FACT petitions Thailand’s Prime Minister over Internet censorship…by hand
At the opening of the 14th Int’l Anti-Corruption Conference at Queen Sirikit Centre for which Thailand’s Prime Minister was a keynote speaker, CJ Hinke, coordinator of Freedom against Censorship Thailand (FACT), presented the following letter by hand to Dr. Pakdee Pothisiri, commissioner of Thailand’s National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) on November 10.
Dr. Pakdee stated he was not really a govt representative as the Commission is an organic body under the Constitution. However, Dr. Pakdee promised to deliver this letter by hand to the Justice Minister, Pirapan Salirathavibhaga, who was also in attendance, to present it to the Prime Minister.
The delivery of FACT’s letter was witnessed by Dr. Huguette Labelle, chairman of the board to Transparency International, Barry O’Keefe, chair of the Int’l Anti-Corruption Council and Dr. Juree Vichit-Vadakan, president of the National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA), during the IACC’s inaugural press conference.
———————————————————————————————————–
10th November 2010
The Hon. Abhisit Vejjajiva
Prime Minister
Government House
Bangkok BY HAND
Mr. Prime Minister:
According to your government’s official media releases from April 15 to today, 283,610 websites are blocked by your government.
Our website Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) has been blocked since May 9, more than six months. We host no illegal or even uncivil content.
It is ironic that an anti-censorship website should itself be censored by government.
What does a citizen do to get their website unblocked? I have been in contact with your ICT minister, your deputy prime minister will not return my calls and the military authorities at your CRES and CAPO are simply unreachable by the ordinary citizen.
Mr. Prime Minister, what about Chiranuch Premchaiporn, facing 60-years in prison under the Computer Crimes Act for statements she did not herself pose?
We wish to continue discussion of these issues with you and see our website unblocked now.
freedom,
CJ Hinke
Coordinator
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand FACT)
—————————————————————————————–
The Prime Minister has devoted a great deal of hot air to freedom of expression and democracy but, in fact, has continued Thailand’s massive censorship. We remind the PM of his own words:
‘No’ to censorship
Don Sambandaraksa
Bangkok Post Database, June 27, 2007
[Excerpt]:
The Democrat Party has pledged greater electronic media freedom if elected to power in the next general elections. Speaking at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand, Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva gave his views on the political turmoil and laid out his party policies on restoring the democratic process, peace in the South through prosecution of officials responsible for state atrocities and reviving the economy that has suffered from years of infrastructural neglect before fielding questions from a packed room.
“I have come up many times to express my disagreement with the way the current and previous governments handle the media, the Internet included. I am not in favour of blocking signals or blocking websites,” he said.
He said that it was a big mistake for the military junta to block CNN and BBC in the aftermath of the September 19 coup. “When they try to curb freedom of expression, they only hurt themselves,” he said. [end excerpt]
Do we really need to add that the PM has not responded to FACT’s letter despite a top official, Thongchai Sangsiri, Director of Computer Forensics at MICT, declaring Thailand’s Internet censorship “a failure”?
Frankly, Mr. Prime Minister, we’re not big on name-calling but, in your case we must make an exception. You lied to the public about your intentions on free speech before your ascendance as PM, you lied to representatives of Thai Netizen Network about the Computer Crimes Act, you lied to Prachatai about Chiranuch’s prosecution and then you lied to the FCCT about her case, you lied to the int’l audience about media freedom in Thailand and now you’ve lied to the IACC in front of 1,200 int’l participants from 130 countries. Our Prime Minister is a liar!
[FACT comments: This is the first time any Thai govt official has raised questions about Thailand’s wholesale censorship policy. Govt releases since the Emergency Decree April 7 total almost 300,000 blocked webpages increasing by 500 every day. Perhaps, like our Foreign Minister who questioned the use of Thailand’s strict lèse majesté laws, Thongchai just felt more free while overseas!
Of course, we all know that MICT has not sought any court orders since the decree of emergency powers suspended the Computer Crimes Act 2007 and all other laws.
Censorship for “good public image”? We think precisely the opposite.]
