or sexless, religiously Buddhist). And these people will not tolerate any deviation from this ideal and would sing the chorus to the occasional outcries, whenever the media drum one up. Like most cultures, much of the Thai Culture is sexualized (mostly involving females) and people are drawn to sex.

"“Only taboo when it’s inconvenient!” – Interview with Thai author Kaewmala on the outrage at topless Songkran dancers", Siam Voices, April 19, 2011

All in all, this whole (made-up) controversy did Nong Ja and her band more good than harm, becoming an online sensation and adding some notoriety to their newly gained popularity, while the cultural heralds are still seemingly trying to wrap their head around the times we live in today.

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

Announcing: Talk at Payap University on September 27, 2011

This is an open event, anyone is invited to come and you can RSVP on the Facebook event page. Also, you have any suggestions and hints for material, links, videos etc. send me an email, tweet or post on my Facebook page.

"Challenging the Sovereign Narrative - Media Perceptions of the Thai Political Crisis and the (missing) Role of Social Media"

Speaker: Saksith Saiyasombut

When: Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 5-6pm

Place: Room 317, Pentecost Building, Mae Khao main campus, Payap University

The Kingdom of Thailand rarely pops up on the global news landscape and if so, then it is mostly for a so-called ‘soft’ story. In recent years though, political struggles, often escalating in violent protests on the streets of Bangkok, have dominated the airwaves of the international media outlets, only to disappear shortly after the protests have ended. With the Thai political crisis dragging on for several years now, reporters are struggling to properly report and explain the situation without simplifying this to just a color-coded conflict between two opposing groups. In particular, the anti-government Red Shirt protests of 2010 were a watershed moment for how Thailand and its political crisis are regarded, with many Thais objecting to the foreign media's coverage, as much as to openly vilify the international TV news networks. On the other hand, the domestic media have failed in its role to objectively explain and provide context to the political developments of recent years.

The more important issue is the rise of social media to counter a sovereign narrative of the mainstream and state media - however, Thailand has yet to see a grassroots revolution fueled by the Internet. Nevertheless, online services like Twitter and Facebook provide Thais a way to read and express alternative viewpoints and also a platform to  fill the journalistic void left by other media outlets, but are threatened by the country’s ambiguously written Computer Crimes Act and lèse majesté law.

This talk looks at the perceptions of the international and domestic media of the Thai political crisis and why this struggle has not translated into an online uprising yet and aims to examine opportunities for "filling in the blanks" left by the mainstream media.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai political blogger and journalist. He wrote for his hometown newspapers Weser Kurier and Weser Report in Bremen, Germany, before working as an editorial assistant for Asia News Network and contributing reporter at The Nation. He started blogging about Thai politics on his personal website  www.saiyasombut.com in early 2010 and since September 2010, Saksith now writes for Siam Voices, a collaborative blog on Thai current affairs on the regional blog and news network Asian Correspondent. He is also currently a graduate student of Southeast Asian Studies at the University of Hamburg, Germany.

Foreign web host company 'snitched' lese majeste critic to Thai authorities

By Saksith Saiyasombut

Earlier this month, the United States has expressed "disappointment" over the prosecution of Joe Gordon, a naturalized US citizen from Thailand who was arrested in May and charged with lèse majesté. Gordon has allegedly linked to the book "The King Never Smiles", an unauthorized and banned biography on Thailand's King Bhumibol Adulyadej and posted translated parts on his blog back in 2007.

The technology website Ars Technica noq has a piece about another Thai-turned-US citizen who ran into trouble with Thailand's draconian lèse majesté law:

In May 2006, Anthony Chai, a naturalized United States citizen from Thailand, took a flight back to the land of his birth to catch up with relatives and friends. He visited his nieces and nephews and spent some time at the resort town of Hua Hin.

But according to a new lawsuit, when Chai tried to return to California via Bangkok airport, he was stopped by a quintet of security agents. Employed by Thailand's Department of Special Investigation, they informed him that they had a warrant for his arrest for committing an act of lèse majesté—a public statement that supposedly violates the "dignity" of a ruler. (...)

The DPI [sic] officers took Chai to an interrogation center and allegedly deprived him of food, water, and sleep until 3.30am while barraging him with accusations and threats. "I know where your relatives live in Bangkok and California," Chai says that one policeman told him. "If you want them to live in peace, you must cooperate."

