Saturday red shirt rally

In The Nation it is reported that the red shirts again brought out tens of thousands of demonstrators. This time they marked the the 10-month anniversary of the Abhisit Vejjajiva regime’s crushing of the red shirt demonstration at Rajaprasong and the jailing without bail of most of the red shirt leaders and many of their followers since then.

The Nation reports that “Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan told an estimated 20,000 red-shirt demonstrators yesterday the group would hold an even bigger rally on March 12 if hundreds of detained red shirts, including seven of its leaders, were not granted bail next week.” Other estimates were of up to 40,000 red shirts, with rallies in other parts of the country as well. The 12 March date is symbolic as this date marks the anniversary of the red shirt rallies in 2010.

From The Nation

Jatuporn made the comparison between the concern the regime has for a few ultra-nationalists when they are jailed in Cambodia and the disdain it shows for the red shirts who have been jailed for month after month. These are political prisoners. This is clear when the differential treatment of yellow shirt leaders facing similar charges is examined; they get bail within hours.

The red shirts gathered at Rajaprasong, moved to the Supreme Court and finished with a rally at the Democracy Monument. The Thai Report has some video and links.

The Nation reports that it “took over an hour for the red-shirt motorcade to leave Ratchaprasong as they travelled slowly along New Phetchburi Road to the Supreme Court and then on to Democracy Monument. The parade was led by red-shirt motorcyclists, who shouted and honked their horns.”

Earlier, at Wat Pathum Wanaram, Red Siam leader Surachai Sae-dan called for “changing the old elite”.

Meanwhile, in MCOT News, it is reported that Bangkok will remain under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for at least another 2 weeks. It is getting hard to remember a time when Bangkok wasn’t under a state of emergency or the ISA. Abhisit, sounding Mubarak-like, stated: “The ISA doesn’t affect the daily lives of people or limit their freedom…”.

Updated: DSI’s Tharit makes more headlines

Tharit

Kind of like a second-rate celebrity, the Department of Special Investigation’s boss Tharit Pengdit seems to crave the headlines. The Bangkok Post alone has three stories that include him today.

The first story that PPT noted had to do with his wife. In July 2010, Tharit’s wife Wassamon was accused by red shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan “receiving 150,000 baht from a businessman an in return her husband, Mr Tharit, would to use his authority to help him out in a case involving 1.7 million baht in back taxes.” The businessman produced records of bank transactions and more to prove the allegations.

Wassamon filed the defamation lawsuit on July 28. Her lawyer now says she has “agreed to withdraw the case against Mr Jatuporn during arbitration mediated by court officials. Details and conditions of the settlement could not be disclosed, the lawyer said.”

Now what did happen to the investigation of those accusations? And why hasn’t the media looked at the allegation in more detail?

The second story relates to yet another DSI attempt to have Jatuporn jailed. And that has failed. Tharit has pushed the request to have Jatuporn’s bail rescinded (and Jatuporn jailed) several times. “The DSI said Mr Jatuporn had breached the court’s conditions set on Dec 28 prohibiting him from taking part in a gathering of five or more people or other political activities or disseminate information to the public, except in parliament, in a way that may obstruct investigation or court precedures in the terrorism case against him. The court ruled that Mr Jatuporn had not breached the conditions. However, the court warned Mr Jatuporn against criticising the justice process as a whole.” Heavan forbid that anyone should be allowed to criticize the justice system for what it is: a corrupt and politicized tool of the royalists.

The third story relates to Tharit’s explanation that the DSI “can still not clearly establish responsibility for the deaths” that occurred during military operations to clear United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) protesters from the streets in April and May 2010.

Tharit explained that after the UDD protest on 19 May 2010, the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) set up an investigation into 89 deaths. The oddity of this should be noted: CRES was responsible for the suppression of the demonstration and, hence, bears responsibility for the state’s portion of the violence, and they are the organization that ordered investigations. But CRES no longer exists, having been disbanded after the lifting of the emergency decree.

It is reported that the “Metropolitan Police Bureau subsequently handed over the 30 cases involving the 89 deaths to the DSI.” That is, the police investigations were halted as they were handed over to DSI, which was a part of CRES.

