FACTorial: If voting could change anything, it would be illegal
Yellowshirt PAD No-Vote campaign billboard: stupid buffaloes, toothless tigers, mad dogs,sneaky lizards and have-a-banana monkeys. Seen in front of the United Nations on Ratchadamnoen Nok on the way to Parliament.
American anarchist Emma Goldman could not have been more right. This was dangerous, seditious speech (and still is) and the US promptly deported her on trumped-up charges.
The trouble is, most people equate voting with democracy. It is actually only a small part of our democratic duties as citizens and govt’s (long forgotten) democratic responsibilities to us.
It’s been a really long time since we had any kind of meaningful election in Thailand. Think about it: Have you ever heard of any candidates who were, say, poor? Certainly not, in any country, and—SURPRISE!– they all seem to get much, much richer in office.
The Yellowshirts’ second billboard—the Heaven and Hell, excuse us, Earth, Party. [The Nation]
Eight million stories in the naked city: here are 24 of them, on Sathorn Road. [2Bangkok]
Voting is compulsory in Thailand, not voting is subject to criminal penalties. The Yellowshirt PAD is encouraging citizens not to vote. However, I see this as ‘passive resistance’ rather than genuine civil disobedience. With this strategy, we run the certainty that another bunch of greedy, little know-nothings will get themselves elected.
In 2007, the military coup govt passed the most repressive laws in Thai history. We have them to thank for the Computer Crimes Act and wholesale censorship, the Internal Security Act, and new film and printing laws, all passed in their outgoing 11th hour. Does anyone else think it strange that future govts accept these illegal laws from an illegal govt as valid?!?
The coup’s legacy remains and military control of Thailand’s govt and people is stronger than it has been in decades. Military strongmen, as in Burma, rule Thailand with an iron fist. The military has shown itself intent on destabilising Thailand’s monarchy by emasculating King Bhumibol by using rampant prosecution in the King’s name with the full cooperation, naturally, of Thailand’s politicians.
I’ve always liked Chuwit’s crazy ads. He is independent of any establishment political parties. His position against govt corruption makes him, in theory anyway, a sort of Thai Ron Paul. But…can we overlook the fact Chuwit earned his wealth on the backs of our daughters in his massage parlours?
If one closely examines his campaign strategy in each election, we see Chuwit selling himself to voters. That’s what businessmen do and that’s precisely what old square-head did. Thailand certainly doesn’t need another big ego in the driver’s seat. So much for the ‘independents’.
Chuwit’s election to office is beyond remote possibility although a lot of ordinary Bangkok voters are talking about him. If there were an enormous number of ballots cast for Chuwit, the outcome would be merely a divided vote, guaranteeing the election of…another bunch of greedy, little know-nothings.
The Democrats are a well-proven choice, of course. The Democrat prime minister has proven himself a liar on nearly every issue. Even worse luck for a pol, he’s a liar who always gets caught.
The Dem’s deputy PM, a savvy old warhorse of a pol who can talk out of both sides of his mouth at the same time he’s walking on both sides of the street and still turn gold into dreck, seems to have been mostly running the show behind pretty boy except for a few occasions when the PM stepped out of line. He’s been at the heart of every single corruption scandal involving the Dems for decades.
Bye-bye! Our fearless Dep climbs down a ladder at the Parliament’s back wall as Redshirt citizens inside Parliament exercise their rights to observe and be heard.
We have the Dems to thank for massive censorship of more than half a million webpages, nine months of a false-flag ‘emergency’ in which all rule of law was suspended, enormous numbers of prosecutions of political dissidents for public protest, the shutdown of radio, television and magazines, more than 1,000 political prisoners, and shooting Thai subjects in the streets, when soldiers weren’t kept busy killing Rohingya and Hmong refugees or Southern Muslims.
Using the military coup’s Computer Crimes Act and data retention regulations as a tool for silencing political dissent was not enough for the ‘Democrats’. This govt introduced not only a new computer law which criminalised mere access and possession of “inappropriate” content and enforced third-party liability with criminal penalties against webmasters, website administrators and owners and all content providers, including ISPs and search engines (that means Google, too). The bill was suspended pending ‘further study’ after substantial protest from netizens and media. No need to worry: They don’t actually care about us. A future govt will ram this though when we’re not lookng.
The Dems also introduced a Public Assembly Act not to protect citizen protest but to, unconstitutionally, restrict and criminalise it.
Can we think any future govt, of any party or coalition, will not resurrect such police-state bills?
The Dems created a govt convinced it knows better than the rest of us and was not afraid to lock people up or shoot them for thinking differently. We’ve definitely had enough Damn-ocracy from this bunch.
Ever since the coup d’etat, it’s really been the Thai military in control. The generals allow us the illusion of civilian govt while pulling the strings. Thailand is fast becoming Burma in sheep’s clothing.
Let’s forget—entirely—all the splinter parties. They’re just vanity voting like vanity publishing. Their puffed-up old pols remind me of Orwell’s Animal Farm. Dinosaurs run these parties for their own self-interest, completely out of touch with Thai people. They may be important in a future coalition minority govt but we can’t imagine who would actually vote for them on election day even were they your relatives.
Voters have just one question—“How much are we gonna get paid?” [Thai Rath]
That leaves Peua Thai. While the Redshirt movement is divided over support for a fugitive PM, Puea Thai is not. With a Puea Thai majority, Thaksin’s sister, Puying-lots-of-luck, will be our next prime minister with square-head pulling the strings from overseas and all govt positions filled by Thaksin sycophants. This exile has already “proudly” described his sister as his ‘clone’.
