Showing posts with label In English. Show all posts
Showing posts with label In English. Show all posts

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Reform panels unlikely to win hearts


BURNING ISSUE

Reform panels unlikely to win hearts

At a dinner function last week, a senior public relations executive for former prime minister Anand Panyarachun's National Reform Committee, had a brief chat with this writer.


Then she insisted that the committee was altruistic - working for nothing but the good of the country. "You know Khun Anand, right?" she said.In the chat, three interesting details came up. The female executive voiced concerns about the media's repeated "mistake" of calling the committee "government-appointed". She also wondered why Matichon newspaper, known to be sympathetic to the red shirts, did not portray the committee in a positive light like other papers did.

While there is no denying that an impressive number of well-known scholars have come together to form Anand's 19-member committee, it is also clear that this panel, along with three others, only came into being after the April-May red-shirt protest was brought to a bloody end.

The fact that Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva - who presided over the crackdown that killed more than 90 people - has handpicked all of the panel's chairpersons, including Anand, makes it undeniably controversial and casts doubts over the independence of the committees as well as their raison d'etre.

Perhaps, this abnormal circumstance helped explain why the PR executive was so touchy.

Besides, there are many people who will likely never support Anand's committee and will do everything to undermine it because of how it came into being. Editor of Red Power magazine, Somyos Prueksakasemsuk, recently wrote an article denouncing these committees, saying it was a continuation of the elites' hand in shaping the country so the elite strata of the society could continue ruling unchecked - the true mission behind the 2006 coup.

Given the circumstances, Anand and his committee would do well to face the challenge of their abnormal circumstances.

Firstly, they should recognise that there has never been a consensus in society supporting this national reform committee. In fact, the red shirts are trying to create their own reform committee in an attempt to undermine the one led by Anand and others appointed by Abhisit.

Secondly, the committee should realise that not all groups share the idea of society's ills and that there is one sensitive political issue that is extremely relevant to the future of Thailand, but it cannot be discussed openly due to the lese majeste law.

Thirdly, the committee was created in the aftermath of death and turmoil, and is functioning while the Kingdom is still in a state of political conflict though a veneer of normalcy is maintained through the use of emergency decree, which Anand very rightly opposes. That's when the question of the accountability of a committee, which uses the taxpayers' money comes up.

To keep people believing in the committee's altruism, it would have to continue proving itself to be more inclusive, transparent, accountable, less hierarchical and understanding.

The fact that the Anand was first appointed by the PM, and then proceeded to hand-pick the rest of his team, it is undeniably a classic top-down approach and not reform-inspiring.

The committee said it would take three years to complete its action plan, but there's no telling if the government at that time would even accept the committee's legitimacy. Millions of red shirts are opposing the committees as it is.

Failing to win over sceptics, the committees have ended up being a bunch of mostly unaccountable members of the elite, whose chiefs were appointed by a controversial PM seeking to buy time in the aftermath of bloodshed, while the country continues to be refashioned in a top-down fashion to their "altruistic" whims. Now all they need is the stamp of unreserved public approval.

This is hardly inspiring PR material.


Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Flag this message Red-shirts protest as Clinton to meet Thai PM

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-07/21/content_11745148.htm


Red-shirts protest as Clinton to meet Thai PM


www.chinaview.cn 2009-07-21 15:41:52 Print

Phuket, Thailand, July 21 (Xinhua) -- A flock of red-shirted protestors began to rally in front of Government House in Bangkok on Tuesday morning and demanded the resignation of two senior cabinet members, as U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is to meet Thai Prime Minister there in the afternoon, Thai media reported.

The anti-government group, United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), demanded Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban and Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya to step down, Bangkok Post online reported.

The red-clad UDD protestors, usually called "red-shirts", said they will continue their rally until U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton meets Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva at Government House at 5 p.m.

Clinton will arrive in Bangkok on Tuesday to meet Abhisit before she flies to the Thai resort island of Phuket to attend the ASEAN Post Ministerial Meeting on Wednesday and 16th ASEAN Regional Forum on July 23.

Suthep was ruled days before by the Election Committee of disqualification as House member for illegal share-holding; and Kasit was charged with involvement in last year's siege of Bangkok airport by then-anti-government group "yellow-shirts".

The red-shirts also demanded political reform, constitutional amendment, and a House dissolution to make way for a general election.

They called for people to sign up for a petition of royal pardon for self-exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted by a military coup in 2006 and sentenced in 2008 in absentia by court to 2-year in jail.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Puea Thai petitions Clinton

http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/149043/puea-thai-petitions-clinton


Puea Thai petitions Clinton

Writer: BangkokPost.com
Published: 15/07/2009 at 03:03 PM

Puea Thai submitted letter to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the US embassy on Wednesday giving the opposition's view of the facts behind the formation of the Democrat-led government.

The letter, delivered by party spokesman Prompong Nopparit, said the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration had no legitimacy to run the country. It was not elected by the majority of Thai voters and was just a consequence of the Sept 19, 2006 military coup.

Mr Prompong said the letter also called on Asean members and other countries to consider Thailand in the same context as the overthrow of the president of Honduras by the military.

The international community is now pressuring the interim government in Honduras to quickly return power to the ousted president.

Mr Prompong said Puea Thai would deliver similar letters to the embassies of other countries.

