Thailand's media under martial law: Controlling the narrative
Originally published at Siam Voices on May 22, 2014 Martial law gives the Thai military wide-reaching powers, including controlling the media. After its declaration early Tuesday morning a lot of the focus has been on the press and what they are or aren't allowed to say. But has it been really effective and does it still make sense in the age of social media?
They turned up in the middle of the night. Olive-green trucks and humvees popped up on the parking lots and soldiers entered the buildings of Thailand's various free-TV stations shortly after the Kingdom's military has declared martial law on Tuesday at 3am.
04.46 เนชั่นทีวี บางนา #nationtv pic.twitter.com/QtINse49yt
— เอม นภพัฒน์จักษ์ (@noppatjak) May 19, 2014
All free-to-air (FTA) TV stations (the privately-owned Channel 3, the public ThaiPBS, the partly state-owned MCOT, the fully state-owned NBT and the army-owned Channel 5 and 7) were ordered to comply with the military by broadcasting its announcements on demand. Initially it seemed little had changed. normal programming continued, only a ticker on army-owned Channel 5 informed viewers of the declaration martial law.
It would take hours before army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha would appear on all television channels at 6.30am to explain his move - "groups with ill-will are creating a violent situation" - and say that he "intends to bring peace to the beloved country of all Thais as soon as possible". He insisted that "this is not a coup d'état" and urged people "to carry with their daily activities as usual."
However, for many Thai journalists the situation was everything but usual. Not only did the martial law put Thailand in a different legal and political situation with far-reaching consequences that would have to be explained to the public, but the media itself was specifically targeted right off the bat with the very first order by the military, also broadcasted on all free-TV channels:
Order No 1 is regarding the broadcast of community radio stations, television broadcasters (satellite and cable), and radio stations and orders them to suspend broadcasting when they are contacted ( ห้ถ่ายทอด ออกรายการจากสถานีวิทยุโทรทัศน์กองทัพบกเมื่อได้รับการประสาน). This is order that there is broadcast of news to the people that is correct/right ( เพื่อให้การเผยแพร่ข่าวสารไปสู่ประชาชนเป็นไปด้วยความถูกต้อง)
(Taken from Bangkok Pundit's blog post detailing all 12 martial law orders.)
Over the course of the day and with more and more orders being announced, it became clear that one of the main objects of the military is to control the media, evident with Order No. 3:
Order No. 3 prohibits media from presenting news that affects peace-keeping of officials ( ห้ามสื่อเสนอข่าวกระทบการรักษาความสงบเรียบร้อยของเจ้าหน้าที่) states that all media entities including online who have the intention to distort, incite, or create disorder or have messages that will make the people to be suspicious [or] to misunderstand and that affects peace-keeping of officials( ที่มีเจตนาบิดเบือน ปลุกระดมให้สร้างสถานการณ์ความวุ่นวาย แตกแยก หรือมีข้อความที่ทำให้ประชาชนเกิดความหวาดระแวง เข้าใจผิด และส่งผลกระทบต่อมาตรการรักษาความสงบเรียบร้อยของเจ้าหน้าที่). Also prohibits distribution of such media.
The first organizations to fall victim to the martial law were 3,000 community radio stations and also in total 14 satellite TV stations, including the protesters' media outlets such as DNN Asia Update of the red shirts and the anti-government protesters' Blue Sky Channel and ASTV/Manager, and later Voice TV (also owned by Thaksin's son) - all of them were forced to "temporarily" stop broadcasting.
ยุติการออกอากาศตามประกาศฉบับที่ 6 ของกฎอัยการศึก pic.twitter.com/3EMcIOyaSd
— Piyachat Kongthin (@Piyachat_TPBS) May 20, 2014
In the evening, as even more orders were broadcast, the military went even further in their attempts to decide what's right and what's wrong with two specific announcements that are so broad that seem impossible to police:
Order No. 9 prohibits the creating of conflict (...) 1. Prohibits the [a] owner, editors, presenters/anchors of print media and all broadcast media to [b] invite persons or groups who do have government positions now whether civil servants or academics including those in the past who are in the judiciary or justice system as well independent organizations [c] from being interviewed or giving opinion [d] that may increase the conflict, distort, or create confusion in society including that may lead to severe violence
That basically bars every expert, pundit and talking head from saying anything on air that is not the official line of the military. While that order targets a specific amount of people, the previous order is a warning shot against everybody else:
Order No. 8 requests cooperation from the online media community and states that in order to distribute news that is correct/right and without distortion and that causes misunderstanding and the situation to have more conflict to the extent that affects peace-keeping officials in bring happiness back to society quickly that requests for those who are connected with online media to suspend the provision of services that incite and creates violence, and affect the credibility and respect for law until the point it affects peace-keeping officials. If it continues, the KPCC shall suspend the service immediately including taking legal action against those who commit actions.
That is such a vague definition and can be so broadly interpreted that arbitrary prosecutions could result. The military has summoned the representatives of Internet service providers Wednesday afternoon to elaborate on ways to manage social media chatter, even though the blocking of many websites isn't as easy as the military would have liked it, especially if the offending hosting website is based abroad.
On Thursday morning the new body set up to monitor the Internet said it was blocking "six inappropriate websites", insisting that "this is not censorship".
Several commentators and media advocates have criticized the harsh restrictions on the media and freedom of speech, with four Thai national journalist association's asking the military to review the orders in a joint statement. The Bangkok-based Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) has correctly noted that out of the 12 orders, 5 "directly impact media freedom and freedom of expression."
While the military has somewhat seized control of the airwaves, it isn't entirely controlling the headlines in the print media as many newspapers have been at least skeptical of martial law and many front pages have also mentioned the shutdown of the 14 TV stations. As for social media, the very notion of controlling it through such drastic measures is futile.
Supinya Klangnarong, a member of the National Broadcast & Telecommunication Commission, was quoted in the New York Times that "the martial law does not cover new technology like the Internet. It’s not realistic and practical." That's hardly surprising, since the Martial Law Act the military has invoked is from 1914.
Phuket journalists on trial for quoting Pulitzer-prize winning Rohingya trafficking report
Originally published at Siam Voices on April 17, 2014 UPDATE: After spending five hours in court cell, Phuketwan reporters Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian are released on bail (100,000 Baht each) and are remanded to appear in court again on May 26, according to a report by Australia's The Age.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE:
The trial against two Phuket journalists for alleged defamation is set to begin today. The Royal Thai Navy has sued Phuketwan reporters Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian for their coverage of the Thai authorities' involvement in human trafficking of Rohingya migrants from Burma. This has been complicated by the fact that the offending passage was a quote from another report done by the international news agency Reuters. Both are facing up to seven years in prison if found guilty.
The charges were filed in December last year (see our original blog post here). Both journalists were charged not only for libel, but also also allegedly breaching the Computer Crimes Act, which makes arbitrary legal suits against online dissent (including by third parties) possible thanks to the vague wording of the law. Phuketwan - which has reported extensively on the plight of the Rohingya at the hands of Thai authorities - has quoted from a Reuters special report that specifically accuses members of the Royal Thai Navy of being involved in the trafficking of Rohingya refugees.
The case has drawn international condemnation and has now seen an interesting development:
Reuters won a Pulitzer Prize on Monday for international reporting on the violent persecution of a Muslim minority in Myanmar [Burma], the Pulitzer Prize Board at Columbia University announced.
The board commended Jason Szep and Andrew Marshall of Reuters for their "courageous reports" on the Rohingya, who in their efforts to flee the Southeast Asian country, "often falls victim to predatory human-trafficking networks."
"Reuters, Guardian US, Washington Post, Boston Globe win Pulitzer prizes", Reuters, April 14, 2014
A list of their coverage can be seen here.
Several observers have noted that the Royal Thai Navy have so far not pressed charges against the global news agency Reuters, but instead after the local Phuketwan and to "make an example of them for others," as Bangkok Pundit blogged yesterday.
Several journalists and media advocacy groups have repeated their calls to drop the charges against Morison and Sidasathian ahead of today's trial. Their case - as with the plight of the Rohingya refugees themselves - has received hardly any coverage in the Thai-language media:
However, [Chutima Sidasathian] said she received little or no help from the Thai authorities. Neither the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) or the Thai Journalist Association (TJA) has offered their assistance in the legal procedure, Ms. Chutima told Khaosod, while her letter to the Rights and Liberty Protection Department went unanswered.
"I filed the letter to the officials in Phuket last month. I just discovered that somehow they did not forward the document to Bangkok," Ms. Chutima said, "I am shocked".
She is also disheartened by the fact that the lawsuit against Phuketwan has received very little coverage in the Thai mainstream media.
"Phuket Journalists To Face Lawsuits Filed By Navy", Khaosod English, April 8, 2014
The case has already set a worrying precedent - it is reportedly the first time the Thai military has made use of the Computer Crimes Act - and things could get even worse if they are convicted. It shows that the Thai authorities have no apparent interest in the treatment of Rohingya migrants in Thailand (as summarized here) or investigating the human trafficking allegations.
'Unlawful' transfer of NSC chief could spell the end for Yingluck
Originally published at Siam Voices on April 2, 2014
UPDATE: Thailand's Constitutional Court today decided to accept the petition against Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra relating to the transfer of Thawil Pliensri from his position as National Security Council (NSC) secretary in 2011, the Nation reports.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE:
The legal challenges against the caretaker government of interim-Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra are mounting as the campaign to chase her and the ruling Pheu Thai Party out of office gathers steam.
The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) is charging Yingluck with dereliction of duty related to alleged corruption in her government's rice-pledging scheme, and is also bringing charges against against 308 lawmakers for their role in proposed constitutional amendments, just to name two cases. But since early March, there's another case that could topple the current government from power.
The Supreme Administrative Court yesterday ruled that the removal of Thawil Pliensri as National Security Council (NSC) secretary in 2011 was unlawful. Mr Thawil was shifted from the position under the orders of the prime minister, Yingluck Shinawatra.
Yesterday's ruling stated that Mr Thawil (...) must be reinstated to his former role within 45 days. It comes a little more than six months before Mr Thawil's mandatory retirement in September.
Mr Thawil lodged his initial complaint with the Central Administrative Court in April 2012, accusing Ms Yingluck of unfair treatment after he was transferred from the NSC on Sept 30, 2011.
On May 31 last year, the Administrative Court ruled in favour of Mr Thawil, revoking the prime ministerial order and ordering Mr Thawil's reinstatement. Appealing against that decision, Ms Yingluck claimed that as head of the government she had the authority to transfer officials to ensure the national administration was in line with the government's policy manifesto.
However, the court ruled yesterday that while the prime minister could exercise her judgement in transferring personnel, there must be plausible reasons to justify her decisions. Transfers should be free from bias or political preferences, the court said.
"Thawil wins fight against NSC transfer", Bangkok Post, March 8, 2014
Thawil was promoted to head of the NSC in 2009 during the administration of Abhisit Vejjajiva and was transferred to the virtually meaningless position of prime ministerial adviser shortly after Yingluck's government took charge in August 2011. While such changes whenever a new government comes is nothing unusual, Thawil argues that his move was because of "patronage":
He was replaced by Pol Gen Vichien Pojposri, then the national police chief, who was replaced by Pol Gen Priewpan Damapong, a brother of Khunying Potjamarn Na Pombejra, Thaksin Shinawatra's ex-wife, and finally by Lt Gen Paradorn Pattanabut.
"Thawil case 'easier way to impeach'", Bangkok Post, March 27, 2014
He went on record to say that the patronage system is "reflected in this unlawful transfer. If the patronage system stays strong, how can civil officials be counted on to do their jobs correctly?" However, his critics would highlight his involvement with the previous Abhisit government and close ties to the military - he was one of the men behind the bloody crackdown on the red shirt protests in 2010, but denies he made any order to kill - as aligning to exactly said patronage system.
