What the establishment protects

A few days ago, the ASEAN Skyline Facebook page had a post that revealed that Bangkok is “Southeast Asia’s Billionaire Capital, Ranking 11th Globally in 2024!”

It said that this ranking was “[b]ased on the report from the Hurun Global Rich List 2024 titled ‘Cities with the Most Billionaires, 2024’,” and noted that “New York tops the list with 119 billionaires in 2024.”

(We think the graphic might be from Visual Capitalist)

Turning to Southeast Asian cities in the global ranking, it wrote: “Bangkok ranks 11th with 49 billionaires, Singapore ranks 15th with 42 billionaires, and Jakarta ranks 17th with 37 billionaires.”

Thailand’s billionaires did well during the tenure of the military junta and the undemocratic regimes that followed. We don’t doubt that one of Puea Thai’s objectives is to shift even more wealth to the biggest capitalists.

In broader terms, it is this accumulation regime that the establishment seeks to protect, with the monarchy – still Thailand’s largest pile of loot – as its keystone.

Ordered to celebrate

Like all recent governments, the Puea Thai coalition is working hard on promoting the monarchy. It seems to feel its survival – or at least Puea Thai’s – depends on being seen as loyal.

PPT also gets the impression that the current government is also driven by a feeling that promoting the monarchy weakens the support for Move Forward.

Vajiralongkorn and dog in earlier days. Clipped from SCMP

So it is that The Bangkok Post reports that “Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin … [has] ordered all state agencies to propose activities to celebrate the sixth-cycle birthday of His Majesty King Rama X on July 28.”

After a recent cabinet meeting, Srettha explained that he had “instructed each agency to propose activities to the steering committee meeting tomorrow.”

Giving them a day to do this suggests that someone must have observed laggards on loyalty.

As always, souvenirs are produced and made available for sale. These are loyalist badges of monarchism.

And, as always, the taxpayer is squeezed to pay for the king’s happy day. This time, “cabinet agreed to spend 700 million baht on … the King’s birthday celebrations.” That’s around $20 million and readers can be sure that agencies will likely spend on top of that.

Further updated: Another Siam Bioscience 112 case

Thai PBS reports that well known singer and TV personality Suthipongse Thatphithakkul (also rendered as Suthipong Tadpitakkul), known as “Heart”, has been “indicted on a lèse majesté charge in the Bangkok South Criminal Court” on 7 May 2024.

The prosecutor alleges that Suthipongse shared “a statement on his Facebook account, about the monarchy’s involvement in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, in a way deemed to defame the revered institution, in violation of Section 112 of the Criminal Code and the Computer Crime Act.”

He was granted bail on a 200,000 baht surety.

PPT has lost count of the number of cases related to the king’s Siam Bioscience and the Astrazenica COVID vaccine. Of course, at about the same time, Astrazenica withdrew the vaccine citing low demand and side effects.

Update 1: This case actually goes back to 2021. Back then, the 112 complaint was lodged by Seksakon “Rambo Isan” Atthawong, a red shirt turncoat rewarded by the military by being made assistant minister to the prime minister. Seksakon was previously known as Suporn.

Suporn was joined by Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha’s lawyer Apiwat Kanthong in lodging “another complaint” against Suthipong. They went to the Nang Loeng police station saying the singer had criticized the government’s vaccine procurement plan, alleging he may have also violated the lese majeste law and the Computer Crimes Act.

The earlier complaint was lodged with the Technology Crime Suppression Division. It seems that the complaint then also related to lese majeste and may be the same complaint.

In this “new” complaint, Suthipong was accused of having copied information on the government’s vaccine procurement plan to his Facebook page and “made additions.” He is accused of adding: “It is a vaccine of the boss” and “It is a Covid-19 vaccine monopoly.”

Lawyer Apiwat reckoned that anyone reading this would immediately know who he is talking about.” It’s not Gen Prayuth. It seems it is he whose name may not be said – the king.

The regime wants the police to seek more evidence and more information to substantiate the accusation against Suthipong. It took three years.

The oddity of a complaint and a possible charge for not saying the king’s name seems insane, even for royalist Thailand.