No protests allowed when ASEAN discusses human rights in Phuket

http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/new-no-protests-allowed-when-asean-discusses-human-rights-in-phuket/



No protests allowed when ASEAN discusses human rights in Phuket

The Nation’s print edition (15 July 2009) has a noteworthy set of stories on its front page of the National Affairs section.

One headline is “Human Rights High on Agenda at ASEAN Summit” and concerns the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in Phuket needing to agree the terms of reference for an ASEAN human rights body. Human rights has seldom been high on the ASEAN agenda and the human rights body has been heavily criticized. As the story explains, “the proposed Asean body has been widely criticised for being toothless in protecting rights in member countries.”

What is noteworthy and lamentable is that this story, which at least engages human rights, surrounds an insert box with this headline: “No Protests Allowed.”

In the online version, this story appears at the end of the abovementioned story. We quote it in full:

“The resort island of Phuket will be off-limits to all protests during the summit next week, when even the delegates and media representatives will be under restrictions.

People have a right to express opinions about Asean – but not in Phuket next week, the Foreign Ministry’s Director of Asean Affairs Department Vitavas Srivihok said.

The island will be under the Internal Security Act and the military, which is in charge of security, will deploy some 10,000 troops there. It will set up checkpoints throughout the island to prevent disruption of the meetings.

Delegates and journalists will not be allowed to move freely in restricted areas near the meeting venue.

All vehicles are required to register before entering the island and unregistered vehicles will not be allowed to cross Sarasin Bridge from the mainland, an official said.

The Internal Security Operational Command (Isoc) is in charge of vehicle control. Registration of vehicles is between 8am-6pm only, meaning vehicles arriving on the island after dark will be in trouble at security checkpoints.

Is it too obvious? ASEAN leaders will sit down to discuss human rights in a situation where the host government has restricted the freedom of assembly, movement and media and effectively put the military will be in charge.

Let police do their job on PAD case

http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/20238/let-police-do-their-job-on-pad-case



Let police do their job on PAD case

Writer: Boonsong Kositchotethana
Published: 15/07/2009 at 12:00 AM
Newspaper section: News

Let us be fair to the police in indicting those 36 suspects, including Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya, who incited the mob to lay siege to Bangkok's two airports last November. Though long overdue, let us give them the credit for finally doing something to at least show that the rule of law does exist in this country and that justice is being served.

It is indeed a step in the right direction to help restore the Kingdom's tainted international image as a country with poor law enforcement, as well as revive confidence in the eyes of the international community. We should not get too embroiled in the political dimensions and personal political bias that may blur the heart of the issue - that seizure of Suvarnabhumi and Don Mueang airports during Nov 25-Dec 4 last year by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) was a very serious crime against the whole nation.

Let us not forget that the PAD held Thailand hostage to achieve its ambitious goal of remedying the Thai political malaise and putting the country on the right governing course - a mission they have not yet succeeded in.

The country has paid dearly for the PAD's embarrassing action: 210 billion baht in losses; the country's GDP has continued to contract ever since the airport seizure.

The blockade left some 350,000 visitors stranded and prevented 3.4 million tourists from visiting Thailand, severely denting the Kingdom's tourist-friendly image. Even today many foreign visitors are still haunted by their 10-day traumatic experience in Thailand, despite apologies from parties other than the demonstrators. Many of them have shunned Thailand for good.

Clearly, those leaders responsible for inducing a massive heart attack on the Thai economy while leaving a long-lasting grave impression about this country must be accountable and deserve to be punished by law.

At this stage, both PAD proponents and opponents ought not to try to draw a hasty conclusion as to whether the branding by police of those indicted for the airport blockage as "terrorists" - who are subject to the death penalty if finally convicted.

They should start by allowing the police to press charges if they have secured enough witnesses and evidence, see whether the public prosecutors will endorse the case, and whether the judicial review will rule the airport blockage as an act of terrorism.

The fact is that there exists a penal code (sections 135/1 and 132/2 amended in 2003) which classifies the seizure of airports as an act of terrorism, a crime subject to a fine of between 60,000 and 1 million baht, as well as the death penalty.

The police believe the PAD's action comes under the definition of this particular law. Law enforcers in the civilised world would most likely make a similar interpretation if such a case ever happened in their country.

Meanwhile, people like Democrat Party executive Sathit Pitudecha and Thepthai Senpong, a spokesman for the prime minister, should respect the legal proceedings and stop defending Foreign Minister Kasit for his involvement in the airport episode.

Mr Sathit has gone overboard in declaring that the charge of terrorism against Mr Kasit and the PAD's core leaders is too severe because the airport seizure was only meant to press the Somchai Wongsawat government into giving up power, as Mr Somchai was believed to be a proxy of fugitive former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

That kind of rather odd excuse goes down the same avenue as the claims by Suriyasai Katasila, PAD spokesman and secretary-general of the New Politics Party, that the airport seizure "was not intended to create unrest but an exercise of the right to peaceful assembly under the Constitution to oppose the then government which was illegitimate".

By saying so, they are suggesting that those who instigated the airport closure should be allowed to go scot-free, as if nothing happened. Should they?

While the severity of the penalty should be left to the discretion of the judicial system, there is public consensus that the punishment needs to be harsh enough to deter any more crimes of this sort.

As for the growing call for Mr Kasit to quit his ministerial post, he should exercise his conscience more deeply, to decide whether he still has the credibility to remain in the office. Remember that in February he told reporters he would resign if charges were laid against him. By resigning, Mr Kasit would help raise the bar for Thai politicians by showing political spirit, a rare quality here.