Thawil's repeated appearances on the rally stages of the anti-government protests in the past five months don't help to deter from that assesment either - so much so that Surapong Tovichakchaikul, one of the men tasked by the prime minister to oversee security, openly declares his mistrust of Thawil and his reinstatement.
While the government publicly states that Thawil will get his job back soon (albeit only for a couple of months until his retirement in September), the case surrounding him could become a bigger legal headache for the government:
Kamnoon Sidhisamarn, a senator, wrote on his Facebook page [here] that the transfer of Mr Thawil would be "the knock-out punch" of the caretaker government before or after Songkran.
Thirachai Phuvanatnarabubala, the finance minister in Ms Yingluck's first cabinet, also quoted on his Facebook [here] another appointed senator, Paibul Nititawan, as saying Ms Yingluck, along with her cabinet, could be impeached much faster over the Thawil case than by the rice-pledging scheme.
"Thawil case 'easier way to impeach'", Bangkok Post, March 27, 2014
Both of them base their argument on a series of Sections in the Constitution. In a nutshell, Prime Minister Yingluck has allegedly violated the second paragraph of Section 266, since her decision to remove Thawil was politically motivated, since the reshuffle ultimately landed Priewphan Damapong as National Police Chief, who is a brother of Thaksin's ex-wife and Yingluck's former sister-in-law Potjaman Na Pombejra:
Section 266: A [MP] and a senator shall not (...) interfere with or intervene in the following matters for personal benefits or for the benefits of others or of a political party, whether directly or indirectly: (...) (2) the recruitment, appointment, reshuffle, transfer, promotion and elevation of a salary scale of a Government official holding a permanent position or receiving a permanent salary and not being a political official, or an official or employee of a Government agency (...)"
Thus she would have breached Section 268 ("The Prime Minister (...) shall not perform any act provided in section 266 (...)"), to which Section 182 would take effect ("The ministership (...) terminates upon: (...) (7) having done an act prohibited by section 267, section 268 or section 269 (...)“) and since it would be Prime Minister Yingluck's position on the line, a ruling against her could also wipe out the entire cabinet according to Section 180 ("Ministers vacate office en masse upon: (1) the termination of ministership of the Prime Minister under section 182 (...)”).
It is speculated that the Constitutional Court will decide today (Wednesday) whether or not to accept such a petition against Yingluck and her government. The court has an ongoing track record of ruling against this caretaker government (see here, here, here and here) and could potentially deal the knockout blow the anti-government movement - campaigning for five months now - is looking for, paving way for a political vacuum that will allow it to install an unelected government.
Thai court renders emergency decree meaningless, limits officials' powers
Originally published at Siam Voices on February 20, 2014
The Thai Civil Court yesterday ruled to sharply limit the authorities' powers to deal with the ongoing anti-government protests, while maintaining the state of emergency which was declared last month amidst increasing violent incidents.
The case was filed to the court by Mr. Thaworn Senniam, a core leader of the People′s Committee for Absolute Democracy With the King As Head of State (PCAD) [sic!], who argued that the State of Emergency enacted by the government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra violates the rights to free assembly guaranteed by the 2007 Constitution. (...)
At 15.00 today the majority of the judges ruled that the government will not need to repeal the State of Emergency, but the verdict also prohibits the authorities from exercising many powers prescribed in the emergency decree.
According to the verdict, the security forces cannot launch a crackdown on anti-government protesters, seize any chemicals from the protesters, dismantle any barricades erected by the protesters, prevent individuals from entering any building at their own will, close down traffic, evacuate or seal off protest areas.
Most notably, the authorities are also prohibited from banning political gathering - the crucial aspect of the emergency decree.
"Court Strips Govt Of Various Emergency Powers", Khaosod English, February 19, 2014
The ruling comes a day after deadly violence erupted between security authorities and protesters on Tuesday at Phan Fah Bridge as the police attempted to reclaim some rally sites occupying public roads. One policeman and four protesters were killed by gunshots with 68 reported injured. It appears that both the police, but also men among the protesters, were heavily armed and exchanged gunfire, in addition to a widely circulated online video showing a grenade attack on police officers (WARNING: graphic content!).
Nevertheless though...
The court, however, found that the protests were being carried out “peacefully without weapons,” and ordered that the demonstrators’ rights and freedoms “be protected according to the Constitution.” The decision bars the government from using force or weapons to crack down on the demonstrators.
"Thai Court Limits Crackdown on Protesters", New York Times, February 19, 2014
The Civil Court echoes a decision last week made by the Constitutional Court to reject a petition by the ruling Pheu Thai Party to outlaw the protests, similarly stating that the actions by the protesters - including the seizing of government buildings, threats against members of the media and most of all the obstructions on election day - are covered by the constitutional right to protest and should be challenged under the criminal law instead, if at all.
It has to be noted that during the anti-government red shirt protests of 2010, the Civil Court upheld the authorities' right to disperse protesters since they have "caused hardships and hurt people’s freedom and [authorities] have full rights to reclaim the area."
The reactions from the government side have been rather tame: interim deputy-prime minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul said the ruling will "complicate" the work of the security officials, while the man in charge of overseeing the protests, Chalerm Yubamrung, remained unconcerned, since they had "no plans to disperse the protesters anyways for now" and even thanked the Civil Court for not outlawing the state of emergency, which is still scheduled to end on March 22.
However, other observers see this as another wrench being thrown into the caretaker government's works in its dealing with the protesters. Human Right Watch's Sunai Pasuk sums it up:
Prominent legal analyst Verapat Pariyawong, who earlier called the Constitutional Court "indifferent to the flagrant abuse" by the protesters, goes even so far saying:
The Thai civil court's order today is one step closer to full scale judicial coup. (...)
2. The constitutional court's ruling only binds the civil court legally but not factually. That means the civil court is bound by legal interpretation but there is no judicial basis for the civil court to rely on factual determination by the constitutional court. The constitutional court determined the facts at one point in time but facts change by minute, therefore it is judicially impossible and legally illogical for the civil court to disregard the current situation and conveniently rely on the constitutional court's ruling.
In sum, the civil court basically teamed up with the constitutional court in attempts to intervene in the executive domain, where the court has no accountability, and pave ways for the protestors to claim pseudo-legitimacy to overthrow the government.
Facebook post by Verapat Pariyawong, February 19, 2014
The Civil Court's ruling has effectively cut off the emergency decree at its knees and the powers of interim Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's caretaker government are seemingly being more and more marginalized - than it already is by law - by the judiciary and (supposedly) neutral government agencies.
The Election Commission has changed its plans again to complete February 2 elections (more background here), while the National Anti-Corruption Commission is investigating against PM Yingluck herself for "neglect of duty" in the government's increasingly disastrous rice-pledging scheme.
These developments will also very likely embolden the protesters to further up the ante in their disruptive crusade to bring down the government by - judging by past actions - any means necessary.
Thai govt declares state of emergency as political crisis deepens
Originally published at Siam Voices on January 22, 2014 The political standoff took a new twist Tuesday when the Thai government's declared state of emergency to counter the ongoing anti-election protests. With additional developments in the background, the wheels in this political crisis are about to spin faster.
With the mass anti-election protesters' campaign to "shutdown" the capital Bangkok entering its second week, the Thai caretaker cabinet decided to declare a state of emergency (SoE) on Tuesday evening as a response to the continuous targeting of government offices and banks by the protesters. The move also comes after explosions on Friday and on Sunday injured over 60 demonstrator and killed one. The suspects are still at large and police have set a 500,000 baht bounty on the perpetrator of Sunday's blast.
The 60-day state of emergency, starting on Wednesday, will last until March 22 and covers Bangkok and in parts its surrounding provinces Nonthaburi, Thonburi, Pathum Thani and Samut Prakarn. While the emergency decree is significant in principle - potentially expanding the power of security forces to include searches, arrests and detentions people with limited judicial and parliamentary oversight and also censor media coverage - details of which regulations are being issued had yet to emerge as of publishing.
The announcement also includes a restructuring of the government organization tasked with handling the demonstrations. It now officially called the "Center for Maintaining Peace and Order" (CMPO) or "ศูนย์รักษาความสงบ" (ศรส.) in Thai.
Tuesday's announcement brought a familiar face in Thai politics back to the front line with the Pheu Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung, who announced the CoE, assuming the position as CMPO director, while police chief-general Adul Saengsingkaew and defence ministry's permanent-secretary Nipat Thonglek acting as operating directors.
Chalerm is a veteran politician known for his bullish appearance and his reputation of being a blowhard, to put it mildly. When he was reappointed from deputy prime minister overlooking national security to labor minister in a reshuffle last year, he bemoaned his apparent political downfall. But when the current protests kicked off last November, somehow Chalerm managed to wrestle his way back into the headlines when he seemingly single-handedly took charge of monitoring the rallies led by opposition politician Suthep Thaugsuban - practically his political counterpart and arch-nemisis. Weeks later, Chalerm even boastfully and colorfully announced that he's "****ing back!"
The CMPO declared that the rallies by Suthep - who in April 2010 as deputy PM issued the last SoE declared in Thailand during the red shirt protests - have "constantly violated the law, especially in closing down government offices and banks and harassment against civil servants to prevent them from working.” But at the same time they insist there are no plans to crack down on the protesters and are hoping that Suthep will surrender himself to the authorities. A notable sight during the televised announcement was the toned down presence by military officers, normally front and center at such announcements, even though many hold positions in the CMPO.
As the effects of the state of emergency declaration are yet to take effect, the government of caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has taken a proactive role after months of a hesitant, non-confrontational approach by police. Protest leader Suthep was unsurprisingly defiant, as he called the authorities to "come and get us" and still insists that his movement is "peaceful" despite riots and threats by its militant wing. Suthep says that the protests will continue with a view to stopping the February 2 election.
In related news, the Election Commission (EC) - still very reluctant to hold the February 2 polls - has asked the Constitutional Court to review the possibility of postponing the election. According to the constitution, a general election cannot be moved to another date, but by-elections can. However, with the SoE declaration affecting only Bangkok and surrounding provinces, the court may actually find a reason delay the vote because of these special circumstances. Moreover, candidacy registration has been disrupted by anti-election protesters in over 20 districts in the deep South.
With the state of emergency declaration the tense standoff between protesters and caretaker government goes to the next level and is less than likely being resolved anytime soon, since the government seemingly determined to hold the February 2 election and Suthep most likely now even more determined to stop it. Adding to that the EC's ongoing efforts to delay the February 2 elections, the National Anti-Corruption Commission's investigation against 308 mostly Pheu Thai lawmakers for their role in the proposed constitutional amendments and another probe directly targeting caretaker prime minister Yingluck for her rice subsidy scheme, the current political crisis in Thailand could be in very real danger of spinning out of control.
Siam Voices 2013 Review - Part 1: Blowing the final whistle on Thailand's political calm
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 27, 2013 Welcome to the Siam Voices 2013 year in review series, where we look back at the most important and interesting headlines, issues and stories that happened in Thailand this past year. Today we start with the political 2013, which looked very different when it started compared to the chaos on the street we have now - and it is far from being over.
NOTE: This was written before Thursday's escalation of violence that killed a police officer. Furthermore, the Election Commission is openly calling to indefinitely postpone the February 2 snap-elections, which was rejected by the caretaker government.
For a while, it looked like the government of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra was seemingly unshaken by almost everything this year. Neither the increasingly erratic and rabid opposition in and outside parliament nor the problems of their own policies threatened the relative stability of this rule - almost.