Update 2: Prachatai has answered our question above regarding how many Siam Bioscience lese majeste cases. It reports:

… Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, former leader of the now-defunct Future Forward Party and current leader of the Progressive Movement, was charged with royal defamation [lese majeste] over an 18 January 2021 Facebook live broadcast, during which he said that the Thai government only bought vaccines from AstraZeneca and Sinovac because it wanted to support Siam BioScience Co. Ltd…. Thanathorn was indicted in April 2022. Meanwhile, a court order was issued banning the video.

Student activists Benja Apan and Parit Chiwarak were charged with royal defamation, violation of the Emergency Decree, the Communicable Diseases Act, and the Sound Amplifier Act for a 25 January 2021 protest at the Srijulsup building, where Siam BioScience’s registered office is located.

5 students in Lampang were also charged with royal defamation for displaying a banner saying “Budget for monarchy > Covid-19 vaccines.” A student at the Rajabhat University, Chiang Rai, was later charged with royal defamation for posting a picture of the banner onto the Facebook page “Free Youth – CEI.” Police believe that she was involved in hanging the banner near to King Vajiralongkorn’s portrait.

On 3 March 2021, activist Piyarat Chongthep, now a Move Forward Party MP, was charged with royal defamation for 7 protest signs against the government’s vaccine policy and for posting pictures of the signs.

A 30-year-old man from Nonthaburi was charged with royal defamation for sharing Facebook posts alleging that Siam BioScience was using taxpayer’s money to produce the vaccines. He was indicted in June 2023. In October 2023, he was found guilty and given a suspended sentence of 1 year and 6 months.

Updated: Mike cops 4 years on 112

Panupong in 2020. Clipped from The Nation

The Bangkok Post reports that on 8 May 2024, one of the leaders of the Ratsadon group Panupong Jadnok or Mike Rayong, 28, has been sentenced, on lese majeste and computer crimes charges, “to four years behind bars and reduced it to three years due to his cooperation during witness examination.”

Mike’s “crime” was found in a Facebook message from 2020. The “court said the message was viewed as offensive to the monarchy and … the King and in breach of the computer law.” He had denied the charges.

Mike wasn’t in “court for the judgement and a bench warrant was then issued for his arrest.” He had also failed to appear on 28 March, when the ruling was first scheduled to be read.

Update: Somewhat belatedly, Prachatai has a post that adds to the account of Mike’s conviction. It states that the case was about a “2020 Facebook post that questioned the King during the “People’s Letter” activity (ราษฎรสาส์น)…”. The message was a question to the king, naming him: “Do you think that when you stand on the ruins of democracy or the corpses of the people, you will be majestic?”

The post also states that the charges were filed by the mad monarchist Nangnoi Assawakittikorn,who is a member of the ridiculously named Thailand Help Center for Cyberbullying Victims. All that group does is bully those it identifies as the monarchy’s “enemies.” Those cyber vigilantes had, by 2021, initiated some 1,400 lese majeste cases. While we cannot confirm it, some social media posts suggest that Mike boycotted the court and its verdict.

The regime’s mirror

Self-crowned

It was recently coronation day for the country’s monarch, with events that were meant to promote royalism and the king. But it also featured its now quite odd royal family.

As the linked “report” had it, the king and queen, “marked the 2019 Royal Coronation Ceremony, accompanied by … Princess Sirivannavari…”.

Meanwhile, two of the king’s sisters, Sirindhorn and Chulabhorn “waited at Amarin Winitchai Throne Hall to welcome the King.”

This report was of one event, and other, lesser members of the extended but still small and always troubled royal family may have made appearances elsewhere, Even so, this report was revealing in its

An earlier photos of several members of the royal family. From: Love to Know

But there was a kind of weird backstory. Chulabhorn, usually seen in a wheelchair, was photographed erect, but the missing were also noticeable. Where was Ubolratana, the king’s eldest and quirkiest sister? More-or-less dead and never mentioned is Princess Bajrakitiyabha is a notable omission as the royal family’s undead. Why is she still being hooked up to a machine?