The DSI claims to have “cooperation from prosecutors and scientific crime investigation police, gathered evidence from eyewitnesses and government authorities who performed their duties in connection with the protest, and obtained still and motion pictures from members of the mass media and the general public…”, but can’t seem to get any further.

The report is a little unclear on what DSI currently claims – perhaps that is reflective of the nature of the investigation as a politicized event. DSI says there are “12 people whose deaths were believed to have been caused by the UDD. They include Col Romklao Thuwatham, other soldiers, police and those who died in the CentralWorld fire.” It isn’t clear if this is the outcome of investigation or of allegations. There are another “13 people whose deaths might have been caused by government authorities. The eight cases covering these deaths had been forwarded to local police to take action under Section 150 of the Criminal Procedures Code.” That bit seems clear. It seems DSI is sure that the “three people who died at Wat Pathumwanaram, the man who died in the Dusit Zoo, army Pvt Narongrit Sala who died near the National Memorial, and Japanese photo-journalist Hiroyuki Muramoto, killed in the cross fire at Khok Wua intersection on April 10″ were a result of state action.

The remaining “64 deaths … cannot yet be concluded…. The dead include Maj-Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol, alias Seh Daeng, Kamolket Akhahad who died at Wat Pathumwanaram, and Italian reporter Fabio Polenghi…. However, the investigators have gathered much information on places, dates, conditions of injuries and directions from which gunshots were fired in these 18 cases.”

Tharit says that the “incidents took place amid rioting, confusion and burning of important places both in Bangkok and other provinces. Therefore, the investigators encountered many limitations, which made it difficult for them to complete their inquiries.” Well, yes, but is something else going on. Think of this: “Mr Tharit asked for justice for government authorities, particularly soldiers, who had to perform their duty in critical situations in which loss of lives and property damage were inevitable.” This sounds remarkably close to the usual call for impunity when the state murders citizens. More so when Tharit adds: “Police and soldiers involved in peace-keeping operations in these situations were protected by the law, and the courts would make the final decision in each case, he said. It was not fair for the UDD to accuse these people of thoughtlessly killing people.”

PPT believes that the UDD and many others are not claiming that authorities “thoughtlessly” killed people. Rather, we’d suggest premeditated and planned murder.

Making the political nature of DSI even clearer, this story also includes details on a DSI arrest of “a man who was a security guard of the UDD during the rally last year. Manop Chanchangthong, alias Ped, was arrested on Wednesday. The DSI chief said Mr Manop took part in the seizure of a large number of weapons from soldiers during the clash at Khok Wua intersection on April 10 last year. The weapons were later shown on the UDD stage and then distributed to UDD guards for use against soldiers.”

Correct us if we are wrong, but PPT’s understanding is that the soldiers dumped their weapons and fled, with red shirts collecting them up.

Manop is also accused of taking “pistols from police who tried to arrest red-shirt leader Arisman Pongruangrong at the SC Park Hotel on April 16…”. That refers to an apparent attempt to arrest and/or assassinate Arisman. Manop is to be charged with “terrorism.” We doubt that the state will ever subject itself to serious investigation of state terrorism that breaks out repeatedly in Thailand, whenever populist mobilization challenges the existing socio-economic power structures.

Update: The Bangkok Post has updated and filled out the story cited above on the investigation of deaths in the events of April and May, which the DSI insists on fallaciously labeling “riots.” The Post now says the DSI has explained and attributed some deaths. We think that is incorrect and some of these results will be challenged, including the death of Romklao.

Unrest is the norm

Getting a slot in one of the big U.S. news weeklies has always been taken in Thailand as problematic. This has been more so since the current regime came to power with various accusations against the international media for “failing to understand” or, worse, being in the pay of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. This week Thailand got a slot in Newsweek as it talked with some international scholars on the problems in the south.