The government launched or continued a series of populist policies that were well-intended but not perfect. The rice-pledging scheme did not lift international market prices as anticipated and Thailand lost its top exporter spot. Instead, the country sits on millions of tons of stockpiled rice it cannot get rid of - if so, only at a loss. Furthermore the scheme was tainted by alleged corruption and scaremongering over its safety.
Other incentives didn't bring in the desired effects either, such as tax rebates for first-car-buyers that proved to be a short-term success but backfired later with car owners defaulting on their purchases, or the raise of the daily minimum wage to 300 Baht (about $10) that benefitted a lot of employees but was met with resistance by their employers, especially small and middle enterprises. Also, the 2 trillion Baht borrowing scheme drew considerable criticism, despite the fact that an overhaul of the country's crumbling infrastructure is much-needed.
Politically, Yingluck herself faced a volley of criticism, for example about her constant absence in parliament or the back-and-forth fallout after her uncharacteristically sharp and committed Mongolia-speech in late April. Even the various anti-government (and utterly mislabeled) groups over the year - "Pitak Siam", "Thai Spring", "V for Thailand", "PEFOT" etc. - were not able to do much, but in hindsight were a sign of things to come later that year.
Despite all this, Yingluck managed to maintain a tense, but relative calm in the Thai power struggle at least for the first half the year. Even the military didn't mind that much to have Yingluck taking up the defense minister portfolio in the last cabinet reshuffle.
Maybe that was the reason why her government and the ruling Pheu Thai Party (PT) felt so confident that they thought it could ram a broad amnesty bill through both parliament and senate. Initially only meant to absolve political protesters from the rallies between 2006 and 2010 but not their leaders (and none convicted of lèse majesté either), a parliamentary committee dominated by PT MPs did an audacious bait-and-switch and re-wrote to expand those "accused of wrongdoing by an organisation set up after the coup of 2006" - which would have included former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's conviction in 2008 and paved him his return to Thailand after years of self-imposed exile.
Protesters' explosion and Democrat Party's implosion
The Pheu Thai Party absolutely underestimated the outrage the bill would spark. It managed to create an amnesty bill broad enough to upset nearly everybody, even their own red shirt supporter base, since it also would have covered those responsible for the violent crackdown of 2010. Thaksin, who undoubtedly still wields considerable influence from afar - has gambled away his ticket home and it'd take a long while until he or his party can try another attempt.
Despite the bill unanimously struck down in the senate and repeated pledges by the government not to resubmit it again, the controversy ignited the anti-amnesty protests which re-united the anti-Thaksin forces and brought them together as a motley crew of self-proclaimed "saviors" against corruption and for "true democracy". After the bill's demise, the movement unmasked itself as an all-out anti-government campaign led by veteran Democrat Party politician Suthep Thuagsuban. The Constitutional Court's rejection of the government's proposed charter amendments did change a little at that time already, as did the House dissolution and scheduling of snap-elections on February 2, 2014.
A lot has been already said here about the protesters and their intentions lately, but it still bears repeating: this drive is not a push against corruption and for true, sustainable political reforms, but an undemocratic power grab that keeps on escalating until there is a complete derailment of the democratic process and the resulting vacuum is replaced by a system (e.g. in form of the appointed "People's Council") that is aimed at disenfranchising a large portion of the electorate only in order to prevent Thaksin and his political influences taking hold in Thailand again, no matter how high the cost. The fact that somebody with such a chequered past like Suthep can now brand himself as the "people's champion" is a cruel punchline of the flexible moralities in Thai politics. Corruption and abuse of power in Thai politics existed before Thaksin and surely will not end with his often demanded "eradication" - somebody like Suthep should know it best.
This is the result of the opposition's pent-up frustration at the electoral invincibility of Thaksin-affiliated parties and the failure to adapt to the changing political and social landscape - especially in the North and Northeast, of which many of the protesters hold dangerously outdated views (e.g. "uneducated rural", "dictatorship of the majority", "vote-buying") of them. The steady demise of the opposition Democrat Party was illustrated by repeated antics in parliament and party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva calling Yingluck a "stupid bitch". After much meandering, the Democrat Party decided not to be part of the democratic solution but part of the anti-democratic problem by announcing to boycott the elections of February 2 and thus declaring political bankruptcy.
This year and especially the last two months have left us with an uncertain future for the state of the country's political stability; divisions are greater than ever before with compromise never further away as we inch ever closer to the brink of chaos. The elections will help little to ease the tensions, but alternatives are no better. The question is now: how do you fix democracy? Surely not by taking down the whole house and letting it be only rebuilt and inhabited by a selected few.
The Siam Voices 2013 year in review series continues tomorrow. Read all parts here: Part 1: Politics - Part 2: Lèse Majesté & the media - Part 3: The Rohingya - Part 4: Education and reform calls - Part 5: What else happened?
Thai navy sues journalists after reports on Rohingya trafficking
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 19, 2013 The Royal Thai Navy has filed defamation charges against international journalists for their reports on authorities being involved in human trafficking of ethnic Rohingya refugees. The move sends a chilling reminder to the media about the dismal state of press freedom in Thailand, the easy exploitation of flawed laws and how little outside inquiry Thailand's military tolerates.
Ever since the deadly persecution of the Rohingya people, an ethnic minority denied citizenship in Burma, in 2012 that caused tens of thousands to flee, mostly on frail and overcrowded vessels on the Andaman Sea, the plight of Rohingya refugees in Thailand has been well documented in the past 12 months*. Reports of abuse, rape, inhumane detention conditions and human trafficking have persistently accompanied the coverage of the refugees in Thailand. A deadline imposed by the Thai government to find and transfer the refugees to another country passed in July with no results and further developments being made, leaving the Rohingyas in legal limbo.
While this story is almost exclusively covered in foreign media and mostly met with apathy in the mainstream Thai media, Phuket Wan has been regularly reporting and unearthing accounts of the mistreatment of Rohingya people, including selling to human traffickers by Thai authorities. In July, Phuket Wan was quoting from an investigative special report by the Reuters news agency that accuses certain sections of the Royal Thai Navy of actively taking part in the smuggling of Rohingya refugees.
This was followed up by Reuters with another special report in December that also carries "startling admissions" by the DSI chief Tharit Pengdit and the Deputy Commissioner General of the Royal Thai Police Maj-Gen Chatchawal Suksomjit over the existence of illegal camps in southern Thailand. In the aftermath of the coverage, both the United Nations and the United States have called on Thailand to investigate the findings of the Reuters report.
This is how the Royal Thai Navy responded to these accusations:
A captain acting on behalf of the Royal Thai Navy has accused two Phuketwan journalists of damaging the reputation of the service and of breaching the Computer Crimes Act. Two other journalists from the Reuters news agency are expected to face similar charges shortly.
The Phuketwan journalists, Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian, denied the charges and were fingerprinted when they presented themselves today at Vichit Police Station, south of Phuket City. They are due to reappear on December 24. The pair face a maximum jail term of five years and/or a fine of up to 100,000, baht
It's believed to be the first time an arm of the military in Thailand has sued journalists for criminal defamation using the controversial Computer Crimes Act. (...)
In response to presentation of the charges today, Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian issued the following statement:
(...) We are shocked to learn now that the Navy is using a controversial law to sue Phuketwan for criminal defamation. The allegations in the article are not made by Phuketwan. They are made by the highly-respected Reuters news agency, following a thorough investigation. (...)
The Rohingya have no spokesperson, no leader, but through Phuketwan's ongoing coverage, the torment of these people continues to be revealed. Their forced exodus from Burma is a great tragedy. Yet how they are treated in the seas off Thailand and in Thailand remains a constant puzzle.
We wish the Royal Thai Navy would clear its reputation by explaining precisely what is happening to the Rohingya in the Andaman Sea and in Thailand. By instead using a controversial law against us, the Navy is, we believe, acting out of character.
We can only wonder why a good organisation finds it necessary to take such unusual action instead of making a telephone call or holding a media conference.
"Navy Captain Uses Computer Crimes Act to Sue Journalists for Criminal Defamation", Phuket Wan, December 18, 2013
This is an extremely worrying development. The navy is not only using the libel law against the two journalists, but also the controversial Computer Crimes Act of 2007 (CCA). Thanks to the CCA's flawed and vague wording, it opens up the possibility for arbitrary charges against all online users to be held liable not only for their own content, but also for the content of third parties that the user is hosting. Recently, the Appeal Court upheld the suspended sentence against Chiranuch Premchaiporn, the webmaster of the news website Prachatai, for not deleting web comments deemed lèse majesté quickly enough.
Another aspect is that it also shows that allegations of human trafficking are hardly being investigated, let alone by somebody outside of the military. After allegations of human trafficking against army officers earlier this January, an inquiry found the men at no fault but they were transferred out to another region nonetheless.
Earlier this year, we blogged about the then-defence minister Sukumpol Suwanatat's "fear of too much press freedom" and this move again reflects the armed forces' self-image that is still being maintained until today: an essential part of the Thai power apparatus that is not to be questioned or criticized, especially by outsiders.
*NOTE: The plight of the Rohingya refugees will be highlighted as part of a special 2013 year-in-review series starting December 26, 2013 on Siam Voices.
Thai minister accuses Rohingya refugees of 'feigning pitifulness'
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 21, 2013 In the past year an estimated that over 35,000 Rohingya - an ethnic minority group from Burma who are denied citizenship there and targeted in deadly persecution (partly incited by Buddhist monks) - fled on often overcrowded and frail boats to the Andaman Sea. They often land on Thailand’s shorelines instead of their preferred destinations Malaysia or Indonesia. Thailand recognizes them as illegal immigrants rather than as refugees, denying them the right to seek asylum.
The ongoing plight of ethnic Rohingya in Thailand is bleaker as ever, as about 2,000 of them are still awaiting their fate in detention centers across Thailand. A six-month deadline to find third-party countries to take them passed in late July without any results, leaving them in legal limbo.
We reported on the detention conditions the Rohingya refugees are facing in often overcrowded holding cells and their vulnerability to human traffickers earlier in July. Recently, Channel 4 News exposed that human traffickers are maintaining a "number of secret prisons" on the southern Thai island of Tarutao, seemingly under the radar of Thai authorities. There have been also several reports of attempted and successful escapes of Rohingya detainees (e.g. July 31, August 12). In some areas, there have been plans to improve conditions:
On August 9, the Thai minister of social development and human security, Paveena Hongsakula, told the media that the detention and trafficking of Rohingya in Thailand were serious human rights issues. Yet at a cabinet meeting four days later she proposed sending them to refugee camps, a plan that reportedly has the backing of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Foreign Affairs Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul. (...)
The Thai authorities have also discussed proposals to create alternative centers for the Rohingya or expand the capacity to hold Rohingya at existing immigration detention centers in Songkhla, Ranong, Prachuab Khiri Kan, and Nongkhai provinces.
"Thailand: Release and Protect Rohingya ‘Boat People’", Human Rights Watch, August 20, 2013
However, such proposals were met with objections by local residents.
Just on Tuesday, 86 Rohingya escaped from an immigration detention center in the southern Thai province of Songkhla. According to the local police commander the refugees "used blades to cut through iron bars and hacked at cement walls before disappearing into nearby rubber plantations," but gave no details where these tools came from and why of all places they went to a nearby rubber plantation.
Also, in early August a riot broke out at a detention center in Phang Nga Province resulting in an 8-hour standoff (that could have escalated into something much worse) after authorities wouldn't allow the detainees to perform prayers marking the end of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.
That's where Deputy Interior Minister Wisarn Techathirawat of the Pheu Thai Party went to on Tuesday to assess the conditions at the detention facility. And then he said this...
