AI on political prisoners and lese majeste

Simon Roughneen at The Irrawaddy talks with Salil Shetty, Secretary-General of  Amnesty International and Isabelle Arradon, Amnesty’s Asia-Pacific deputy director. The two were in Burma for a World Economic Forum meeting and the interview began with Burma and turned to other members of ASEAN.

PPT has only mentioned Shetty in two previous posts, when we were highly critical of AI’s stance on lese majeste. In fact, it was the lack of any stand and its capitulation to the Abhisit Vejjajiva royalist regime’s vigorous use of the lese majeste and computer crimes laws that was the issue. AI in Thailand was under the influence and control of royalists and its then Southeast Asia representative Benjamin Zawacki repeatedly made comments supportive of arguments about lese majeste being about “protection of the monarchy” and argued publicly that the king was a defender of human rights.

AI’s stance on lese majeste remains somewhat less than crystal clear, so whenever it makes a statement, we try to highlight it. This is from the interview:

Q: How many people are in jail or have been charged under lese-majeste in Thailand? Are they categorized as political prisoners or prisoners of conscience if they are detained under lese-majeste or associated aspects of Thailand’s computer crimes law?

IA: Amnesty International has expressed a number of concerns with lese-majeste laws—they don’t meet international human rights standards. Some of them are prisoners of conscience, such as Somyot Prueksakasemsuk [a magazine editor and labor activist who was sentenced to 11 years jail for lese-majeste in January], and we have been campaigning actively for their immediate and unconditional release. Another aspect we are concerned about is the denial of bail to those charged under lese-majeste. It is very important that all those facing charges are free pending investigation and trial. It is very hard to say the exact number detained under the lese-majeste laws, I believe it is tens of people. We are not able to say at the moment how many of those are prisoners of conscience. There are other laws such as the Computer Crime Act that we are concerned about and recently the use of criminal defamation suits as well.

SS: We will be meeting the Thai prime minister and will raise several of these issues and also issues of rights violations in the conflict in the south of Thailand. And just to go back to the region [ASEAN], it’s not overall a pretty picture, there are violations in most countries. For the region, freedom of expression, reform of the criminal justice systems and accountability for past violations are the three key issues for us. There are land issues, issues of women’s rights are other important issues as well that come up across the region in terms of human rights.

To be honest, we don’t think AI has been active enough on lese majeste, political prisoners and accountability in Thailand. But as we have said before, at least AI is no longer expressing support for laws that made political prisoners of regime opponents.

AI on LM

The Bangkok Post reports that Amnesty International,which once had its representative Benjamin Zawacki in strong support of monarchy and lese majeste, is now taking a more consistent stand on lese majeste and freedom of expression.

Noting that freedom of expression in “Thailand continues to be curtailed, primarily through the lese majeste law and the 2007 Computer Crimes Act,” Amnesty International says that there are “five issues that are marked by human rights violations in the country.” These are:

They are the armed conflict in the deep South; lack of accountability for political violence; freedom of expression; refugees and migrants; and the death penalty.

On the lese majeste and 2007 Computer Crimes laws it notes that “heavy jail sentences for perceived insults to the monarchy” remain in place and that challenges to the laws or calls for amendment have so far failed and that, ominously, the Constitutional Court upheld the lese majeste law.

The Post report  states that the number of lese majeste cases in Thailand jumped from 33 in 2005 to 126 in 2007, 164 in 2009 and then 478 in 2010. It seems, although no data are available, that these numbers have dropped precipitously since the 2011 election.

The short AI annual report for 2012 on Thailand also notes that:

After a court found security forces responsible for the May 2010 killing of UDD protester Phan Khamkong, murder charges were lodged against former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his former deputy Suthep Thaugsuban in December. They were the first officials to be charged in connection with the 2010 political violence.

 

Condemning the Somyos lese majeste conviction

Prachatai reports that the European Union Delegation to Thailand has issued a statement “in agreement with the EU Heads of Mission in Thailand”:

The EU Delegation to Thailand is deeply concerned by the court’s decision to sentence Mr. Somyot Pruksakasemsuk for 10 years imprisonment for violating the Article 112 of the Criminal Code.