The take-off point is the observation that  “Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva appears eager to show that Thailand is on the mend. In late December, the government lifted the state of emergency that had been in place in the capital for more than eight months, and Abhisit then gave an optimistic end-of-year speech promising stability. As one indication, the cabinet also lifted a much older state of emergency in three districts of Thailand’s troubled Deep South—where successive administrations have been unable to quell an insurgency that since 2004 has claimed more than 4,400 lives.”

Abhisit claimed: “It shows that the government is making progress…” on the south.

Newsweek seems to refute this, citing the analysis of three scholars familiar with the region. Zachary Abuza, a professor at the U.S.’s National War College says: “The violence isn’t down…”. He adds that : “there’s no end to the conflict in sight…”. One of the reasons for this is that: “Harsh military and police tactics, meanwhile, such as detaining suspected insurgents without charge and allegedly using torture, seem only to make things worse.” And, as for lifting the state of emergency, this means little when the Internal Security Act remains in place.

Professor Duncan McCargo from Leeds University hits the nail firmly on the head when he says: “What you see in the Deep South is just an extreme version of the national problem in Thailand, which is that power is overly concentrated in Bangkok, where “the military and monarchy sit.”

Michael Montesano, a researcher at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies responds that the solution is “[d]evolution of power … both in the Deep South and countrywide…”. Yet he knows this is deeply challenging for the elite who are “reluctant to cede real power, while Abhisit’s government is backed by Thailand’s most centralized powers—the military and the crown.”

PPT agrees when the article concludes: “Until the country’s leaders are willing to address the longstanding grievances held by Thais outside the traditional power structure, unrest, both in the South and in Bangkok, will likely continue to be the norm.”

Updated: The emergency decree and continuing the repression

The Bangkok Post and many other outlets report that there is consideration of lifting the emergency decree. The current three-month implementation of the decree expires on 5 January.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has said that the decree could “well be revoked before the New Year now that the overall situation has improved…”. He quickly added that “it was still necessary for the government to monitor the activities of various groups to ensure there was no incitement to violence.”

Is this a big deal. Well, yes, in the sense that many have called for the lifting of this aspect of a military-backed regime’s headlock on political activism. But not really such a big deal if one considers that the emergency has been in place since April. That’s now 8 months of this repression under a government that repeatedly claims to be democratic and interested in human rights. Of course, it is an authoritarian regime that shows scant regard for any rights. That will continue. And, since the regime has used emergency rule to arrest repress and smash the various elements of red shirt opposition – there remain more than 200 in jail following the arrests that followed the government’s crackdown on red shirts – there is unlikely to be a retraction of the military’s steel claws that strangle opposition.

Abhisit acknowledges this when he says: “The overall situation has improved. I have instructed the secretary-general of the National Security Council (NSC) to lay down measures to cope with the situation after the decree is lifted…”. Remarkably, Abhisit admits repression: “The government does not want to infringe on the rights of the people and does not want to use a special law indefinitely…”. Repression can continue by other means that are strengthened by the rise of the military and the regime’s purging of military, police and bureaucracy.

It is noteworthy that Abhisit made his statement only after Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwon, director of the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation, said the emergency decree could be lifted.

Update: The Bangkok Post reports thatthe Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situations has “agreed to recommend that the cabinet end the enforcement of the emergency decree in Bangkok, Nonthaburi, Samut Prakan and Pathum Thani…”. It was added: “After the decree is lifted, a peace-keeping plan prepared by the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) would be implemented to maintain law and order…. If unrest reoccurs, the Internal Security Act would be imposed to enable the deployment of soldiers…”. Welcome to the internal security state.

 

More on PAD and change

Prachatai has more on the PAD rally, with an estimate of “[h]undreds of supporters” rallying against charter amendments.

It says: “Sondhi Limthongkul demanded a referendum prior to any amendments, while Praphan Koonmee said outright that he wished for a coup today, and without a coup Abhisit would never have become Prime Minister.”

Sondhi stated: “We [PAD] have always insisted that we have no problems with charter amendments, but we ask that a referendum should be held.  Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva himself has said that he would not amend the charter, but, as time passes, he shows that he doesn’t act the way he talks.  He changes his mind and goes for the amendments, without caring for the 14.7 million people who voted for this charter…”.