Our blacklist has failed us: Thai minister
ZDNet: November 17, 2010
http://www.zdnet.com.au/our-blacklist-has-failed-us-thai-minister-339307333.htm
Thongchai Sangsiri, MICT’s Director of Computer Forensics
A senior minister in Thailand’s ICT authority, which oversees internet censorship in the country, said that blacklisting has failed and should be dropped.
Thongchai Sangsiri, director of computer forensics within Thailand’s Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT), told the Asia-Pacific Telecommunity cybersecurity forum in NSW today that its blacklists are verbose and have created onerous management problems for internet service providers.
“We would like [to] leave parents and teachers to decide what to filter … because [the current system] is too much to handle,” Sangsiri said.
“The blacklists grow with many, many websites to become a burden on ISPs. Blacklisting doesn’t work.”
In light of the litany of technical problems involved with internet content filtering, such as limitations with content blocking and the technique being vulnerable to circumvention, Sangsiri said that the Labor Government may just be fostering public support with its now stale plans to impose mandatory blacklist filtering.
“The majority of the public will think the government is doing something; for public image it is good,” Sangsiri told ZDNet Australia.
The Thailand Government uses URL blacklisting and gateway filtering, and has come under fire from activist groups for alleged oppressive use of the technology.
But Sangsiri maintained that websites listed on the government-run blacklist are only blocked through a court order; however, there are allegations that providers that refuse to comply with non-court-ordered blocking face substantial penalties.
Internet content filtering has also drawn the ire of activists in New Zealand after the voluntary scheme came into force earlier this year.
Martin Cocker, director of New Zealand children advocacy organisation NetSafe, told ZDNet Australia that he opposes content filtering on the grounds that it cannot prevent access to banned materials, but acknowledged that it has value as a deterrent.
New Zealand’s content filtering plan, unlike Australia’s, blocks only child abuse and exploitation materials.
Telecom NZ is spearheading a trial of the scheme.
We consider the illegal entrapment of Viktor Bout by US police on Thai soil and Thailand’s cooperation in his arrest for no crime committed in Thailand or the US to be one of Thai govt’s most shameful foreign incidents in decades.
In the course of a single week, we see Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma’s ‘heroine of democracy’, legally “freed” without any help or even lip-service from Thailand and Viktor Bout illegally shanghaied with the cooperation of Thai govt, making a mockery of any pretence to ‘democracy’.
Whatever Viktor Bout’s reputation or his guilt or innocence, Thai courts broke Thai law by admitting his case to court from the outset following his illegal arrest.
Not content with Bout’s illegal arrest based on a self-interested police informant, Thai govt tried to blame him for the arrival of a North Korean arms plane.
Furthermore, when the Criminal Court ruled against his extradition because the Colombian FARC insurgents are not a terrorist organisation in Thailand, Viktor Bout should have been immediately released and repatriated.
Instead, as on many previous occasions, Thailand chose to bend over to the USA with no Vaseline. After all, the US is a far bigger trading and military partner than Russia.
Thailand buried the rule of law on the Bout case. And all because the US won’t tolerate any competition as the world’s biggest arms merchant. The real Lord of War, the genuine Merchant of Death, is America.
The last arms dealer, extradited to the US from Spain, got 30 years. We have no doubt Viktor will get the same, with plumped-up evidence courtesy of Thai police.
The US has had a plane sitting at Don Muang since Bout’s appeal. Today it took only hours after Cabinet’s decision to put him on that plane. The PM may be trying to pass this decision off on Cabinet but we think the PM must take full responsibility for what happens to Bout in the US.
No matter what we think of Viktor Bout, he has human rights which were denied him by Thailand.
Bout’s wife, Alla, was 10 minutes late to prison. By the time she got there, he was gone…
Viktor Bout extradited to US
- Agence France-Presse: November 17, 2010
- http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/206678/viktor-bout-extradited-to-us
Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout was flown out of Thailand on Tuesday on a special US government jet to face trial in the United States, bringing to an end months of legal wrangling over his extradition.
The 43-year-old former soviet air force pilot has been fighting extradition on terrorism charges since his March 2008 arrest after a sting operation in Bangkok involving undercover US agents posing as Colombian FARC rebels.
