Prachatai English

Royal debate over baby elephant's name

prachatai — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 12:09:47 +0000

Sen Lam, ABC Radio Australia

Two Australian academics want a baby elephant to be named after a political prisoner in Thailand, as a way to draw attention to his case.

The elephant was born at Sydney's Taronga Zoo and is the first to be born in Australia. It's sure to be a drawcard for visitors but will it be named after Suwicha Thakor, who was jailed for insulting Thailand's king?

Presenter: Sen Lam
Speakers: Dr Andrew Walker, fellow at the Australian National University
Listen: Windows Media

WALKER: Suwicha Thakor is a political prisoner in Thailand. He's been sentenced to 10 years in prison for posting satirical images of the Thai King on the internet. It's an outrageous and draconian charge and we think that naming the baby elephant after him is a good way of highlighting Australia's concern about his fate.

LAM: What does Taronga Zoo make of you politicising their little baby elephant?

WALKER: We haven't had any reaction from the zoo yet, but I think it's important to remember that in South East Asia and in Thailand in particular, elephants for a very long time have been a symbol of power and politics and we're trying to pick up on that symbolism to gently make a very important point about human rights.

LAM: And of course, the baby elephant is behind bars like the political prisoner?

WALKER: That's right and we're also trying to highlight the fact that due to the very good care provided at Taronga, the life of the baby elephant behind bars will be much, much more pleasant than the life Suwicha Thakor faces in a Thai prison.

LAM: The lese majeste law in Thailand is there because the people of Thailand love their king, but so to many people, it would seem that Suwicha Thakor did break the law and did offend a few people?

WALKER: Well, the lese majeste law is there to prevent political discussion on certain issues related to the monarchy and whatever we might think about whether Suwicha was disrespectful or impolite, that might be one issue. Putting someone in prison for ten years for being disrespectful and perhaps impolite, is a draconian and excessive charge.

LAM: How much support have you had from the wider community in Thailand? Have you put out your feelers there?

WALKER: Well, we've certainly had some positive reaction on the blog that we run and a number of international blogs have picked it up. There is a campaign going on in Thailand to reform this very draconian lese majeste law and we're trying to offer our international support to people who are campaigning for human rights at considerable personal risk to themselves.

...[censored]

84,876 workers have been laid off this year, and many more are likely

prachatai — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 11:45:23 +0000

1,003 factories have been shut down between 1 Jan and 7 May, putting 84,876 workers out work. Many more factories and workers are likely to meet the same fate, according to the Department of Labour Protection and Welfare.

The electronics sector tops the list with the layoff of 20,923 workers from 110 factories, followed by the textile and leather sector with 15,709 workers from 114 factories, the automobile and transport sector with 12,784 workers from 81 factories, the machine manufacturing sector with 9,007 workers from 48 factories, and the furniture manufacturing sector with 7,355 workers from 81 factories.

Reasons for the layoffs include losses, illiquidity, reduced orders, expiry of contracts or cancellation of concessions, and loss of competitiveness in the export market due to the appreciation of the baht.

184,250 more workers in 429 factories are likely to be affected, with 61,319 at high risk of being dismissed and 122,931 receiving lower bonuses.

Most of these factories manufacture products for export.

On 16 July, 160 workers filed complaints with Songkhla Labour Court against Thai International Food Co which dismissed them from work and refused to pay compensation.

And on the same day in Chainat, 241 workers protested inside the Safe-T-Cut factory after they had been dismissed without compensation as of July 2. The employer asked the protesters to allow entry to the factory, and to leave the premises, but the protesters persisted and a clash nearly occurred. The protest ended after more than 30 police were called in.

Seminar 'Cyber-Crime laws: Global perspectives and Legal practice' on 27 July

prachatai — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:30:59 +0000

Thai Netizen Network with support from Media Legal Defense Initiative (MLDI) and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) would like to invite you to a seminar on Cyber-Crime laws: Global perspectives and Legal practice.

Cyber-Crime laws: Global perspectives and Legal practice

Monday 27 July 2009 at Monet & Pissarro room, 4th floor, Novotel Hotel, Siam Square, Bangkok

09.00 – 11.00 Public lecture “Cyber-crime laws: Global perspective and Thai’s legal practice.”

Overview on global perspectives on cyber-crime laws by Eddan Katz, Electronic Frontiers Foundation www.eff.org
Comparative analysis of cyber-crime laws: Global and Thai practice by Tossapol Tassanakulpan, Faculty of Law, Chiangmai University
Perspective from Thai authority by the representative from the Ministry of ICT or Ministry of Justice*

11.00 - 11.30 Break

11.30 - 12.30 Q&A, discussed and moderated by Supinya Klangnarong, Thai Netizen Network

12.30 - 13.30 Lunch

13.30 – 15.00 Panel discussion “Internet freedom worldwide: moving forward or backward?”