"Thai censorship critic strikes back at snitch Web host", Ars Technica, August 29, 2011

Just a reminder: this took place in May 2006, back when the numbers for lèse majesté cases were by far not as high as they were today! The article goes on to describe the interrogation, including that Chai allegedly had to hand over passwords and e-mail addresses so the officers could access his confiscated laptop.

At one point during the interrogation, Chai was presented with a document that revealed the e-mail addresses that he and an associate had used to post comments to manusaya.com. (...)

Did Anthony Chai even make statements against the Thai monarchy? No. Using an anonymous e-mail address, he had posted comments critical of Thailand's lèse majesté law to the website www.manusaya.com (...) The site was eventually shut down by its Canadian host, Netfirms, at the request the Thai government.

"Thai censorship critic strikes back at snitch Web host", Ars Technica, August 29, 2011

This shows the problem of the ambiguously worded lèse majesté law, which states "Whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years" - without saying though what actually constitutes defamation or insult, criticizing the law itself doesn't seem to fit it.

The fact that Chai could be charged for something he did outside the Kingdom is thanks to the Section 17 of the Computer Crimes Act that basically states anyone, Thai or not, can be charged under this law no matter from where the offense was committed.

The Ars Technica article then highlights a rather strange and blatantly impudent acts of a Thai police Colonel personally showing up in California to meet Chai - that has to be read in its entirety...

So, how did the Thai authorities found out about him...?

But Netfirms didn't just close the site, say Chai and his attorneys.

"Sometime before May 2006, also at the request of Thai officials, Netfirms.com provided Mr. Chai's IP address and the two e-mail addresses associated with that IP address," Chai's complaint charges, "without Mr. Chai's knowledge or consent." In addition, the Canadian company allegedly handed over this data without requesting a court order, subpoena, or warrant from Thai authorities, and without contacting the US State Department for guidance.

"Thai censorship critic strikes back at snitch Web host", Ars Technica, August 29, 2011

This procedure mirrors Yahoo!'s outing of Chinese cyber dissidents over the last several years. What differs in Chai's case though is that Netfirms is not based in Thailand and did not need to appease the Thai government by making amends with their internet services - so it seems quite strange why this Candian company was so willing to snitch him to Thai authorities without any kind of documentation.

This is why Chai is now, with the help of the World Organization for Human Rights, suing Netfirms $75,000 in damages. It will be interesting to see how this court case will turn out, since this is the first time (at least to my knowledge) that a foreign internet firm has actively assisted Thai authorities with the prosecution of alleged lèse majesté offenders.

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

As opposition against Thailand's lese majeste law continues, it claims another victim

Originally published at Siam Voices on August 16, 2011 Earlier this month, a 23-year old graduate from the Kasetsart University has been arrested for allegedly posting content on his blog that is deemed insulting to the monarchy - also known as lèse majesté. Prachatai and The Nation's Pravit Rojanaphruk (and unsurprisingly no one else) with the details:

The person who filed the charge was said to be a vice rector for students affairs, who reportedly said he was pressed to file the charge by the University Council and that the complaint was filed in a bid to protect the university's "reputation". (...)

The man made remarks on his blog that were allegedly offensive to the monarchy while he was a senior student at the university. These were apparently first spotted by fellow students, prachatai.com reported.

He faces charges both under the lese majeste law, which carries a maximum 15-year jail term, and the Computer Crimes Act, which has punishment of up to five years in jail.

"Student held for alleged lese majeste", The Nation, August 7, 2011

Meanwhile, Prachatai reports that he has been released on bail. This student, whose name and picture has been widely published, is another victim of Thailand's infamous Article 112 of the Criminal Code, also known as lèse majesté. In recent years, this law has been excessively abused, the number of such cases has skyrocketed from just a few cases in 2006 to almost 500 in 2010 and, in conjunction with the equally controversial 2007 Computer Crimes Act (CCA), thousands of websites have been shut down. On the other hand, due to the volatile political atmosphere in Thailand, it has enabled an excessive witch-hunt, as detailed here:

[Name of accused] was apparently 'witch hunted' by a Facebook group calling itself the Social Sanction (SS) group, according to his father. His name, photos, personal address and numbers were posted online, and he was heavily criticised by members of the SS group. (...)

