Puea Thai and lese majeste

Reuters reports that activists have been pressuring the Puea Thai Party to develop a spine on Article 112.

The report notes how draconian the law is and notes that it “has long been a taboo topic in Thailand…”. Depending on how “long” is defined, that is not entirely accurate, at least according to historians of lese majeste.. Reuters is correct that “calls for it [112] to be reformed have also led to arrests.” That may seem absurd, but in royalist Thailand it is “normal.”

The eight activists who met “with the Pheu Thai party … said scrapping Article 112 must be a priority.”

Activist Somyos Prueksakasemsuk said he believed that revoking 112 is an electoral asset.

Naturally enough, “[a]ll 17 ruling coalition parties have vowed not to touch the law, while the ultra royalist Thai Pakdee party has started a petition to make it even stricter.”

Following the meeting, it was stated that “Pheu Thai gave no firm answer on abolishing article 112.” Party secretary-general, Prasert Jantararuangtong, however, “encouraged public discussion on the way it was being enforced as a means of addressing problems in the short term.” He warned: “There are many opinions and polarised views in society on the amendment of this law, which could lead to more conflict…”.

And, while the military remains resolutely royalist, Puea Thai knows that there always the threat of the royalist coup. No doubt they also know that the palace has learned that the law is necessary to maintain the luxury, taxpayer supported lifestyles of royals. They also know that the king covets the political power he has accrued in recent constitutional and administrative changes.

The fact remains, that without pressure from activists (and political parties), royalist feudalism will continue to dominate and smother modern Thailand.

Dangerous, barking mad royalist

Thaiger reports that Tossaporn Srirak a former Puea Thai Party MP faces a sedition charge following a complaint made to police by ultra-royalist Sonthiya Sawasdee, a saying he is “former adviser to the House committee on law, justice, and human rights.” By our reckoning the quite looney Sonthiya knows nothing of justice or human rights, but is an active lawfarist.

He believes that wondering aloud if the troubles on the streets of Sri Lanka, due to food and fuel shortages, forcing the nation’s president, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, to flee for his life and UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s troubles was facing Thailand under the General amounts to sedition, “whipping up hate against the PM Prayut Chan-o-cha…”.

The mad monarchist “urged police to launch an investigation into Tossaporn because he believes his Facebook post ‘Do you want it like the UK or Sri Lanka?’ could be interpreted as a call for unlawful insurrection against PM Prayut and his government.”

Of course, Sonthiya has a long record of taking up royalist and rightist causes. Back in 2015, Sonthiya, then reported to be “a representative of a political group called the Federation to Monitor the Thai State,” filed a complaint with the Crime Suppression Division against then US Ambassador Glyn Davies for a talk at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand where he expressed concern about “the lengthy and unprecedented prison sentences handed down by Thai military courts against civilians for violating the lese majeste law…”. He added that “[n]o one should be jailed for peacefully expressing their opinion…”. Sonthiya screamed lese majeste.

In 2018, it was a madder Sonthiya who demanded the Election Commission to investigate the newly-formed Future Forward Party and whether it might amend the lese majeste law.He said Article 112 was off limits.

He was especially “busy” in 2021, trying to see off the calls for reform, including to the feudal monarchy. In April, Sonthiya urged police to investigate Jatuporn Promphan for lese majeste following a speech to a protest for the Sammakhi Prachachon Pheu Prathet Thai (People’s Unity for Thailand). The protest was about ousting the General, but Sonthiya thought anti-monarchism was at work, presumably because Gen Prayuth is a royalist and his regime a lackey for the palace.

Then in May, by then Palang Pracharath Party member, Sonthiya demanded that the Criminal Court review its decision to free lese majeste detainee Parit Chiwarak on bail after the protest leader was accused of violating his bail conditions in a social media post.

By July, Sonthiya was working a tag-team with red shirt traitor and now regime flunky Seksakol [Suporn] Atthawong to bring charges against opposition politician Sudarat Keyuraphan for “wrongly accusing the government of poorly managing the Covid-19 crisis.” This was deemed not a fact but defamatory.

And, in November Sonthiya was (barking) mad that Miss Universe Thailand Anchilee Scott-Kemmis for standing on what looks like a Thai flag in a picture released online in a promotional campaign before Anchilee competed in the 70th Miss Universe pageant in Israel. Sonthiya wnated her investigated for breaching the 1979 Flag Act and a PM’s Office announcement banning the use of national flags for commercial purposes.

The problem with mad monarchists is that they are often taken seriously by royalist regimes, police, judges, and prosecutors.