That assessment may be even more true because Yingluck is facing criminal and civil cases related to her brother’s assets. Should this lucky girl become prime minister, she could be convicted and gaoled during her term of office. Thai courts have already ruled her to be proxy to big bro’s assets. Just runs in the family!
Square-head’s kid sister is also facing three charges of perjury for making false statements to Thailand’s SEC and further charges brought by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. Certainly doesn’t seem to make for a squeaky, honest PM from the git-go. Can we expect her to be any less of a liar than the current PM?
Our runaway prime minister bled this country dry. I think it inconceivable that the fugitive PM could legally be allowed to return except to a gaol cell but this is Thailand so there is at least the possibility all pretence at legality might be discarded with PT at the helm.
Thaksin the Great, you say? So why doesn’t he just suck it up like anybody else and go to gaol for his paltry two-year sentence? If he is too cowardly to go to prison for us, how can he be brave enough to lead us into a democratic future? He has a lifetime to answer for murdered families in his three wars on drugs, murders at Tak Bai and Krue Se, extrajudicial killings, tortures, murders which took place with his tacit approval. If we really need to be more clear: Thaksin Shinawatra murdered Somchai Neelapaichit. Two years, he could do it planking!
If Thaksin is somehow pardoned by circumventing the court process, rewriting the Consitution, Thailand’s entire judicial system will be brought into even greater disrepute. We will have become just another corrupt, third-world tinpot pretending at democracy. Constitutions, ahem, are supposed to mean something.
Many in the Redshirt movement who support Thaksin’s return have obviously failed to consider that grants for education, healthcare, water and more to poor villagers came not from his own money but from ours. These programmes were accomplished solely out of self-interest. Thaksin, along with all other government officials and parliamentarians, refused to even meet with the Assembly of the Poor. Thaksin himself refused lunch with Granny Hai. Granny Hai—listen, is there anybody else you’d rather have lunch with?
Will Puea Thai unblock our Internet? Get rid of lèse majesté laws?
The only genuine reason Thaksin wants to come back to Thailand is to recover his prestige after being tossed, to take back his ill-gotten gains seized by the courts and…to steal some more money from the rest of us.
If anyone genuinely decries ‘double standards’ by Thai politicians and want to get rid of the rich, elite in govt, Thaksin is first off the dance-card. This billionaire is no phrai peasant!
Peua Thai plans to make it a Cabinet decision to free Thailand’s political prisoners, calling it an ‘amnesty’. This is certainly a laudable sentiment but hardly one likely to be put into action. In fact, this PT platform is the only reason we can think of to vote for them.
In most ways, all prisoners are political prisoners. Has Puea Thai really thought this strategy through? Where will they draw the line? What about “terrorism” charges? It is unlikely they will see those arrested, for instance, for drugs as political prisoners. (Yes, they are.) Thaksin, of course, solved the drug problem by murdering a few thousand Thai drug users, along with their children and grandmothers. And we want him back? WTF!!!
How about convictions using the Computer Crimes Act or other lèse majesté laws? Would Peua Thai actually be brave enough to accomplish the release of those political prisoners pitting themselves squarely against Royal cronyism? Will the party stop specious prosecutions, ensure free media and unblock our Internet? Will they support, for example, the abolition of the Privy Council?
Our neighbour Myanmar firmly denies it has any political prisoners. Guess that depends on how one defines politics but I think Thai govt would offer the world the same responce!
Will Puea Thai drop lèse majesté prosecutions of Thais in exile: socialist, republican academic Giles Ji, Thaksinite Jakrapob, Red hardliner Arisman and undoubtedly others? Will the party allow free thinkers to return home? We genuinely doubt any political party would court free thinkers.
Thai pols are not known for decisive action, thinking differently or exhibiting any personal courage involving political risk. Frankly, even if Puea Thai is elected to a majority govt, we think it will be business as usual, just another cheap trick on Thai people.
In fact, Yingluck is already looking for the exits on this issue—the PT platform has been clarified as only an amnesty for convicted politicians, must mean big Bro! Gee, that makes me feel better.
Despite Thailand’s flagrant and atrocious human rights abuses, our govt serves as chair of the UN’s National Human Rights Council. Can anyone believe human rights would be more protected under Puea Thai or any other regime? Thailand is ruled by military junta, unless all of us do something about it.
Would Puea Thai cut the nuts off the military? Get real!
[Khaosod]
In short, voting in the July elections gives me no sense of comfort or justice. Much as in the USA, and Zimbabwe, there is no change which means there still is no hope. If we vote, the greedy, little know-nothings win; they win if we don’t vote, too.
We find it wildly appropriate that 53.5 million ballots are being printed—for only 47.3 million voters—by the National Lottery Board. That’s exactly what this election means for Thailand: gambling on a lottery.
Disclaimer: I have never voted. I think it antithetical to democracy to vote for the lesser of two evils. Show me somebody worth voting for.
Where we’ve been, where we’re going: No direction home.
It’s not him. The worst of the worst: There’s actually a candidate, Pradit Phataraphasit, promising a house and a car for every Thai voter. Here’s a guy who knows money. In fact, he was former deputy minister of finance. PMUOTFILSHINTGTTH! [Pick me up off the floor, I’m laughing so hard, I need to go to hospital!] Of course, it’s not his money! Just what we need, more traffic jams, more pollution, more debt. Maybe he gets one on those nice Royal escorts, snarling up the rest of us. Just get under the house, Pradit!