Sawitree Suksri, a law lecturer at Thammasat University, described the SS group's method as "vicious" and "irrational" and a form of online violence that parallels the real-life violence in Thailand. She also noted in a signed article that the ongoing Social Sanction phenomenon appeared to have the support of the Thai authorities.

"THAILAND: Student blogger charged with lèse majesté", University World News, August 13, 2011

As charges for lèse majesté grow in numbers, so does the resistance against this law. We have previously reported about an open letter by a group of 100 young writers calling to amend this law and stop its excessive abuse. This group has now grown to 359 writers and they also have published a new open letter, key excerpt:

We hereby appeal to the Members of the Thai Parliament who are the representatives and law makers for the Thai people to take the lead in amending Article 112 of the Criminal Code. This is our call for courage to politicians, academicians, the media and intellectuals from all sectors of Thai society to awaken their conscience and to recognize that the suppression of freedom of speech and expression through the misuse of Article 112 by means of physical threats, pressing charges, lawsuits and intimidation by government officials in power or among members of the Thai public including the mass media, is a grave danger to the stability of our nation. This is of utmost national concern and in urgent need of reform.

A society will fail not as a result of diversity of opinions, nor lack of solidarity in political discourse, but a society will fail due to its inability to respect basic human rights, to allow opportunities for the public to voice their opinions, and to cherish and learn from the constructive exchange of different points of view. For our society to progress and prosper, it must develop a spirit of cooperation and cultivatean understanding of human rights, freedom and equality. The goal is for all Thais to live harmoniously under the constitutional monarchy rather than privilege those few who hold their view supreme, above and untouchable by common law and legal provisions or even the constitution which governs the nation.

"359 Thai Writers Manifesto", via Prachatai, July 25, 2011

The numerous cases show the problem about how this law is applied. In theory, anybody can file such a complaint at the police, who are obliged to investigate everyone of them, no matter how nonsensical they are. They can forward them to the prosecution and subsequently to the court which then has to decide on the very ambiguously worded law as well. Throw in the also very vague 2007 Computer Crimes Act (which was at one time planned to be replaced by an even worse new draft), then you are in a very (perhaps deliberately) unchartered legal territory - as the trail against Prachatai webmaster Chrianuch Premchaiporn has shown.

Many have laid their expectations on the new government to change something about this. But hopes for a quick solution to the problem were quickly dashed when the new prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra said that she has no intention to amend Article 112, but does not want see this law misused. Any administration even thinking publicly about reforming or changing this problem will have to face attacks by royalists who will brand them anti-monarchist, a severe accusation which is a killer argument that prevents any rational discussion about possible political and societal reforms.

Even worse, the new Minister for Communication and Technology (MICT) Captain Anudith Nakornthap of the Pheu Thai Party has gone on record declaring this:

(...) นับจากนี้ไป จะมีการกำชับให้ข้าราชการ และเจ้าหน้าที่ของกระทรวง ในทุกระดับ มีการเข้มงวดมากยิ่งขึ้น ในการกำกับดูแลปราบปรามการกระทำผิด พ.ร.บ.เกี่ยวกับคอมพิวเตอร์ และการหมิ่นสถาบันผ่านเว็บไซต์ต่างๆ โดยจะดำเนินการบังคับใช้กฎหมายอย่างเด็ดขาด

(...) from now on, the ministry's officials and staff members of every level have been urged to be more stringent in the pursuing of violations against the Computer Crimes Act and lèse majesté on websites, by enforcing the law to the fullest.

"รมว.ไอซีทีประกาศปราบเว็บหมิ่น ก่อนประเด็นลามถึงในเฟซบุ๊ก เจ้าตัวย้ำจะบังคับใช้กม.อย่างเป็นธรรม", Matichon, August 13, 2011

The new MICT minister made clear that nothing will change about the status quo, which means a continuation of the online witch-hunt, with support from a state-sponsored volunteer 'cyber-scout' network of denunciators and like-minded people who act on anticipatory obedience (see this link again for the aforementioned Social Sanction group and how students feel intimidated to speak their mind). All that in an atmosphere of when the army feels the urge to overemphasize their loyalty to the royal institution and openly threatens to crackdown on lèse majesté offenders. It sets a dangerous precedent of a black-and-white dichotomy against the Thai people, who think out of the norm.