The weight that is 112

Article 112 is stifling not just dissent, but Thailand itself. The weight of Article 112 is felt by the young, the innovative, and just about everyone who is interested in a more open politics. Blame the regime. Blame the royalist drivel taught in schools and paraded through the media. Blame ultra-royalists and their infantile attachment to symbols of a feudal path. Blame a judiciary that has lost its way as it protects neo-feudalism.

Of course, as everyone knows, there are attempts to change things. Such efforts are usually met by repression doled out by a blood-thirsty military.

The most recent effort to change things and to roll back neo-feudalism began two years ago. La Prensa Latina has an article about this anniversary and meets up with some of the leading protesters and the manner in which the military-monarchist regime has sought to silence them with lawfare and the legal weight of lese majeste and other serious charges.

Clipped from Prachatai

The article begins with Panusaya “Rung” Sithijirawattanakul. She now attends university classes wearing an electronic monitoring (EM) device on her ankle. The 23 year-old has been charged with 10 counts of violating the lese-majeste law and a 16 other charges.

The regime’s idea is that semi-house arrest, EM, a 9pm to 6am curfew, and a myriad of legal cases means she’s got no time or opportunity for much else.

Maynu Supitcha, a 20 year-old university student from Thaluwang “has conducted street surveys on the monarchy, and other peaceful protest actions, for which they said authorities handed them three lese-majeste charges.” Maynu also has EM.

Panupong “Mike Rayong” Jardnok, “said he has been slapped with more than 40 charges, including 16 related to lese-majeste, which could see him spend nearly a lifetime in jail.”

 

According to recent data there are now some 210 Article 112 cases since November 2020.

Royalist ratbag politics

A few days ago, Thai Enquirer reported on royalists responding to the wave of graduates rejecting royal graduation ceremonies.

The expected royalist response has begun, with “a campaign to stop the hiring of university students who did not receive their diplomas from the royal family as per tradition.”

Of course, the news outlet’s use of “tradition, which follows a post at Prachatai, ” is a bit of a royalist stretch. As far as we know, having members of the royal family present diplomas was introduced in 1930 and was discontinued until after WW2, and then became one of those mid-20th century royal “innovations” during the era of Sarit Thanarat, and meant to tie graduates to the monarchy. Like other innovations, it “restored” a practice briefly used under the absolute monarchy. More a royalist propaganda device than a “tradition.”

Since the monarchy reform and anti-lese majeste campaigns got underway quite a number of graduating students “have chosen to not attend the ceremonies in solidarity and because they say the cost of attending the royal ceremony is too high.” Some of them oppose feudalism.

Royalists are aghast and some “business owners are striking back at the protesting students by saying they won’t hire any that didn’t attend their graduation ceremony.” They plan to demand graduation photos as evidence for having prostrated before the wealthy, feudal, family.

In the way of feudalists-fascists, “Paisal Puechmongkol, a former senator and former assistant of Deputy Prime Minister General Prawit Wongsuwon, wrote of students as non-human. He claimed employers “need to initially consider whether the person who is being hired is ‘a human being that can work within a human society and a job that provide services to customers or not’.” He considered those who avoided the royals as “stupid people who do not know what is right and wrong…”.

Such attitudes tell us much about these nasty fascists engages in ratbag royalist politics.

Boycotting feudal royals

A couple of days ago, Prachatai reported that the Chiang Mai University Student Union had announced “that its representatives will not receive members of the royal family at the university’s graduation ceremonies during the current committee’s term in order to uphold equality.”

The graduation ceremony for the classes of 2019 and 2020, which was held on Friday 14 January 2022, presided over by Princess Sirindhorn, usually framed as the most popular among the odd family of royals.

The report explains the ceremonies:

Thai graduation ceremonies are often long, complicated, and strictly regulated as they are presided over by a member of the royal family. Student representatives at many universities are required to wait to receive the member of the royal family arriving to preside over the ceremony. Universities also impose strict dress codes on graduates, specifying even hair colour and nail polish colour, while many transgender students face obstacles in getting permission from university administrations to dress according to their gender identity. Attending the ceremony also costs graduates and their families a large sum of money, including the cost of the graduation gown, hiring a photographer, and travel costs for those who live in distant provinces.

The Student Union explained that it would:

not send representatives to receive Princess Sirindhorn as she arrives for the ceremony, and that it will not receive any member of the royal family at any graduation ceremony which takes place during the current committee’s term, as receiving members of the royal family would show support for “feudalism” [sakdina] and because they see the reception ceremony as a form of oppression and inequality. It also calls on other faculty unions to boycott the reception ceremony.