If you vote, write in a protest vote, vote for yourself or your favourite buffalo or favourite monkey, spoil the ballot. If enough voters had the courage to protest at the polls, govt might consider itself warned. That is what only nonviolent civil disobedience can accomplish, putting power back into the hands of the people.
FACT’s prediction: Our next PM. An animated straw man with head stuffed with sawdust. “If I only had a brain…”
FACT’s bottom line: No way we can win, no matter the outcome. No matter the outcome, Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) will still be here defeding your freedoms, at considerable risk. Sign FACT’s petition!
Thai Election Watch
21-06-11
Thai Election Watch
http://www.thaielectionwatch.net/
What is Thai Election Watch ?
The Thai Election Watch project aims to empower Thai citizens and other observers to monitor the Thai parliamentary elections on 3 July 2011. The project’s goal is to unify nationwide data on election-related irregularities and violence, and visualize them on a map of Thailand. The data sources are reports from official bodies (Police, Election Commission of Thailand etc.), established news outlets, accredited election observers, and citizen reports. Thai Election Watch is grounded in the belief that citizens’ reports on election-related events in their local constituencies can add to a free and fair flow of information. This in turn increases the accountability and transparency of the election process.
Who is Thai Election Watch?
Thai Election Watch is an all-volunteer project started at Thammasat University, Bangkok. It is independent, non-partisan and politically unaffiliated
What technology is used for Thai Election Watch?
Thai Election Watch is based on the open source platform Ushahidi and the non-profit application FrontlineSMS.
How can I report?
1. By sending a text message (SMS) to 088-876-5768 2. By sending an email to report@thaielectionwatch.net 3. By sending a tweet with the hashtag/s #thaielectionwatch 4. By filling out the online report form
Your report should include details on the event in the following order: WHERE?, WHEN?, WHAT? Also, please do include pictures, videos or links to news sources to increase the credibility of your report whenever possible.
What should I report?
You can contribute to Thai Election Watch by reporting any electoral misconduct or violence related to the parliamentary elections of 3 July 2011. Our report categories can give you some idea of the type of events that are considered misconduct. You can either report events that you personally witnessed or send in other reports from established news media. Please do not report rumors and hearsay unless you have credible evidence.
Why should I report?
• Because you can contribute to the transparency and accountability of the elections by sharing your information
• Because you can exchange your experiences with other citizens by commenting and rating reports or having your reports rated.
• Because you can contribute to a free and open society through your civic participation.
How do you address privacy and safety of reporters?
Your name, phone number, IP address or any other identifying information will never be published on the website, unless you deliberately include it in your report.
How to get involved?
There are several ways in which you can contribute to the project: 1) Submit reports.
Report on electoral misconduct or violence in your area. All reports are useful and will
contribute to the overall information content of the platform. 2) Spread the word.
Tell everyone you know about Thai Election Watch, send the link via email, Facebook, Hi-5, Myspace and other social networking sites. Tweet it, blog it, add us to your friends list, display our banner. Take out an add in your local newspaper, call in to your favorite radio show, in other words: Use all available means to get the word out! The platform can only be successful if as many people as possible know about it and use it.
3) Be a volunteer. If you are willing to share your expertise (graphic design, programming, media contacts, election monitoring experience etc.) with us, and you subscribe to our ideals of impartiality, open information and integrity, please send a mail to volunteer@thaielectionwatch.net
[CJ Hinke of FACT comments: Our modern “justice” system is simply a system of revenge. This means that all prisoners are really political prisoners. In fact, by gaoling large numbers of political prisoners, govt is unwittingly breeding schools for the radicalisation of ordinary ‘criminals’! Ooops...
Frankly, I don’t have an answer for what to do about those who commit heinously unspeakable violence (sort of like soldiers and police, eh?). There may always be such people who need to be separated from society for the protection of others.
But I believe fundamentally that people are good, know the difference between right and wrong and are capable of redemption. Which means the rest of us must be capable of not only forgiveness but acceptance for prisoners’ return to society.
Even the most violent, incorrigible recidivists should be allowed the dignity and respect of human rights in prison. This includes adequate contact with the community outside with reading matter, news, television, film.
Most importantly, this means that every prisoner deserves Internet access to educate themselves and email to contact family and friends. Yes, Facebook and Twitter, too.
We can raise our own standard of humanity by the proper treatment of prisoners.
Dostoyevsky: “The degree of a nation’s civilisation can be seen in the way it treats its prisoners.” All nations of the world are so far a pitiable failure.]
Prisons found to be bulging at the seams, research finds
Bangkok Post: June 1, 2011
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/239920/prisons-found-to-be-bulging-at-the-seams-research-finds
Thailand’s prisons are bulging at the seams with more than double their holding capacity. a problem the Corrections Department is far from solving, new research has found.
Danthong Breen, chairman of the inmate rights protection activist group Union for Civil Liberty (UCL), said some 224,300 inmates were currently doing time in 143 prisons throughout the country which have a total capacity of just 105,748.
“This means that Thailand’s prisons are the eighth-most crowded in the world,” he said.
He also said that the problem of overcrowding was worse in prisons for women.