Boonsong Kositchotethana is Deputy Assignment Editor (Business), Bangkok Post.

ASEAN Summit Sandwich Between Thai Realities

http://thaiintelligentnews.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/asean-summit-sandwich-between-thai-realities/



ASEAN Summit Sandwich Between Thai Realities

Can I have a sandwich too?

Can I have a sandwich too?

By Terry/Tavivoot

The right wing Democrat Party head government of Abisit is pinning a great deal of hope on using the ASEAN foreign minister summit in Phuket to boost their standing in Thailand-as the Kasit, Thailand’s foreign minister that is being investigated with terrorism, and the government poor handling of the epidemic-drags its popularity down.

It looked for a moment that Abisit and his right wing support will get away with that. But boy can things change overnight.

A major high level public forum on “Thailand’s Global Image” is happening right before the ASEAN Summit, and right at the end “The Reds” are gathering for a massive anti-government protest.

So now the ASEAN summit will be sandwiched now-between two real reality of Thailand. First, that Thailand’s image globally has been wrecked, and second that there are a great many people in Thailand that are very strongly against the government.

And those realities, will be hitting the globe in a major way-thanks to Abisit bringing the ASEAN meet to Thailand.

Foreign media heading to Thailand for the ASEAN summit in Phuket, will certainly see an island that is locked down tight with security-many will be told that it is because of the red shirt disruption of the other ASEAN summit-that Bangkok Post called the most embarrassing thing that ever happened to Thailand.

While the ASEAN delegates goers, and about 30 delegates from around the world, said the issue of human right will be discussed for the first time the issue of human right, but there is no getting away with the fact that even peaceful protest will not be allowed.

So what do people fighting for democracy in Thailand-even if they go overboard at times-do in response of being shut out.

Well there will be a major public forum on Thailand’s global image right before the ASEAN meet. And as the ASEAN meet closes, the Reds will be organizing a mass gathering in Bangkok-and they say about 100,000 anti-government Thais will show up.

Both the public forum and the mass gathering-will sandwich ASEAN right in between.

Red vs. Yellow - Nick Nostitz at the FCCT

http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2009/07/16/nick-nostitz-at-the-fcct/#more-6048


Nick Nostitz at the FCCT

July 16th, 2009 by Nick Nostitz, Guest Contributor · 1 Comment

[This is the text of the talk given by Nick Nostitz last night at the launch of Red vs. Yellow held at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand.]

Making a book is the most exciting and at the same time terrifying experience – you live for your subject matter for a very long time, and it becomes very personal. It is terrifying to go public with what you passionately believe in, but others may not share.

On the other hand, the exciting part is that making such a book is what I see as the best expression of my profession as a photographer and journalist, and a great tool of communication.

I will try to talk here about the story behind the book. How this whole thing started, what motivated me, and how I got involved in Thai politics.

For years after my book on Bangkok’s nightlife scene, I have concentrated, in my personal work, on social problems in urban and rural Thailand, inspired by what I encountered then but had not covered in that project. This has led me to politics, when they began to turn visible enough to be captured by a camera in the end of 2005.

Like many other journalists I followed the pre-coup PAD protests. But I also got interested in the other side. One of my key experiences was when I visited the caravan of the poor in their last campsite before Bangkok in Navanakorn, an industrial suburb – those were the Thaksin supporters who came on these small lot I-den to Bangkok. I expected some simple paid for protesters, but I when I chatted with these mostly poor farmers, I found they were far more diverse in their views than I previously thought, when they talked about Thaksin.

They have all said that they knew that Thaksin was in many ways a faulty character, but explained how his policies have improved their lives. I have to admit that they have out discussed me. That made me think a lot. Especially that when I report about Thailand’s politics, it is not really important what opinions I hold, but the opinions of the people I report about, which they base on their experience of life, and that I will have to try to put myself in their shoes if I report on them.

After the military coup, when only very small protests happened, most ignored the situation. But I was convinced, because of the emotions expressed by those villagers, that the coup was just the beginning of major social and political shifts in Thailand, regardless of the initially small numbers of protesters. People just had to recover from the shock of having lost their prime minister through a military coup.

Being a freelancer, I am not exactly blessed with regular assignments, I had the time, and it did not need that much money as all happened ten minutes away from my house. And I saw this as a unique opportunity to record history as it is made.

What I also felt was very special, and unprecedented in Thailand’s history, is that for the first time large regions and social classes were suddenly involved in a political struggle, and not, as before, a mostly educated and/or money elite. That made these developments so different and unpredictable.

At the beginning I was rather intimidated, often being the only foreign journalist, at times even the only journalist working on this, surrounded by protesters and spies. At times there were actually more spies than protesters.

But that gave me the unique opportunity to meet people, and get to know them early on – both protesters, and agents of the different intelligence services. To be on the safe side, I have always approached them first, introduced myself, asked them not to mistake me for an activist, but see me as a journalist. And I asked them that if my presence is a problem, or if I make a mistake, that I am always open to talk and listen.

Over the years meeting at countless protests, some of them very violent, with many I have formed close personal friendships, and I have learned much from their knowledge and experience. Often they have advised me, and at times protected me, yet never was I hindered in my work, or put under any pressure by those agents.