The verdict seriously undermines the right to freedom of expression and press freedom. At the same time, it affects Thailand’s image as a free and democratic society. The EU urges the Thai authorities to ensure that any limitation of fundamental rights is applied in a proportional manner consistent with upholding universal human rights.

Prachatai also reports that Amnesty International has condemned the conviction, saying that the “sentencing of a human rights defender to ten years in prison for publishing two articles allegedly insulting the monarchy is a serious setback for freedom of expression in Thailand…”. It describes this as a “regressive decision – Somyot has been found guilty simply for peacefully exercising his right to freedom of expression and should be released immediately…”.

AI went further and urged “the authorities to release Somyot and all other prisoners of conscience without conditions. They should also grant Somyot reparations for the time he has spent in pre-trial detention,” adding that the “lèse majesté law should immediately be suspended and revised so that it complies with Thailand’s international human rights obligations.”

Amnesty day/แอมเนสตี้ อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล ประเทศไทย

Readers in Bangkok will find this of interest:

Dear Members,

You’re invited to the I Amnesty Day! Write for Prisoner of Conscience”Free Somyot”

We will Write for an Urgent Action: editor at risk of unjust sentence IN THAILAND “Somyot Prueksakasemsuk”
For more info:
http://tinyurl.com/ausnhcr

Where: Amnesty International Thailand Office, Ladprao Soi 1 (MRT:Phaholyothin Station, exit 5)
When: January 18, 2013 (Friday)
Time: 10:00 – 12:00 Office warming. 13.00 onward: Write for Prisoner of Conscience”Free Somyot”
Party time (gift exchange) staring from 18.00 onward

Theme: Amnesty Shirts Party

Please bring a present worth approximately 256 baht for the gift exchange. Members attending the Amnesty International Thailand “New Year Party” gets a gift.

We’ll have lots of snacks, so bring your appetite! and don’t forget, YOUR SIGNATURE OR LETTER CAN MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE TO SOMEONE’S LIFE!
—
Team Amnesty International Thailand

แอมเนสตี้ อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล ประเทศไทย ขอสวัสดีปีใหม่สมาชิกทุกท่านผู้เป็นพลังสำคัญในการทำงานเพื่อปกป้อง คุ้มครอง และส่งเสริมสิทธิมนุษยชนทั้งในประเทศและระดับสากล

ทีมแอมเนสตี้ อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล ประเทศไทย มีความยินดีเปิดบ้านแอมเนสตี้ ต้อนรับสมาชิก อาสาสมัคร นักกิจกรรม ร่วมเขียนจดหมาย ลงลายเซ็นเพื่อปฏิบัติการด่วน “บรรณาธิการไทยเสี่ยงจะถูกตัดสินลงโทษอย่างไม่เป็นธรรม” http://tinyurl.com/ax4bz7y และพูดคุยแลกเปลี่ยน อัพเดทซึ่งกันและกัน (ไม่เป็นทางการ)

แอมเนสตี้ อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล ประเทศไทย “สวัสดีปีใหม่ 2556”

สถานที่: สำนักงานแอมเนสตี้ อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล ประเทศไทย ซอยลาดพร้าว 1 (ซอยดวงพร) รถไฟใต้ดินสถานีพหลโยธิน ทางออก 5 (เข้าซอยดวงพร-บ้านหลังแรกขวามือ)

วันศุกร์ที่ 18 มกราคม 2556

เวลา 10.00 น – 12.00 น. ทำบุญปีใหม่

เวลา 13.00 น เป็นต้นไป เขียนจดหมายและลงลายเซ็นปฏิบัติการด่วนเพื่อนักโทษทางความคิด “สมยศ พฤกษาเกษมสุข” และเวลา 18.00 น เป็นต้นไป ปาร์ตี้สวัสดีปีใหม่ 2556 (แลกเปลี่ยนของขวัญ / มีอาหารและเครื่องดื่มเบาๆ เตรียมไว้ให้ ยินดีอย่างยิ่งหากสมาชิกหิ้วของตัวเองติดไม้ติดมือไปร่วมด้วย)

ธีม: เสื้อแอมเนสตี้

กรุณาเตรียมของขวัญมูลค่าตั้งแต่ 256บาท เพื่อแลกเปลี่ยน

สมาชิกร่วม “สวัสดีปีใหม่ 2556” ทุกท่านจับฉลากรับของที่ระลึกจากแอมเนสตี้ฯ ประเทศไทย