Deputy Interior Minister Wisarn Techathirawat says the presence of the media encourages Rohingya refugees to “act-up in front of the camera” in order to get sympathy. Mr Wisarn was at the Phang Nga Immigration center yesterday to inspect the facility, following a Rohingya riot there earlier this month.
“The media often knows that the Rohingya are arriving even before the police do,” he said. “And when the media are present, the Rohingya cry and put on a performance designed to get sympathy. When the media are not present, they act normally, and even seem to enjoy their interaction with the officers.”
The "feigned pitifulness" of the Rohingya reported by the press is giving Thailand a bad name, Mr Wisarn said.
"Rohingya play 'pity card' for media: Deputy Interior Minister", Phuket Gazette, August 20, 2013
And this...
The deputy interior minister expressed fears that the asylum-seekers would harm locals and discourage tourists from visiting Thailand.
"The monsoon season will be over in two months and more boat people will come. We've asked the UNHCR to help fix this problem," Wisarn Techathirawat, deputy interior minister, told Reuters, adding the UN agency only took on a few asylum-seekers. "The rest of the burden is left to us."
"Muslim Rohingya asylum seekers escape Thai detention centre", Reuters, August 20, 2013
It is the apathy of the Thai authorities and politicians towards people fleeing from a country that denies them citizenship and leaves them open to violent and deadly persecution; it is impunity of Thai officials involved in human trafficking, deadly shooting of Rohingyas or towing out refugee boats out on the sea again with the engine removed (not only once); it is so-called forensic experts linking Rohingya refugees to the South Thailand insurgency on dodgy grounds; it is regularly rejecting help from international organizations like UN's refugee agency UNHCR and at the same time bemoaning the lack of international help; it is contemptful comments like these from public figures such as this deputy interior minister - THAT is giving Thailand a bad name and NOT refugees seeking help and security!
Thailand fails to find closure on Bangkok massacre
Originally published at Siam Voices on August 16, 2013 Over three years after the deadly military crackdown on the anti-government red shirt protests, battling narratives on what happened that day are still defining the current political climate - even more so with the debate on the government-sponsored amnesty bills and the release of an official inquiry report that fundamentally contradicts with recent court rulings.
On May 19, 2010, after nine-and-a-half weeks of anti-government protests and street occupations by the red shirts, the military staged a bloody crackdown. With the previous clashes since April 2010, at least 90 people were killed and thousands injured, mostly civilians. The chaos and carnage has left a gaping wound in the nation's psyche that still hasn't healed. Not least because the questions surrounding what exactly happened and who is responsible for the deaths are still the subject of intense argument across all political allegiances, mostly with little facts and much hyperbole.
Last year, the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT) released their final inquiry report into the events of May 19, 2010. The panel, set up during the administration of then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva with virtually no powers or access, found faults on both sides and was promptly criticized and dismissed by both sides.
Last week, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) released its own report in what they think happened in the crackdown:
The report, around 90 pages long, can be summed up in 2 points: that the security forces did commit several inappropriate actions - such as dropping teargas from the helicopters onto the crowd below and censoring a number of websites - but the bigger issue is that it was the Redshirts who "violated human rights" by engaging in unlawful protests and provoking the authorities.
The Redshirts under the leadership of the National United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), the report said, violated the laws by organising a protest at Ratchaprasong Intersection, the heart of Bangkok′s financial district. The move equals to provoking violence, according to NHRC. Therefore, the NHRC said, it is entirely lawful that Mr. Abhisit formed up the Centre for Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES) and declared emergency laws. (...)
The casualties during the crackdowns in April and May 2010 were results of clashes between the security forces and shadowy armed militants allegedly allied to the protesters, according the report. (...)
Even the deaths of 6 civilians at Wat Pathumwanararm Temple, declared as ′safe zone′ for fleeing protesters by the authorities, were described as a consequence of alleged gunfights between the militants and the soldiers near the temple - (...)
"NHRC Accused Of Whitewashing Authorities' Hands In 2010 Crackdown", Khao Sod English, August 10, 2013
The NHRC report fails to point the finger of blame at the military for the deaths, which Abhisit and his then-deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban are now facing murder charges by the DSI. Especially foggy are the circumstances, in which six civilians were killed inside Wat Pathumwan, that are described by the NHRC inquiry ("killed outside and then dragged inside the temple grounds"). In fact, they were disproved in a landmark court ruling just a few days earlier that explicitly found the military responsible for the deaths - which was instantly rejected by army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha, back then one of the key commanders of the crackdown.
Expectedly, the NHRC report was met with heavy criticism with accusations of whitewashing the crackdown, since it also seems to be reinforcing the same official line that has been touted by the authorities and the Abhisit government back then in 2010 and is still insisted upon today by the now-opposition Democrat Party and its supporters. Given the political affiliations the NHRC head Amara Pongsapich and the circumstances that led to her appointment, the report is hardly a surprise, but a disgrace to the National Human Rights Commission's task.
The May 19 crackdown was also a central issue of the parliamentary vote of the so-called amnesty bill last week. From the various draft bills that have been suggested (including one by families of the Wat Pathum victims strangely supported by Abhisit), the government led by the Pheu Thai Party (PT) submitted the draft of PT MP Wocharai Hema, that grants all political protesters amnesty - including the various yellow and red shirt protests since the 2006 military coup - but does not include the protest leaders and authorities responsible for the crackdown. The bill was initially passed by the lower House, but has to vetted and submitted for vote again.
The heated exchanges during the debates saw both political sides occupying their narratives to the events of the violent clashes during the red shirt protests of 2010. One such moment included Democrat MP and former deputy PM Suthep insisted that no snipers were deployed in the dispersal, despite secret documents stating the contrary.
On Thursday, the Bangkok Post published a column by Democrat deputy leader Korn Chatikavanij voicing his opposition to the amnesty bill, accusing the government for a lack of "any genuine desire for reform or reconciliation" and points to the TRCT panel that was set up by then-PM Abhisit (but gave it virtually no powers whatsoever), cites the "objections from the UN human rights office" (although the UN OHCHR only cautioned and then clarified it didn't object the bill at all) and (mistakenly?) references the NHRC as "our own Human Rights Watch", while during the Abhisit government he and his government regularly blasted the findings by HRW and other international human rights organizations.
What all these events in the past week show is that the wounds of what is considerably the worst political violence in the Thailand's recent history still have not healed, because not only are competing truths evidence of an ongoing divided political discourse, but also the very likelihood of repeated impunity for the authorities and the military for the May 19 crackdown still prevails, something that has been practised too often in the country's history - 1973, 1976, 1992, 2006, just to name a few - in the short-sighted hope that all is forgotten and forgiven until the next tragedy.
UK GT200 distributor found guilty of fraud - but what about Thailand?
Originally published at Siam Voices on July 29, 2013
A British businessman has been convicted for selling the bogus GT200 bomb detector. Gary Bolton, the former director of Global Technology Ltd, was found guilty of fraud by the UK's Central Criminal Court on two counts on Friday.
The prosecution said he sold them for up to £10,000 [$15,300] each, claiming they could detect explosives. The trial heard the company had a £3m [$4,6m] annual turnover selling the homemade devices. (...)
Richard Whittam QC, prosecuting, told the court that Bolton knew the devices - which were also alleged to be able to detect drugs, tobacco, ivory and cash - did not work but supplied them anyway to be sold to overseas businesses.
"Gary Bolton guilty of selling fake bomb detectors", BBC News, July 26, 2013
Earlier this year in May, the same court sentenced James McCormick to 10 years imprisonment for selling the similar, non-functioning ADE-651 device mostly to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Both the ADE-651 and the GT200 were advertised to detect explosive materials and other chemicals by inserting the appropriate "sensor cards" into the device's plastic grip and erecting a swiveling antenna mounted on it to search for the desired substance. The manufacturers claimed that the devices did not need any batteries but only the user's static electricity. Both devices have been found to be utterly ineffective.
In 2010 BBC Newsnight exposed the devices to be nothing but an empty plastic shell with an attached dowsing rod and plastic cards with "nothing to program on" that were sold to dozens of countries. Upon these revelations, the United Kingdom banned the export of all such devices.
Also on the effectiveness of the device:
Further stringent "double-blind" tests carried out on the GT200 by Dr Michael Sutherland of the University of Cambridge found that it worked successfully twice in 24 tests searching for TNT, which was less than the probability of finding the explosives at random.
"Gary Bolton guilty of selling fake bomb detectors", BBC News, July 26, 2013
Thailand was arguably the biggest customer and procured 818 GT200 devices for the Thai military and at least 13 other government agencies since 2004, paying 900,000-1.2 million Baht (US$27,000-36,000) per unit - a reported total of about 800-900 million Baht (US$21 million). Among the customers was reportedly the post-coup military junta, which ordered the devices in 2006. A majority of 535 bomb detectors was used by the army in the South of Thailand to tackle the ongoing separatist insurgency, where attacks with improvised explosive devices (IEDs) are a common occurrence.
With the emergence of the BBC report in 2010, the government of then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva ordered tests on the GT200's effectiveness - with unsurprising, but still shocking results:
The government will not buy any more GT200 substance detectors after test results showed the device performs worse than a roll of the dice. (...)
The tests consisted of 20 trials in which explosives were placed in one of four boxes. The device succeeded in recording just four correct readings.
"Abhisit scraps GT200 orders", Bangkok Post, February 17, 2010
Just to clarify the results: flipping a coin would be more accurate than using the GT200. It is difficult to assess how many people fell victim to the bogus GT200, but numerous incidents in the past indicate that the device either failed to detect actual explosives (with deathly consequences) or gave false positives. Furthermore, a false positive also paved way for potentially false arrests:
Soldiers have used the devices during security sweeps of ethnic Malay Muslim communities or at security checkpoints, contending that the movement of a rotating antenna on the devices can find traces of explosives or gunpowder on suspects' bodies. Civil rights lawyers in the network of the Muslim Attorney Council say that since 2007 about 10 percent of suspected insurgents have been arrested on the basis of a GT200 reading.
Officials at the Justice Ministry told Human Rights Watch that GT200 readings cannot be used as evidence in court. However, Thai military forces consider GT200 readings a valid basis for exercising arrest and detention powers under the 2005 Executive Decree on Government Administration in Emergency Situations (Emergency Decree).
"Thailand: Stop Using Discredited Explosives Detector", Human Rights Watch, February 17, 2010
The question now is, three years after the revelations of the bogus nature of the bomb sniffing device, whether or not Thai authorities are still using it? Last year at this time, we reported on army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha's conflicting statements, saying it was still used by the army in the South and at the same time saying that 4th Army Region in the South is NOT using it anymore. Nevertheless, he still fexpressed his faith in the GT200, as did supreme commander Thanasak Patimaprakorn and then-defense minister Sukumpol Suwanatat, all stating it is still in use because of a lack of alternatives. However, they also said they would respect scientific evidence that prove the opposite - completely ignoring the existence of same since 2010.
And then earlier this year...
Commander-in-Chief Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha has requested the public to stop fueling criticisms and leave the case to be investigated by Department of Special Investigation (DSI) and the Thai court. He added that the army has already stopped using the devices for 2-3 years. However, he admitted that some military personnel still use them since there is no other alternative instrument.
"Army chief urges the public stop criticizing GT200 fraud", National News Bureau of Thailand, April 25, 2013
The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) has not made any progress since the start of their investigations last year.
With the conviction of both con-men in the UK at least some progress has been made their, whereas in Thailand this - especially on a legal and political level - still has yet to happen.