As much as the topic fascinated me, as much was I depressed about the lack of interest. I think that I have sold the first photos of these political problems after 2 ½ years, from the October 7 riots. Even until now I have not made a fraction of what I have invested in time and money.

Almost every time I have read articles in the medias, I have not found that they reflected what I have experienced while working on the ground. I had no outlet to communicate what I felt were tremendously important developments in a very important country, and a country that is very dear to me.

Dr. Michael Nelson, with whom I regularly discuss events and issues, persuaded me to begin writing for New Mandala, a small academic website. At first I was not very enthusiastic, as there was no payment involved, and I am always broke. But I started writing for them, because I thought at least I will have a respectable outlet to write what I thought has to be published, and read by the few people that actually were interested.

My third story there, about the October 7 riots, had a massive impact which took me completely by surprise. It was straight away translated into Thai by Prachatai, reposted on countless internet forums and blogs, was then printed in one Thai newspaper, and even read in full on national television, in the truth today show, the pro red TV station on channel 11.

Many people liked what I wrote, but there were many that disagreed, mostly from the more fanatic quarters of the PAD, and accused me of having been bribed with large sums by Thaksin. Which is completely absurd. I received many threats at the time. Even today you can see on many web forums insults, and accusations of me having been bribed by Thaksin’s lobbyists.

The serious threats after my report lasted until people started to hate somebody else more, about a month later. Fortunately my friends in the different intelligence services looked out for me, and one police officer accompanied me when I went to public events, until emotions calmed down.

A frightening part here in Thailand is that for many people the subject matter is not dealt with rationally but on a purely emotional level, which can be quite dangerous.

At first I wanted to include these political problems into a book project I have been working on for the last 9 years – on Thailand’s social problems and changes. But last year the political deterioration was so rapid that I had a huge amount of images and an incredibly complex topic at hand. Somebody said to me that this could be a book project by itself. After thinking a bit I thought that this is indeed so, and that this is a book that has to be published soon.

Therefore I did not bother to look for an international publisher. I thought a local publisher is ideal for the book I had in mind, somebody who appreciates that this subject has to be dealt with in detail. A much smaller budget than with international publishers I thought was secondary – even with a small budget we can make a very nice book. So I called up Diethard Ande from White Lotus, who straight away accepted the idea.

Fast forward. When the songkran riots happened I had to think hard if I should change the by the time already finished and edited manuscript to include the events. But I decided against it. First of all, to do justice to all the images the budget would have not been enough, I would have had to make a far too tight editing. The delay would have been too long. I still get new information about the songkran riots, and much more is to come. We decided to make a break with the end of the year 2008, and come up with another volume when events of this year are more clear.

Than a strange thing happened. Suddenly 4 printers refused to print my book. I have made sure that this book is clearly within the law, that is the parameter I work under. The fourth printer was actually very nice, and explained me why they cannot be associated with this project. They said that they liked my book, that it doesn’t break the law indeed, but it shows too well the problems of Thai society, and that it could cause them problems later on. They recommended me to approach midsized printers, and also said that if I can’t find one, they would help me finding one. A day after a good friend of mine connected me to a printing company who accepted the book. Their only concern was that my book cannot break the law, which it doesn’t.

I would like to say something about the many accusations going around of me being biased. I do not feel that I am biased. I work the story on the ground, and go to both camps. Of course I have sympathies, in this climate anybody who works this story closely and says that he hasn’t sympathies would be a liar. But I do not let my sympathies interfere in factual and fair reporting. I have never whitewashed anything I have seen.

My sympathies are, and have always been with poor people, with people who do not have a voice in the mainstream, when they demand a better life for themselves, and important ideals such as equal opportunities. And here it happens that most of these underprivileged sectors are with the red shirts.

I do not accept the reasoning that these people are too uneducated to make a choice for themselves. This is a highly patronizing and elitist view. Much sophistry and polemics are used to explain THIS POSITION, WHICH FOR ME IS UTENABLE, COUNTER TO the humanistic ideals I try to follow.

My wife of 15 years does come from such an underprivileged sector of Thai society, and she has a lot of common sense, which often is more important than education. I believe that I have learned at least as much from her as she has from me.

The government, Thaksin, or leaderships of protest groups do not need the sympathy of people like me, they have many other avenues to express their views to the public.

It is irrelevant if I like or dislike Thaksin, in this context. What matters is that his supporters have their valid reasons to have elected his government. Even if I may disagree, I have to respect their choice.

The point here is, that the ones who hold those elitist views have difficulties to relate to the experience of life in Thailand of these social classes, and to their struggles in everyday life.

But I also want to point out here, that I have also sympathies with many ordinary yellow shirts. I am convinced that in their way they also want to create a better Thailand. Many of their complaints are absolutely justified. Nobody in his right mind could possibly deny that they do not address very valid issues.

The tragedy here in Thailand is that there is very little exchange between the classes happening in this rigidly structured society, and very little common ground between, lets say, to simplify the issue, the Isaarn farmer and the city based thai Chinese, or also, for example, those rural and urban poor and most people in this room.

This lack of communication is strongly contributing to the vehemence of the present conflicts. Thailand is an emerging democracy, and beginning to change into a pluralistic society. It will take more time before the state and the people are able to build a platform where these differences can be fought out in an orderly, nonviolent and productive manner.