It will be a long process until those who claim to protect the institution see that they are doing more harm than good in the long-run. One of the country's most outspoken social activist Sulak Sivaraksa was recently quoted in an foreign newspaper interview that "loyalty demands dissent. Without dissent you cannot be a free man, you see." Ironically, due to the same legal reasons as discussed here, I cannot provide a link to the source of that quote...!

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

Thai commander-in-chief's anger at media

Originally published at Siam Voices on August 2, 2011 We have featured the outspoken commander-in-chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha before, which has been a constant source for material including his, erm, shall we say unusual handling with the media. Recently, the armed forces have suffered a series of three consecutive helicopter crashes within a week which has claimed at least 17 lives in total (including a Channel 5 cameraman). The first two reportedly went down due to bad weather, while the last one suffered a technical failure. While accidents are unfortunately unavoidable, the string of tragic events that hit the rescue operations after the first crash on July 17 posed questions about the state of the army's equipment and funding despite a $5.2bn strong war chest.

The more Gen Prayuth felt the need to defend his armed forces from any criticism - in his usual manner...

ประยุทธ์ฉุนจวกนักวิชาการด่าทหารโกงโยงฮ.ตก ซัดพูดแล้วต้องรับผิดชอบ ทำทหารเสียขวัญ อัด “เอเอสทีวี-ทีวีแดง-เฟซบุ๊ควาสนา”ทำบ้านเมืองเสียหาย (...) พ้อไทยไม่ได้เป็นชาติมหาอำนาจจะได้มีฮ.ทันสมัยสูงสุด แต่ยัน ฮ.ไทยทันสมัย อาเซียนก็ใช้ โวจะอยู่เป็นผบ.หรือไม่ ไม่สนใจ แต่ทบ.ต้องอยู่ด้วยเกียรติยศ วอนนำเหตุฮ.ตกเป็นบทเรียนปรับปรุง

Prayuth has slammed military experts, who have accused [the army] of corruption in relation to the crashed helicopters, saying that those have to take responsibility [for their words] for destroying the armed forces' morale. He attacks "ASTV, red [shirts'] TV and 'Facebook Wasana'" for destroying the country. (...) He says: "Thailand is not a developed country, which can have the newest helicopters," but also insists that "Thai helicopters are up to date. Other ASEAN states are also using them." Prayuth is not interested if he stays commander-in-chief or not, but the armed forces should have honor and that the helicopter crashes should be taken as a lesson for improvements.

"ในหลวงพระราชทานน้ำหลวงอาบศพเหยื่อฮ.ตก ผบ.ทบ.จวก“เอเอสฯ-ทีวีแดง-เฟซบุ๊ควาสนา”ทำบ้านเมืองเสียหาย", Siam Rath, July 25, 2011 - translation by me

This is an unprecedented case in which a high ranking, influential army officer has explicitly singled out media outlets for criticizing, as if he were trying to point out those who have been especially naughty. But what and who is he referencing to? At the center of Prayuth's attack is Wassana Nanuam, military correspondent for the Bangkok Post, whom he bizarrely referred to only as 'Facebook Wassana' (which also doesn't make much sense in Thai as well).

Here is what Wassana wrote on her Facebook a day before:

เก้าอี้สะเทือน ฮ.ตก3 ลำซ้อนพล.อ.ประยุทธ์ โฟนอินทีวี3-ทีวีไทย ยันเครื่องขัดข้องเสียใจ อย่าตำหนิทหารขอกำลังใจเห็นใจทห​ารเสี่ยง สายข่าวเผยเจนเนอเรเตอร,มีปัญหา​ แต่ก็เอาขึ้นบิน นักบินเสียขวัญ คำถามตามมา ให้ ผบทบ.ตอบมากมาย..แต่ควรมาแก่งกร​ะจานเยี่ยมลูกน้องบ้าง ไม่กล้านั่งฮ นั่งรถก็ได้

The chairs are shaking, three helicopters down - Gen. Prayuth phones into Channel 3, TVThai, claims technical failure and mourns [the deceased] - urges not to criticize the army, but to show sympathy and acknowledge their risks. Reports have indicated problems with the generator, but still went up anyways, the pilot has lost confidence [in the machine]. Many more questions for the commander-in-chief to answer [now], but he should visit the troops in Kaeng Krachan - if he's too afraid to take a helicopter, he can go there by car!