Thailand: Reconciliation games continue as amnesty bill goes to parliament
Originally published at Siam Voices on July 26, 2013 When Thailand's parliament reconvenes next week to continue the political season one of the most discussed and possibly the most controversial issue will be the passing of the so-called amnesty or reconciliation bill. Advertised as a means to overcome the ongoing political division by giving far-reaching amnesty to those convicted for taking part in the countless political protests - of both yellow and red shirts - since the military coup of 2006, opponents are accusing the government of white-washing the activities of the red shirt protesters and exiled former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
Depending on which of the various drafts you read, the bill could issue an even more far-reaching amnesty that also includes the junta behind the military coup, the military and civilian authorities responsible for the violent crackdown of the 2010 anti-government red shirt protests (including then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his deputy Suthep Thuagsuban), the various protest leaders, erasing the post-coup judiciary (a junta-appointed court which has dissolved deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's Thai Rak Thai Party and banned 111 politicians from office in 2007) and - according to one draft - even absolve Thaksin himself from a 2008 court sentence for abuse of power in a land purchasing case.
The authors of the drafts nearly all come from the governing Pheu Thai Party (PT). Red shirt leader and current deputy commercial minister Natthawut Saikua and coup-leader and now-opposition politician Sonthi Boonyaratglin may come from opposite ends of the political devide, but have presented similar amnesty drafts, with the main difference that "those who commit terrorist acts and acts causing death" are excluded in Natthawut's bill proposal. The former deputy prime minister and now newly demoted named labor minister Chalerm Yubamrung also throws in a draft of his own in a typically eager attempt to leave a personal mark on this issue, in which almost everybody - including Abhisit and Thaksin - are absolved. None of the bills include those imprisoned under the lèse majesté law.
Last week, another proposal for a reconciliation bill was introduced by a group that has been often neglected in the political infighting but was arguably most affected in the political crisis:
Relatives of those killed in the April-May 2010 crackdown on red-shirt protesters are to submit a "Worachai-plus" amnesty bill as parliament prepares to consider six other amnesty bills next month. (...)
"People from all colours will be absolved of any offence they committed or had committed against against them, except for core leaders," Ms. Payao [Akkahad, the mother of 25-year-old Kamolkade Akkahad, a medical volunteer who was killed inside Wat Pathum Wanaram on May 19, 2010] said of the victims' relatives' version of the bill.
The relatives will submit their five-page bill to Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra tomorrow, and to the parliament speaker on July 24, she said.
This bill, [Punsak Srithep, father of the 17-year-old Samapun Srithep, who was killed on May 15, 2010, on Ratchaprarop Road,] said, would allow judicial lawsuits to be pressed against persons or groups that killed people and/or damaged private property. The relatives' bill also does not prevent private entities whose properties were damaged in the unrest from launching civil suits against vandals or arsonists, he said.
"2010 victims' relatives push amnesty bill", Bangkok Post, July 15, 2013
The draft, coined by local media as the "People's Bill", has found in opposition Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva an unlikely proponent. While he lauds it to be "the first amnesty bill that had been proposed with a reasonable and reconciliatory tone," parts of the proposal directly target him and his administration's role in the violent crackdown on the red shirt protesters in 2010 (both he and his former deputy Suthep are facing murder charges by the DSI on at least one count, if not even more). It comes as no surprise that his party supporters and other ultra-conservatives have criticized Abhisit for voicing his support, many questioning whether or not he actually read the entire thing. The opposition has not yet brought up a proposal on their own.
Meanwhile, the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), the mainstream red shirt umbrella organization, has voiced skepticism about the "People's Bill":
Prominent Pheu Thai politicians and Redshirts leaders, such as Mr. Weng Tojirakarn, Mr. Sombat Boon-ngarmanong, and Ms. Suda Rangupan, have accused Ms. Payao and Mr. Pansak of trying to slow down the process to pass amnesty bill by picking a fight with the powerful military.
According to those opposed to the ′Victims Families′ amnesty bill, the effort to free detained Redshirts protesters should be a priority over the need to prosecute the security forces. They expressed their fear that the military would never allow Ms. Yingluck′s government to pass such a bill, ruining the chance of any little gain there might be altogether, and might even launch a military coup in retaliation.
Some Redshirts also openly questioned the motives of Ms. Payao and Mr. Pansak, indirectly accusing them of being collaborators with the rival Democrat Party which, strangely enough, had expressed its support for the ′Victims Families′ amnesty bill.
"Fragmentation Among Redshirts Highlighted By Amnesty Debate", Khaosod Online, July 24, 2013
Instead, the UDD and the Pheu Thai Party are reportedly backing the draft by PT MP Worachai Hema, putting it top of the agenda for deliberation in parliament (even before the 2014 Budget Bill!) and ditching all other proposals - a move some observers say is to avoid uproar from the UDD, despite reports of dissatisfaction among certain groups within the fragmented movement. Under Worachai's bill, all political protestors will be granted amnesty - regardless of their political allegiance - while excluding the protest leaders and authorities responsible for the crackdowns.
August rings in a new political season that could get very heated very quickly: on top of the 2014 Budget Bill, the 2.2 trillion Baht (US$ 730bn) loan for infrastructure investments and proposed constitutional amendments, the amnesty bill will spark months of legislative tugs of war and wars of words (and potentially worse antics by the opposition outside and inside parliament like last year) - once again revealing how big Thailand's political divisions really are and that even a far-reaching amnesty will not be enough to close the gap.
Rohingya stuck in Thai detention vulnerable to traffickers
Originally published at Siam Voices on July 8, 2013 Over 2,000 Rohingya refugees are detained in Thailand as more reports about inhumane conditions, human trafficking and rape surface while efforts to relocate them to another country have so far failed. With a deadline looming very soon, they are now threatened to be stuck in limbo.
The Rohingya, an ethnic minority group denied citizenship and targeted in ongoing deadly persecution in Burma (partly incited by Buddhist monks), have fled on often overcrowded and frail vessels in the Andaman Sea in attempts to reach Malaysia or Indonesia, but more often than not land on Thailand's shorelines or are being intercepted by Thai authorities and either towed out back to sea again (euphemistically labeled by Thai officials as a "help-on"-policy) or deported back to Burma, since the Kingdom regards their status as those of illegal immigrants rather than asylum seekers.
In recent years, there were numerous reports of mistreatment by Thai officials during these "help-on"-procedures such as setting refugee boats adrift on the sea again and sometimes allegedly even removing the engine. Earlier this January, we reported on allegations that officials of the Thai Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) have sold off 74 Rohingyas to human traffickers. Later in March, the Thai Navy faced allegations of shooting and killing as many as 20 refugees that were fleeing in the water from a failed boat-transfer. In both cases there were no impartial investigations and internal inquiries have come up without any results.
Those stranded or rescued by Thai officials - as many as 800 were found in human trafficker camps - are put into detention. According to statistics by Muslim humanitarian groups and published in the Bangkok Post, 2,018 Rohingya refugees are currently detained at 24 stations of vastly different standards, mostly located in the South of Thailand but also some as far as Chiang Rai in the North.
In the late May, Channel 4 News visited the second-largest detention center in Phang Nga and found the conditions to be dismal:
We got a good idea of just how serious these problems are when Channel 4 News accompanied a group of charity workers to an immigration lock-up in a Thai town called Phang Nga. The volunteers, who were members of a local mosque, told us the facility was severely overcrowded and they wanted us to see for ourselves.
(...) We found 276 male Rohingya living in extremely cramped conditions on the second floor – the majority crammed in one of two small “cages”. Inside, there was barely enough room to sit. There were a small number of others living between the two cells suffering from swollen feet and withered leg muscles. The cause was simple – lack of exercise. The men say they haven’t been let out in five months.
(...) This place typically hosts five to 15 men – not 276 – and the smell of sweat, urine and human waste was overpowering. The heat and mosquitos were oppressive and the men seemed to share a deep sense of despondency. A man told my translator that he was ready to tie his clothes together and use them as a rope to hang himself. In another conversation captured on film an inmate told us he had “nothing to live for”. Our translator was forced to plead with them not to kill themselves.
"The plight of Burma’s Rohingya Muslims in a Thai camp", by John Sparks, Channel 4 News, May 31, 2013
The report goes on to say that the Thai authorities are aware of the problems and "alternative arrangements are being identified." How these alternatives look (e.g. additional buildings) was not said. However, in some areas, plans for the construction of additional facilities were met with protests of locals.
In other locations, there are reports of female refugees falling victims to human traffickers and sexual assault:
[H]uman traffickers – both Rohingya and Thai – were able to gain access to the shelter in Phang Nga province soon after a group of about 70 Rohingya women and children arrived there in January. Korlimula, who was identified to Human Rights Watch as working for a Rohingya-Thai human trafficking gang, told Narunisa that he would reunite her with her husband in Malaysia for a fee of 50,000 baht (approximately US$1600).
On May 27, Korlimula helped Narunisa and her two children to escape from the shelter and took her to meet with other associates. Narunisa and her children were put on a pickup truck driven by a man, whom she later learned is a police officer at Khao Lak police station in Phang Nga province. The three of them were taken to six hideouts in the province, and in each case locked up against their will. At the final hideout on Koh Yipoon Island in Phang Nga province’s Kuraburi district, Korlimula repeatedly assaulted and raped Narunisa at knifepoint over the course of three days, from June 9 to 11. After that, Narunisa and her children were dumped on the street in Kuraburi district and the three of them made their way back to the shelter on June 18. Narunisa reported the rape case at Kuraburi district police station on June 18, and then filed a formal complaint against Korlimula on June 21.
"Thailand: Traffickers Access Government-run ‘Shelter’", Human Rights Watch, June 27, 2013
Such cases reveal that some human trafficker rings are colluding with local officials and politicians. Bangkok Post reports that both the human trafficker and the police officer have been charged.
The refugees have been waiting for at least six months, while Thailand is trying to find another country to take them in, but has yet to find one. The deadline of July 26 is running out, but the question about the fate of the more than 2,000 Rohingya refugees stuck in a legal limbo in Thailand's detention centers remains unanswered.
Thailand: HRW calls for probe into alleged Rohingya shootings
Originally published at Siam Voices on March 14, 2013 New details have emerged about the alleged shooting at Rohingya refugees by Thai navy officers in which as many as 20 people were killed, according to witness reports (we reported). The New York-based NGO Human Rights Watch has released a statement calling on the Thai government for an investigation. HRW also published their own findings about the incident:
Survivors told Human Rights Watch that on the morning of February 21, Thai fishermen helped their drifting boat ashore on Surin Island off the coast of Phang Nga province. On that same day, at about 6:30 p.m., a Thai navy patrol boat numbered TOR214 arrived at the island and towed their boat back to the sea. Navy patrol boat TOR214 and the Rohingya boat arrived near a pier in Kuraburi district of Phang Nga province at around 5 a.m. the next morning. According to the survivors and Thai villagers on the shore, navy personnel from the patrol boat began to divide the Rohingya into small groups in the boat and ordered them to get ready to board smaller boats. At that point, the Rohingya became uncertain whether they would be taken to immigration detention on the mainland or be pushed back to the sea. When the first group of 20 Rohingya was put on a smaller boat by the Thai navy, some panicked and jumped overboard.
“Navy personnel fired into the air three times and told us not to move,” one survivor told Human Rights Watch. “But we were panicking and jumped off the boat, and then they opened fire at us in the water.”
"Thailand: Fleeing Rohingya Shot in Sea by Navy", Human Rights Watch, March 13, 2013
This account was based on 4 survivors of this incident, after they have swum to a nearby village and have been sheltered by the local villagers and also hidden from the authorities. These 4 men have now reportedly fled to Malaysia as they fear retributions from Thai authorities. Reportedly, two bodies were found and pulled out of the water with one of them baring a bullet wound in the head. These two have been already been buried at a nearby cemetery. The rest of the 20 men are still missing, but presumed dead.