I do view these conflicts from a historical perspective – they are very painful, but a necessary learning curve. I feel very privileged that I was, and still am, allowed and able to witness history in the making. I have learned more than I could have possibly imagined when I started.

I am sure that one day these conflicts will be solved (not before much more pain and blood though, I am afraid), and Thailand will come out the better, and will be on track to become a developed and successful country.

Thank you.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Flag this message Abhisit, Suthep and fear of red shirts

From http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/

July 11, 2009

New: Abhisit, Suthep and fear of red shirts

On Friday, The Nation (10 July 2009: “Ban on protests in Phuket”) reported on the draconian measures being put in place to prevent a repeat of the protests that brought the Pattaya ASEAN summit to an end in April in the run-up to the Songkhran Uprising. United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship red shirts gathered in Pattaya and literally crashed the ASEAN meeting. However, apart from clashes prompted by Newin Chidchob’s blue shirts, there was little violence in Pattaya.

Some will applaud that the Democrat Party-led coalition government has taken steps to avoid violence. However, are the measures reasonable?

The government is led by increasingly politically impotent Abhisit Vejjajiva but these measures are organized by his deputy and chief powerbroker Suthep Taugsuban, together with banned politician Newin Chidchob in the background, and with the backing of the military’s top brass who are directly represented in government by Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwan.

It was Prawit who was cited in the Nation. The security measures are explained: “Phuket must have no protests whatsoever. We will designate no areas for demonstrations. No road blockade, no submission of a protest letter, and not even a peaceful gathering is allowed…”. Not even the usual NGOs that meet on the outskirts of ASEAN meetings will be permitted over the next two weeks.

This state is brought about through the application of the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA) that was hurriedly put in place at the end of the military-appointed government led by current privy councillor Surayudh Chulanont following the 2006 coup.

Apparently, though, not even ISA is sufficient. The Cabinet issued “additional rules for the implementation of security during the Phuket meetings [with] relevant authorities … required to cooperate with officials from the Internal Security Operations Command when requested. Isoc officials are empowered to designate certain buildings or places off-limits.” In addition, “unauthorised people are not allowed to carry weapons outside their residences, and the Isoc director is empowered to impose a ban on use of electronic devices in certain areas. The Isoc chief is also empowered to impose restrictions on the use of certain roads or vehicles…”. Prawit added that the use of force would be sufficient to ensure that things did not get out of control.

Deputy Prime Minister Suthep, who is in charge of security affairs, said “local residents would be told about prohibitions. For example, gatherings would not be allowed in the airport or on roads to and from the airport, as well as areas around hotels where meeting participants will stay.”

These are remarkable measures that place ISOC in a position of virtually establishing martial law and power over the island. But it gets more worrying.

The Bangkok Post (10 July 2009: “Protesters not allowed at Asean meeting”) reports that Suthep has warned the UDD because it announced that it would not disrupt the meeting but that it “would try to hand a letter to Asean officials during the meeting in Phuket, demanding the resignation of Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya.”

And then the Post adds this neat final paragraph: “The PAD’s Phuket branch released a statement saying the group supported the Asean meetings and would help authorities keep an eye on any suspicious people to prevent anyone creating chaos during the summit.” A loyal reader comments: “Thugs and goons, encouraged and protected by the government, in the streets.” Even if PAD isn’t mobilized, at a minimum, this is another example of the government’s lack of commitment to the even-handedness.

PPT wonders if Newin’s blue shirts will again show up and whether they will be accommodated by the government, as they were in Pattaya.

Meanwhile, on Saturday, in another example of the “great fear” permeating the government and ruling class, and despite considerable misgivings about the visit to Newin country, Abhisit is in Buriram province. The Nation (11 July 2009: “4,800 police deployed”) reports that Jongrak Juthanond, deputy national police commissioner, expressed confidence that the addition 4,800 police deployed in the province “would be able to prevent any serious incident from happening even though some 15 groups, including the red shirts, were expected to gather during the prime minister’s tour.”

Jongrak said that “peaceful protests would be allowed but that police would take legal action against any troublemakers who create violence.”

PM’s Office Minister Satit Wongnongtaey is reported to have said that “some 60 community radio stations in northeastern provinces would relay and broadcast Abhisit’s speeches during his Buri Ram visit. Satit said the radio stations would link up to Radio Thailand to broadcast the speeches live.” In a veiled threat, Satit asked the “red shirts not to disrupt the visit, because the prime minister will be there to discuss budget to be allocated for development projects in Buri Ram.” PPT recalls the complaints from the Democrat Party when Thaksin Shinawatra’s government made similar threats to withhold funding from dissident provinces.

UDD leader Nattawut Saikua, while noting that red shirts had the “freedom to travel anywhere they liked in the country,” wryly commented that “it would be the PM’s visit, not the red shirts, that would disrupt peace in Buri Ram, judging from the amount of police to be deployed.”

The Bangkok Post (11 July 2009: “PM given commando escort to Buri Ram”) adds several details on the fear amongst the government (or is it hope for a clash?) and that Abhisit will have the Arintharat commando unit surrounding and escorting him in Buriram.

Thursday, July 9, 2009

No Longer a Laughing Matter

From http://asiacable.blogspot.com/2009/07/no-longer-laughing-matter.html

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

No Longer a Laughing Matter

When I worked for Asiaweek Magazine in Hong Kong back in the 1990s, we published a feature called the “50 Most Powerful People in Asia”. In the first edition we ranked Thailand’s King Bhumibol Adulyadej high on the list. He had earned that spot by defusing a potentially dangerous political stalemate after troops had fired on demonstrators in Bangkok.