Facebook status update by Wassana Nanuam, July 24 at 12:49pm - translation by me

Of course, Wassana took a small swipe at Prayuth and this status update has set off a long discussion thread in the comments with now few heavily taking aim at the commander-in-chief and the armed forces. This was then later mentioned on ASTV and Manager Radio, both media outlets of the yellow shirted, ultra-nationalistic PAD, who have been fiercely criticizing the armed forces ever since the Preah Vihear temple conflict with Cambodia.

Clearly, this appears to be a case of somebody mixing up the medium with the person and its interaction possibilities. Wassana seems to share the sentiment as she wrote in her rebuttal on Facebook:

ผบ.ทบ.เปิดศึกโซเชี่ยลมีเดียตำห​นิทวิตเตอร์เฟสบุ๊ควาสนา แย่มากโจมตีกองทัพเรื่องฮ...ไม่​รู้ท่านอ่านเองรึเปล่า...คนอื่น​แสดงความเห็นทั้งนั้น วาสนาช่วยแจงจนคนหาว่าวาสนาเข้า​ข้างทหารด้วยซ้ำ ทหารฝ่ายเสธ.เอาแต่เรื่องไม่ดีร​ายงานนาย ทีช่วยกองทัพกลับไม่รายงาน..สงส​ัยเห็นวาสนา เป็นผู้ชายเหมือนกันมั้ง

Commander-in-chief declared a war on social media, blames Twitter and 'Facebook Wassana'. What disgrace, criticizing the army over the helicopters... I don't know if the general has read them himself... it was all the other people expressing their opinions! I tried to explain this until they [the comments] accuse me to side with the army. The Chiefs of Staff only report about the bad news to [Prayuth], but when I try to help [explaining] them they don't. May be they think that I'm a man among those men.

Facebook status update by Wassana Nanuam, July 25 at 2:03pm - translation by me

One really wonders what Prayuth thinks about the media, old and new alike (other than closing them down). Nevertheless, a day later, he tried to justify his public erratic behavior:

พล.อ.ประยุทธ์ ยังกล่าวอีกว่า ทุกครั้งที่ตน​แสดงสีหน้าอา​การดุออก​โทรทัศน์ ​เพราะต้อง​การ​แสดง​ให้​เห็น​ถึงภาวะ​ผู้นำของตน​เอง​เท่านั้น

General Prayuth said: "Every time when I appear angry on television, it is because I only need to show my leadership [authority]"

"ผบ.ทบ.​เตรียมจัดซื้อ​เฮลิคอป​เตอร์ล็อต​ใหม่30ลำ", Naew Na via RYT9, July 26  - translation by me

Which probably then excuses the next nervy outburst:

"วันก่อนผมเดินทางไปร่วมพิธีรดน้ำศพของผู้เสียชีวิตที่กาญจนบุรี ซึ่งเรามีแผนการเดินทาง (...) ทั้งเดินทางด้วยรถยนต์ หรือฮ. ถ้าโดยปกติถ้าอากาศไม่ดีก็จะไม่บินขึ้น (...) แต่ไม่ใช่ว่าไปเขียนกันว่ารมว.กลาโหม ผบ.ทบ.ไม่กล้าขึ้นฮ. แต่ให้ลูกน้องขึ้นแทน ซึ่งผมไม่ได้โกรธ แต่เป็นธรรมหรือไม่"

"Yesterday, I traveled to the funeral in Kanchanaburi, for which we had plans for the travel (...) including by car or by helicopter, which normally in bad weather would not be used. (...) But it's not like in the newspapers that the Defense Minister and the Commander-in-Chief are too afraid to go on the helicopter, but let their soldiers go on it instead - I'm not angry about it, but it is not fair!"

"ถ้าไม่ตอบคำถามตนว่าใครพาดหัวข่าว ก็ไม่ต้องมาถามกันอีก ต่อไปนี้จะไม่ให้สัมภาษณ์แล้ว"

"If you don't tell me who wrote those headlines, then you should not come to me for questions, from now on I would not give any more interviews!"