PPT doesn’t need to defend Abhisit, but to argue that the military referendum was a model for anything and bears any relationship to a democratic process is ludicrous. We also point out that a referendum is not required by the military’s 2007 Constitution, so PAD’s allegiance to the document is politically mediated. Bangkok Pundit has some more details.

Sondhi continued: “The 2007 Constitution has been protected through the great struggles of the people and the loss of their lives.  How can we let a boy who only wishes to cling to the Prime Minister’s chair amend it and harm the country?  If this happens, the country will not survive.  The amendments are only to please the coalition parties.  I even wish that parliamentarians would adopt [red-shirt] Dr Weng Tojirakan’s version of the amendments, so that Prime Minister Abhisit would be branded as someone who harms the monarchy and the people, only to serve his ambition to hold on to power…”.

As we noted in an earlier post, there is little new thinking from PAD and its supporters, just the usual extremist and rightist shibboleths.

Praphan Koonmee “said that if he was Army Chief, he would stage a coup today, and dared anybody to arrest him.” He damned Abhisit: “Those who wish to have a coup wish to see changes to the country, to get rid of bad politicians from the country.  If a coup really happens, you will only run scared with your tail between your legs.  Is it true that you have contacted universities abroad to find a teaching job after you fall from power?… What is wrong if I want a coup?  Without the coup, Abhisit would have still been a new boy.  Without the coup in 2006, Abhisit would never have become PM.  Without the PAD, Abhisit would never have become PM.  How come he talks in such an ungrateful manner to the people?”

For a moment it seems Praphan sounded somewhat red shirt when he attacked the premier as a “fake advocate of democracy, not in touch with the people, still wearing a suit and a tie when visiting flooded areas, and violating the rights and freedoms of the people the most.  The evil of Thaksin Shinawatra with his extra-judicial killings and interference with constitutional independent bodies and so on was a well-known fact, but Abhisit was the only PM who declared the Emergency Decree and sat on it for months to suppress all groups of people…”.

But to show his true yellow radicalism, Praphan demanded Abhisit crack down even harder on red shirts! It seems a “true democrat” would arrest, lock up and hunt and kill red shirts….

Abhisit and red shirt photo opportunities

In an earlier post, PPT had details of a Social Move call for the end to the state of emergency. Now Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva seems to be responding, but in his usual vainglorious manner.

The Bangkok Post reports that the “emergency decree still in force in Bangkok and adjacent provinces could be lifted before January because the overall situation has improved…”. January would mean that Bangkok will have been under emergency rule for some 10 months, having been enacted on 7 April 2010. But lifting the decree will always depend on the army and other “security agencies.”

In the same story, the Post refers to a performance that ranks high for arrogance, the prime minister sought a photo opportunity with two “UDD suspects who were freed on bail, with money placed by the Justice Ministry, to meet him at parliament.” PPT finds this kind of odd. The two had been “detained on a charge of violating the emergency decree.”

PPT suggests that readers look also at a Prachatai account of what is happening on these cases before relying on the Post and the prime minister’s acting voice, Panitan Wattanayagorn. They seem to offer up Abhisit’s political move as some kind of act of reconciliation. Clearly it was a photo opp and not much more. Abhisit might have asked the men “about conditions in the prison and their health,” but he is responsible for them (and many more) having to have spent months in jail.

The Nation adds to the story saying: “Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva summoned two of the three red shirts released on bail yesterday morning … to meet him and expressed concern about their health and lack of employment.” The report adds: “The surprise move came after the three red shirts were freed after spending six months in jail for violation of the emergency decree.  The meeting, which lasted 20 minutes at the Government House also included Justice Minister Peeraphan Saleeratpitak and Suwanna Suwanyuta, director general of the Department of Rights and Liberty Promotion and Protection.”

This is meant to make Abhisit look like a big shot who cares about these red shirts who have languished in prison. In fact, Abhisit and his regime are the ones responsible for their predicament. As PPT has shown several times, many of these detainees have been arrested on fabricated charges and have been kept in very poor conditions. Being the “big shot who cares” reinforces some of the worst elements of Thailand’s hierarchical power structure.