Updated: Human rights organizations on Somyos

Several human rights organizations have released this statement on the lese majeste case involving Somyos Prueksakasemsuk.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

19 September 2012 – Bangkok

Free Somyot Now

Human rights and labour organizations today urge that magazine editor and human rights defender Somyot Prueksakasemsuk be immediately released from 17-month pre-trial detention. If convicted, he faces up to 30 years in prison under Article 112 of the Criminal Code (the lèse-majesté law) for the publication of two articles deemed insulting to the monarchy. The group further called on the Thai authorities to uphold international standards of freedom of expression, and to stop using Article 112 and arbitrary detention to criminalize or restrict free speech.

The outcome of Somyot’s trial is a litmus test of Thailand’s commitment to protect the rights to freedom of opinion and expression, the group said Somyot has been held in prison since his arrest in April 2011, five days after he launched a petition campaign to collect 10,000 signatures required for a parliamentary review of lèse majesté law. Lengthy pre-trial detention of Somyot clearly violates Thailand’s obligations to refrain from arbitrary detention.

On 18 September, the Thai Criminal Court cancelled a court hearing in his case scheduled for 19 September, prolonging his pre-trial detention indefinitely. The Criminal Court did not provide reasons for the cancellation or a new date for the hearing.

Background

Authorities have turned down Somyot’s eleven requests for release on bail. In denying him provisional release, the court has not provided adequate justifications, as required by Section 40(7) the Constitution and Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which restrict pre-trial detention to exceptional circumstances, and by the International Covenant on Civil Political Rights (ICCPR), which Thailand has ratified.

During the past two years, Thai courts have repeatedly denied bail to alleged lèse-majesté offenders. The UN Human Rights Committee, which oversees compliance of States with the ICCPR, has reminded States that pre-trial detention may, in itself, be a violation of the rights to liberty and presumption of innocence.

Thailand’s lèse-majesté law prohibits any word or act, which “defames, insults, or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent, or the Regent”. The law overrides the Thai constitution and places the country in contravention of its international legal obligations to uphold international standards of freedom of expression. Thai civil society groups, families of those prosecuted under the lèse-majesté law, and United Nations human rights experts have repeatedly called for a public debate on reform of the lèse-majesté law. When Thailand’s human rights record was examined in October 2011 during the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council, its member states addressed more than a dozen recommendations to amend or repeal both the lèse-majesté law and the 2007 Computer Crimes Act that criminalizes online defamation under the same provision. Four of the alleged lèse-majesté offenders, including Somyot, have pending requests to the Constitutional Court to rule on the constitutionality of Article 112. On 19 September, Somyot was expected to learn if the Constitutional Court had ruled on whether Thailand’s lèsemajesté law complies with guarantees of freedom of expression and the press in the 2007 Constitution.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression “reiterate[d] the call to all States to decriminalize defamation” in his report (A/HRC/17/27) to the UN Human Right Council in May 2011. The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders guarantees the right “[t]o submit to governmental bodies and agencies and organizations concerned with public affairs criticism and proposals for improving their functioning and to draw attention to any aspect of their work that may impede the realization of human rights.” Thailand has increasingly criminalized writers and editors of publications that carry articles deemed offensive to the monarchy.

For more information, please contact:

Arthur Manet, Press Officer, International Federation for Human Rights. (FIDH) + 33 1 43 55 25 18

Isabelle Scherer, Coordinator, World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) + 41 22 809 49 39

Brittis Edman, Southeast Asia Programme Director, Civil Rights Defender +46 8545 27751

Mary McGuire, Senior Communications Officer, Freedom House +1.202.747.7035

Ineke Zeldenrust, International Coordinator, Clean Clothes Campaign +31-6-51280210

Olof Blomqvist, Press Officer Asia/Pacific, Media Programme, Amnesty International – International Secretariat  + 44 (0) 20 7413 5871

Update: PPT has heard from excellent sources that Human Rights Watch has refused to join this group that issued the appeal. While we should congratulate the International Secretariat of Amnesty International for taking a stand, HRW has again fallen by the human rights wayside.