"ปรากฎการณ์" ฟิวส์ขาด"ผบ.ทบ.วาทะร้อนไม่กล้าขึ้น ฮ. สื่อvsบิ๊กตู่"บทบาท"ที่แตกต่าง แต่"เจตนา"ไม่ต่าง", Matichon, July 28  - translation by me

As usual, General Prayuth talks about journalists required to take responsibility over their words and not 'destroy the country' (or at least his vision of it), while at the same time being completely oblivious about his own words and how they come across to the public eye. The commander-in-chief's relation with the press will remain a contentious one.

BONUS UPDATE: Thanks to @SteveInCM on Twitter, we have now video footage of that most recent incident, including him walking off the interview and making gestures at the press. Also, I forgot to mention that Matichon headline has been aptly named "Blowing up his fuse, Commander-in-Chief spews fury, (...) media vs Big Tu [Prayuth's nickname] (...)"

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

Thailand: Pressure mounts to amend lese majeste law

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 26, 2011 The debate about Thailand's draconian lèse majesté law, Article 112 of the Criminal Code, gains more traction with several groups either discussing or demanding to at least amend the law, which forbids any discussion about the royal family and can be punished with up to 15 years in prison - and there's at least one discerning person who begs to differ...

First off was a panel discussion at the Foreign Correspondent Club of Thailand (FCCT) on Tuesday evening on that very subject, with veteran social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, academic David Streckfuss and Benjamin Zawacki of Amnesty International Thailand. Particularly the presence of Zawacki and his views on the law raised some high interest. More background on that at Bangkok Pundit. We will have more on the FCCT panel in the coming days.

In a separate development, the National Human Rights Council's (NHRC) sub-committee on civil and political rights has announced to look into the content of the law and how it's been used.

NHRC sub-committee chairman Niran Pitakwatchara said on Monday that the controversial use of the lese majeste law was urgently called into question, since it could be a condition leading to violence in society.

The NHRC sub-committee held its first hearing on the problem of the application of the lese majeste law last week with some 60 participants, including those being imprisoned, harassed and implicated as a result of people citing Article 112.

Dr Niran said after the four-hour-long session that the sub-committee was hopeful that in the next few months its research into the subject would be completed and a report forwarded to the government and the public for consideration.

He said the sub-committee, which included well-known human rights activists Somchai Homla-or, Jon Ungphakorn, Boonthan T. Verawongse, and Sunai Phasuk, would examine human rights abuses in the cases of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, a trade unionist and a red-shirt editor of the Voice of Thaksin, and Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a senior historian at Thammasat University [as a study platform]. (...)

"Dealing with the issue has never been an easy matter and I could not pledge how much we can do to resolve the problem as we are also surmounting internal self-adjustment difficulties within the (NHRC) office," said the chairman of the sub-committee on civil and political rights.

"NHRC to study lese majeste clause", Bangkok Post, May 23, 2011

The two cases mentioned in the article are of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, the editor of a pro-Thaksin publication and a trade unionist who most likely got arrested for collection signatures for a petition to repeal Article 112, and Thammasat historian Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a vocal critic agains the lèse majesté law, who went public saying that he has been threatened and eventually charged, possibly for the contents wrote in an open letter to Princess Chulabhorn about a recent, much discussed TV interview.

Another story dealing with this law was published earlier this week, when a group of 100 young writers joined in an open letter calling to amend the law and stop its use as a political weapon.

Signatories include wellknown youngergeneration mainstream writers such as Probed Yoon and Waning Prasertkul [sic! the whole sentence!]. In an open letter issued yesterday, they urged other writers, irrespective of their political ideology, to defend freedom of expression as a fundamental aspect of a free society.

"We believe you agree that enjoying freedom of expression and freedom of expression is a fundamental part of being writers in a democratic society, disregarding whatever genre of writing one subscribes to," part of the open letter reads. It also called on the army to stop using the monarchy institution as an excuse to crush its opponents.

"100 young writers join forces calling for change in lese majeste law", The Nation, May 21, 2011

The authors are actually named Wansing Prasertkul, Prabda Yoon - but that can happen at The Nation, especially since they misspelled the name of the son of The Nation's executive editor Suthichai Yoon! Many of these writers, including Binla Sankalakiri and Sakariya Amataya, are winners of the prestigious S.E.A. Write Award. The full open letter in Thai can be read here.