Danny O'Brien, EFF's international outreach coordinator,
Assist. Prof. Pirongrong Ramasoota Rananand, Faculty of Communication Arts, Chulalongkorn University, and
Sarinee Achavanuntakul, Thai Netizen Network

15.00 - 16.30 Discussion, moderated by Isriya Paireepairit, Siam Intelligence Unit

16.35 Press conference on the proposal for Computer-related Crime Act 2007 by Thai Netizen Network committee

* Speaker awaiting confirmation

Please register for your seat at http://thainetizen.org/ before 23 July 2009

Public forum on 'International Perceptions of Thailand’s Crisis' to be held on July 21

prachatai — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:24:09 +0000

The forum will be held by Chulalongkorn's Institute of Security and International Studies. Speakers will include President of the FCCT, Executive Director of the American Chamber of Commerce (Thailand), representative of JBIC and the Ambassador of Argentina. Details are below for those interested.

An ISIS Public Forum on

“International Perceptions of Thailand’s Crisis”

Tuesday, 21 July 2009 at 9.30 am – 12.00 pm

The Chumbhot-Pantip Conference Room, 4th Floor Prajadhipok-Rambhaibarni Building

Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University

Henry Dunant Rd., Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330

Agenda

09.00 – 09.30 am Registration and Refreshments

09.30 – 09.40 am Welcome Remarks

Dr. Charas Suwanmala

Dean, Faculty of Political Science,

Chulalongkorn University

09.40 – 11.10 am Speakers

Mr. Marwaan Macan-Markar

Southeast Asia Correspondent

Inter Press Service (IPS)

Ms. Karen Percy

Southeast Asia Correspondent

Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)

Ms. Judy Benn

Executive Director

The American Chamber of Commerce (Thailand)

Mr. Yuhei Ohmi

Chief Representative

Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), Bangkok

H.E. Mr. Felipe Frydman

Ambassador

The Embassy of the Argentine Republic to Thailand

Moderator

Dr. Thitinan Pongsudhirak

Director, Institute of Security and International Studies

Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University

11.10 am - 12.00 pm Open Discussion

Contact staff for reservation: Tel: 02-218-7432 – 3, fax 02.254.0119, or e-mail: isisthailand@gmail.com

Triumph workers in the Philippines also laid off

prachatai — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 05:56:08 +0000

Asian Transnational Corporation Monitoring Network

The Asian Transnational Corporation Monitoring Network (ATNC) strongly condemns the closure of the Triumph International Philippines factory inside the FTI Complex in Taguig City and the nearby Star Performance Incorporated as well as the layoff of nearly 50% of the workforce in the Body Fashion Thailand (BFT), Triumph International's Thai subsidiary.

(Signatures are being collected in support of the workers in an online petition: http://gopetition.com/online/29350.html.)

The ground reality

Philippines:

Effective July 9, 2009, 1,660 workers of Triumph International (Philippines) will be laid off from its factories in FTI, Bicutan. Additionally, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) is attempting to convince workers to accept the management’s offer of separation pay, despite reports that the company is shifting operations to Region IVA or CALABARZON (Cavite-Laguna-Batangas-Rizal-Quezon). This apparent relocation and hiring of new workers in the areas of relocation proves that economic crisis excuse for the layoffs is nothing short of a smoke screen. The company has consistently failed to prove that its operations are actually losing revenue.

Thailand:

Body Fashion (Thailand) Ltd. (BFT) in Bang Pli, Samut Prakan province, a subsidiary of Triumph International Headquarters in Germany and Switzerland, manufactures and distributes women's lingerie and swimwear. After employing 4,200 workers for the past several years, the company has now suddenly announced a dramatic layoff of half of its workforce without advance notice. 1,930 employees, roughly half the factory’s workforce, are to be laid off effective August 28th. The company claims that it will pay the workers a severance pay in accordance to a Labour Protection Law, but in reality the severance pay offered falls far short of other related laws, Labour Relation Act of 1975, and Triumph International (Thailand) Labour Union 's CBA of 1999. The layoffs are also concentrated in those plants which have a militant and strong union.

The economic downturn and consequent reduction in sales and demand have been cited as reasons for the layoffs, however, the company has refused to provide details of their financial status to prove this.

ATNC believes that these moves are blatant attempts on the part of Triumph International to gag and undermine the trade unions in these factories. The ruse of the financial crisis and its impact on the company is being used as a smoke screen, to enable Triumph International to relocate and through this neutralise the strong worker's unions which have been demanding fair wages and better working conditions. It is our collective opinion that the economic downturn has not affected the company so drastically so as to justify such actions. If cost cutting is a concern for the company, it has many other ways to do so, particularly trimming off the bloated pay packets the top level management receive, instead of depriving thousands of their livelihoods.

Triumph International has not only reneged on collective bargaining agreements it had entered into with the workers, but also shows scant regard for national laws.

The millions in profit that have lined the pockets of the management and the investors have been through the blood, sweat and tears of workers in these factories. We demand that

 Unconditional reinstatement of all workers

 Immediately stop the relocation of factories and production material

Triumph workers say BOI’s support loses them jobs

prachatai — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:37:52 +0000

On July 13, workers rallied at the office of the Board of Investment, saying that the Board’s support for the investment of Body Fashion (Thailand) Co in Nakhon Sawan lost almost 2,000 of their jobs in Bang Phli, Samut Prakan.

According to Bunrod Saiwong, leader of the Triumph Labour Union, Body Fashion Co has laid off 1,959 workers at its Bang Phli factory, in a bid to relocate its production base to another province where there is cheaper labour and no labour union.