The union viewed “the ceremony as oppressive, outdated, and a way of normalizing inequality. Boycotting the ceremony would therefore be a way of upholding equality and human rights.”

Along with the 2020 – 2021 pro-democracy/monarchy reform protests, “graduation ceremonies have become a platform for young people to express their discontent at the status quo. Many graduates see boycotting the ceremonies as an act of civil disobedience, while activists are reported to have staged small activities at their universities’ graduation events.”

At a Khon Kaen University graduation on 13 December 2021, students and graduates hung banners reading “Free our friends” and “Repeal Section 112. ” They gave speeches “criticizing the university and its Faculty of Law for not taking action when its students were detained on political charges.” Student activist Sarayut Narkmanee:

gave a speech saying that for the 2021 ceremony, which was presided over by Princess Sirindhorn, the university designated a wider than usual area as royal space, which pushed people off campus. He also said that students don’t graduate because they are handed a degree, that graduation should be for the people, and a graduation gown is created by the authorities and so is not necessary. He then burned a graduation gown in an act of protest.

At the Chiang Mai event, “two student activists were arrested … [on] 14 January … while holding banners near the Chiang Mai University … auditorium calling for graduates to boycott the graduation ceremony … and for the repeal of Section 112.”:

CMU student activist Yotsunthon Ruttapradid and Phimchanok Jaihong, member of the activist group Thalufah, were arrested this morning (14 January) by plainclothes and uniformed police officers while standing on the foothpath opposite the university auditorium, where a graduation ceremony was being held. They were reported to be holding banners saying “Repeal Section 112” and “Feudal degrees” in a campaign for the repeal of the royal defamation law and to call on graduates to boycott the ceremony, presided over by Princess Sirindhorn, the King’s younger sister….

The activists were charged with creating a noise without a reasonable cause and refusing to comply with an official’s order. They received a 1500 baht fine and were released. Officers reportedly said that they were able to charge the activists with causing noise while on campus because the campus was considered royal space during the ceremony.

Social media reports that only about 40% of graduates showed up for the royal ceremony.

Updated: Backing a man of the past

We have watched in wonder as the Bangkok Post regularly has stories on failed Democrat Party politician and former finance leech Korn Chatikavanij and his minnow party Kla. Kla is meant to mean something like Dare or Daring Party. It is anything but that. But the Bangkok Post keeps acting as if it is a paid promoter of the man and his “ideas.” It is as though he has buddies at the Post. Of course, he does, on the company’s board.

We haven’t commented much on this, but the most recent “story”-cum-advertorial is so feeble that it deserves to be called out.

The story comes with the headline “Kla leader dares to be different.” Confusing the reader, the story, which comes with a posed portrait of a “casual” Korn, says nothing at all about him or how he “dares” to do anything at all. Rather, it is about a party that has failed before it has started:

The Kla Party will field candidates in all upcoming by-elections, seeing the contests as an opportunity to reach out to voters ahead of the general election, even if its chances of winning are slim.

We’d guess that “slim” means no chance. Korn is quoted as saying of his party in the south: “we have neither organised support nor bought votes…”. Leaving aside the claim of vote-buying, which was a Democrat Party claim as it lost election after election to more popular and capable parties, the fact that the party is not organized suggests that to “dare” means to waste time, money, and printers’ ink (and bandwidth). But Korn says “the Kla Party has high hopes that it can use these three by-elections to raise public awareness of its existence and policies before a general election is held.”

He may be onto something. Recently, at a rally arranged by the the Songwriters for the People group in front of Bangkok Remand Prison that was demanding the release of political activists detained without bail,the Kla Party was jeered and heckled:

… when the campaign vehicle of Kla Party candidate in the same by-election  Mr. Attawit Suwanphakdi passed by, the protesters shouted “Feudalism [must] be destroyed and people prosper” at the team.

Kla is no party of the future and the Post is backing feudalism.

Update: Remarkably, the Bangkok Post has yet another contribution to Korn’s party. This one’s an interview. In it, Korn is asked: “What are your main policies?” His response is telling and revealing as Korn comes up with nothing at all that could be construed as a policy. But the egotistical rich man is ready to be prime minister:

It doesn’t have to be me, it’s up to the people, but I’m ready. I think, as I just mentioned, the leader of the country needs to fully understand the changes that are taking place and the adjustments that are required for Thailand to take full advantage. However, a leader also needs experience and know-how, and my time in the private sector and the political arena, as a minister of finance, have prepared me well.

His mantra is change. No idea what this means, especially as he’s a man of the past with no policies and no ideas. He can’t say what he “understands” or what “adjustments” he might suggest. His “experience” is as a moneygrubber and a tart for the military.