Even though the Corrections Department regulations require that each inmate have 2.25 square metres of space in a cell, under the current circumstances they only have 1.1 square metres or less.
Strikingly, the current overcrowding has not surged to record levels. That was reached back in 2001 and 2002 when the country’s prisons housed 250,000 inmates.
The information on the prison population was the result of a research project conducted by UCL and Thammasat University’s Research Centre on Criminology and Justice.
Thailand has the second-largest inmate population in Southeast Asia, behind only Singapore. The kingdom’s prison population is the 25th largest in the world.
The researchers found that overcrowding was the result of three factors – people being held while awaiting trial, too severe penalties, and a lack of other forms of penalties.
Researchers also conducted in-depth surveys and interviews at Bang Kwang Prison in Bangkok and the Central Women’s Prison of Chiang Rai.
At Bang Kwang Prison, cells measuring 6×8 metres housed up to 43 inmates – equating to prisoners having only 0.7 to 0.8 sq m space apiece.
Also, death row inmates are chained all the time despite the fact that the prisons in which they are housed are high security.
Despite the crowding, researchers found that overall conditions in Bang Kwang have improved over the years with a lower incidence of violations. Still, human rights violations are a regular occurrence.
Inmates who were interviewed said they would like to see improvements in the food they are served, better lavatories and shower facilities, opportunities to work and receive wages, and to be given access to educational programmes.
The use of physical and psychological torture on death row inmates should be stopped, and, more importantly, the death penalty should be abolished without any conditions, the researchers opined.
Even worse crowding was found in the central women’s prison in Chiang Rai where cells measuring 12×19 metres hold on average 180 to 200 inmates and 6×8-metre cells hold 90 to 100 women. The figures are so high because of the large number of illegal foreign workers being held there.
“Women prisoners are unlike men because they endure bad conditions and do not complain,” Mr Danthong Breen said.
Researchers recommended using other forms of punishment such as fines and repatriation, instead of incarceration.
In addition, up to 90% of prisoners are young people and workers who have committed minor crimes. That prison population should be separated and sent for rehabilitation, fined, or sentenced to public service instead, they recommended.
Thanadech Khantanachot, consultant to the Campaign to End the Death Penalty, an activist group, and ex-prisoner at Bang Kwang Prison, said convicts had already been judged and punished by the courts, but they were punished a second time by human rights violations in the jails.
| Dear all
Warm greetings!
On the 30th April of this year Somyot Pruksakasemsuk was arrested for the second time under the Lese Majeste Law/charge.
His bail applications were denied by the court for twice last week. It seems that he may stay in prison till his case/trial is completed. This is a great violations of human rights for anyone before proven to be guilty, they shall enjoy the right to be bail out.
(Note: About Somyot’s case: http://trinleychodron.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/somyot-preuksaka)
The international community from the social and labour movement has set up a global cooperation and joint campaign for Free Somyot. Free Somyot campaign is officially launched on the 15 June 2011.
Please read here: A cross border international effort has set up to launch and start the campaign to “free Somyot” on the 15 June 2011. This is the official site of the campaign. you can stay in touch with all the happenings of Somyot’s case and the actions from the international and inside Thailand. You may receive Somyot;s letters from prison from time to time . About Somyot: He is amongst 100s of politically active people in Thailand who have been detained under Article 112, the lese-majeste law, in the run up to the Thai elections in July. For more information go to this website, http://www.freesomyot.wordpress.com/ http://freesomyot.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/launching-the-campaign/
2, A face book page has launched . so you may share your views directly. Click and join this FB page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Free-Somyot/122999694453000
3. International actions continue: The protest actions in front of Thai embassy in Denmark; Read here: Copenhagen Clean Clothes Campaign action! http://freesomyot.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/copenhagen-clean-clothes-campaign-action/ o http://www.cleanclothes.org/news/further-action-for-somyot - Australia and Asia Workers Link appeal for supporting Free Somyot campaign and write letter to Somyot - http://mapping.aawl.org.au/content/write-somyot
4, Free Somyot Campaign calling for your solidarity actions; What you can do: We are asking you to do two things. The first is to submit a letter of protest to the Thai Prime Minister and to the Thai Embassy in your country. To do this go to http://freesomyot.wordpress.com/letter-to-thai-prime-minister/
The second request is to send Somyot a book or some creative product, in his capacity as the Librarian of Bangkok Prison (yes, seriously, he is the librarian!). You can do this either by post to: The Librarian, Somyot Pruksakasemsuk, Bangkok Remand Prison, 33 Ngamvongvan Road, Ladyao, Jatujak, Bangkok 10900 or electronically to thelibrarianofbangkokprison@yahoo.co.uk
Your action will help to keep international attention on Somyot and the other activists which raises both their safety and their chances of release. Read: http://freesomyot.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/launching-the-campaign/
- There is a new video clip that is produced by one of the victim of the Lese Majeste Law. The clip produced by Pruay Salty Head This is an interesting short video clip on Lese Majeste Law and why it has to be abolish!! - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYqZjfZkjZo
Many thanks for your kind attention and solidarity From -Malaysia Support Group for Democracy in Thailand –
SUPPORT: -“Free Somyot Campaign”
Wish you well and happy always, Siew Hwa 李书华 |
An Open Letter on Lese Majeste Law in Thailand:
To:
Ambassadors of Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Denmark,
France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United
States of America, and Head of Delegation of the European Union.