The union demands that the BOI reveal the information and reasons for giving support to the company, and suspend its support until the company reinstates the laid off workers.

Affiliated to Triumph International Co, Body Fashion (Thailand) Co produces swimwear, underwear and sportswear for brand names including Triumph, Sloggi, etc.

On June 29, the company announced that 1,959 workers or about 50% of its workforce at the Bang Phli factory in Samut Prakan were to be laid off on Aug 31. Most of them are members of the labour union and women, including those who are pregnant, old, sick or disabled. 13 out of 19 members of the union committee are also to be laid off, says the union in its letter to the BOI.

The company claims that it did so to restructure costs to improve overall efficiency, while it has built a new factory in Nakhon Sawan, which at full capacity can employ 2,000 workers, with a 75.5 million-baht investment supported by the BOI. Currently, the factory employs more than 1,000 workers, and there is no labour union.

The Triumph Labour Union believes that, besides relocating to where labour is cheaper, the layoff is meant to destroy the labour union.

In July 2008, former leader of Triumph Labour Union Jitra Kotchadet was sacked by the company who claimed that she had ruined its reputation by wearing a campaign t-shirt in support of Chotisak Onsoong’s defiance of the lèse majesté law while appearing on a national TV programme.

Afterwards the union members held a series of protests, claiming the company was trying to destroy the labour union. The showdown came to an end when the provincial Labour Court in Samut Prakan ruled in favour of the company in September 2008.

Outlaws All

prachatai — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:02:20 +0000

Harrison George

So hats off to iLaw for giving Thais the chance to say what laws they want, and what they want scrapped.

And are we surprised that in the first flush of enthusiasm, much of the discussion concerns the lèse majesté and cybercrime laws?

I should here make a disclosure. The director of Prachatai, Chiranuch Premchaiporn, is currently reporting at regular intervals to the Office of the Attorney-General while they make their minds up whether she should be prosecuted under the cybercrime law.

She is also the person who reads this before you do. So if you are not at the moment reading this article, it’s her fault for censoring me in a valiant attempt to stay out of jail.

Now with respect to the lèse majesté law, there has been a great deal of discussion. The Minister of Justice, before he became Minister, wanted to extend the scope and up the penalties. The learned Dr Bowornsak, in a lengthy 3-day occupation of the Bangkok Post op-ed page, gave a sort of defence and sort of mooted some possible sort of changes. And the Dutch Ambassador responded by advising him to be careful if he thinks citation of European lèse majesté laws has any real relevance.

And the blogs have been full of far less restrained comment. Including the ingenious idea of using one bizarre feature of the law to engineer its downfall.

Translators and policemen from Bang Mod and English teachers with un-English names have been able to cause mayhem in the ranks of Bangkok’s press corps with legal broadsides against all and any, by exploiting the fact that, unlike defamation laws, where the defamed is the one bringing charges, you don’t have to be a majesté yourself to file an lèse majesté charge.

So, says one warped mind, why don’t we just charge everybody we can think of with lèse majesté? Clog up the police stations, swamp the courts, and give the Attorney-General a headache he won’t forget. When we are all accused, then no one is.

This will, it is hoped, provoke somebody somewhere to re-think the way the law works and come up with some improvements

There is just one tiny fly in this ointment of irritation. The courts have heard cases where the lèse majesté accuser has become the accused and charged with malicious prosecution. And been found guilty and punished.

So, attractive as it may seem, it may not be wise to lash out blindly at your favourite villains. You know, the security guard at Sukhumwit MRT station who always makes me open my bag; the woman who walks her poodle to poop in front of my gate; Volvo drivers; and the rest.

We should, at least in the early stages, have some justification for a lèse majesté charge, however tenuous. And in this, we are only following legal precedent. Khun Chiranuch, after all, did not write anything defamatory; she was merely the legal custodian of the website where someone else allegedly did. Her legal problems stem from not stopping them.

And in fact there may be many lèse majesté cases of a similar nature, where the accused is merely an accessory after the fact. Or during, or before. It’s hard to give a number when such cases can be held behind closed doors.

But let us take the fairly blatant case of Oliver Jufer, whose drunken spray-painting was so badly aimed that he’ll not be seeing Chiang Mai again in this lifetime. Jufer himself was fairly promptly charged, tried, convicted and pardoned.

However, Prachatai has reason to believe that lèse majesté charges have also been brought against the person who sold him the spray paint (for not recognizing the dangers of what he might use it for); against the owner of the portraits that Jufer defaced (for failing to remove them before they could be vandalized); against the local corner shop proprietors who sold him the Chang that got him so inebriated (for allowing the potential for graffiti that would not have existed had he not been drunk in charge of a spray-can); against Thai Beverage plc (for making Chang such a heady brew that it provokes even a sober-sided Swiss into drunken disparagement); against the bobby on the local beat (for being absent on a toilet break when his presence may have prevented disloyalty); against the airline that brought Jufer to Thailand (for failing to screen out republicans and prevent them boarding flights to Thailand); against Jufer’s doctor (for failing to diagnose his latent propensity for lèse majesté); and so on.