The Post’s support for a buddy who’s hopeless makes the newspaper also look hopeless and a rich people’s plaything.

A whiff of royalism

Feudal punishment associated with the palace: Pol Gen Jumpol Manmai

Is it just us at PPT or does this somewhat odd Bangkok Post story have a distinct royal whiff to it?

The report is of naval chief Adm Somprasong Nilsamai and Vice Adm Narupol Kerdnak, the commander of the Sattahip Naval Base, decising to undergo “self-punishment to uphold discipline and show responsibility after one of their subordinates committed a serious misconduct.”

That wealthy admirals, with power that cannot be challenged within the navy, should “choose” such a path seems unprecedented, almost unbelievable.

They “decided” to punish themselves after “Lt Alongkorn Ploddee, director of the Real Estate Division of the Sattahip Naval Base, has been involved in quarrels and made false claims on various occasions, ruining the reputation of the navy as a whole…”.

It seems odd that a junior officer some 7-8 ranks below the two admirals should impact them. Equally odd, is that Lt Alongkorn is listed as “director of the Real Estate Division of the Sattahip Naval Base.” We have previously questioned the navy’s commercial activities, noting that the navy has effectively become an investor and player in the Eastern Seaboard activities promoted by the regime, together with Sino-Thai tycoons.

Feudal punishment associated with the palace: Pol Maj Prakrom Warunprapha

Lt Alongkorn was shown “on video verbally abused Sattahip policemen who showed up at a restaurant for a routine inspection, saying they had ruined his happy time.” He demanded “honor”: “You don’t give me due honour…”, throwing “a glass of liquor at them and said he could put them in trouble.” This threat included name-dropping as a threat, saying “he was a friend of ‘Big Joke’, a reference to Pol Lt Gen Surachate Hakparn, the assistant police chief.” Big Joke has a record including odd events, was sacked and reinstated, and no one says why.

Feudal punishment associated with the palace: Suriyan Sujaritpalawong

In other words, Lt Alongkorn was behaving as a dark influence and a gangster. That is not unusual in the armed forces. He made his gangsterism clear when he invoked notions of territory: “Lt Alongkorn said that the police should have known that Sattahip belongs to the navy…”. In other words, they are the bosses and the territory is theirs. Other gangs – the police – trespass on the navy gang’s turf at their own risk.

As usual, Lt Alongkorn a navy disciplinary committee which will “conduct an investigation into his alleged misconduct.” Seldom does anything come of these sham exercises, except where the person involved has distressed very senior people – seems he has – or threatened the monthly take.

So what causes senior navy men to “show responsibility for the misconduct” by an underling? What causes the bosses to undergo “self-punishment for three and seven days, respectively.”

The whiff of royal involvement comes from the punishment: “The self-punishment includes shaving heads, walking long distances with a backpack, running with weights, doing menial labour and three days in confinement.” This is exactly the kind of neo-feudal punishment used by the king inside the palace. We do not know if the king is involved in this case, but it coincided with his return to Thailand from Europe. If he wasn’t involved, it shows how his neo-absolutist influence has percolated through the military wing of the palace.

Feudal court, old men and the end of reform

We have taken a while to get to this post, but it remains important: the Constitutional Court’s determination of same-sex marriage as unconstitutional. Indeed,this decision is definitional of Thailand as a country for old men, a theme at PPT that goes back to 2009. The old men might be recycled through as some die, but the deeply conservative ideological disposition remains and is, it seems, hardening.

We say this based on the release of the Constitutional Court’s detailed decision as discussed in several reports, including at Thai PBS.

The frustration with the Court’s ruling has become “with the full content of the court’s long ruling being released.” The ruling states that:

Marriage is when a man and a woman are willing to live together, to build a husband and wife relationship to reproduce their offspring, under the morals, traditions, religion and the laws of each society. Marriage is, therefore, reserved for only a man and a woman.

Other parts in the verdict also mention that members of the LGBTQIA+ community cannot reproduce, as it is against nature, and that people of those communities are no different to other animals with strange behaviours or physical features.

The Nation adds: “The verdict cites LGBTQ as a different ‘species’ that needs to be separated and studied as it is incapable of creating the ‘delicate’ bond of human relationships.” Indeed, the Court referred to the “different species” who should be “treated differently” because “same-sex marriage defies the laws of nature and family.” In the Court’s feudal wording:

…The purpose of a marriage is to allow a man and woman to live together as husband and wife, so they can establish a family unit to have children, to maintain the human race according to natural order and to further allow the passing of wealth, inheritance and bonds between father, mother, sisters, brothers, aunts and uncles. But marriage between LGBT+ persons cannot establish such delicate bonds or relationships….