Lese majeste prisoners

A story at AFP confirms some of the worst stories that come out of Thailand’s overcrowded and inhuman prisons. The article confirms that lese majeste prisoners are mistreated in the prison system. However, the article is not without its mistakes and misunderstandings.

For example, the article begins by stating: “Locked up for breaking Thailand’s most enduring taboo, the kingdom’s ‘royal insult’ prisoners say they face mistreatment from jail guards and are shunned even by common criminals.”

That the prisoners are mistreated is understood, but the claim that lese majeste is an “enduring taboo” is simply wrong. As anyone who has done even an ounce of research on the topic knows, it is only in times of high political conflict that lese majeste becomes a “taboo.” The taboo is politically constructed. This is confirmed later in the article when it is noted that the current prisoners say “that their conditions have improved under the current [Yingluck Shinawatra] administration.”

Tanthawut Taweewarodomkul, serving 13 years, is quoted: “Some of the wardens took me to a different part of the jail and ordered other prisoners to beat me…”. Like his fellow prisoners held on this political charge, as a political prisoner, he shouldn’t even be in a common prison. He shouldn’t even be in jail!

The article claims that the Office of the Human Rights Commission of Thailand says there are “nine lese majeste prisoners in the kingdom…”. This is nonsense. We do not have all of the cases listed because they are often kept secret, but our records show that there are more than this awaiting trial or already convicted. And these are only the most highly publicized cases.

For some unfathomable reason, the report cites Benjamin Zawacki of Amnesty International, who again seems to jump on the Thais state’s wagon, claiming that lese majeste is perceived as an “offence to society.” This is only true for the royalist judges who consider those charged guilty until proven innocent, with only about 5% of those charged ever being found innocent. Zawacki goes on to compare these political prisoners to pedophiles. He should be defending these political prisoners and demanding their release. When he seemingly grudging says: “If that is the only law under which they have been in prison they should be released,” he knows that this is the case for all of these political prisoners.

Even if the prisoners are doing better now, as the report says, Darunee Charnchoensilpakul, “was still being beaten by some wardens” who “want to bully her.” It is the representatives of the state who continue the punishment of these political prisoners.

On Joe Gordon’s release

The short report at CNN is worth reading, not so much for the content, but for the short video that reminds us of the Joe Gordon’s incarceration and his sentencing.

From the report itself, the media is tending to report rather than comment, and yet there are issues that deserve discussion. Not least, the repeated statement that Joe received “a royal pardon from the king” while factually correct demands dissection.

Why is it that Joe and all other lese majeste victims have to appeal for a royal pardon? In fact, one reason is that this law is enforced by judges who hold all prisoners guilty from the beginning. This charge has a conviction rate of over 94%. Another reason is that those accused are pressured to plead guilty. The threat of years and years in a stinking jail, usually with no bail, means that a “royal pardon” is held up as an opportunity to end torment.

A third reason is that “granting” pardons makes the king look good. By granting an appeal he appears benevolent. In fact, the victims of this political crime that “protects” this fabulously wealthy and politically interventionist king who now divides Thailand, are only in jail because the monarchy is a significant element of the system that protects the privileges of a grasping royalist elite.

The CNN report also notes that:

Gordon’s case is one of several that provoked criticism from human rights advocates over Thailand’s controversial laws that punish defaming, insulting or threatening the royal family. U.S. authorities had also expressed concern about his imprisonment.

This is only partly true. So-called human rights advocates like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have been altogether too timid and even politically compromised in their attention to lese majeste.They should have been far more vocal. As for the U.S. authorities, they made one intervention in public on Joe’s case. On lese majeste generally, they have been essentially silent and compromised.

Like almost all other reports in the media, the CNN report has Joe guilty of “posting a link on his blog to an unauthorized biography of King Bhumibol Adulyadej…”. This isn’t correct. Joe pleaded guilty under duress. We have no idea whether he did what he’s accused of. Even if he did, it wasn’t an illegal act in the United States.

Joe’s lawyer is reported as saying: “The case is over, he has no more pending court case or obligatory things to do…”. We hope that this is not the end of Joe’s case. We would like to see him write extensively of his experience, tell us who helped him and who didn’t, and in support of other victims.