“Bout left Thai soil at 1.27 pm (0627 GMT) from Don Mueang airport,” Pol Col Supisarn Bhakdinarunart, commander of the Crime Suppression Division, said.
“He left on a US jet escorted by six officials,” Pol Col Supisarn said.
“I myself saw him off. The next destination of the flight is secret, but its final destination is the US,” he said.
Mr Bout’s sudden departure came shortly after the Thai cabinet approved his handover.
He was escorted by police from Bangkwang maximum security prison in a convoy of police cars with their sirens blaring.
Mr Bout’s wife Alla was waiting outside but did not have a chance to see her husband immediately before he left.
The inspiration for the Hollywood film Lord of War, Mr Bout formerly operated a fleet of cargo planes that delivered weapons to clients in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. He always claimed he did not know what was in the shipments
The 43-year-old former Russian major was the subject of the book Merchant of Deathby Douglas Farah and Stephen Braun, published in 2008.
Some say he was the inspiration for the 2005 film Lord of War starring Nicholas Cage as an arms dealer named Yuri Orlov. According to the director of the movie, a key scene in the film used an Antonov AN-12 aircraft rented from Mr Bout and his Skylink airline, one of more than a dozen the arms trafficker maintained.
The Appeal Court in August ordered the Russian to be handed over to the United States on terrorism related charges, prompting Washington to send a special jet to collect him.
But on that occasion the plane was left waiting on the tarmac after the process was held up by technicalities over new accusations of money-laundering and fraud filed by the United States in an attempt to strengthen its case.
Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had said earlier he would make the final decision on whether to extradite Mr Bout, whose nickname the “Merchant of Death” was coined by a former British government minister.
Mr Bout has maintained his innocence from the day he was detained in the Thai capital after allegedly agreeing to supply surface-to-air missiles in a series of covert meetings that also took him to Denmark and Romania.
Viktor Bout boards a special US jet at Don Mueang airport amid tight security on Tuesday.
He has repeatedly denied suggestions that he is a former KGB agent and maintains that he ran a legitimate air cargo business.
Washington, which has described Bout as “one of the world’s most prolific arms traffickers,” had lobbied hard for his extradition. The case put Thailand in a difficult diplomatic spot between the United States and Russia.
A furious Moscow has said the extradition attempt was politically motivated and vowed “to do everything necessary” to bring Mr Bout home, sparking speculation that he may have knowledge of sensitive information.
The secretary-general the National Security Council, Thawil Pliensri, expressed confidence there would be no rift with Moscow over his extradition.
“This decision will not create a problem with Russia because our foreign ministry has already talked with Russia,” he told reporters. “It’s our decision, no matter whether Russia agrees or not.”
Mr Bout, who speaks six languages and has used at least seven separate identities, faces a maximum sentence of life in prison if convicted in the United States on charges including conspiracy to kill US nationals and providing material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organisation.
Washington claims that the arms he has sold or brokered have fuelled conflicts and supported regimes in Afghanistan, Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Sudan.
The US embassy in Bangkok declined to comment on the case.
14th IACC report-The Nation
17-11-10
[CJ Hinke of FACT comments: We’ll provide real statistics later but, for now, we’ll say there were more than 1,200 delegates from 130 countries. Although we met some fine people who were really committed to making a difference, we didn’t notice anybody except us demanding any transparency from Thailand. However, the decision to hold such a meet and then to have the PM and several Cabinet ministers lie about democracy in Thailand was shameful. We hear the 15th IACC will be held in Harare (not sure Brazil is much better!).
The PM escaped from the hall following his keynote and Justice Minister Pirapan found it more important to have a free lunch than meet the press.
That left the only govt rep Prof Pakdee Pothisiri, commissioner of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. He declined to answer my direct question as to the 283,610 websites blocked by Nov 10 or how to unblock FACT. However, Dr. Pakdee claimed to be meeting the Justice Minister that afternoon and promised to deliver FACT’s letter for the PM.
We have yet to hear from any of them. Must have something more important than free speech...]