All very feudal and resembling the things Thais were taught about race in the late 19th century. But it gets even worse, reflecting Nazi thought:

However, when advanced technology in the future finds more details that certain species have different behaviours or biological traits, then they shall be categorised into a different group for further studies. The same applies to the State or the Legislature treating or acknowledging people of different sexual orientations differently….

The Court concluded:

… After weighing the benefits of making marriage a possibility for couples of the same sex, there is a net loss of benefits for both traditional unions between men and women, and same sex-couples.

Along with the loss of benefits, there will also be the destruction of the laws of nature and family unity, which are important foundations for society and the survival of mankind….

These judges demonstrate that the old men of Thailand’s conservative ruling class are troglodytes, incapable of change, and implacably opposed to reform. Indeed, even reforms that have been seen throughout the world seem unable to penetrate the moribund minds of the elite. They really do need to be swept aside.

Students vs. the feudal regime II

As expected, following the Chulalongkorn University’s Student Union’s decision Phra Kieo coronet, Chulalongkorn University’s emblem, in the Chulalongkorn-Thammasat football match procession, royalists and other feudalists have begun grumbling.

The Bangkok Post reports that the “student administration had voted 29-0 to scrap the tradition…”.

Even so, the Post takes up points that will irritate royalists: the “announcement was issued on Chulalongkorn Day falling on Oct 23 … the day King Chulalongkorn … died.” That dead king is claimed to be “the founder of the university and his successor, King Rama VI, gave the present name to the university.”

The Post adds that student union president Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal “…put himself in the spotlight when he and six other students walked out of the ceremony held for new students to prostate themselves before the monument of the two kings on campus in 2017…”.

It adds that the “Facebook account of the student union was flooded by comments supporting the controversial move…”.

That such a popular move is from those considered dubious by royalists draws them out from under their rocks. Turncoat Wattana Muangsook hit out at the union, declaring they had no right to make the change. He declared that “former students from the two schools would be ready to carry the symbol on a sedan chair…”.

Others “argued that Phra Kiew … was the link between school students and university students with King Rama V…”.

Meanwhile, as Thai PBS reports, “Chulalongkorn University’s administration has been urged to do something about the Student Union’s controversial decision…”, with Nantiwat Samart, former deputy director of the National Intelligence Agency, suggesting a royal insult had occurred, saying “that the use of some wording in the announcement was intentionally disrespectful to the coronet…”. Only royalists could come up with such a notion. He opined: “that the university administration must protect the name of the late king, the founder of the university, against the disrespectful act of ‘just a handful’ of students.”

And so it will go on, with the royalists hyper-ventilating.

Students vs. the feudal regime I

As Pravit Rojanaphruk points out in a Khaosod op-ed:

A year has passed since the students-led monarchy reform movement descended to the streets of Bangkok and beyond in large numbers. One year on, over 140 have been charged with lese majeste crimes, or defaming the monarchy. It’s punishable by a maximum imprisonment term of 15 years. Around half a dozen of them are currently … incarcerated….

Scores of others face hundreds of other charges. Some are in jail, others have bail, others await more charges.

While the media face censorship and with “self-censorship are the norm, combined with self-denial or silence to due fears of repercussions or political expediency,” the students continue to push for change.

Thai PBS reports that the Chulalongkorn-Thammasat football match procession will be different this year. The executive committee of Chulalongkorn University’s Student Union is unanimous in canceling the Phra Kieo coronet, Chulalongkorn University’s emblem. Why? They see “it to be representative of a feudal culture and a symbol of inequality.”

As the most royalist of universities, with many connections with the monarchy and royal family, the message is clear.

In his  article in support of other students who suffer feudal repression – lese majeste – Pravit calls on the media to support them:

The press could continue to watch and simply report about more prosecutions as more youths take the risks, are taken to jail, repeatedly denied bail, and refrain from questioning the anachronistic law . Such stance means the Thai press continue to be part of the problem for their lack of courage and commitment to greater press freedom.

It means the mostly young political activists feel the need to express themselves publicly on the streets or on social media, despite the risks as they regard the current situation as not just abnormal but unacceptable, untolerable and undemocratic…..

The least that journalists and media associations can do is to call out publicly and say we need to talk about the lese majeste law and something needs to be done about it. Even if they do not support the abolition of the law, there are crucial details worth reforming: the severity of the law which is disproportionate and more.

In fact, from our observation, the media has not been comprehensive in reporting of these arrests and charges and the reporting is so sporadic that we feel the regime and its supporters have cowed the mainstream media.

The students deserve better. Thailand deserves better.