Charges against Jufer’s parents as the root cause of the entire problem have had to be dropped when the Swiss Embassy confirmed that under Swiss law, corpses cannot be exhumed in order to stand trial.

About author: Bangkokians with long memories may remember his irreverent column in The Nation in the 1980's. During his period of enforced silence since then, he was variously reported as participating in a 999-day meditation retreat in a hill-top monastery in Mae Hong Son (he gave up after 998 days), as the Special Rapporteur for Satire of the UN High Commission for Human Rights, and as understudy for the male lead in the long-running ‘Pussies -not the Musical' at the Neasden International Palladium (formerly Park Lane Empire).

Thai Government’s decision to cease forced repatriation is a welcomed move yet there is concern regarding new refugee management

prachatai — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 06:57:41 +0000

Following the demands from the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus on humanitarian aid for new refugees who arrived in Tha Song Yang district of Tak Province since early June, and the expression of concerns from the network of Thai non-governmental organizations regarding the increase in forced repatriation, restriction of humanitarian aid, access to education, and the lack of a clear, proper and up-to-date refugee management measures,

We, the network of Thai non-governmental organizations, welcome the decision of the government under the leadership of prime minister Abisit Vejchacheewa, to cease the repatriation, allow the refugee leader to meet the refugees and bring in drinking water as usual, and allow the students who were separated from their parents to go back studying in Mae La refugee camp, after they were called out by the local authorities.

However, the government has not yet responded to the demand for a solution for the new arrivals and the review of the existing policy not to accept new refugees in refugee camps.

After a month, over 3,500 refugees are still staying in temporary conditions - plastic tents, monasteries and under villager huts. The Thai military had once tried to move the people to Ban Mae Usu in the same district but eventually ceased action on the plan due to the information insisted by the UNHCR and NGOs that the area is not safe from the DKBA.

The current problem is, therefore, although it is accepted that the new arrivals will not be able to return home in the near future, or even near to their homes on the Burma side, the local authorities have not yet found a proper and safe place for them to stay, while the Thai government’s policy still insists on not accepting a group of new refugees into refugee camps.

We, the network of non-governmental organizations, have serious concerns over the barring of new refugees to enter a refugee camp, which will have impacts as follows:

1. The group of refugees have to live in bad conditions that affect their physical and mental health, which will contribute to a greater humanitarian crisis,

2. The current temporary shelters, although warmly welcomed by the local Karen villagers who are relatives, have effects on the local residents’ daily lives. For instance, the refugees staying in monasteries bar the locals from their usual religious practices,

3. Time, human resources, and finances were and will be unnecessarily spent for finding a new location for temporary shelter, or to establish a new place with proper infrastructures,

4. There will be unnecessary negative impacts on environment, natural resources and local communities in setting a new temporary shelter,

5. Over a thousand refugee children (except the 50 persons who were allowed to study in the camp) have not had access to education for over a month until now. The fact that there is a possible and proper facility nearby in Mae La camp but the children are not given access means the state has failed to fulfill its obligation to the Convention on the Rights of the Child,

6. There will be unnecessary negative impact upon Thailand’s image regarding its human rights standing in the international arena.

Therefore, we, the network of non-governmental organizations demand the Thai government to:

1. Give a permission to the local authorities to allow this particular group of new arrivals into the Mae La refugee camp urgently, as the camp has adequate capacity in terms of security, sheltering, education and health service structures and management and protection system under the Ministry of Interior,

2. Review the existing policy of the National Security Council that has barred a group of new refugees from entering camps.

We truly believe the Thai government will stand firm in support of human rights and humanitarian standpoints as it has in the past.

Action Network for Migrants

The Peace Way Foundation

Friends Without Borders Foundation

Cross-Border News Agency

Press release by Luksna Kornsilpa

prachatai — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:02:25 +0000

Luksna Kornsilpa has sent a press release plus an article in Thai and English to the press today. According to the press release, more charges are to be filed against many people including police and state attorney for malfeasance. Besides Thaksin and his cronies, those who will sign the petition to the King will be charged as well.

PRESS RELEASE - Thursday July 9, 2009 11:00 am Metropolitan Police Bureau Headquarters Bangkok

Summary of the Charges Filed & Major Issues of each Case plus Additional Notes

In addition to the charges under article 112 of Thai Criminal Law further charges are to be filed this day against Thaksin Shinawatra, Jakrapob Penkhair, Veera Musikapong, Nattawoot Saikuea, Jatuporn Prompan, Marwaan Macan-Makar, Jonathan Head, other FCCT directors and UDD members that are implicated in crimes against the nation. Criminal Code articles 107, 113, 114, 116, 133, 135/1, 210, 213, 215, 217, 220, 288 and 289 are all used and each of the accused will have at least 2 or more of the aforementioned articles filed against them. Instant action is demanded as the cases expose a co-ordinated gang of conspirators committing acts of treason and concealment that not only threaten the Kingdom of Thailand and her national security but also insult Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and the constitutional monarchy of the United Kingdom of Great Britain that she reigns (not rules). Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is protected by article 133 of Thai Criminal Law.