Anti-graft campaigners wind up meet
Kornchanok Raksaseri
The Nation: November 14, 2010
The 14th International Anti-Corruption Conference closed with a Bangkok Declaration announced yesterday. Decision makers and practitioners agreed to focus more on people and the media.
“We recommended that the G20 uphold their pledge to “prevent and tackle corruption through [their] Anti-Corruption Plan”, and increase integrity and transparency in global financial markets. The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) conclusion on corruption as a threat to prosperity and development must also be followed up,” the Bangkok Declaration said in regard to other international forms being held at this time.
During his closing speech, chair of the IACC Council Barry O’Keefe said good signs were emerging as corruption had become a main agenda issue nationally and globally. But there were many challenges and threats of corruption. He encouraged the participants not to give up hope in the fight against corruption.
As well as civil society groups putting pressure on governments about corruption, to restore trust for peace and security, the participants agreed that law enforcement must be changed so there is no compromise to corruption, the Bangkok Declaration said.
While discussing ways to lift transparency and accountability in natural resource and energy markets, the panelists identified trends and main problems caused by corruption related to the natural resources, as well as the need to modernize administration of those resources.
The conference discussed how to ensure a collective commitment related to climate governance and also discussed the corporate sector’s role and pushed for more engagement by civil society groups.
Huguette Labelle, chair of Transparency International, said the conference was successful with so many participants exchanging experiences, ideas and identifying new issues worth addressing.
However, she said it was natural that the declaration would be a broad statement rather than a detailed one.
“Declaration is meant to demonstrate to the world that a large group of people met here and expressed a commitment. When you come to a meeting like this you don’t have an action plan,” she said.
“It is broad in order to get consensus, it’s hard when you have so many diverse interests. [The statement] is more inspirational than details,” she said.
Brazil will host the next conference in 2012.
Thai military in charge-Bangkok Post
17-11-10
[FACT comments: Lest you harboured any illusions that ‘emergency powers’ are merely a euphemism for martial law, it can now be clearly seen that the military is really calling the shots and Suthep is back in the driver’s seat.]
CRES to decide when to lift decree
- Bangkok Post: November 12, 2010
- http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/206063/cres-to-decide-when-to-lift-decree
The Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) will decide the appropriate time to lift the emergency decree from Bangkok and adjacent provinces, supreme commander Gen Songkitti Jakrabatra said on Friday.
“The situation right now is normal, but to revoke the emergency decree potentially dangerous incidents must first be dealt with and state agencies must be able to work normally,” Gen Songkitti said.
“The CRES is the centre that coordinates with different ministries and departments and will determine when the emergency decree should be lifted.”
When reporters asked about Democrat Party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban’s return as deputy prime minister in charge of security affairs, the supreme commander said the army and the Defence Ministry had no problems with Mr Suthep.
On Deputy Prime Minister Sanan Kachornprasart’s plan to meet with army officials to discuss his plan to bring about national reconciliation, Gen Songkitti said the army had no enemies but the army also supported Maj-Gen Sanan’s peace mission.
| [FACT comments: We’re sure that most Thais, including us, thought we were rid of this thug when he stepped down as Deputy PM for national security to contest the Surat Thani by-election. He won on his home turf at better than 87% of the vote. Now, by some right royal joke the Dems' own strongman is back flush with victory and ready to crush any dissenting voices. This is where Burma started...]
Suthep Royally Endorsed as Deputy Prime Minister |
||
| Thai-ASEAN News Network: November 15, 2010
http://www.thailandoutlook.tv/tan/ViewData.aspx?DataID=1037339
|
||
| His Majesty the King has graciously endorsed a minor Cabinet reshuffle, putting Suthep Thaugsuban as Deputy Prime Minister effective today. Suthep will be sworn in on November 19 at 5:30 P.M. at Siriraj Hospital. |
[FACT comments: That this survey is published at the conclusion of the int’l anti-corruption congress is telling. There was a lot of posturing at the IACC but just business-as-usual for Thai govt.]