So, all in all a lot of debate about Article 112, that undoubtedly has severely damaged Thailand's freedom of speech in both the real and the online world and with very few people in power realizing that the more they stress the need to protect the royal institution from a perceived threat, the more it apparently backfires.

More staggering is how self-proclaimed herald of 'Thai-ness‘ and culture minister Niphit Intarasombat responded to this petition in Matichon, which the colleagues at Prachatai have translated:

On 22 May, Niphit Intarasombat, Minister of Culture and the Democrat Party candidate for Phatthalung, said, in response to a public call to amend the law made by a group of writers last week, that he did not see any problem with the lèse majesté law and its enforcement. (...)

‘I’ve never seen Article 112 being used as a political tool, and over 99% of politicians have no problem with the law. I’ve travelled to several countries which used to have monarchies. People there all said in unison that they regretted that they no longer had monarchs, and they wished to have them restored as head of state and a unifying figure. But Thailand still has a monarch as head of state and a unifying force, so we should have the law to protect the institution,’ he said.

"Minister of Culture sees no problem with lèse majesté law", Prachatai, May 24, 2011

So, he claims to have never seen the law being used as a political weapon? He probably isn't aware that this law actually politicizes the royal institution to a worrying extent. Second, of course why should any politician be against this law and commit career and social suicide, especially everyone since seems to overbid themselves with their loyalty (also arguably a political tool). And finally, I don't know to which former kingdoms he has traveled to and to whom he has spoken to (surely he doesn't ask the common man on a European street, does he?), but I cannot imagine that many people in France, Russia, Germany, Italy, Austria, Greece, Persia (Iran), Iraq, Mexico etc. all want their former monarchs back?

P.S.: Niphit is now the second government minister after finance minister Korn who has openly asked if a former monarchy is sad that they have no king anymore. If only the countries in question could respond...

The May 19 Bangkok Crackdown, One Year On - Some Personal Thoughts

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 19, 2011 Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author and not of Asian Correspondent and of the other Siam Voices authors

I've been blogging about Thai current affairs and politics for over a year and my writing debut coincided with the start of the protests by the red shirts in March 2010. Over the next nine weeks, I was trying to grasp this potentially crucial moment in the recent history of the Kingdom not by documenting each and every minute of what was happening on the ground (since I was and am still based in Hamburg), but more from a different meta-level by providing context and backgrounds on the persons, motives and other backgrounds.

I was in shock after the violent clashes on April 10, 2010. I was angry about the knee-jerk reactions against foreign opinions and international media, which wasn't perfect - but still better than the domestic coverage. I was doubtful if the leadership of the red shirt was too big and indecisive. I was baffled by the ignorance of many people who couldn't see the roots of the problems. There were many stories during the two and a half months that became my daily routine.

And then came May 19, 2010: I was about to go to bed shortly before midnight, when I received first words from Bangkok (where it was already about 5 AM) about a potential troop movement closing in on the under-siege Ratchaprasong intersection and about to strike. Already exhausted I decided to follow that lead and to stay up for a few more hours to see if something actually happened. The rest was, well, not only another 16-hours-streak of live-blogging but also the definitive destruction of a national myth, that Thailand is a unified and peaceful country.

One week after the violent crackdown on the red shirt protests, I wrote a column on my personal blog, stating that the mess had just only begun and a radicalization of all factions could occur. I doubted that there would be any serious attempts at reconciliation since nobody seems to get that understanding is crucial to harmony. I condemned the democratic institutions including the courts and the media for failing to effectively solve or even address problems that had been boiling for years. I feared we Thais would just preach to move on and forget by just putting a blanket over the ever-increasing rift. I hoped that everyone would sincerely think for a moment why we got to this point and does not forget this at the next best diversion.

Unfortunately, one year on, I don't see much has changed.

Of course, one might have a different observation from the one I have and that's totally fine - but this is more an attempt to describe the despair and anger I have when looking at the current state of Thailand from outside - and I'd argue that this distance creates a vastly differently picture than from the inside.