To represent the Kingdom of Thailand and her people Ms. Luksna Kornsilpa, 57 years of age; an analyst, management system auditor, industrial sector consultant and hazard analysis specialist having an engineering education with a solid management background shall file the charges against all conspirators identified herein and hereafter.

Presently she is working on her doctoral research in visualization (forming correct and twisted perceptions, understandings and misunderstandings through graphical and textual information).

Ms Luksna has researched, detected, analyzed and documented evidences of numerous acts of treason and treachery using sound academic principles.

Extensive scrutiny of Ms Luksna's meticulous reports clearly reveals and proves without a shadow of a doubt that there is an organized underground movement that aims to destabilize and overthrow Thailand's Monarchical Democracy, it is also highly evident that fugitive convict Thaksin Shinawatra is both the puppet-master and highest benefactor of the now exposed treason plot. Ms Luksna reveals numerous techniques used by the plotters including both audio-lingual and visualization tactics that target those with below average education who make up the majority of Thailand's population.

Condemning facts highlighted include the fact that Mr Jakrapob Penkair and his cronies conspired with the directors of the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand in a fashion designated under Thai criminal law as literally being a “Brothel of Criminals” which when defined by judges equates to a “Den of Conspirators”. This event was the first of a long series of propaganda events staged at the FCCT and during the event Mr Jakrapob who according to the FCCT was speaking as Thaksin's spokesman made a proclamation that a violent rebellion would be staged to create chaos and destabilize the nation and change the political system to bring absolute power to his treacherous Thaksinophilia faction.

From the FCCT stage Mr Jakrapob deliberately lied and made fraudulent statements attacking Thailand's highest institution thereby creating a new tool to add fuel to his underground insurgency both nationally and globally.

Mr Jakrapob knew that various stunts had created resentment and misunderstandings regarding the use of Lese Majeste laws and that coupled with the powerful network and corruption of the Thaksin regime there would be little chance that anyone would dare fight back to protect the nation's developing democracy. Mr Jakrapob had his speech disseminated via the FCCT's sale of DVDs and the voice of many directors along with a campaign to remove the Lese Majeste laws which would also mean having to rewrite the constitution.

The DVDs sold by the FCCT each contained the speech and question and answer sessions for ONE event on each DVD. These DVDs were sold to the public (non-members) until the FCCT fell under closer scrutiny and on 12th December 2008 the FCCT announced that their DVDs would no longer be available to the public but only to paid up members.

Of the numerous events and activities of the FCCT board designed to destabilize the Monarchical Democracy, 3 prominent events resulted in Lese Majeste charges being filed against speakers and presenters.

These were:

1. “Democracy and Patronage in Thailand” on the 29th August 2007, the official invitation to the event drafted by the FCCT board stated that the speaker “is out on bail” and “After a particularly turbulent evening of protest in July outside General Prem's house, Jakrapob and seven other UDD leaders were charged by police with illegal assembly of more than 10 people, defying police orders and attacking police, and instigating disturbances.” The invitation ended with “Join us for what promises to be a provocative evening.” Charges were subsequently filed against Mr Jakrapob for the content of his speech which was found to be full of lies, deceit and unwarranted hatred towards the highest institution causing him to resign from his ministerial position. note: Many British nationals were shocked and outraged at how Mr Jakrapob rudely lashed out at Her Highness Queen Elizabeth II from the FCCT stage stating amongst other things that Tony Blair had put her in her place, Mr Jakrapob was questioned by a British national and forced to concede that like the presenter of the event he had very poor knowledge regarding the Great British Monarchical Democracy and that most of what he knew he learned by watching a movie. Mr Jakrapob arrogantly stated that Thaksin only had some loyalty for the monarchy.

2. “Coup, Capital and Crown” on 13th December 2007 at the FCCT also attracted Lese Majeste charges, the official invitation to the event asked questions such as “Why was there rivalry between monarchy and Thaksin?” would be answered. The question itself stunned many as it presumed that there was a rivalry in existence that even Thaksin himself has publicly denied. Any attempt to answer such a presumptuous question could indeed defame both the monarchy and fugitive convict Thaksin Shinawatra. (Ironically the title of this event was very similar to the name of a plot exposed by General Chawalit Yongchaiyut some time before the FCCT events in which Gen. Chawalit stated that an underground movement to discredit and destroy the military, monarchy and economy existed.)

3. “The State of Politics and the Way Forward for Thailand” on 9th December 2008 resulted in Lese Majeste charges being filed against 2 of the speakers Mr Veera Musikapong and Mr Nattawoot Saikuea. Again the speech was full of verbal vitriol that viciously attacked various groups whilst implicating and defaming the monarchy with lies. This speech led to Lese Majeste charges being filed against both Mr Veera and Mr Nattawoot just days before the Red Shirt movement took Bangkok by siege, this was the head on clash that Mr Jakrapob had announced in his speech in 2007. The official invitation to the event from the FCCT board stated “Join us for an insight into the nature of a crisis analysts say is the biggest to face Thailand since World War II.”