An important call for AI to help Thailand’s political prisoners

Andrew Spooner has published a letter from lese majeste convict Tanthawut Taweewarodomkul (also known as Num). The letter is addressed to Amnesty International and was delivered by former National Human Rights’ Commissioner, Jaran Ditapichai. The letter, which is on behalf of 55 political prisoners, laments that AI has not yet done anything for the prisoners. They hope that “one day” AI may do something for them. PPT reproduces it in full below:

Re: Request for aid for lèse-majesté law and political prisoners in Thailand after September 19, 2006 coup.

Bangkok Remand Prison

May 14th 2012.

Dear Amnesty International,

My name is Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul; I am a 40 years old lèse-majesté prisoner who received a 13-year sentence – I have been incarcerated for 2 years and 1 month and was not released on bail while awaiting for my trial. At present I have just withdrawn my appeal because I am applying for a royal pardon. 7 other lèse-majesté law prisoners also decided to drop their appeals and chose to apply for the royal pardon as well.

Besides lèse-majesté law prisoners, many others have been arrested and charged during political demonstrations since the 2006 coup – they are now detained in Laksi prison in Bangkok and many other places in Thailand. All of them have been prosecuted because they exercised their civil and political rights to demand democracy as citizens of their country.

But we have never been treated justly; our basic rights such as right to bail, right to be treated with respect and dignity as prisoners of conscience and political prisoners, which are guaranteed by international laws, have been denied. The authorities have physically assaulted many of the prisoners. Many prisoners have been put in very crowded cells and refused proper medical treatment which led to the death of Amphon Tangnoppakul aka Ar Kong who was 62 years and died of advanced stage of cancer on May 8, 2012 – he didn’t receive proper care and medical treatment.

Up until now, we have been suffering physically and mentally from incarceration. Many have been incarcerated for over 2 years without being allowed bail even though the governmental organizations and human right organizations in Thailand and overseas have continually been trying to help out.

So we now hope that Amnesty International, an organisation that is widely respected because of its outstanding human rights work and which has a huge global network, including in Thailand, would be able to help us out.

So far, we have never been contacted by or received any attention from Amnesty International in Thailand at all. We are deeply sad about this but we still hope that one day, Amnesty International, might start to pay attention to us.

At the moment, Thailand has a democratically elected government and its policy is to create reconciliation in Thailand, a country that has been deeply divided since the 2006 coup. Many organizations in Thailand and overseas have been working together to create reconciliation as soon as possible.

We, therefore, hope that Amnesty International will be part of this reconciliation process in Thailand by doing everything it can to ensure that the basic rights of incarcerated political prisoners meet international standards. We will be very happy if Amnesty International does this.

Furthermore, we hope to see peace in Thailand as soon as possible. We have always respected and believed in democracy governance with the King as the head of state and we are ready to do everything to make the country become normal again.

Finally, we hope that you will consider lending us some help and we are looking forward to the day you are able to do so.

Respectfully,

Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul

Lèse-majesté law prisoner writing on behalf of 55 incarcerated political prisoners in Thailand.

Scans of the hand-written Thai version can be found here and here.

US and UK governments and lese majeste

It has long been known that the Government of the United States couldn’t care less about lese majeste in Thailand. Not even when one of their own – Joe Gordon – is incarcerated for totally legal actions in the Unites States does the government get off its lazy, politicized and collective posterior and do or say anything principled.

PPT has posted on the recently published but hopelessly, probably deliberately, deceitful U.S. “human rights” report for Thailand in 2011. If it wasn’t deliberately deceitful, then we imagine that everyone on the Thailand desk at the Department of State and in the Embassy in Bangkok has been lobotomized to the extent that they are deaf, dumb and blind on lese majeste and other political prisoners in Thailand.

A reader points out a useful story at IPS News reflecting on the hopelessly unprincipled and contradictory approach to human rights by the U.S. The rport coincides with the release of the annual human rights reports.

The report quotes the head of Amnesty International’s Washington office who criticizes the U.S. for “selectively champion[ing] freedom and human rights when convenient…”. PPT entirely agrees.

Of course, we also wonder what AI does about its own selectivity on lese majeste in Thailand. What they criticize for the U.S. government has long been characteristic of AI Thailand’s selectivity and Benjamin Zawacki’s unprincipled position on lese majeste.