The whereabouts of the remaining refugees are unknown, as they could have been towed out and left to the sea again on their journey to Malaysia or Indonesia. Or worse, they could be sold off to human traffickers, as recent cases have shown and more accusations by Rohingya refugees have surfaced. This has now also been underlined by witness reports of local villagers.
The Thai authorities are fiercely denying the allegations, pointing the blame back at the Rohingya refugees themselves.
"The navy commander [Adm Surasak Rounroengrom] has insisted that the navy did not kill or shoot at the Rohingya," a navy source told the Bangkok Post. "We feel for them. No humans or sailors can commit such act because the Rohingya people are not our enemy."
Firing on the Rohingya "doesn't even cross our minds," the source said. (...)
The same source said Vice Adm Tharathorn Khachitsuwan, commander of the Third Region Navy, and Rear Adm Weeraphan Sukkon, commander of the Royal Navy Phang Nga Base, both believed the navy was being framed by Rohingya who were angry because the navy prevented them from coming ashore.
(...) "Those who accuse the navy of hurting or killing the Rohingya should come out and take care of them too. They should not accuse others and not help" to look after the displaced people, the official said.
"Thai navy denies shooting Rohingya refugees", Bangkok Post, March 13, 2013
A spokesman from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs seems to contradict with the usual handling of Rohingya boat refugees:
Human Rights Watch has criticized the "push back" policy, saying Thailand is failing to provide the Rohingya asylum seekers with the protections required under international law. Thai foreign ministry spokesperson Manasvi Srisodapol denied the existence of such a policy as described by Human Rights Watch and many other organizations.
"Fleeing Rohingya Refugees Fired Upon, Says Rights Group", VOA, March 13, 2013
Compare that to the comments made by Royal Thai Navy Commander-in-Chief Admiral Surasak Rounroengrom:
"Since the policy is to push them back out to sea, we provide humanitarian aid with food and water, medicine and gas for them to continue their journey. All we do is help them, even fixing their boats [if necessary], before sending them back on their way," Surasak said.
"Navy dismisses reports on Rohingya killings", The Nation, March 14, 2013
On Monday, at an event of the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand (see a summary here), Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra also addressed the issue of the Rohingya refugees in her keynote speech, stating that Thailand is treating them well and "on humanitarian grounds”. Zoe Daniels from the ABC further asked her about the specific shooting incident:
YINGLUCK SHINAWATRA: In the case of the navies I think we will work on a fair basis and will be fair to everyone under the legal process.
ZOE DANIEL: Talking though about the Thai Navy shooting and killing refugees, could I ask you will you order an investigation into that incident?
YINGLUCK SHINAWATRA: Okay, first of all I have to say that we don't encourage any violence, to do any harm to anyone. This is our policy and of course that we will have to fair to everyone and we will look and investigate the case.
"Calls for Thai Govt to investigate alleged navy shooting", ABC News, March 13, 2013
The likelihood of an impartial and independent investigation into any matter concerning the authorities' handling of the Rohingya refugees are slim. The military is unwilling let anybody - let alone a civilian body - conduct a probe into this. An internal inquiry by the Internal Security Operations Command into allegations of their officers being involved in human trafficking (we reported) has found no evidence against them, but still has transferred them into a different part of the country.
UPDATE: Shortly after publication of this article, Phuketwan has another story with more witnesses about this incident:
A fisherman told today for the first time of having a gun pointed at him by a military officer in a controversial incident that led to the deaths of an unknown number of boatpeople north of Phuket.
Fisherman Yutdhana Sangtong said today that four other fishermen were in the boat when the gun was pointed at him. They were ordered to leave. ''Go away. These people have been fed already. Get out,'' he says he was told at gunpoint.
Later, he heard a volley of gunshots, In the days that followed, Khun Yutdhana says, he found three bodies in the water nearby. Other fishermen around the district reported finding more bodies along the coast, around the village of Hinlad.
"Two Accounts of the Boatpeople 'Shooting' Leave Questions to Answer", Phuketwan, March 14, 2013
Report: Thai military killed Rohingya migrants in botched boat transfer
Originally published at Siam Voices on March 7, 2013 According to reports, between two and 15 Rohingya migrants were killed by Thai military troops who opened fire on them in a botched boat transfer north of Phuket.
The killings, which are said to have occurred on February 22, came during a botched attempt by the military to transfer about 20 would-be refugees from the large boat on which they arrived from Burma (Myanmar) with 110 others, to a much smaller vessel.
When some feared they would be separated from family members, they jumped in the water and the military men opened fire during the predawn incident, the witnesses said.
Survivors Habumara, 20, Rerfik, 25, and Jamar, 16, said yesterday that they swam for their lives when the shooting broke out. They are currently being sheltered by sympathetic villagers. (...)
The three survivors said they believed that the killers were members of the Thai Navy, but village residents said they probably belonged to another branch of the Thai military.
Previous abuses of the Muslim Rohingya have been carried out by other arms of the Thai military or operatives trained as paramilitaries.
Vice Admiral Tharathorn Khajitsuwan, the Commander of Thai Navy Three, which patrols the Andaman coast, declined to comment.
"Thai Military Opened Fire and Killed Rohingya North of Phuket, Say Boatpeople, Villagers", Phuket Wan, March 7, 2013
The shooting is the latest incident in the mass exodus of the ethnic Rohingya people, a Muslim minority fleeing from sectarian violence in Burma. According to statistics from the United Nations' refugee agency UNHCR, over 13,000 Rohingya left Burma in 2012. Reportedly, another 3,000 have fled in the first two months of 2013.
The winter months is where the Andaman sea sees the highest activity of refugee boats, given the relatively calm sea conditions. The main destinations are Malaysia and Indonesia, but many of these boats are either washed ashore or intercepted by security forces near the Thai coastline. Thailand does not regard the Rohingya as asylum seekers, but illegal economic migrants.
In recent years, the standard procedure by the Thai authorities in handling intercepted Rohingya refugee boats is to "help on" their journey by supplying them with food, water and fuel and to tow them out to sea again. Should a boat be deemed unsafe or washed ashore, the refugees will be detained and deported back to the Burmese border. As they are not regarded as Burmese citizens, this leaves them in legal limbo and vulnerable to human traffickers waiting behind the border.
There are also reports of abuse and involvement in human trafficking by Thai authorities. It was reported in January that 74 Rohingya were sold off to people smugglers by Thai authorities, specifically the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC). An internal investigation has found no wrongdoing by their own officers, but has nonetheless transferred two accused ISOC officers out of the South.
In late February, the Associated Press reported the Thai navy intercepted a boat, removed the engine and left them floating for 25 days. According to surviving boat refugees rescued by Sri Lankan navy, 97 people died of starvation. This allegation is nothing new as the Thai navy has faced a similar accusation in 2009. Fellow Asian Correspondent blogger Bangkok Pundit has more on this here.
Currently, there are over 1,000 Rohingya migrants in Thai detention, most of them found in a raid on illegal trafficker camps in the deep South of Thailand. Their fate is currently unknown, but the Thai state has pledged to provide them shelter for 6 months while a third country is being found to accept them.
Reports: Thai authorities sell Rohingya refugees to human traffickers
Originally published at Siam Voices on January 22, 2013 Thai authorities have "sold off" ethnic Rohingya migrants who have arrived in Thailand by boat to people smugglers, according to both local and international media.
Last week we reported on the fate of the 74 Rohingya migrants, among them many women and children, that were intercepted by Thai officials on New Year's Day. They were traveling in a flimsy fishing boat for weeks in the Andaman Sea on their way to Malaysia. Near Phuket, the boat was towed on land by Thai authorities since their boat was deemed unsafe. As per usual procedure, the refugees would be deported back to Burma - back to the country where they are fleeing from targeted violence against them that has killed at least 88 people and displaced over 100,000.
However, they never made it across the border. As previously reported, the refugees were put on other boats and sent out to sea again. This has also been 'confirmed' by the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) - in fact, the 74 Rohingya have always been in the hands of ISOC, according to sources.
Then, BBC News reported on Monday:
The BBC found that boats were being intercepted by the Thai navy and police, with deals then made to sell the people on to traffickers who transport them south towards Malaysia. (...)
We spoke to one of the brokers involved in the deal. They said that 1.5 million baht (about $50,000, £31,500) had been transferred from Malaysia and paid to officials in Thailand. That amount was confirmed to us by other members of the Rohingya community in Thailand.
The Thai authorities told us they believe there are just a few corrupt officials. But in the border town of Ranong a Thai official closely linked with the Rohingya issue told us that working with the brokers was now regarded as the "natural" solution.
"Burmese refugees sold on by Thai officials", by Jonah Fisher, BBC News, January 21, 2013
The BBC also reported on the horrible conditions these refugees have to endure, as this video report shows. Also, be sure to check the local Phuket Wan's story on the same topic.
On Sunday, the Bangkok Post also reported the alleged involvement of ISOC officers in the trafficking of Rohingya refugees. In this case, over 800 migrants have been found in army-led raids in the southern province on Songkhla, believed to be held captive in camps of human traffickers (we reported).
A high ranking police source involved in the case said the investigation found the trafficking of Rohingya migrants - mostly from Myanmar's [Burma] Rakhine state - to Malaysia via Songkhla had been going on for several years and was under the control of some military officers with ranks from major to colonel. (...)
"Sometimes they even used military trucks to transport these Rohingya migrants," said the police officer. Sometimes local police stopped the trucks to check them. Soon after, they would get a phone call from someone who claimed to be a senior military officer seeking to release the trucks. (...)
Isoc spokesman Ditthaporn Sasisamit said the command has not received information about the issue from police. However it will cooperate with police to take action against the officers. (...) But so far no evidence had emerged to link them to the trafficking.
"Army officers linked to Rohingya smuggling", Bangkok Post, January 20, 2013
Reportedly, army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha is also aware of the possible incrimination of army officers in people smuggling and has announced his intentions to "eradicate" the "bad army officers". Whether or not actual consequences will follow his words has yet to be seen.
This follows after the seemingly misplaced remarks of Supreme Commander Tanasak Patimapragorn, who slammed the international community for allegedly "not doing enough" to help the Rohingya migrants:
He said while international organisations stressed the need to help the Rohingya, they did not provide enough direct assistance and Thailand was forced to shoulder the burden of looking after them.
"Tanasak demands global help", Bangkok Post, January 19, 2013
What Thanasak seems to ignore is that Thailand does not always allow foreign help:
Thailand’s response to arriving Rohingya asylum seekers contrasts sharply with the policy in Malaysia, where the authorities have routinely allowed the UN refugee agency access to arriving Rohingya. Those recognized by the agency as refugees are released from immigration detention. (...)
Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to seek asylum from persecution. While Thailand is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, under customary international law the Thai government has an obligation of “nonrefoulement” – not to return anyone to a place where their life or freedom would be at risk.
"Thailand: Don’t Deport Rohingya ‘Boat People’", Human Rights Watch, January 2, 2013
While the UNHCR has been granted access to the 800+ migrants in Songkhla province by the Thai government, no specific date has been set yet.
The media attention on the ethnic Rohingya now shifts from their plight of enduring the weeks at sea to those who have sold them off to the people smugglers.