After careful examination of DVDs, hundreds of pages of documented evidence including witness statements from journalists and members of the public numerous further charges to be filed on 9th July 2009 include:

Extension of Case filed at Lumpini Police Station on June 30, 2009:

FCCT Board Further Charged with Article #210 “Criminal Conspiracy to destabilize National Security”

On 30th June board members of the FCCT were charged with Lese Majeste which means a maximum sentence of 15 years in jail. If a crime committed warrants a maximum sentence of more than 10 years and if the crime involves 5 or more conspirators then article 210 can be applied. This means that the FCCT has acted as a “Den of Conspirators” or more literally as a “Brothel of Treacherous Criminals”. One article in this group of laws has in the past been used against Chinese Triad organizations that threatened the nation and now similar articles in this case apply to the FCCT, this means that directors involved in acts that destabilize national security are by legal definition Criminals; not Correspondents.

Case 1 of July 9, 2009:

Police and Attorney General Charged with Treason and Information Concealment

Government officers in both the Police Department and the Attorney General Office have been found to be delaying prominent cases affecting national security and concealing information of a nature that is forbidden to hide by laws designed to ensure transparency and protect the nation. Charges of malfeasance have already been filed against some officers and on July 9 more serious charges are to be filed against officers whose malfeasance poses a threat to the stability of the nation and her internal security. The Chief of the Royal Thai Police, the commanders of certain divisions of the Royal Thai Police and the Chief Attorney are to be officially charged. Some of these officials will also have charges of treason and conspiracy filed against them.

Case 2 of July 9, 2009:

Thaksin, Treason Leaders/Supporters and FCCT Board Charged with Committing National Security and Royal Safety Crimes

On 9th July other laws that protect National Internal Security and the safety of the Monarch are to be filed against Thaksin Shinawatra, Leaders of the UDD and the FCCT board. These laws empower special teams of officers; allow for rapid issuance of arrest warrants and the penalty is execution. Government officials delaying such cases would find cases filed against themselves for malfeasance.

Additional notes:

The above mentioned cases will be processed fairly. Due to their sensitive nature, importance to national stability and the irresponsible behavior of some media outlets that seek to distort and deceive, only reliable fully accredited media without criminal charges filed against them will be provided with case details providing that the details do not violate laws of the land which are to be respected by all those on Thai soil be they Thai nationals or foreigners.

Although due to the dissemination efforts of the FCCT board the content is widely known the exact details will not be printed in this press release as repeating a slight could be perceived as Lese Majeste by those who do not understand that actually Lese Majeste cases must have negative intentions before they are taken seriously and of course those Thai nationals who are not interested in filing any case would still feel saddened and hurt to learn how evil and unethical the board of the FCCT had been. The goal is to restore peace and unity to Thailand and although some things are best forgotten it is difficult to forget when these subversive activities continue to flourish, it is hoped that these unprecedented cases will teach the guilty parties a serious lesson in journalistic ethics and help Thailand and her people start afresh in a society where people are not separated by the color of a T-shirt.

Mr Jakrapob resigned when he was exposed and indeed all those in positions of responsibility who have likewise been exposed should resign to prevent adding insult to injury.

Ms Luksna states, “Some media have distorted the facts recently, this is not an issue of freedom of speech. I fully support freedom of speech but do not support the dissemination of lies and propaganda in an underground movement to destabilize Thailand's economy and internal security. Foreign correspondents clubs and media alike are advised to examine the facts carefully before making biased statements, intelligent nations like China and Japan should be able to differentiate between news and lies. Lese Majeste cases should not be filed against anyone unless there is clearly malicious intent that can be proven, people cannot just file Lese Majeste cases against others when there is absence of motive as that would result in either the case not being processed or the accused receiving a Royal pardon after a short spell inside, the accuser could also be sued heavily if sufficient evidence is not provided to show serious malicious intent. Many media sources lack legal knowledge and are guilty of reporting that anyone can file a case against anyone; this is simply not true. His Majesty has stated himself that he is human and as such can do wrong. This does not however mean that people are free to make unwarranted accusations and lies regarding His Majesty as such behavior would anger his subjects and cases would certainly be filed, especially if the Lese Majeste statements were being used as a tool for subversive threats to internal security."

It is interesting to note that numerous blogs that appear on the Internet attempting to protect the FCCT from their crimes are written by anonymous bloggistas and clandestine journalists.

It is also noteworthy that Thai law protects EVERYBODY from defamation not only the Thai monarchy with article 112; article 133 protects all royal families all over the world and articles 326 and 328 protect all those on Thai soil both Thais and foreigners. Anyone filing false charges could find themselves with heavy counter charges filed against them so these laws are usually only used when there is solid evidence.

Ms Luksna's cases filed today are done so in good faith using internationally accepted research and analysis tools that enable the harvesting of concrete evidence to support all facts stated and accusations made. She is well known in data analysis circles and renowned for her attention to fine detail and high integrity. She is a certified translator of both German and English.

To avoid misunderstandings by foreign media it should also be noted that the term “Brothel of Criminals” is a literal translation of the legal term used for the crimes committed by a “den of conspirators”. A brothel is a place where numerous prostitutes gather to ply their trade and according to dictionaries the definition of a “prostitute” is usually given as:

1. One who solicits and accepts payment for sex acts.

2. One who sells one's abilities, talent, or name for an unworthy purpose.

tr.v., -tut·ed, -tut·ing, -tutes.