SURVEY
Suthep ranked least honest; Abhisit tops poll
The Nation: November 10, 2010
http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/415473-suthep-ranked-least-honest%3B-abhisit-tops-thai-poll/
New Democrat MP Suthep Thaugsuban is the least honest politician, but his immediate boss Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is the most trustworthy, according to Bangkok Poll.
Among 1,136 residents of Greater Bangkok responding to the survey, 39.2 per cent consider Democrat secretary-general Suthep as the least straightforward, followed by Newin Chidchob, the de facto leader of the Bhum Jai Thai Party, at 24.2 per cent and Transport Minister Sophon Saram at 8.3 per cent.
The opinion poll on “Believe in Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to solve the corruption problem” was conducted by Bangkok University Research Centre last week.
The most sincere politician is Abhisit at 49.8 per cent, followed by Democrat chief adviser Chuan Leekpai at 30.3 per cent and Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij at 2.2 per cent.
The worst form of corruption is politicians abusing their policy for their own benefit at 40.8 per cent, followed by collusion at 16.4 per cent and double standards in policy and law enforcement at 13.0 per cent.
Despite Thailand’s hosting the 14th International Anti-Corruption Conference from today to Saturday, 72.3 per cent believe the corruption problem in this country won’t change, while only 15.5 per cent think it will improve and 12.2 per cent fear it will increase.
Rights group calls for end to ‘failed’ emergency
Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation: November 11, 2010
The military should withdraw armed soldiers from BTS Skytrain and MRT subway stations and lift immediately the emergency decree which has been imposed for nearly six months. The prolonged decree and soldiers’ presence is militarising Thai society and creating fear among those who oppose the government, said Patchanee Kumnak, a committee member of Social Move, a fringe group of Thai leftists.
As most local human rights groups and the National Human Rights Commission have failed to put pressure on the government, the group decided to issue its own statement on Sunday ” nearly seven months after the state of emergency was imposed in Bangkok and beyond.
“We concluded that the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) had no clear policy on the matter, including the issue of detained [red-shirt] political prisoners. They do not stand alongside a majority of the people. They do not defend the rights of political expression of red shirts and appear to be more concerned about the government’s stability. The same can be said of many local human rights NGOs,” Patchanee told The Nation.
Patchanee said the emergency decree has failed to bring about a political solution to the conflict. “It only reinforced the sense of fear,”
she said, adding that the government is exploiting the emergency decree for its own political gain while soldiers’ presence at public mass transit systems are having a negative effect on democracy as it thwarts political expression.
“They should not look at the people as their enemies,” she added.
Army Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd, spokesperson for the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES) said a survey was conducted by CRES and showed that passengers “feel safe” in the presence of armed soldiers at BTS and MRT stations in Bangkok.
“Nevertheless, I’ll inform my commanders as to how it may result in negative impacts,” Sansern said. The colonel added however that lifting of the emergency decree would be a decision made by the Cabinet and not CRES.
Meanwhile, national human rights commissioner Nirand Pitakwatchara ” queried about demands by Social Move and criticism against the independent body ” admitted the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) may not have regularly followed up on demands to have the emergency decree lifted.
“It must be admitted that we have not followed up [on the issue]. We must follow the development of the government.”
Nirand insisted however that the position of the rights body is crystal clear. “We reiterate that the government should lift the emergency so it would lead to a climate of reconciliation. The CRES should also be dissolved and a government body tasked to look into CRES conduct as to whether it did things right or not,” said Nirand, adding however it was up to the government to decide whether the decree should be lifted.
Nirand, who chaired NHRC’s political rights subcommittee, said that the commission had been working closely with the Department of Protection and Promotion of Human Rights and the Law Council in seeking bail for remaining ordinary red shirts jailed since May 19.
Progress had been made with some detainees being granted bail.
[FACT comments: We simply don’t agree with Mr. Russell. Each censoring country creates a climate of acceptability for censorship adopted by other states. While most of us do not understand most of the censorship occurring in the Middle east, for example, we understand China better politically and culturally. Make no mistake: it’s Thai govt’s wet dream to have the control over citizens the Chinese have! All that remains is citizen resistance to censorship, subversion and circumvention.]