June 10, 2011
Dear Mr/Madam Ambassadors,
This letter is an appeal on behalf of the people in Thailand who have been suffering from the suppressive and violent measures imposed by the upper social, military and judiciary echelons. In addition to state-military brutality which resulted in 92 deaths and thousands injured during April-May 2010, the ruling regime continues to instill fear, harass and arrest people simply because their writing and speech are seen as detrimental to the interests of these elites and their political position.
In their obvious contempt for the value of human life and peace, the ruling regime has shown little regard for constitutional freedoms, judicial fairness in decision-making and in human rights. Some public voices have been raised against the arrests of academics and well-known people, but many more cases involve ordinary people who do not have the privilege to receive domestic and international attention to their plight.
Seemingly, putting people behind bars for spurious reasons is carried out in the name of law. But the legal action in fact serves either as a pretext to intimidate people into submission or as a disguised device of authoritarian politics. In the name of lèse-majesté law (Section 112 of the criminal code) and of the Computer Crime Act of 2007 together with some other criminal charges, basic human rights as well as the fundamental codes of decency have been abused and violated the rights of the general public. Since the 2006 coup, there has been an unprecedented increase in the number of lèse-majesté cases.
The number has jumped from an average of less than five cases per year prior to the coup on the 16 September 2006 to 126 in 2007 to more than 220 people at the present time – the highest ever since the law came into force.
The intimidation of academics, social activists, as well as countless ordinarycitizens, is symptomatic of a broader set of despotic practices which gravely threaten the exercise of rights and the future of democracy in Thailand. Based on such deteriorating situation, we would humbly ask Your Excellency to support our concerns and relay the attached information to your democratic governments.
In order to prevent further abuses of human rights and damage to the international reputation of Thailand, we request that your government send an urgent appeal to the Thai Government as follows:
1. The reform of the lèse-majesté law.
2. Pending the reform, the Thai Government is morally obliged to suspend for the time being the use of the current lèse-majesté law and the Computer Act in connection to the lèse-majesté charge.
3. The Thai Government must take action to withdraw the current lèse-majesté charges against ordinary people and political opposition, and work to secure the immediate release of those already convicted in a secret court hearing under the lèse-majesté law.
We, the undersigned, sincerely hope that your country with its utmost respect for democracy, human rights, freedom and integrity, will try every possible means to help stop the further violation of human rights and encourage the return of the democratic process and liberty in Thailand.
Yours sincerely,
The Santiprachadham Network
Nitirassadorn (Enlightened Jurists www.enlightened-jurists.com)
Apichart Satitniramai, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof. Faculty of Economics, Thammasat University
Charnvit Kasetsiri, Ph.D., Former Rector of Thammasat University
Chaiyan Rajchagool, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof., Institute for Religion, Culture and Peace, Payap University
David Streckfuss, Ph.D., The CIEE Research and Development Institute, Khon Kaen University
Kasem Phenpinant, Ph.D., Asst. Prof., Department of Philosophy, Chulalongkorn University
Krittiya Archawanitkul, Ph.D., Assoc.Prof. Institute for Population and Social Studies, Mahidol University
Niti Pawakapan, Ph.D., Asst Prof., Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University
Prajak Kongkirati, Lecturer, Faculty of Political Science, Thammasat University
Pinkaew Luengaramsri, Ph.D., Faculty of Social Science, Chiangmai University
Puangthong Pawakapan, Ph.D., Asst. Prof. Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University
Saksinee Emasiri Thanakulmas, Researcher, Project for the Estabishment of thInstitute for Human Rights and Peace Studies, Mahidol University
Sriprapha Petcharasmesree, Ph.D., Center of Human Rights Studies and Social Development, Madidol University
Thanet Apornsuwan, Ph.D., Professor, Pridi Banomyong International College, Thammasat University
Thongchai Winichakul, Ph.D., Professor, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Ubonrat Siriyuvasak, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof., Professor Emeritus Chulalongkorn University, Independent academic
Viengrat Nethipo, Asst. Prof., Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University
Yukti Mukdawichit, Ph.D., Asst. Prof., Faculty of Sociology and Anthropology, Thammasat University
Coordinator: Mr. Pokpong Lawansiri pokpongl@gmail.com
FACT reaches one million pageviews
20-06-11
FACT reaches one million pageviews
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand was founded on November 15, 2006 on a platform of no censorship, no compromise, in order to petition the National Human Rights Commission and, later, the Official Information Commission, over Internet censorship. Both those petitions met with govt refusals and stonewalls and reached no conclusions, findings or even analysis.
In 2006 we thought ending censorship in Thailand would be easy. We failed to recognise how pervasive and entrenched censorship of all kinds has subjugated Thai citizens throughout the Chakri dynasty. Censorship is by and large accepted by Thai people mostly because they know nothing else.
So how do we rate our successes? Obviously, we did not succeed in ending Internet censorship. The largest number of websites ever, more than 500,000 URLs, is blocked by at least nine Thai govt agencies with ample assistance from Thai military and police.
In 2006, the military coup ordered Internet blocking on its first day. Govt sees the Internet as dangerous and we netizens are the enemy. This attitude, of course, is inconsistent with even the pretence of democracy.
Democracy cannot coexist with censorship.
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) made leaked Thai govt’s secret blocklists public on our website and mirrored them as the first documents posted to WikiLeaks. I myself was appointed to the WikiLeaks international advisory board in early 2007.
