Font size:

The compilation can currently be found in Thai only at Lèse Majesté Watch at http://lmwatch.blogspot.com/. Currently the English language link is not operating, probably because most of the material has yet to be processed. This blog currently indicates 32 lèse majesté cases either active or already adjudicated.

The most recent such case is that of Papatchanan Chingin, an FM radio program hostess in Nakhonratchasima. On Thursday she led a small group of Red Shirts – supporters of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra – in burning a coffin in effigy on which was written, “His Majesty General Prem (president of the Privy Council); People’s Alliance for Democracy; government of crooks; Born … Died April 8, 2009.”

The use of the honorific “his majesty,” according to local sources and Chingin herself, was a parody of the same expression that anti-Thaksin media baron Sondhi Limthongkul used on ASTV when he called General Prem Tinsulanonda “his majesty,” in what was most likely an unintentional error.

The crux of the matter in Chingin’s case is whether the Thai courts will view parody and mimicry as legitimate methods of expression when combined with the king’s unique title. She will have a chance to find out, since two days after the coffin burning a group of Yellow Shirts and Thai military, upset with the demonstration, dropped by police headquarters and filed lèse majesté charges against her.

Currently out on bail after using a relative’s government position as guarantee, Chingin has denied all charges and insisted that “I was not the first” to use “his majesty” to describe General Prem.

Hopefully “someone” will also put together a well-organized compilation of Thailand’s human rights record, complete with historical details and identifying bottlenecks by name. Although many agencies and nongovernmental organizations have already been active in documenting individual human rights cases, two major failings have persisted.

First, there is little to no protection from continued human rights abuses up to and including kidnapping, political harassment and murder. Secondly, the process for “closure” is too prolonged, with cases generally going on for years before they are concluded, if ever. At the heart of this process is the very institution that protects the Thai monarchy, the Royal Thai Police.

Thailand’s police have so far escaped major consequences arising from their many past failures. The most recent was their failure to protect the country’s Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva when he attempted to act as host for the 14th ASEAN summit in the resort town of Pattaya last month. The prime minister’s car was lanced with Thai flag poles and his driver was severely injured as Red Shirt supporters blocked his car and attempted to manhandle him. The summit was canceled.

While many in Thailand are asking where the police were at the time, many also know the answer – in accordance with Thaksin’s wishes, they were letting mobs set fire to the country’s image – again for political reasons.

Hopefully next month in Phuket there will not be a replay of the mayhem that hit Pattaya, wreaking havoc on its reputation and image as a safe recreational area. The resort island is booked for a renewed ASEAN meeting and security measures are said to be in place. The police and the army, as well as the provincial governor, have indicated their preparedness for the new summit.

Thailand has understandably embarked on another public relations campaign, both locally and internationally, to help rectify its image and prevent further deterioration of its credibility.

Abroad, the kingdom is disseminating “the truth” about what has been occurring in the country so that foreign diplomats and commercial partners “understand” Thailand’s situation. Internally, the state machinery, comprising the army and a special Protect the King committee, police, Privy Council, government, hard-line traditionalists and a few well-meaning but ineffectual democracy activists, are clamping down on “undesirable” dissent and “potentially damaging” media reports.

This method – fighting freedom of speech in order to preserve it – is not unique to Asian countries. Rationalized most visibly under the guise of protecting national security and safeguarding the nation, echoes of Italian wartime dictator Benito Mussolini and Japanese Emperor Hirohoto reverberate around the globe, but are seemingly unheard in the Land of Smiles.

Whether Thailand’s concerted campaign of containing the damage, preserving the country’s image and “educating” others to “understand” what is really going on will work is moot – it won’t. It only satisfies those who are going through the motions and provides them with more justification for carrying on as in the past.

It is no wonder that University of North Carolina Professor Kevin Hewison, whose detailed discussion on General Prem appears online at http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/1200, has indicated a considerable degree of pessimism regarding Thailand’s political future. The only optimists seem to be those who think that things will soon return to “normal.”

--

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