1. To offer (oneself or another) for sexual hire.

2. To sell (oneself or one's talent, for example) for an unworthy purpose. use: to prostitute one's talents.

The “brothel of criminals” in this case refers to the second definition of prostitute.

The laws used in all these cases are all related to conspiracy to ruin the political system and the penalties are severe, those found guilty of violating article 107 will be subject to the death penalty.

"Freedom of Deceit" versus "Freedom of Speech"

Ms Luksna wrote an interesting piece on the FCCT case on June 30, 2009 entitled "Freedom of Deceit" versus "Freedom of Speech"

As an information specialist and management system consultant conducting doctoral research, she detects the abuse of "Freedom of Speech" as a means for "Freedom of Deceit" realization.

In the world of uncontrolled information overflow, LIES with dishonest purposes are passed efficiently over the mass media channels. Some have the target to erode national security.

In Thailand, the effort to change country's foundation was announced purposely by treason leaders at the FCCT. And a means to that change is through LIES. As traitors themselves lack the necessary ethics and qualifications to be capable national leaders, they need to soil the existing foundation with LIES.

Among LIES to soil country foundation, Lese Majeste is the most frequently used. Agent Provocateurs foolishly believe that if charges are filed against them that they will make threats to continue telling the world that such law can be easily abused which is far from true, they will also try to use language like “draconian laws” to discredit even the laws of the land that they live in.

Sadly and surprisingly, the FCCT board got involved in the divisive LIES content fabrication and distribution!

As judicial process might not have full and proper access to the cases filed against traitors, as they have often been screened out by upstream authorities; the cases filed against FCCT will finally bring back all rejected cases directly to the judiciary for prompt processing so that Thailand can return to stability and social unity.

When the case is analyzed in court, mass media around the world would realize how "Freedom of Deceit" is discriminated from "Freedom of Speech".

Mass media cry for rights without duties and responsibilities. This will be their first lesson that, in order to possess rights, ones need to show adequate duties and responsibilities.

This is just a part of the many duties of this astute information specialist, in her effort to make world's information highways cleaner.

Book review: Blogging and Democratization in Malaysia

prachatai — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:47:22 +0000

Julian Hopkins

Blogging and Democratization in Malaysia: A New Civil Society in the Making is the first book to discuss blogging in Malaysia in detail. It draws upon a survey completed in late 2006, interviews and observations, and it is a unique record of the early moments of social-political blogging in Malaysia. There is also a timely postscript to the book that discusses the overall impact of blogging on the ‘political tsunami’ of the Malaysian general elections in 2008.

The first chapter provides a brief history of blogs, and some of the earlier research by writers including Blood and Herring; it then discusses their potential as a “democratic medium” (4), particularly as an alternative media, and argues that bloggers and journalists have complementary roles—as opposed to being locked in a “duel to the death” (7).

The second chapter focuses on the relationship between the media and Malaysian “pseudo-democracy” (9), highlighting the relevance of the “developmentalist” (12) discourse that posits a pay-off between stability and economic progress on the one hand, and democratic and human rights on the other. Legislative restrictions on the media are explained, as well as how the ruling parties exercise control through the direct or indirect ownership of the major media outlets. Developing out of the Reformasiupheavals of 1998, when websites and email were deployed in opposition to the government, and because it does not print on paper, a highly successful online news website Malasysiakini has been able to bypass some of these restrictions; thus the Internet is described as the “final frontier for freedom of speech” (18).

Chapter three examines the slim pickings of previous research on the Malaysian blogosphere, and notes the apparent prominence of political blogs in Malaysia compared to other Asian countries. Quoting from newspapers, the authors detail “the increasingly fraught relationship between control-minded ministers and bloggers” (20). In 2007, legal action by a major English-language broadsheet and related individuals against two prominent social-political bloggers sparked the formation of the National Alliance of Bloggers (All-Blogs). This is a very interesting episode of which Tan had direct experience, and is recounted in some detail. The debates amongst bloggers that these moves engendered are recounted, as well as details of other cooperative endeavours such blogger meetings, blog awards, or charity events. Also noted are the increased means for bloggers to make money through blogs.

Noting that the Malaysian blogosphere “is by no means a homogenous community” (34), chapter four starts to detail the results of the online survey to which 1,537 blog readers, including 852 bloggers, responded. The picture that emerges is of mostly young and ethnically Chinese respondents; educated, middle or upper-class occupations; and avid blog readers who prefer blogs to newspapers, and prefer personal diary-type blogs to SoPo blogs. Political commitment is assessed: 89 per cent were not affiliated to any political organisation (40), but nearly all intended to vote. Those interested in SoPo content were mostly older and male. The bloggers reflect similar demographics, but a lesser proportion of them prefer to read social-political blogs, and only 6 per cent have social-political blogs. ‘Personal experiences’ was the overwhelmingly popular choice of self-description for blogs and most update three or more times a week, in English.