FACT has also distributed 27,000 CDs teaching circumvention technology so that netizens can simply ignore govt censorship.
Since 2006, Thai govt has banned even more books including the infamous Royal biography, The King Never Smiles, by Paul Handley. In 2011, Thai-born American citizen Joe Gordon was arrested for lèse majesté, computer and national security crimes totalling 60-80 years in prison for merely linking to for chapters of The King Never Smiles in Thai translation. However, we have also seen books by Royalist social critic, Sulak Sivaraksa, banned along with others which might upset our Chinese or Burmese military friends. And, of course, our principal military and trade ally, the USA, says nothing.
The tenth triennial Thai Studies Conference was held at Thammasat University in 2007. For the first time, several panels were held to openly discuss Thailand’s monarchy, including one on Handley’s banned book. Plainclothes police were much in evidence but this was a major step for academic freedom.
Films, television and radio were also banned in this period. Such internationally acclaimed films as Syndromes and a Century by Apichatpong Weerasethakul and Insects in the Backyard by transgender director Tanwarin Sukkhapisit were banned along with Zack and Miri Make a Porno.
The most extensive media bans were used against Redshirt media of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship. Red cable station, People TV, was surrounded by troops and dozens of small Red community radio stations were closed by police. Redshirt publications Red News, Red Power and Truth Today were banned. Even after the bans were lifted, no printers would print them, no distributors could be found, no bookstall would carry them. On April 30, Red Power editor, labour organiser and human rights activist Somyos Preuksakasemswuk, suffered his second arrest, this time charged under Thailand’s feudal lèse majesté law.
Censorship was a primary agenda of the military coup leadership. The laws the coup promulgated and passed are the most repressive of freedom of expression in Thailand’s history despite the ignored fact that they were unConstitutional even with a new Constitution promoted by the coup govt in 2007.
The Computer Crimes Act which not only included broad provisions for censorship but sought the death penalty for computer crimes was the coup’s first law. The Printing Act, Film Act, Internal Security Act, all 2007, swiftly followed and were rammed through a military-appointed legislature in its final hours.
The Computer Crimes Act, in particular, was used as an adjunct to the lèse majesté provisions of Article 112 of Thailand’s Criminal Code. Govt’s aim was to stifle all commentary or discussions of the monarchy and whipped the public into a great frenzy of kingly adulation and nationalistic fervour.
Let’s make it more interesting. The King Never Smiles does not uncover any dirt on the King. But it does uncover a lot of abuses in the Thai military.
Lèse majesté prosecutions have increased more than 2000% from pre-coup levels. At least 172 lèse majesté prosecutions have been initiated since the 2006 military coup d’etat. 98% of defendants are found guilty. Most accused choose to plead guilty for a sentence reduction. Of those who don’t, the longest sentence so far has been 18 years for Redshirt Darunee Charnchoengsilpakul. There are presently dozens of political prisoners, denied bail by Thai courts, for lèse majesté. And hundreds more political prisoners for other crimes.
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) is the common thread which ties these issues together. We report on Thai and international censorship issues in Thai and English. FACT is the only website anywhere solely concerned with censorship and providing comprehensive news of all censorship issues.
When we founded FACT, censorship issues were rarely reported in Thailand’s news media. Since FACT began its opposition to govt censorship and publicising these efforts extensively, censorship has become a hot-button issue in Thailand and is widely reported in the local press. Thailand’s censorship is no longer a secret.
The monarchy is a very sensitive issue in Thailand. However, when FACT became aware that lèse majesté was being used as an excuse for censorship and a tool for blatant political repression, we began to report on such censorship and prosecutions. Frankly, we lost many Thai supporters who considered the monarchy not to be a free speech issue and opposing lèse majesté as being too dangerous.
Lèse majesté was an issue, like censorship, which was simply never reported in the media. FACT was the first group opposing lèse majesté censorship and prosecutions and, slowly, more civil society groups are also taking this stand. Lèse majesté has now become a hot-button issue in Thailand, due to FACT’s efforts.
Some firsts from Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT):
1) FACT was the first Thai organisation to create an online petition, against all forms of censorship.
2) Before FACT, censorship issues were simply ignored. FACT made censorship a hot-button issue.
3) FACT’s only issue is censorship. FACT posts censorship news in Thai and English from around the globe and we offer Thai censorship issues to the world community.
4) FACT has identified 57 kinds of govt censorship taking place today in Thailand. Every one them them affects all of us.
5) In 2007, FACT was the first Thai organisation to recognise govt abuse of lèse majesté laws, resulting in a 98% rate of conviction, as a censorship issue. Many Thai signers of FACT’s petition quickly distanced themselves from this issue out of fear and formed other organisations.
However, when FACT founding signer, Prachatai’s Chiranuch Premchaiporn, was arrest for lèse majesté, every free expression activist realised all of us were under threat of long prison sentences. Lèse majesté has now become a hot-button issue.
6) FACT joined the int’l movement of Pirate Parties to oppose copyright as a censorship issue. Thai govt has written a new computer law which criminalises every netizen for content it deems ‘illegal’ or even ‘inappropriate’ including copyright issues.
7) In 2009, FACT presented submissions to the Council of Europe. In 2010, FACT offered presentations to the United Nations. These efforts resulted in a free Internet legislated as a universal, fundamental human right in the European Union and globally.
8) In 2010 and 2011, FACT has become part of five separate campaigns to repeal (not reform) Thailand’s Draconian lèse majesté laws.