When it came time to publish the second list the following year, we initially ranked the King much lower. There had evidently been no crisis to defuse in Thailand that year. Then we caught ourselves. We can’t demote the King!

If we kept the King at the same level as the previous year when he didn’t deserve it, we compromised the integrity of the list. If we moved him to a lower ranking we risked being accused of lese majeste (insulting the monarch), which might get our issue, or maybe even the entire publication, banned in Thailand. What to do?

Soon we hit upon a solution worthy of Solomon. We created a separate sidebar, called it “Asia’s Most Powerful Monarchs” and put the King of Thailand at the top. That was safe. No other monarch in Asia, indeed probably no other monarch the world, had as much prestige and subtle influence in his country’s affairs than King Bhumibol.

It made for an amusing story, something to pass along and chuckle about over a few drinks in the bar of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club. But it might not be a good idea to do it around the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand these days. The club has been collectively accused of lese majeste, or at least the President Jonathan Head, Bangkok bureau chief of the BBC, and 12 other members of the FCCT board, including three Americans.

One Laksama Kornsilpa, a 57-year-old woman who works as a translator filed the complaint with the local police regarding a speech by Jakrabob Penkai. Like similar clubs all over
Asia, the FCCT had invited Jakrabog, then a cabinet minister, to speak to the club. It later made a DVD of the speech to disseminate to members who had not been able to attend.

Laksama obtained a copy of the DVD and took offense at its contents, which was a rather rambling history of Thai kings over the past 700 year with some vague references to the “
patronage system”. The speaker made no specific references to Thailand’s reigning monarch, his queen or the crown prince.

Never mind. In Thailand anyone can file a lese majeste complaint. The police are bound to follow up no matter how trivial or tangential the speech is to the monarch himself. The accuser saw the speech and the action by the FCCT as “acting in an organized fashion to undermine the credibility of the high institutions of Thailand.”

In making a direct assault on the foreign press Thailand seems to be going the way of Singapore in trying to punish outside publications. The Economist magazine’s Dec. 6-10, 2008, issue, for example, was banned for its frank reporting of the King. Probably no country, outside of
China, spends more time and effort trawling the Internet to close down sites thought to be disrespectful.

The insidiousness of the threat posed by Thailand’s lese majeste laws comes less from any particular disrespect for the King himself. Indeed, much of the foreign reporting about King Bhumibol’s more than 60-year reign has been deservedly positive. The problem comes from the fact that various factions in Thailand long, grinding political struggle between supporters and opponents of
former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra use the law as a cudgel against opponents.

Say, for example, that the King gives a speech and describes the political situation in the country as a “mess,” as in fact he did so describe it a couple years back. So if you were to say that in your opinion it is not a mess, somebody can accuse you of lese majeste for contradicting and thus insulting the King.

Many prominent Thai politicians carry the added burden of defending multiple lese majeste accusations. Thai media mogul Sondhi Limthongkul, a prominent opponent of former premier and leader of numerous anti-Thaksin demonstrations, has more than 30 lese majeste charges hanging over him - not to mention a couple of criminal libel convictions.

Ironically, the King himself has spoken out against the abuse of lese majeste laws, saying in 2005 “that if you say the King cannot be criticized, that is to suggest that the King is not human.” But at 81 it may be that the King is too feeble to affect any changes. He has said very little, in public at least, about the recent political turmoil.

Not every lese majeste case involves freedom of speech. People can be accused of disrespect for failing to stand for the
royal anthem that introduces movies. In 2007 a longtime Swiss resident of Chiang Mai named Oliver Jurer was convicted and sentenced to ten years in prison. His offense: defacing one of the countless portraits of the King with a can of spray paint.

King Bhumibol pardoned Jurer, as, in fact, he usually does for all foreigners and Thais convicted of lese majeste. But just the accusation means detention until a trail is convened, the public humiliation of being in prison garb and even shackles, the expense of lawyers, public approbation and finally expulsion from a country that the accused may have considered his home.

Even before the latest outrage, the world was beginning to take note of the abuse of lese majeste laws in Thailand and their effect on free speech. In March a delegation of prominent academics led by Noam Chomsky petitioned
Prime Minister Abhisit Vejajiva to take steps to prevent future abuses.

The premier said he would look into the law and its application to ensure that it would not be abused by anyone. He said he would discuss the matter with police to ensure against frivolous or obviously politically-motivated abuses of the law, but nothing much came of it.

Perhaps the complaint against the FCCT adding to the extremely unfavorable international attention occasioned by such actions as the temporary closing of international airports in
Bangkok that stranded thousands of businessmen and tourists last year, will bring global attention, and approbation, against this human rights abuse.

Sunday, July 5, 2009

Da Torpedo’s Speech Kills 12, Injures 344, Destroys Rice Harvest

From http://www.notthenation.com/pages/news/getnews.php?id=804

mproper words from red-shirted activist causing blindness in children and elderly; Army mobilized


BANGKOK – In a stunning and horrific vindication of the government’s decision to treat the case of Daranee “Da Torpedo” Charncherngsilpakul as a national security issue, the inflammatory words of the red-shirted defendant have escaped from prison and killed at least 12 people in Bangkok and injured over 300, some severely.