As the IPS story makes plain, the State Department has explained its unprincipled actions in terms of President Barack Obama’s “theory” of “principled engagement”, where human rights are contingent, limited and inconsistently prioritized.

All of that says quite a lot about lese majeste and political prisoners in Thailand. They are ignored because other interests – economic, military, ideological – hold sway.

But what about the Government of the U.K.? Readers may recall that a week or so ago, we briefly mentioned questions posed regarding lese majeste and political prisoners by the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, Kerry McCarthy Labour MP. The responses are instructive. Here they are:

Q. 1: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Government of Thailand on the imprisonment and death of Ampon Tangnoppakul.

A. 1, by Jeremy Browne (Minister of State for South East Asia/Far East, Caribbean, Central/South America, Australasia and Pacific, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Taunton Deane, Liberal Democrat):  In November 2011, following the sentencing of Ampon Tangnoppakul, the UK issued a statement jointly with our European Union partners to express concern about the court decision to convict and imprison Ampon for 20 years. The statement reiterated the importance attached by the EU to the rule of law, democracy and respect for human rights. The EU also urged the Thai authorities to ensure that the rule of law was applied in a non-discriminatory and proportional manner consistent with upholding basic human rights, including freedom of expression.

PPT: This is essentially a non-response, and completely ignores the question related to Ampol’s death in custody. As weak as this is, at least “concern” has been expressed.

Q. 2: … what recent assessment his Department has made of access to health care for prisoners in Thailand.

A. 2: Conditions in Thai prisons are generally poor. Prisons are old and often have run down infrastructure. However, basic medical treatment is available in all prisons in Thailand and prisoners may be transferred to a local hospital for more complex medical treatment.

As part of our consular responsibilities, embassy staff in Thailand visit British detainees every eight weeks. These visits are carried out by trained consular staff, who check the welfare of detainees. Any issues of concern can be then brought to the attention of the prison authorities, including any medical or dental problems a detainee might have.

PPT: This is essentially a non-response. At least conditions are described as “poor,” but then any visitor to a prison recognizes this within seconds, so not great insight. There seems no idea of how many prisoners die while incarcerated or of the actual availability of medical care to prisoners. The rampant corruption of prisons is not mentioned. Lese majeste detainee Darunee Charnchoensilpakul has been waiting some 4 years for proper dental treatment. Ampol died while in a prison “hospital.”

Q. 3: … what assessment his Department has made of the treatment of people (a) arrested and (b) convicted under lèse majesté laws in Thailand.

A. 3: The UK attaches great importance to human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Freedom of expression is a fundamental right of every human being. We are closely following the development of freedom of expression in Thailand and are concerned by the significant increase of lese-majeste cases in the country and the application of the laws and length of sentences in recent cases.

With our European Union partners, the UK expressed concern last year at the conviction and imprisonment for 20 years of Ampon Tangnoppakul for violating the lese-majeste laws.

Our embassy in Bangkok continues to monitor the ongoing trials of high profile lese-majeste and freedom of expression on the internet cases. We have urged the Thai Government to ensure that the rule of law is applied in a non-discriminatory and proportionate manner consistent with upholding basic human rights, and will continue to take appropriate opportunities to do so.

During my visit to Thailand in 2010, I raised the issue of conditions for detainees in Thailand, referring specifically to the importance of access to exercise, proper food and medical facilities.

PPT: This is more like a real answer. Yes, the trite human rights response is repeated, but Browne indicates that there is concern for the development of freedom of expression in Thailand, about the large increase of lese majeste cases and the length of sentences. That the Embassy monitors trials is presumably useful. His representations on the conditions of detainees apparently had no impact at all.

Q. 4: … what assessment his [Browne's] Department has made of the compliance of lèse majesté laws in Thailand with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and what representations he has made to the government of Thailand on freedom of expression and the lèse majesté laws.