FACT takes risks for free expression. FACT’s website was blocked under martial law from May 9, 2010 and today remains blocked at some ISPs. Although it is ironic for an NGO against censorship to be itself censored, we think we must be exposing govt’s underbelly for it to so publicly fight back.
FACT is now taking the censorship issue back to the new National Human Rights Commission. The public deserves some answers.
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) is a vital tool for free expression in Thailand. Nearly 1,500 have signed FACT’s petition and our mailing list has grown to more than 10,000. 1,000,000 pageviews is not insignificant in a country of only 65 million. FACT has posted more than 7,000 news articles in censorship issues.
FACT hopes to end censorship well before we reach our second million!
NO CENSORSHIP! NO COMPROMISE!
CJ Hinke
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT)
We all know the state
can’t give you free speech
based on…
the state can’t take it away.
You’re born with it,
like your eyes, like your ears.
We all understand that.
Freedom is something you assume,
then you wait for someone to try to take it away from you.
The degree to which you resist…
is the degree to which you are free.
Pencil motion
crosses out our minds.
Utah Phillips
June 20, 2011
VPN Service
As some of you may already know, Mr. Harper himself promised to enact the “Lawful” access law as part of a Crime omnibus law. This law will mandate wiretapping of all Internet connections with disclosure of information at the simple request of law enforcement. This is an unprecedented abuse of the privacy of all Canadians!
This is why we are launching Ostra.ca, an OpenVPN based VPN technology. This will allow to encrypt all communications until they reach our breakout points, where they will mix with all of the traffic. It will also allow for the traffic to be redirected through other countries with better laws.
Each paid for account will also serve to provide a free account to someone in a monitored country, in particular Syria and Iran.
The service costs 10$/month. 7$/month gets counted as a contribution, for a total of 84$/year. Sign up now at http://www.ostra.ca
2011 Southeast Asia Civil Society Statement on Internet Governance
Southeast Asian Centre for e-Media: June 18, 2011
http://seacem.com/regional-events/2011-southeast-asia-civil-society-statement-on-internet-governance
Firstly, we applaud and welcome the report by UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression, Mr Frank La Rue, at the 17th session of the UN Human Rights Council, which affirmed human right in the internet. Noting the important role that the internet played during times of political unrest, the report affirmed it as “an indispensable tool for realising a range of human rights, combating inequality, and accelerating development and human progress”. We, too, agree that there is enormous potential in the internet in all aspects of human development – from economic and social, to commerce, finance, business, innovation, mobilisation and the attainment and exercise of freedoms. And since the Internet as a source of information is especially crucial in the context of the repressive situation many Southeast Asian countries still find themselves in, we are heartened by Mr Frank La Rue’s call that “ensuring universal access … should be a priority for all states.”
In keeping with the agenda of the 2011 Asia-Pacific Regional Internet Governance (APrIGF) Roundtable in Singapore for an inclusive multi-stakeholder dialogue on the internet, we civil society representatives from the Southeast Asia region, wish to offer our perspectives on a few developments as well as concerns.
Digital divide
There remains much to be done about the digital divide. The fact that the ArIGF is being held in Singapore after Hong Kong in the previous year – with both states on the extreme positive end of the spectrum – gives an indication of the gap and we look forward to the day when this meeting can be held in a country at the other end of the spectrum, such as Cambodia, Myanmar & Timor Leste.
Internet censorship
We are concerned by increasingly sophisticated blocking or filtering mechanisms used by states for censorship. The lack of transparency surrounding these measures also makes it difficult to ascertain whether they are truly necessary for the purported aims put forward by states. The problem is further compounded by the various definitions across the region to internet censorship, because of the differing levels of democracy and standards for rule of law. While international human rights laws allow the State to impose restriction on freedom of expression, including those in the internet, however, these measures must meet, (a) the test of the principles of predictability and transparency as it must be provided by law; (b) the test of principle of legitimacy as it must pursue the purposes of protecting the rights of reputation of others and to protect national security or public order, or of public health or morals; and (c) the test of the principles of necessity and proportionality as it must be proven necessary and proportionate in addressing the problem. Furthermore, these legislative restrictions must be applied by an independent body with adequate safeguards against abuse, including the possibility of challenge and remedy against its abusive application.
Cyber security
We note with dismay that websites of human rights organisations, critical bloggers, and other individuals or organisations that disseminate information that is critical to the State or the powerful have increasingly become targets of cyber-attacks. Although determining the origin of cyber-attacks and the identity of the perpetrator is often technically difficult, it should be noted that states have an obligation to protect individuals against interference by third parties that undermine the enjoyment of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. There needs to be a global framework to address the issue of government-sponsored cyber-attacks and the establishment of an international programme that provides support and resources to victims of cyber-attacks. We should also be on guard against justifications for state surveillance arising from valid security concerns such as hacking and data theft, and the public-private partnerships toward this end, which usually consist of non-transparent institutions.
Internet Privacy
While users can enjoy relative anonymity on the internet, states and private actors have access to technology to monitor and collect information about individuals’ communications and activities on the Internet. Such practices can constitute a violation of internet users’ right to privacy, and undermine people’s confidence and security on the internet, thus impeding the free flow of information and ideas online. Thus, in is in the interest of all for states to adopt effective privacy and data protection laws in accordance with article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Human Rights Committee’s general comment No. 16. This includes laws that clearly guarantee the right of all individuals to ascertain in an intelligible form whether, and if so what, personal data is stored in automatic data files, and for what purposes, and which public authorities or private individuals or bodies control or may control their files.