Then there’s Sineenat Wongvajirapakdi or Goy, the king’s official consort who disappeared a couple of years ago. Where was Prince Dipangkorn, the only male currently in line for the throne. His current competitor for the throne, calling himself a prince, but still officially not, is Vacharaesorn Vivacharawongse. He’s stalking around the country looking like a celebrated royal.

This quite odd family has some resonances with a new mini-series, The Regime, about a year within the palace of a crumbling authoritarian regime. Sure, it is about something other than a bunch of grasping, gasping royals, but for anyone who follows Thailand’s political travails there are many moments where a viewer recognizes Thailand’s royal family.

Monarchy studies

Within a couple of days, PPT has seen two recent studies of the role of the monarchy in urban development.

The first is a journal article with Asian Studies Review by Puangchon Unchanam of Naresuan University, titled “No Royal Road: Urban Transportation, Capitalist Development, and Monarchy in Thailand.” The abstract states:

This article examines the role of the Thai monarchy in shaping urban transportation in Bangkok, Thailand’s capital and one of the world’s most congested cities. With an inquiry into the history of Bangkok under the reign of the previous king, Rama IX, the narratives of city staff who received the monarch’s guidance, and the king’s initiatives that relate to city planning, this article illustrates the problematic role of the monarchy in urban transportation. While the palace and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration have saluted Rama IX’s initiatives for building more ring roads, overpasses, and bridges to solve traffic congestion, this article argues that these royal initiatives failed to address the roots of the problem. These include an excessive reliance on motor vehicles, insufficient public transportation, the dominant role of the automotive industry in the national economy, city planning that serves middle-class drivers at the expense of the mass of commuters, the close association between the crown and car companies, and the unconstitutional role of the monarchy in such matters. Swept under the rug during the historic reign of Rama IX, these problems have started to come to light in the current reign of Rama X.

From Quora

While the article is behind a paywall, PPT has always found authors generous with the free electronic copies they hold.

The second is a talk, at Hong Kong University, by Rawin Leelapatana of the Faculty of Law, Chulalongkorn University, available on YouTube. The abstract for the talk titled “The Monarchy-led Urban Development: Lessons from Bangkok’s Planning Regime” states:

Although royal absolutism was abolished on 24 June 1932, much infrastructure, including many roads and public facilities in the capital, Bangkok, is said to be the products of royal initiatives of his majesty the king. Ostensibly, the construction of such infrastructure was delivered, especially from the 1970s onwards, by a constitutional rather than an executive monarch and even against the presence of democratisation and the Western-style urban planning regime. Such construction was put into operation by either the royal institution, a state organ, or individual royalist elites in honour of the king. As a result, these structures become visible symbols of public loyalty to the sacred throne as well as the king’s graciousness and altruism towards the people. I call this royal-initiated form of urban development ‘the monarchy-led urban development’ (MUD). I argue that to implement the MUD in democratizing Thailand, the monarchy must move away from operating blatantly outside the law and instead seek recourse to it. Written constitutions, planning law instruments, and non-planning law instruments are integral for turning the abstract constitutional ideology of royal nationalism into concrete reality, while also lending a veneer of legality to royal prerogative in urban planning.

PPT added the emphasis. As lecturers used to say, “compare and contrast.”

Targeting young women with 112

Rung

Amnesty International reports that “Niraphorn ‘Bie’ Onnkhaow, an Amnesty International Digital Rights Champion who recently engaged with the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, and Panusaya ‘Rung’ Sithijirawattanakul, a prominent protest leader featured in Amnesty International’s 2021 Write for Rights campaign, were today indicted under the charges of lèse-majesté and violating Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act.”

Bie (clipped from AI)

Amnesty International’s Thailand Researcher Chanatip Tatiyakaroonwong stated: “Today’s indictment shows that Thai authorities are continuing to weaponize spurious charges to silence critical voices of young people who want to speak about their human rights…”.

These charges were made in November 2021 but “the public prosecutor only recently decided to proceed with the indictments.” Both women are known to have been members of the student-led United Front of Thammasat and Demonstration and have been “vocal on freedom of expression, digital rights and gender equality.”

They are alleged to have been administrators of the United Front of Thammasat and Demonstration Facebook page and the charges “stem from accusations that they made three posts on the page that were considered as being defamatory towards the monarchy.”