A. 4: We understand the particular reverence the people of Thailand have for the monarchy. The Government attaches importance to the respect of fundamental human rights in line with the universal declaration of human rights. Specifically on article 19 which covers freedom of opinion and expression, the UK thinks that it should be possible to discuss constitutional reform without fear of coming under the purvue of laws that were designed for non political purposes. In October 2011 at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the human rights situation in Thailand was reviewed as part of the Universal Periodic Review process. The UK played an active role, including raising our concerns about freedom of expression and specifically recommending that the Thai Government seek to review its lese-majeste laws. The report of this session can be found online at the following link: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/a_hrc_wg.6_12_l.6_thailand.pdf

Our ambassador in Bangkok has raised the issue of freedom of expression with the Thai authorities. I also raised the issue when I visited Thailand in September 2011. We will continue to take appropriate opportunities to do so.

PPT: A reasonable answer suggestive of the U.K. Government being concerned about the suppression of discussion of constitutional matters, including the position and role of the monarchy.

While the answers do sound like the usual parliamentary careful responses, if they are compared with the pathetic U.S. human rights report “there are no political prisoners” nonsense, then the U.K. response is downright explosive.

PPT can’t help thinking that readers can bring pressure on their local and national politicians to ask more questions of Thailand’s government and embassies about these issues. We have some links that readers might find useful here.

Debating lese majeste

At The Nation it is reported that Democrat Party deputy leader Thaworn Senniam has apparently said that the amendment of the lese majeste law must be done. A man bites dog story? Perhaps, although he adds that it can only be done when “the political climate and public sentiment are favourable.”

At the meeting where he spoke, it was said that there had been “five attempts since 2007 to modernise what some believe to be an outdated law concerning lese majeste offences…”. All have so far failed. They were:

The first was proposed by a team of lawmakers led by Pornpet Wichitchonlachai, a member of the National Legislative Assembly, in September 2007; the second by a team led by Pheerapan Salirattawipak in 2008; the third by People Power Party members led by Jumpol Bunyai in the same year; the fourth by Bhum Jai Thai Party members led by Sanong Tepaksornnarong in November 2009; and the Nitirat group was the latest group with its proposal for an amendment in December last year.

Thaworn is reported to get fully on a royalist script but then apparently gets confused. PPT couldn’t understand this bit:

I do not agree with the amendment, because right now Thailand is confusing lax law enforcement with loopholes in the law. I believe there are no loopholes in Section 112, but our justice system fails to enforce the law….

It seems he wants to keep lese majeste because it is easily enforced. Somehow, in a feat of twisted logic, lese majeste becomes an example of a good law.

He soon added the royalist claim that “Thailand’s Section 112 was no different from laws in other countries concerning the protection of the monarchy under a democratic system.” Of course, this is a lie, but Thaworn has a different take on the stale line:

He pointed out that Malaysian laws restrict certain rights of their people, for instance banning insults to the monarchy or the Islamic prophet Muhammad, and banning homosexuality.

Perhaps, in Thaworn’s realm, banning homosexuality and “protecting” the monarchy seems a useful couplet.

Meanwhile, Somchai Homlaor, who has been a member of the Truth for Reconciliation Commission said “the problem involving Section 112 is caused by the law itself, its enforcement, and the court’s interpretations.”

Despite often being described as a human rights lawyer, Somchai is no opponent of a law that restricts rights. He wants judges – who have been shown to be remarkably biased in lese majeste cases, to the point of acting unconstitutionally – to be able to “exercise their discretion” in sentencing, so that “penalties should vary depending on the damage done to the monarchy.” It seems that Somchai thinks that “if a person sends an insulting message once,” then this is not as “damaging to the monarchy” as a message that “gets disseminated across the globe…”.

That’s an interesting distinction for a human rights lawyer who remains chair of Amnesty International Thailand. Perhaps it tells us something more about the tragedy of AI’s hopelessness over recent years on this draconian law.

Nitirat’s Worachet Pakeerat corrected Somchai when he pointed out that a major issue with the law is precisely the “problem of interpretation by judges. He saying judges are very sensitive about the issue, resulting in ambiguous legal interpretations.”

More in line with democratic freedoms and liberal philosophy, Thammasat academic Kittisak Porakati who stated that:

the lese majeste law has been problematic since the country changed the ruling system from absolute monarchy to constitutional monarchy. He believed that people are entitled to express their opinion, but their rights must not be exercised in violation of others….

For a recent overview of the issues associated with lese majeste, readers might be interested in an article at Asia Sentinel. For those who can read Thai, much more on Nitirat is available too, including its most recent statement on lese majeste.