UPDATED: Thailand moves to deport 800 Rohingya as exodus continues
Originally published at Siam Voices on January 16, 2013 Thailand is moving to deport around 800 Rohingya, underlining the country's continuing policy of refusing Burma's (Myanmar) persecuted ethnic minority asylum status. The refugees were found in an army-led raids on human trafficker camps in the Southern Thai border province of Songkhla last week and are now detained. There are reportedly around 160 children and 30 women among them.
Many witnesses reported inhumane conditions at the trafficker camps, where the refugees received insufficient food and regular beatings. Police have arrested several suspects, including a local mayor.
The Thai Foreign Ministry insisted today that nearly 1,000 Rohingya migrants, arrested last week for illegal entry, will be eventually deported from Thailand.
Sihasak Puangketkaew, permanent secretary for foreign affairs, said legal action against the Rohingya ethnic detainees will be on humanitarian grounds while international organisations have been asked to intervene and assist.
"Foreign Minister: Rohingya migrants must leave Thailand", MCOT, January 15, 2013
The exact number of refugees is unclear. The secretary-general of national security says that 790 are in detention, while other sources claim that the number is 857. They are now currently under the detention of Thai authorities where they are being screened and most likely prepared for deportation.
Meanwhile, the Foreign Ministry's permanent secretary has announced that it will cooperate with international humanitarian agencies, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), and Unicef, to aid the refugees and determine their status. However, as of writing...
“UNHCR has asked the Thai authorities for access to recent irregular boat arrivals and people involved in the raids. We have not been granted it yet,” Vivian Tan, the agency’s spokesperson, told AlertNet on Tuesday. (...)
UNHCR has also urged the Thai government to treat them humanely and “not to send them back to a place where their lives and freedoms could be in danger,” she added.
(...) UNHCR told AlertNet late Tuesday that while there has been progress in talks with the government, they are still awaiting access to the latest group of Rohingya detainees.
"UNHCR seeks access to Rohingya detained in Thailand", AlertNet, January 15, 2013
Additionally, Human Rights Watch's Sunai Phasuk has tweeted on Tuesday evening:
#Yingluck government assured Thailand won't rush to deport 857 #Rohingya. Discussion still going on with #UNHCR.
— Sunai (@sunaibkk) January 15, 2013
On New Year's Day the Thai Navy intercepted a boat with more than 70 Rohingya migrants (including children as young as 3 years old) near Phuket. The Rohingya, who were bound for Malaysia, were at sea for almost two weeks. The usual procedure by Thai authorities is to "help on" these boats on their treacherous journey from Burma to Malaysia or Indonesia through the Andaman Sea by providing medicine, food and fuel on the condition that no one leaves the boat.
If the boat is washed ashore or, like in this case, deemed too unsafe, the refugees are deported back to Burma. However in this case, amid protests by activists, the Thai authorities instead put these refugees back on another boat(s).
Thailand has been often at the center of controversy in the past concerning their handling of Rohingya refugees. Reports (not in Thai media) of boats being towed out to sea again and set adrift (sometimes removing the engine) put the Thai authorities in a very bad light.
Sectarian violence flared up between the Rohingya Muslims and Buddhists in Rakhine state in Burma last year. The clashes, instigated by nationalists, have killed at least 88 and displaced 100,000 more. According to a phone interview with Human Rights Watch, there are at least "one or two boats passing by the Thai coastline every day" during this time of year. In fact, Phuket Wan reports:
NINE boats containing about 1000 Rohingya men, women and children are off the coast in the Phuket region now, maritime authorities said on Monday. Two boats that were being ''helped on'' are now being brought to shore, the authorities said.
"'1000 Rohingya' Off Phuket as Scale of Trafficker Trade is Revealed", Phuket Wan, January 14, 2013
The Thai state usually regards the Rohingya not as persecuted refugees, but rather as illegal economic immigrants, therefore constantly refusing to grant them asylum. Deported Rohingyas are in danger of falling into the hands of people smugglers, who extort an enormous sum of money for transportation to Malaysia and are often forced into labor to pay off their debts.
At the same time, Thailand is facing international pressure as the United States State Department has put the country under close scrutiny over its efforts to combat human trafficking:
Thailand has been on a Tier 2 Watch List status – the second-worst rating – for three consecutive years for not fully complying “with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.”
A downgrade to Tier 3 – the same level with North Korea - could result in non-tariff sanctions being imposed on Thailand.
"UNHCR seeks access to Rohingya detained in Thailand", AlertNet, January 15, 2013
That also probably explains why the National Security Council has reportedly requested a "special budget from the government" to deal with the Rohingya migrants and "for Thailand’s image in the global community" (source) - because apparently this is as important for the Thai authorities as tending to those in dire need of help.
UPDATE [January 16, 2013 at 16.30h]:
Thai authorities have granted the UNHCR access to the migrants. UNHCR spokeswoman Vivan Tan told Siam Voices that this move is "a positive step at the moment." While no specific date has been agreed on yet, the organization is hopeful to make a first early assessment as soon as possible. According to Tan, there's a possibility that not all about 800 persons are all Rohingya, as it has been widely reported, hence why it is important to get this first access in order to "talk who they are, verify themselves and ask them about their background." The agreement in principle only at the moment as details about the extend of assessments are still being worked out with the authorities.
Thai army ordered to stand down after bullying yellow shirt paper
Originally published at Siam Voices on January 14, 2013 This past weekend, around 40-50 military officers suddenly showed up in front of the building of ASTV-Manager protesting the paper's harsh criticism of the army and the 'slandering' of their armed forces chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha. The soldiers from the 1st army region assembled on Friday afternoon after the newspaper compared Prayuth's most recent outburst to a "woman in her periods". A second protest was staged on Saturday morning at the same spot and they threatened to repeat it again every day until the paper apologizes.
The show of force by the officers in green came after a public tit-for-tat between General Prayuth and the newspaper, the latter attacking the armed forces for their handling of the border conflict with neighboring Cambodia over the ancient Buddhist Hindu temple Preah Vihear. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will hold hearings in April, after the Cambodia has requested the ICJ to reinterpret aspects of the 1962 ruling in their favor. A decision is expected to take place in October later this year.
Just to be very clear, the publication the soldiers were protesting is far from being the beacon of the Thai press media: ASTV-Manager is the press outlet of the ultra-nationalistic and ill-named "People's Alliance for Democracy" (PAD), also commonly known as the yellow shirts. Apart from their regular anti-democratic diatribes and low punches as seen above (that reflects its comments section), the Preah Vihear temple conflict is one of the issues the political pressure group is using to rally up supporters - just that it's one of the less popular ones compared to those that have a distinct anti-Thaksin and nowadays anti-Yingluck agenda to it.
The last PAD protest over the temple conflict was in early 2011, following another deadly clash at the border between Thai and Cambodian troops. At the short-lived and small protest sit-in, the yellow shirts were at times calling for an open war with Cambodia. Frustrated with their diminished relevance in Thai (street) politics, it was also during that time when they broke off their formerly close alliances with the Democrat Party (which were in power back then) and with hawkish factions of the military, as the PAD accused both of not doing enough for the "interest of the country" over the border conflict.
In the run-up to the ICJ hearings - to which the PAD has urged the government not to accept anything at all by the ICJ in the irrationale fear of losing sovereignty - the PAD's news-outlets are repeating their diatribes against Cambodia, the ICJ and also the army as they started criticizing General Prayuth, which deteriorated into the spat and ultimately to the soldiers' protest, who see not only their army chief being attacked but also the institution of the armed forces as a whole:
The green-uniformed protesters on Saturday said the article has damaged their morale because the army chief is like their "second father". They demanded the media outlet issue an apology to the general.
They also denied being ordered by their superiors to stage the event. Gen Prayuth told reporters earlier that the soldiers were free to hold such rallies because they were trying to protect the armed forces, not just him. (...)
"If [the PAD] were the government, I would have to listen to it. But since it is not, I have no idea what to do with it," Gen Prayuth said during a visit to the border area earlier in the week.
"Prayuth to troops: Stand down at ASTV", Bangkok Post, January 12, 2013
Despite the fact that Prayuth has ordered the soldiers to cease from any more protests, the public display by the soldiers underlines the over-confident self-perception of the armed forces' role in Thai society that they are above from criticism - given Prayuth's erratic outbursts at the media (read here, here and here) that is hardly surprising. While this is mouthpiece of an ultra-nationalistic pressure group we're talking about, having 50 troops show up at their doorstep isn't right either! And to make matters worse, the army is now asking for forgiveness "confidence in the army" - quite an ambitious request after this weekend.
Generally, the reactions by fellow Thai journalists on this incident were swift and clear:
The TJA statement called for the army to respect freedom of the press. If the army feels the media have violated its rights, it can file a complaint with the National Press Council. As well, it said the army chief should listen to media coverage that fairly reflected the army's and his performance without bias and in a constructive way.
At the same time, it said, all media (...) should refrain from distorting the facts or abusing the dignity and human rights of people appearing in the news. They should also refrain from using rude or insulting words, it said.
"Journalists decry threats", Bangkok Post, January 12, 2013
While this response is in principle correct, it begs the question where the TJA was during other (arguably equally severe) interferences and threats to the media and freedom of speech in the past few years? Where was the TJA on the countless lèse majesté cases affecting free speech and charges made against journalists? Where were they when on the verdict of Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn, held liable for online comments she didn't make? Did they say anything about the media interferences by the Abhisit administration? Was there any criticism made over the apparent failure by Thai TV to inform about a potential tsunami warning? And what did the TJA say when (of all people) journalism students were protesting against reforms of the lèse majesté law?
UPDATE: As soon as this post was published on Monday afternoon, news came out that army chief Prayuth has "apologized". However, he merely did only excuse his choices of words ("a lousy newspaper"), but not the message itself.
Thailand in 2012 - Some personal thoughts (Part 2)
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 29, 2012 This is the second and final part of the Siam Voices year-in-review. Yesterday in part 1, we looked at the year of prime minister's government, that of the opposition and the prevailing impunity over the 2010 crackdown.
Lese majeste: Cowardice in the face of first victim
One topic we expected to continue to play a role in 2012 is the draconian lèse majesté law and its unjust application to crack down on alleged dissent voices. And in many ways - despite the release of Thai-American Joe Gordon and an 'only' suspended sentence against Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn for not deleting monarchy-insulting web comments quickly enough - it unfortunately still made headlines for the wrong reasons.
The death of Amphon "Akong" Tangnoppakul marked what could be argued the first victim of lèse majesté. The 64-year-old retiree was serving a 20 year sentence for allegedly sending four defamatory text messages to the personal secretary of Abhisit Vejjajiva (despite inconclusive evidence). Having repeatedly being denied bail and suffering bad health, Akong died in detention on May 8. Obviously, his death sparked universal condemnation against the law - almost: Thailand politicians showed little sympathy and interest to do something about the arbitrary law, with Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra insisting not to do anything to change Article 112 of the Criminal Code.
Up until this point, the heated discussion about how to amend or if not abolish the law altogether was ongoing. Leading this debate was the Nitirat group, a collective of reformist law academics from Thammasat University, amidst considerable uproar. And it was that university that had a reputation for being one of the more liberal institutions in this country that was struggling and battling with itself, which led to one of the most astonishing sights of this year: of all people, journalism students (!) were seen protesting against Nitirat and the reform of the lèse majesté law by saying “Don’t use knowledge to distort morality!”
The chances that the law will be somehow changed (or even just remotely touched by politicians) remain slim as two incidents have shown that it is untouchable: the Constitutional Court rejected a petition by Somyot Pruksakasemsuk and Ekachai Hongkangwan, both currently on trial for lèse majesté, as it does not see the constitutional right to free speech being violated by Article 112 of the Criminal Code. In another story, a bill petition proposing to amend the law - signed by over 30,000 - was dismissed by the speaker of the parliament.