How the Guardian got it wrong on censorship in SE Asia
Jon Russell
Social Media & Technology in Asia: November 2, 2010
http://www.asiancorrespondent.com/jon-russell/how-the-guardian-got-it-wrong-on-censorship-in-se-asia
|
A recent Guardian article which concluded that “governments across southeast Asia are following China’s authoritarian censorship of the digital world” made a big impact in one unintended way. Frankly, it is patronising to conclude that southeast Asia is following in China’s footsteps. Yes, internet censorship is rife across the region at varying levels, but to say it is “following” the Chinese path is far too simplistic. A host of domestic reasons and intricacies are responsible for censorship in each country. First up, however, was the reporting in the article which cited the following on the censorship in the Philippines: In the Philippines, cybercrime legislation before the parliament would outlaw anything deemed obscene or indecent. Palatino says: “The laws are deliberately broad and vague so they can be used to shut down anything subversive.” As noted Philippines digital commentator Janette Toral told me: Legislations are not yet laws and can’t therefore be stated as if it is already in the present and happening. But this was just the start. Feedback was such that the same newspaper commissioned a follow-up article from Filipino freelance journalist Anne Elicano who expressed concern that the original article would do “more harm than good” simply by associating the two regimes together. The report quotes an MP who worries that pending anti-cybercrime bills in parliament are deliberately vague so “they can be used to shut down anything subversive”. One bill was thrown out by parliament in 2009 and refiled again this year. But even if it were to become law, “subversives” have nothing to fear unless they’re the type of subversives who enjoy child pornography, cyber sex, illegal computer access and internet fraud. Away from its coverage of the Philippines, the article covers the ongoing issues surrounding Thai Prachathai website editor Chiranuch Premchaiporn (Jiew), who was most recently arrested for failing to delete a comment made to the web board she moderates quickly enough. However, it makes little more than a small reference to the national state of emergency (SOE), failing to point that this method is being used, almost at will, to block and restrict access to a huge amount of websites. In comparison, censorship through the SOE makes lese majeste – the offence for which Jiew was arrested – seem orderly, something which it is certainly not. The latest wave of SOE-backed censorship will, according to FACT, see 46,000 new websites blocked taking the grand total to more than 250,000. Given that Thailand was the first country to break the 100,000 websites censored barrier earlier this year, the new figure represents an astonishing amount of censorship, using the mysterious SOE. Interestingly, FACT highlights that alongside the newly blocked sites, another 3,000 are described as “pending”. This begs the question, are these sites dangerous or not? If they are, then block them, if not leave them alone. It seems the censors are having trouble defining exactly what constitutes a threat to national security. Here is what FACT says on the matter: [The] Govt has no plan to left the state of emergency but they seem to be blocking as fast as they can in case the situation reverts to ‘normal’ and they must once again seek court orders for blocking under the Computer Crimes Act 2007. Back to the original Guardian article. While it can be argued that censorship in Vietnam – which Facebook is using as a ‘test-bed’ for China – has elements in common with China, a number of the other countries mentioned have less. Burma is, for example, arguably more restrictive than China, as was demonstrated this week when it is alleged to have slowed the country’s internet speeds to minimise the negative news flowing out of the country in relation to its controversial elections. While Burma chooses to remove choice from its citizens, for example just 4 percent of the population make use of telephones, internet penetration is 0.4 percent, China allows mobile and other technologies, to develop and grow under the close eye of the state. The Burmese stats are mentioned within the article. However they are presented as mere background rather than an example of the hugely constrasting attitudes between the regimes of Burma and China. Not so. After all, restricting access to technology is a form of censorship itself, and a hugely effective one at that. It is usually positive to see southeast Asia’s web censorship raised in mainstream titles like the Guardian, however I can’t help agreeing with Elicano in thinking this article may do more harm than good. The assumption that the region is following China is hugely misleading and belies the complex domestic circumstances and cultures which are responsible for each country’s own censorship issues. As the Thailand government has shown, censorship in the region is far from black and white and shouldn’t be lumped together to make for easy comparison with China. |
|||