First off, there's the utter lack of even acknowledging that mistakes have been made and the deaths have been caused by the Thai military. Instead, we get the perfect denials and a blatant white-wash by the authorities that not a single soldier could possibly have killed (not even accidentally) a civilian. Of course not, "they all ran into the bullets!" And they wonder why nobody believes them and there's dissatisfaction over their findings?

The problem with reconciliation is that it isn't enough just to give out amnesty to everyone (as the opposition Pheu Thai Party plans, more on them later) and appease both sides. More and more people, especially the red shirt protesters are demanding justice and accountability! But getting a 'mea culpa' from anybody in the higher echelons of power is very unlikely.

It's almost ludicrous to see the 'attempts' at reconciliation when comparing the authorities trying to seize control over the main national narrative of the current state of affairs. It cannot be denied that that there's at least a perceived increase in restrictions of freedom of expressions, especially online. Hundreds of thousands of web pages have been blocked in recent years, cyber-dissidents have been either intimidated, prosecuted or jailed for saying things out of the norm, a subversive 'Cyber-Scout' programme has been created - one cannot help but feel paranoid while giving their views anywhere on the web. But these attempts will ultimately backfire sooner or later and have already created unwanted international attention, as seen in the case of Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn.

Where does the sudden urge to protect everything that defines 'Thai-ness' come from? Why do the knee-jerk reactions from self-proclaimed heralds of 'Thai Culture' - whatever that is - grow stronger and stronger? Does it seem almost desperate to cling to a constructed ideal and shove it down the throat of the people? What are they afraid of?

It's change!

The perceived threat of many in power may be embodied by a large angry mob, lured in by sweet promises of a capitalist who doesn't play by the old rules (more on him later as well) - but in reality it is the possibility of change that might threaten the status quo even just a bit. So instead of embracing it, they try to push it back as hard as they can. The need for reform is greater than ever, but what many don't (or won't) realize is that reform and long-lasting change is hard and painful for everybody. Instead, many are just looking for quick fixes and instant satisfactions.

Speaking of which, the upcoming election is a chance to give Thailand some normalcy back but on the other hand it is also the return of campaigning, which is a whole other reality than after the elections. The opposition Pheu Thai Party (PT) is banking all their campaign on their leader who isn't there. The fact that Thaksin is the only campaign program they have and that his sister is running as PM candidate shows that Thaksin himself has missed the moment to make room for a new fresh start. But it cannot be denied as well that Thaksin still draws in a big electorate, so a PT victory is not unlikely.

The bigger tragedy in my opinion though is that the red shirts have missed the opportunity for a fresh new start and to emancipate from PT and Thaksin. There was a void one year ago, with most of the red shirt leaders jailed, that could have been filled with a progressive leader that leads a real democratic movement. But ever since seeing Thaksin calling-in again repeatedly and also battling their enemies with means they don't endorse in the first place, the red shirts have not moved forward.

The big question of course is what the military will do after the elections? This question alone shows how far we have fallen back. It is poisonous to democracy to have the armed forces as an unpredictable faction in current affairs, fearing that they could sweep in at any time. The 2006 coup has re-politicized the army and they are more present than ever. I cannot remember a commander-in-chief who has been that vocal and over-emphasized the loyalty to the royal institution. They have a very clear image of what the country should look like, but they cannot expect anybody to agree with them.

Yes, the situation seems to be very desperate - one might even agree with the royalist yellow shirts, who recently demanded to close down the country for a few years and let an appointed government 'cleanse' the political system. But as mentioned before, we should not give in to quick fixes and cathartic moments of making more wrongs to eventually get a right. Change needs time and sacrifices, two things many Thais are unwilling to give, apparently.

The list of problems the country faces is very long and many are debating how to fix them. But even more problems are (willingly or not) left in the dark and are just slowly emerging to the surface. I can't help but feel that Thailand is falling back in many regards and at every opportunity it digs a deeper hole into descending, into insignificance. Yet at the same time I'm confident that the world sees the kingdom in a different light now than the glitzy travel brochures and Thailand cannot hide itself anymore in this day and age.

As I said, these are just my feelings about a country I call my origin, but in recent years became so much more alien to me. I'm not hoping that the Thailand I know will come back, but I hope that the Thailand that will emerge in the future will be a free, thinking and mature one - until that I will not stop doing my part for this hope!