On a slightly different point, does any reader know more about the Orwellian-sounding Department of Rights and Liberty Promotion and Protection? We’ve heard of an agency with this name in Japan, but we do not recall this for Thailand. Let us know.

The emergency decree and the failure of the NHRC

The Nation’s Pravit Rojanaphruk reports on yet another call for the emergency decree to be lifted. This coincides with Amnesty International’s apparently cordial meeting with Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, and his apparent lecturing of AI on the decree’s usefulness. The rights group Social Move has a different view.

It says the “military should withdraw armed soldiers from BTS Skytrain and MRT subway stations and lift immediately the emergency decree which has been imposed for nearly six months. The prolonged decree and soldiers’ presence is militarising Thai society and creating fear among those who oppose the government…”.

NHRC: Independent?

Social Move states that they are making this call due to the failure of “most local human rights groups and the National Human Rights Commission” to condemn the now “nearly seven months after the state of emergency was imposed in Bangkok and beyond.” Social Move “concluded that the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) had no clear policy on the matter, including the issue of detained [red-shirt] political prisoners. They do not stand alongside a majority of the people. They do not defend the rights of political expression of red shirts and appear to be more concerned about the government’s stability. The same can be said of many local human rights NGOs…”.

National human rights commissioner Niran Pithakwatchara disagreed, saying: “We reiterate that the government should lift the emergency so it would lead to a climate of reconciliation. The CRES should also be dissolved and a government body tasked to look into CRES conduct as to whether it did things right or not…”. But, he also added: “It must be admitted that we have not followed up [on the issue]. We must follow the development of the government.”

So the NHRC has a “crystal clear” position but does nothing. Why? Niran says “it was up to the government to decide whether the decree should be lifted.” What is the point of being “independent” if all the NHRC does is wait for government?

With 3 updates: Maintaining the state of emergency, maintaining royalist rule

PPT notes that, while lifting the state of emergency in three provinces, it remains in Bangkok, Samut Prakan, Nonthaburi and Pathum Thani. We think that this is unnecessary for things have clearly returned to normal as indicated in these links we have lifted from The Thai Report:

40 armed men take over Suvarnabhumi parking lot…

Parking lot re-opened with armed men inside…

Police patrol parking lots…

The first of these says: “The first floor of Zone 2 parking lot at the Suvarnabhumi Airport has been closed off by armed men who arrived at around 4 A.M. this morning. The problem stems from a concession dispute after a new concessionaire won the rights to manage the parking lot, but the previous concessionaire refuses to vacate the premises. Around 40 armed men dressed in black took over the parking lot early this morning and closed it down [Update 1: the Bangkok Post says 200 armed men!]. Police are on the scene and are reportedly negotiating with the perpetrators. Airport officials, however, insist that airport services are open for business as usual. Passengers are advised to avoid the Zone 2 parking lot.”

Clearly the men in black are back, but these are just the normal gangster men in black as opposed to the government’s statements about men in black with red shirts. So this is normal and as they must be working for the more entrepreneurial classes, they can pose no threat to anybody politically.In any case, the normal practice is for police and military men to dress in black when moonlighting for godfather businessmen.

They also seem no threat to the public as they remained after the car park was re-opened….

Occupations of Bangkok’s airports are also part of normalizing politics, so the potential for a shoot out in the international gateway to Thailand is also suggestive of the return to normalcy.

Yes, the occupation of an airport car park by armed men in black can only be cause for lifting the emergency decree, for Bangkok is back to normal.

Update 2: An eagle-eyed reader points out that a further sign that things are back to “normal” in Abhisit Vejjajiva’s dinosaur regime of royalist, military and bureaucrat control is provided by the Ministry of Interior. The Bangkok Post report is here in full:

Staff at the Interior Ministry have thrown a lavish farewell party for permanent secretary Manit Wattanasane before his retirement today.

The party yesterday included lucky draws for prizes including 64 gold necklaces, 10 32-inch television sets, 10 BlackBerry and iPhone handsets, refrigerators and motorcycles. All guests also received from 1,000 to 2,000 baht in cash. The gold necklaces given away at the party were estimated to have a combined value of about 342,000 baht.