Arrested last year shortly after making the speech, which included defamatory remarks against the monarchy, at an anti-government rally, Daranee has been held in prison and repeatedly denied bail. Additionally, her trial was closed to reporters and outside observers by the presiding judge, citing national security as the reason for the special conditions.

Strict censorship over reporting of the case in the Thai media, as well as the aggressive blocking of websites and online forums which discuss the case have largely contained Daranee’s dangerous words. But one draft of the deadly text appears to have escaped into the Thai public domain via a chatroom at Panthip.com.

Once free, the toxic words spread widely throughout the capital, breaking windows and setting small fires. Daranee’s speech has also been reported turning over cars at intersections and firing a pistol into a crowd of schoolchildren. Police attempted to subdue the speech, but it proved too powerful and aggressive for them.

“It grabbed the gun from my hand,” said one injured policeman who was taken to hospital. “It started pistol whipping me in the head and then ran off. I thought it was going to kill me.”

Though the policeman survived with only moderate injuries, others were not so lucky. The speech ran a public bus off Rama IV road, causing a crash that killed three passengers and injured many others. Later, flames ignited by the speech consumed a family of four inside their house in the Klong Toey area.

Additionally, persons who have encountered the speech on its rampage through the city have reported numbness, nausea, and in some extreme cases, loss of vision. The speech is suspected to have also killed farm animals, withered crops, and poisoned the water supply, though that has not yet been confirmed. Authorities have declared a nationwide state of emergency and urged everyone to stay indoors until the speech can be hunted down by the combined military forces and destroyed.

“These are no ordinary words,” explained General Anupong Paochinda. “This is a deadly force the likes of which we have never seen. I hate to say it but we tried to warn everyone. Now it may be too late.”

Since Daranee’s arrest, numerous western journalists and organizations have been writing about the case and calling for reform of the lese-majeste laws under which she was charged. However, with the new developments conclusively showing that words can kill, the opinion of journalists has quickly swayed the others way.

“Clearly things are different in Thailand ,” admitted BBC correspondent Jonathan Head, who was himself charged with lese-majeste two years ago for reporting on possible royal involvement in the 2006 coup. “We outsiders must defer to their ancient wisdom and culture when it comes to domestic matters. I am terribly ashamed of my ignorance.”

The Economist magazine, which had been frequently withheld from distribution because of its in-depth reporting on the role of the king in political matters, issued an apology in its lead editorial, citing a “humbling lesson in how free speech is not a universal value; at least not in the totally morally separate universe of Asia .”

Daranee, who remains in custody, has been charged with 45 counts of murder, arson, mayhem, destruction of property, and treason against the Thai state in addition to her three counts of lese-majeste. Although she is legally entitled to separate trials for each charge, many in the Thai government are calling for her immediate execution.

“This woman should never be allowed to speak again,” said caretaker Senate Speaker Major General Manoonkrit Roopkachorn, who himself overthrew or attempted to overthrow the government four times, including an unsuccessful seizure of Bangkok in April 1981, which forced the royal family and prime minister Prem Tinsulanonda to flee the city, and another in 1985 which killed five and injured 60. He was never charged for any crime after being granted parliamentary amnesty by subsequent governments consisting largely of ex-military men.

“It’s our duty to recognize the real threats to our nation,” Manoonkrit said, “and in Thailand words always speak louder than actions.”

Opposing Thaksin by supporting the monarchy

From
http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2009/07/04/new-opposing-thaksin-by-supporting-the-monarchy/

July 4, 2009...3:59 pm

New: Opposing Thaksin by supporting the monarchy

When the pressure mounts from the so-called pro-Thaksin side of politics, the other side, represented by PAD and the Democrat Party gets excited. They attack Thaksin and demand loyalty and trumpet the monarchy as their symbol of anti-Thaksinism. The election victories have Puea Thai have set the cat amongst the pigeons again.

The Bangkok Post (3 July 2009: “PM, senators denounce petition for royal pardon for Thaksin”) is a useful example of panic amongst royalists and their supporters.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is reported to have “condemned as inapproriate the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship’s (UDD) campaign to collect a million signatures of support for a petition requesting royal clemency for fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra.”

Why? Because, apparently, the “UDD leaders and their red-shirt supporters should not try to bring the royal institution into politics.” Abhisit parrots a number of arguments that have been made about royal clemency, but the point seems to be that the UDD keeps poking a political finger at the monarchy. Surely it is a bit late to claim that the monarchy is above politics?

Other anti-Thaksin people have dusted off their yellow shirts, with “Former member of the defunct Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC) Kaewsun Atibhodhi and his twin brother Kwansuang, a former senator, also took the red-shirt movement to task on Friday for its ”improper” petition. They demanded at a press conference that the red-shirt group stop disturbing the royal family and drop its plan to gather a million signatures in support of a pardon.”

Kaewsun “said he would use left over donations from his failed bid for the Bangkok governorship to place advertisements in newspapers informing readers about the red-shirts’ action and explaining why it would not bear fruit because it was in violation of the constitution.” He reportedly “insisted his opposition to the petition was not a love-hate issue between him and Thaksin. Rather, it was about the royal institution, which was the core of the nation.”

Now here’s the rub: “The red-shirt leaders should not be acting this way. They knew how people who sign their names would feel towards the royal institution if His Majesty the King did not grant a pardon to Thaksin…”. And people appear to have been lining up to sign the petition.