Meanwhile earlier this week, a former stockbroker has been sentenced to four years in prison under the equally flawed Computer Crimes Act for spreading "false information".
Emerging neighbors: Thailand's geo-political opportunities and blunders
This past year showed the rapid rise of neighboring Myanmar, as the country carefully progresses economically and politically - despite the unmasking of the ugly side of the Burmese pro-democracy movement regarding the genocide against the Rohingya - and other countries of course are in a gold rush mood, as they see new investment opportunities and also to grow their regional influence.
Thailand was one of the few countries that already did business with its neighbor before the change and the upcoming industrial area and deep sea port in Dawei on Myanmar's west coast is the biggest of them. But we reported at the beginning of this year that the mega-project ran into some problems and also caused the Thai government to reconsider their commitment. However, after a visit by Prime Minister Yingluck to Myanmar it seems to be on track again.
A different story shows how Thailand has lost some regional credibility: When NASA planned to use the Thai naval airbase in U-Tapao for atmospheric research study, the opposition Democrat Party drummed up nationalistic outrage and tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists came out crawling again - conveniently forgetting that...
Officials have noted that the Democrats, now opposed to the NASA initiative, approved the program while in power in 2010 and that it would not entail the use of military aircraft.
"Baseless controversy over Thailand's U-Tapao", Asia Times One, June 22, 2012
It was petty domestic political squabbles that eventually led the annoyed NASA to kill the project and gave Thailand a huge slap to the face geo-politically for not being able to sort itself out.
While the prime minister was busy traveling the world this year to bolster economical ties (read our exclusive report on her visit to Germany and France here), Thailand needs to take charge in the ASEAN region (and without looking down on its neighbors), if it doesn't want to loose relevancy.
The exploits of "ThaiMiniCult" in 2012: Mammophobia!
Of course it wouldn't be Siam Voices if we wouldn't monitor the self-proclaimed cultural heralds of everything “Thai”-ness - or in short "ThaiMiniCult". And while this year they have been noticeably less outraged in quantity, there were still instances when we could only shake our heads.
There was for example the ThaiMiniCult that was rumored (and thank god it was only a rumor) to order that "100 per cent males" shouldn't play transgender roles on TV. Or some arbitrary survey that blames Facebook for teen pregnancies, only to find out that it was lazy journalism that caused that headline, while the real problem of nearly non-existing sexual education is being swept under the carpet. Or the MP that was caught looking up some naughty pictures on his phone in parliament.
But probably the most noticeable media outrage (and also the most-clicked Siam Voices story of 2012) was the 'controversy' over the literally bare-breasted painting performance on the TV show "Thailand's Got Talent" that caused one of the judges to throw a sanctimonious tantrum on national TV and a moral witch-hunt. In the end, it turns out that the producers have "hired" her for a staged controversy. However, given how Thais reacted (or claimed to react) to this brouhaha, it was in many ways revealing.
What else happened this year? (in no particular order)
- The four-part series on Thai Education Failures by our regular Siam Voices contributor Kaewmala is a must-read! Be it ridiculous O-Net questions, questionable standardization, our poor international performance and lacking English proficiencies - our archaic education system is in dire need of change! And what does the Pheu Thai government do? Give away free tablets...!
- A rape case in Krabi, the disgusting denial by the Thai tourism minister in order to 'protect' the image and a father's creative plea for justice.
- Thais being outraged by five tourist douchebags cutting down a tree while most population doesn't give a damn about their own environmental lifestyle and willingly plastic-bags everything...!
- Thais being outraged at Lady Gaga for tweeting the intention of buying a fake Rolex while most of the population otherwise willingly ignores the countless counterfeit markets, and after campaigns by outraged religious groups in the Philippines and Indonesia to ban her concerts, looking rather silly and childish...!
- The Thai senator who accidentally shot his wife...or secretary...or cousin...with an uzi...or not...!
- In upside-down world news this year: The reactionary right-wing ASTV/Manager (media outlet of the anti-democratic yellow shirts) accuses the blatantly anti-Thaksin The Nation (an attempt of a newspaper) of being pro-Thaksin - mind blown!
- "Double, double toil and trouble;" - Thailand's movie adaptation of Shakespeare's "Macbeth" gets banned, but not for the depiction of regicide, rather for the depiction of another "Dear Leader" and the disparagement of his followers.
- Three Iranian terrorists literally blowing up their cover on Valentine's Day in the middle of Bangkok after a warning by the United States Embassy and the immediate arrest of a Hezbollah suspect a month before that and the tweeting motorcycle taxi driver that got the scoop of his lifetime. And deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung as the spiritual successor of the former Iraqi information minister by saying that there's "absolutely no terrorism" in the kingdom.
- Deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung as our new regular contributor to the "Tongue-Thai’ed!"-segments and coming up with the most creative name for the new command center in the South!
- The tsunami scare in April and the failure of Thai TV to inform the public because of a royal cremation ceremony.
- The Dhammakāya Movement's newest revelation: the afterlife of Apple's Steve Jobs...!
- The visit of US President Barack Obama to Thailand, and his meeting with Yingluck Shinwatra and half of the internet not able to be mature about it.
- The Bangkok Futsal Arena fiasco, as the city has failed to construct a purposed-built arena in time for FIFA Futsal World Cup and thus embarrassing themselves on a world stage.
- The return of the fraudulent bomb-sniffing device also known as the GT200, essentially a horrendously overpriced empty plastic shell with a dowsing rod. It's ineffectiveness has been proven since 2010, but it has emerged that the bogus device is still in use by the armed forces for the simple reason that there's "no alternative" but to keep on using it until there's a replacement, while soldiers are unnecessarily risking their lives more than they should because of this fraud, whose UK manufacturer has been charged this year.
- Thailand has FINALLY reached the early 21st century with the arrival of real 3G network coverage after an eternal farce and one last court decision - while neighboring Laos is preparing for 4G already...!
- And last, but not least: The still undisputed, most coherent article by The Nation - EVER!
I’d like to thank my co-writers and editors at Siam Voices and Asian Correspondent for their contributions and work this year, and YOU, the readers, for the support, feedback, criticism, links and retweets! Here’s to an eventful, exciting 2013 that brings us news, changes, developments to discuss and report for all the right reasons! Happy New Year!
Thailand in 2012 - Some personal thoughts (Part 1)
Originally published at Siam Voices on December 28, 2012 As tradition dictates, we're here to yet again look back at the year gone by in Thailand. It looks quite different compared to the previous ones - at least on the surface. While we did not have to deal with week-long political protests, 'biblical' natural disasters, and even the self-proclaimed "Thainess" heralds went easy on us in 2012 (well, almost). Nevertheless, there was still enough going on to report on, as you will see here.
If you read this article, we have apparently survived the Mayan Doomsday Prophecy (and Christmas as well). Luckily, Thais did not really believe it and academics from Chulalongkorn University reassured us that nothing was going to happen - but then again, who knows if this finding was actually theirs and not stolen? Now, since we are still here, let's look back at Thailand 2012.
In part 1 today, we look how 2012 was for the government of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, for the opposition in and outside parliament and also the ongoing injustice despite the change of government.
Yingluck's first full year in power: challenging the odds
As hinted in the introduction, this year in politics was relatively calm compared to the tumultuous and eventful previous years. It was the first full year for the government of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra and the Pheu Thai Party - and arguably no other in recent history has been under much fiercer and thorough scrutiny by the political opponents both in and outside parliament. Many of them are legitimately aiming against the government's policies, like the subsidy rice-scheme that puts a big dent in the country's agriculture economy, or giving away tablets at schools instead of tackling our decaying education system head-on and now the tax refunds for first-car-buyers. On the other hand, many target this government with very irrational and erratic behavior - more on that later in this article.
Nevertheless, her government has more or less sailed through this year unharmed despite everything that was thrown at them: it has comfortably survived a no-confidence debate in November and the Constitutional Court has spared them from doom in the summer. Even the hawkish military feels comfortable to side with Yingluck at the moment (and despite a few hulk-outs, army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha was pleasantly less erratic this year), since it has a government that is willingly buying new toys for them.
But the main challenge for the government will remain not to step on anybody's toes, while trying to push ahead their policies and political goals as far as they can. In doing so, it will and already is running danger to alienate and disappoint the red shirt supporters, who are still seeking for justice for the victims of the 2010 crackdown and of the still archaic lèse majesté law - both issues that the government has been very hesitant to tackle. Add to that the ongoing omni-presence of Thaksin, who's constantly testing the water (as he did recently on state TV) for a potential return with possible amendments to the military-installed constitution of 2007 or an amnesty bill, and the Pheu Thai Party could be in for a busy 2013 if they're not careful enough.
Extremely loud and incredibly desperate: Thailand's opposition wrestling with relevancy, reality
Ever since elections in July 2011, Thailand's opposition both in and outside the democratic playing field are trying to grasp with the new reality of yet another Thaksin-influenced government - and have done so quite badly. While the Democrat Party is taking on their usual role as the parliamentary opposition and have been eager to criticize every single thing the government is doing, there have been some incidents however during the debates over the 'amnesty bills' earlier this summer, where the tantrum thrown by them are just erratic and desperate.
Meanwhile outside the House, the reemergence of Thailand's royalist, right-wing and anti-democracy movements show how little progress has been made to overcome the political intolerance: the yellow-shirted, ill-named "People's Alliance for Democracy" (PAD) have staged street protests at the parliament in summer with just a couple of thousand supporters and the ultra-royalist multi-color shirts have attempted to re-brand themselves under the "Pitak Siam" ("Protect Siam") banner and Gen. Boonlert Kaewprasit as their (most of the time lackluster) leader, who right out of the gate calls for yet another military coup as the only way to topple the government.
Emboldened by their first rally in October, Pitak Siam upped the ante a month later with a rally at the Royal Plaza, in which the group was deliberately trying to provoke the police forces and to incite violence. Fortunately for all involved, the rally ended in a non-violent disaster with Gen. Boonlert calling it off and also throwing in the towel as leader, as they have failed to rally enough supporters in order to reclaim 'their' Thailand that either doesn't exist anymore or has never existed in the first place. However, this year has also shown that a compromise is not what is on their minds and their irrational hatred makes real reconciliation harder to realize.
Impunity prevails: when 'reconciliation' is more important than 'truth'
One of the key problems of this political conflict is the fight between competing 'truths' about past events in recent history, especially when it comes to the violent clashes and the crackdown of the red shirt protests in 2010. In September, the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT) presented its final report on its investigations into the violent clashes between the authorities and the red shirts, in which at least 90 people have lost their lives and thousands were injured. The overall conclusion of the inquiry was that the commission finds faults with both sides.
But the report will not change much or bring any justice, because both sides are already subscribed to their version of the 'truth' (and to some extend in total denial) and the TRCT never had any real powers and access to conduct a proper investigation in the first place. It must have been more insulting for the red shirts on May 19, on the anniversary of the 2010 crackdown, when Thaksin phoned-in yet again to urge to push for national reconciliation and set aside their feelings of anger and injustice. Of course, Thaksin had to back paddle after some considerable outrage by his supporters.
Even though now more and more death cases are determined to have been caused by the army an, then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his then-deputy Suthep Thuagsuban have now been formally charged by the very flexible Department of Special Investigation, it is doubtful that these two or any other will ever be convicted - since this country has always upheld a culture of impunity - especially towards the army - in a numbers of events (1973, 1976, 1992, 2006 etc.) and it needs a lot more to end this.
In the second part of our year-in-review tomorrow: Lèse majesté claimed its first victim, Thailand's upcoming regional challenges, the dismal state of our education and all the other small stories that made 2012.