With an important reminder that blogs are not a panacea for systemic deficiencies in democratic institutions, chapter five opens by stating that “Blogging as an instrument for democratization is only as effective as the civil society behind it.” (49). Interviews show that the social-political bloggers explicitly see themselves as role models with an educative role, enabling the presentation of more critical viewpoints and providing a space in the blog comments for open political debate. The significance of blogs as an alternative channel of information is demonstrated: the head of an opposition party, who would normally struggle to have his voice hear through the mainstream media, garnered a daily audience of 4,000-7,000 readers; bloggers are used as a back channel by unnamed influential figures in industry and politics to leak stories; and there are also some documented examples of blogs having initiated public debate and remedial measures by the government. That this bothers people in power is suggested by evidence of intimidation of bloggers from police as well as unidentifiable sources. The ubiquitous call for “responsible blogging”—aptly described as “an ambiguous code of ethics which many have talked about but none have actually defined” (55)—is discussed, and the authors identify two fundamental aspects: checking facts and revealing identity. Results show that more than half of the bloggers do not check facts, and about half use pseudonyms. In spite of this, bloggers tend to trust blogs more than the mainstream press, but the foreign press is the most trusted.

The sixth chapter gives examples of the government clamping down on bloggers in the period before the 2008 elections, and recounts examples of bloggers rapidly mobilising support, and organising ad-hoc gatherings in response to police action. The importance of the comments in blogs was highlighted when a blogger was arrested because of a comment left in his blog; in a countermove, a police report was filed against the Prime Minister because of objectionable content in comments on his website. Additionally, rumours were rife of ‘cyber-troopers’ who were believed to be paid by the ruling party to leave comments and/or to act as agents provocateurs.

In effect, there are two conclusions to this book—the first, offered in the conventional manner; and the Postscript, which is able to deal with the actual context of the 2008 general election. In the conclusion, the three goals of the work are outlined as: firstly, “to understand the composition of the Malaysian blogosphere and its readers” (78); secondly, to see whether blogs are being “used as a platform for enabling civil liberties” (ibid); and thirdly, to assess blogs’ actual influence on the political/public agenda. The main argument is that blogs offer a clear opportunity for greater freedom of information, and potentially democratisation. There is a clear and vocal minority of bloggers who make moves in that direction; these are mostly journalists, politicians or civil society activists. However, overall political indifference remains prevalent amongst bloggers: “an ethnicized or racialized view of society remains overwhelming [and]… the possibility of developing a more inclusive – and thus more democratic – terrain of political struggle is deeply compromised” (79). The relevance of the digital divide, the negative impact of government anti-blogging propaganda—which may also paradoxically increase the profile of certain bloggers—and popular inertia towards political participation are highlighted as relevant factors. “What needs to happen is the translation of the interactive energy captured by the Internet into the making of a vibrant civil society and, crucially, viable and effective opposition parties.” (81). It may be that, with blogging, the genie of free information has been let out of the bottle, but it remains to be seen whether it can have a decisive effect.

The Postscript makes an important point that not only blogs, but also SMS, email, YouTube and even Facebook were important in breaking the monopoly of the media by the government. Even though the digital divide was present, there was also the ‘ripple effect’ whereby revelations and discussions on the Internet spread to non-Internet users by the distribution of printouts and CDs. Again, the complementary but non-decisive contribution of blogs is noted: six bloggers overall were elected to public positions, but they benefited from party organisation and media exposure in various forms; blogs helped to mobilise and publicise ceramah—public gatherings—but these articulated issues that were already of concern to voters (corruption, inflation, etc.), rather than necessarily setting the agenda. Here more attention is paid to particular affordances of the blog as a medium. The bloggers as “proactive agents” (93) are able to challenge the dominant discourse and articulate broader issues to interested citizens. By sharing personal experiences and thoughts, the regular readers can begin to identify more with the blogger and even engage in a conversation with the blogger and other readers via the comments. This enables “personalized and interactive synergy … between certain social-political bloggers and their readers.” (p.92) which assists their emergence as “thought leaders” (93).

Blogging and Democratization in Malaysia: A New Civil Society in the Making is an invaluable resource for anyone interested in blogging in general, as well as its political aspects. It has a wealth of primary data, drawn from a large survey and in-depth interviews, some of which are reproduced in full as appendices. It is also unique in Malaysia and possibly worldwide, in terms of the detail provided and fortuitous events that occurred during its conception and fed into the research. It could however benefit from more comparative discussion, for example drawing upon the works done in relation to liberal and conservative bloggers in the USA. It could also have engaged more with debates on the meaning of ‘democracy’ as such. Especially with hindsight, it is clear that the social-political bloggers had different concepts of acceptable democratic practices—after the upset of the 2008 elections, some bloggers were vocal in arguing for a greater use of detention without trial, and there has also been a pro-government/anti-government alignment of blogs.

Readers looking for a discussion of the blog-as-medium, and related issues of sociotechnical systems, or technology as agent/actant, will not find much here in terms of theoretical debate. Neither does it problematise the terms ‘blogosphere’, ‘community’, or ‘civil society’. However the authors do well to emphasise the socially embedded nature of social-political blogging in Malaysia, and avoid jumping on the ‘netopian’ bandwagon or falling into the real/virtual dichotomy that has plagued much research on Internet phenomena.

Blogging and Democratization in Malaysia: A New Civil Society in the Making
(2009)

by J. Tan & I. Zawawi
SIRD (Gerukbudaya)
ISBN: 9789833782536
153pp MYR25.00