In conclusion, we would like to stress that the nature of the IGF as a multi-stakeholder meeting should be reiterated with a view to representativeness in terms of nationality, interest and gender. We thank you for your attention.
Hereby signed by:
- Ndaru, blogger, Indonesia-IGF committee member; uradnuradn@gmail.com
- Yap Swee Seng, Executive Director, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA); yap@forum-asia.org Mobile (Bangkok): +66.81.868.9178 www.forum-asia.org
- Chiranuch Premchaiporn, Executive Director, Prachatai Online Newspaper; chiranuch@prachatai.com Mobile (Bangkok): +66.81.6207707 www.prachatai.com; www.prachatai.org/english
- Sean Ang, Executive Director, Southeast Asian Center for e-Media (SEACeM); sean@seacem.com Mobile (Kuala Lumpur): +60.166.533.533 www.seacem.com
- Billy Hong, Free Journalist Network of Vietnam.
- Francisco da Silva, Director Timor Leste Media Development Centre ; francisco@tlmdc.org
- Chuah Siew Eng, Publicity Officer, Centre for Independent Journalism; sieweng.cij@gmail.com Phone (Kuala Lumpur): +60.340.230.772 cijmalaysia.org
- Oliver Robillo, Founder, Mindanao Bloggers Community; blogie@dabawenyo.com Mobile (Davao): +63.918.540.0878 www.mindanaobloggers.com
- Yan Aryanto, Indonesia ICT Partnership; yan@ictwatch.com; Mobile (Jakarta): +62.818.930, www.ictwatch.com
- Htaike Htaike Aung & Aung Paing Soe, Executive Member Myanmar Blogger Society (MBS); aungps.andy@gmail.com
- Arthit Suriyawongkul, Coordinator, Thai Netizen Network; arthit@thainetizen.org Mobile (Bangkok): +66.875.042.221 www.thainetizen.org www.thainetizen.org
- Charlie Saceda, Projects Coordinator, PECOJON – The Peace and Conflict Journalism Network; saceda@pecojon.ph, Mobile: +639088722278, http://pecojon.org.ph
- Lim Teck Ghee, Centre for Policy Initiatives, Malaysia; 1, Jalan Maharajalela, Kuala Lumpur,50150 Malaysia, admin@cpiasia.net, 603-22749186, http://www.cpiasia.net
PUBLIC DEBATE
Lese majeste law in eye of storm
Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation: June 19, 2011
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/06/19/national/Lese-majeste-law-in-eye-of-storm-30158164.html
Amid increasing criticism, the country needs a rational approach instead of a policy that is causing conflict
The debate on the merit of the controversial lese majeste law reached a new height earlier this week when Army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha defended the law in his surprising nationwide address through Army-controlled Channels 5 and 7.
The move came as increasing numbers of people are calling for a repeal, if not abolition of the law. The topic is no longer limited to a handful of concerned academics and political activists like historians Somsak Jiamteerasakul and Thongchai Winichakul or exiled political scientist cum-red-shirt Ji Ungpakorn but has been embraced by architects, movie directors and even young novelists.
However, with its characteristic self-censorship on virtually all critical issues regarding the monarchy, a majority of the mainstream mass media continue to turn a blind eye to the issue. This has led to a group of writers, with more than 300 signatories, launching an online press conference earlier this week, on Monday, partly as a way of breaking through the wall of self-censorship imposed by the traditional mainstream mass media who are self-appointed gatekeepers of news and information.
This group of writers, led by young high-profile novelists like Wad Rawee, Sakariya Amataya and Prabda Yoon, caught the attention of the wider public and royalists alike as they normally do not involve themselves in launching any political campaign or making joint political statements.
Another group, Awareness 112 – a reference to penal code section 112, which is the other name of the lese majeste law – instead tried to bring people from diverse professions to speak out and raise awareness about the contentious issue.
Like other activists and academics who made the point before them, these groups essentially stated that the lese majeste law is hindering freedom of expression and is undemocratic with its heavy penalty of maximum 15 years’ imprisonment.
While many royalists may wish that the debate would simply go away, it is highly unlikely. The fact that His Majesty the King is advancing in age, currently at 83, and has been in hospital for more than a year, has led to much speculation about the future of the institution and the law. Even with the lese majeste law intact, and more than 300 people charged over the past five years, according to experts like Khon Kaen-based scholar David Streckfuss, a growing number of Thais, and not just red shirts, continue to critically discuss the perceived role of the highest institution in politics and society, albeit online or in private.
Some use coded names to discuss the topics while others are more straightforward or even full of angst and resentment. On the other hand, the authorities, including the Army and citizens who are ultra-royalists, are promoting the idea that the highest institution is being severely challenged and threatened like never before.
Both sides are full of passion and have interests to defend, including that of the status quo of the social hierarchy. It is hoped, however, that less emotion and more rational and frank discussion and debate can grow and eventually turn into a long deliberation regarding lese majeste law and the preferred relationship between Thai citizens and the monarchy in a democratic society. As more and more people are joining the call to reform or abolish the lese majeste law or move to defend it, they ought to recognise that the debate can never be resolved through more self-censorship or suppression.
There is too much at stake for Thai society to simply turn a blind eye to this burning issue and pretend as if it does not exist.