A group of 40 senators that also condemned the UDD campaign also saw the political implications, “saying it would further divide the country. Appointed senator Prasarn Marukaphitak said it would split the country in two — those who love His Majesty the King against those who love Thaksin.” He is reported to have urged but perhaps it was a warning that “the general public to think carefully before signing their names.”

Foreign reporters targeted in Thailand

From http://www.upiasia.com/Politics/2009/07/03/foreign_reporters_targeted_in_thailand/1571/

Foreign reporters targeted in Thailand
Laksana Kornsilp, translator, seen filing lese majeste charges against Jonathan Head of the BBC, the Bangkok-based Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand and thirteen others at the Lumpini police station, Bangkok, Thailand on June 30, 2009. (Photo/Manager Online)

Font size:

Bangkok, Thailand — Bangkok’s Lumpini Park is well known for its spacious decorated gardens, wonderful running tracks and exercise stations, which the public uses on a daily basis. Lumpini is also developing as a favorite place to drop by and file lèse majesté charges against foreigners – this time, a lot of them.

On June 30 Laksana Kornsilp, age 57, appeared at Lumpini police station and filed charges against thrice lèse majesté beleaguered Jonathan Head of the BBC’s Asia desk. In addition, she filed lèse majesté charges against the entire board of the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand of which Head is a member, and a group of thirteen individuals.

In her complaint she alleges that Head, the FCCT and others joined together in providing a platform for defaming the monarchy by hosting a speech that threatened the revered Thai king. Because the FCCT had recorded the 2007 panel discussion, transferred it to compact discs and distributed them, it was also cited in the complaint.

Kornsilp’s filing is the first time ever that the Bangkok-based Foreign Correspondents’ Club has been charged with lèse majesté – but this should not be considered much of a surprise.

Ever since former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra began “involving” members of Thailand’s Privy Council in accusations of political wheeling and dealing against him, reactionary elements have been busy behind the scenes and in public, blasting frank speech, shutting down or blocking thousands of “offensive” websites, and arranging for the arrest and imprisonment of dozens throughout the kingdom for allegedly insulting the monarchy and/or members of the royal family.

Like a train gaining downhill momentum, these reactionaries have gleefully watched as hapless people like Suwicha Thakhor went to prison for 10 years for lèse majesté, Da Torpedo found the carpet of justice under her feet suddenly withdrawn when the judge at her own lèse majesté trial determined that proceedings should be held in secret, and now watching the latest Laksana-led facade playing out against Head and the entire board of the FCCT.

Thailand has, through its dogged harassment of those with different opinions than those who demand preservation of the status quo, made it abundantly clear that it will not only fight against what it falsely maintains to be lèse majesté, but will also persecute and prosecute any and all. No one is immune, in Thailand or around the world.

An accompanying tragedy in all of these spurious lèse majesté charges is that those being charged are not fighting back with guns blazing. Thailand’s current civil and criminal law codes have multiple provisions for counter-suing individuals, the state and state officials for various wrongdoing, up to and including the same thing that they are conspiring to charge others with – that is, lèse majesté.

There are those who maintain that when the revered Thai king on Dec. 4, 2004, publicly declared that he “wanted to be criticized when it was warranted so he could improve himself, that he was not a super human but only a mortal, and further that he was bothered by lèse majesté cases,” meant that criticism was not only allowed but was in fact solicited by the king himself.

Some observers of the king’s speech then also feel that officials who act against this royal “hint” are themselves guilty of ignoring the king’s advice and personal wishes. World-famous Thai social critic, Buddhist scholar and academic Sulak Sivalak has openly advocated criticism of the king and members of the monarchy.

Sulak described the status of the country’s lèse majesté laws after Laksana’s filing against the FCCT as “messy.” He is known for being overly polite and very humble. If he were not, he would have described the situation in more precise terms.

Thailand’s lèse majesté cases are in a dangerous vacuum at the moment because they are always handled defensively and without the accused filing meaningful counter-charges against those who stir up lèse majesté sentiment.

Lawyers in Thailand are highly reluctant and even afraid to represent anti-lèse majesté law activists or “victims” of investigations, and there are few resources in Thailand for human rights groups to intercede and protect the legitimate rights of those accused.

The campaign in Thailand to protect the monarchy will probably become a unique case history for academics outside the kingdom to study how civil society can be cowed into silence, foreigners still be demonized, and how ancient prejudices can still be effectively used to ensure change, which is only an occasional whisper in the wind. That it became a murmur frightened powerful interests and they are now increasing pressure.

Laksana’s exact role is subject to some suspicion. That she is a translator, and that the translation of Head’s supposed crimes was an issue some time ago; that there is a select group in Thailand that seeks to use lèse majesté charges against agents of change – these things are no longer much of a secret.

Who prompted Laksana to file charges? And will the public ever know those people or groups? Will any of them ever face criminal or civil charges, as they seem absolutely oblivious of their own exposure?

--

(Frank G. Anderson is the Thailand representative of American Citizens Abroad. He was a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer to Thailand from 1965-67, working in community development. A freelance writer and founder of northeast Thailand's first local English language newspaper, the Korat Post – www.thekoratpost.com – he has spent over eight years in Thailand "embedded" with the local media. He has an MBA in information management and an associate degree in construction technology. ©Copyright Frank G. Anderson.)