Participants were also entertained by well-known actors, actresses and singers.

The party was organised by the Interior Ministry’s Wives Club, and the gifts were sponsored by private companies.

Party preparations began early with a large stage and tables set up. But when technicians fine-tuned the top-class sound system in the afternoon, some officials were so disturbed by the noise they were unable to finish the 2010 fiscal year reports they were working on.

Ignoring issues of corruption and political business, this is a statement of who’s in control in Thailand. If it feels a little like 1977, PPT thinks that is because Abhisit and his friends have set the country back 30 years in political terms.

Update 3: Recall, on the airport story, that the Airports of Thailand company wants to make Suvarnabhumi airport one of the 10 best in the world and so is planning to add a new concourse building and expand its passenger terminal. Maybe they need to expand barracks facilities for off-duty police and military men in black so that they don’t scare the tourists when they march on car parks….

Suthep on double standards

The Nation tells us that Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban has denied that the Abhisit Vejjajiva regime is using double standards in law enforcement when it allows yellow-shirted demonstrators to rally in Bangkok despite the state of emergency.

Suthep said that failing to arrest demonstrators led by the People’s Alliance for Democracy rallying outside  Government House on Saturday was not a double standard because Suthep had “checked with the authorities and was informed that they had properly complied with the laws when dealing with the PAD-led protesters.”

Perhaps there is a de facto law for PAD. Suthep is then cited as saying: “that although the yellow-shirt protesters violated the rally ban in Bangkok, they had not yet violated four prohibitions, including obstructing traffic,” so that’s okay for PAD.

Suthep seems to have reached the stage where he can’t even tell what constitutes a double standard.

Protest allowed for government supporters

Bloomberg has an interesting report that claims “Thailand’s government said it will approve peaceful protests that are short in duration in a sign it’s preparing to lift a state of emergency imposed four months ago in Bangkok and several outlying provinces.”

Why is the government saying this? One reason is posterior covering, perhaps, given the number of commentators who have pointed to the double standards that allowed hundreds of People’s Alliance for Democracy demonstrators to mass on Bangkok’s streets despite the emergency decree. PPT doesn’t support the decree and supports the rights of people to demonstrate, but the glaringly obvious double standard is what matters.

A second and related reason is provided in the report: “A nationalist group called the Thai Patriot Network plans to gather 10,000 people in front of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s office on Aug. 7 unless authorities clarify the status of a border dispute with Cambodia…”.

So acting government spokesman and spin master Panitan Wattanayagorn comes out to say: “We don’t see that as a violation of the decree as long as there are clearly established guidelines,” said by phone today. “In the past few weeks, demonstrations have been allowed briefly.” As long as they weren’t red shirts. Okay, there have been several flash red shirt demonstrations, but the police have been unable to do much about these except arrest a couple of people.

The implausible Panitan now says that demonstrations are permitted “provided they don’t block traffic, carry weapons, create disturbances and ‘disperse within a few hours…”. Let’s see what happens if red shirts test this. Panitan then comes up with another set of fibs when he says that the emergency decree “is necessary for authorities to prevent prolonged protests, shut down media outlets that make death threats and investigate financial transactions from protests earlier this year…”. This is simply tripe, apparently concocted on the spot.

Incidentally, at the very time PPT was reading this report in Bloomberg, Channel 3 reported Panitan as claiming car bombs were possible at the major business intersections in Bangkok, while the Department of Special Investigation chief was requesting that frozen funds now be released for all of the persons under investigation and more red shirt bail applications were refused. It seems Panitan’s tail hasn’t caught up with his mouth.

While Panitan rambled, he seems not to have commented on the major success of the day for the government. It seems that their chief political ally, Newin Chidchob has succeeded in getting – by hook, crook and probably promises associated with lucre – 4 more Peua Thai Party members to shift to his party and the coalition. Without Newin’s connections, money and cunning and the steel shell of protection provided by the military, this government would be totally lost in spin and double standards.