AI “urge[s] the Thai authorities to immediately drop charges against these activists.”

Much to lose, much to protect

VOA has an article reminding its readers of the popularity of Move Forward and the strength of the monarchy.

As it faces dissolution, as recent polls show, Move Forward and its leaders remain remarkably popular with the electorate. As Thaksin Shinawatra can attest, popularity is seen by the establishment as a threat to the existing order and, at its core, the monarchy.

As the article points out, this popularity derives from “a radical slate of reforms for equitable governance — to cut the military from power, break up an economic monopoly and amend the royal defamation law, known as lèse-majesté, which criminalizes criticism of the powerful monarchy.” In many places, such reforms would not be seen as “radical,” but this is royalist Thailand.

A Move Forward spokesperson stated the obvious: “We’ve seen party dissolution being used as one of the tools against parties that are opposite from the establishment institution of Thailand…”.

Clipped from Asia Democracy Chronicles

The article makes another obvious point:

Thailand’s monarchy is extremely powerful, and the royal defamation law protects it from criticism, with sentences of up to 15 years per conviction.

Dozens of young pro-democracy activists have been jailed in the last few years under the law.

That the monarchy remains powerful despite the youthful rebellion against it in 2020-21 demonstrates, for royalists, how important Article 112 is for maintaining the socio-economic and political order.

But does all of the establishment action against Move Forward suggest that the ruling class are in their death throes? Does party dissolution really “… make … no difference,” as legal academic Prinya Thaewanarumitkul says, arguing:

The coalition government will get slightly stronger [without an opposition]. But when it comes to the next election, there will be four million new voters. Without the appointed Senate, it’s highly likely that the MFP’s next version will be the government.

We can’t help wondering if the establishment doesn’t have a plan for that as well…. It has much to lose and much to protect.

Thaksin deal redux and double standards

While we don’t know the exact details of the palace/establishment deal done with Thaksin Shinawatra to get him back and to keep him out of prison, it does seem that another deal is being negotiated, quite publicly, for Yingluck Shinawatra’s return.

The public voice in this is lawyer and Shinawatra favorite Pichit Chuenban. Pichet is well known as a bagman for Thaksin:

He was sentenced to six months in prison while leading the defence team for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in June 2008. The Supreme Court held him and two legal representatives responsible for an apparent attempt to bribe the court.

Two million baht in cash was found wrapped in a paper bag in the court’s compound in early June 2008. Pichit claimed he thought it was a bag of snacks. He was seen handing the so-called “snack bag” to court clerks when Thaksin and his then-wife Potjaman Na Pombejra were due to appear in the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office.

Pichit is now an “adviser” to the prime minister.

He says: “There is nothing complicated about the [return] process… It will depend on [Yingluck] on when she decides to come home.” He then made the extraordinary claim that the deals done and being done “is not considered a double standard as it is done in accordance with the law.” He says: “We have adhered to the principles of law enforcement and justice process…”.

Like so many who are trained and work in the legal system, Pichit is unable comprehend the meaning of double standard. This is because double standards are simply normalized. The rich, the powerful, and the influential get wondrous interpretations of the law while the poor, ordinary, and, significantly, political opponents of the establishment get something else.

In other words, “principles of law enforcement and justice process” are constructed on double standards.

Delaying a certainty

Move Forward recently applied to the country’s most prominent political court – the Constitutional Court – for an additional 30 days “to present evidence in its defence against an application, by the Election Commission, seeking the dissolution of the party and banishment of its executive committee members from politics for 10 years, on charges of attempting to overthrow the country’s Constitutional Monarchy.”

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MFP_B_Final-01-1024×724.png

The court granted just 15 days.

Move Forward “hopes that the court will conduct an enquiry, which would allow the party to present witnesses to support its case.”

In other words, the party wants the court to properly conduct a legal case. Based on its now long record of politicized decision making, this seems unlikely.

As the linked report makes clear, the “Constitutional Court has already found the party guilty of attempting to overthrow Constitutional Monarchy for its election campaign to amend Article 112 of the Criminal Code, more commonly called the lèse majesté law.”

It would be a remarkable decision if the court decided that this quite ludicrous determination would not mean dissolution.