112 update V

This is the fifth in our multi-part update on 112 from the past 3-4 weeks:

On 21 December 2023, Prachatai reported that the Criminal Court had, that day dismissed a lese majeste charge against online influencer Aniwat Prathumthin, also known as Nara Crepe Katoei, for the Lazada video advertisement.

The videos featured Aniwat and two other online influencers, Kittikhun Thammkittirath and Thidaporn Chaokuwiang and were released on Aniwat’s TikTok account in May 2022 to push a Lazada sales campaign.

Clipped from Thai PBS

The first video features Thidaporn in what is now widely assumed to be “traditional Thai dress” but is better viewed as royalist styling, sitting in a wheelchair. Kittikhun, also the same style of dress, is standing next to her. Aniwat is shown giving her skincare products. The second video features Thidaporn, still in royalist-style dress and sitting in a wheelchair, while Aniwat accuses her of stealing her clothes and recommends that she buy clothes from Lazada during their sales campaign. Thidaporn then gets up from her wheelchair in shock.

Ultra-royalist groups were aghast, claiming the videos:

made fun of members of the royal family, [who they] thought to be Queen Sirikit … and Princess Chulabhorn … and launched a boycott campaign against the platform. Lazada and Intersect Design Factory, the media agency in charge of producing the videos, later issued a public apology for the videos.”

Royalist snitch and serial complainer Srisuwan Janya filed a complaint against the three and the two companies, alleging multiple 112 infractions.

In the Criminal Court the charges against Aniwat were dismissed:

on the grounds that the content of the videos does not constitute an offence under the royal defamation law, because they were produced as part of a marketing campaign and contain no “anti-monarchy symbols,” such as one that communicates the demand to amend the royal defamation law. The speech used in the videos are also normal speech, and the videos did not use the personal coat of arms of a member of the royal family, while traditional Thai dress is something anyone can wear.

The court said that while the prosecution presented evidence that the videos are an act of parody, they do not constitute defamation since the defendants were only playing a role to promote their products, although the content may be seen as inappropriate by some groups of people.

The case against Thidaporn is scheduled for August–September 2024. Kittikhun fled Thailand “in July 2023 and is seeking political asylum in Germany.”

Elections and the reform protesters I

The Diplomat updates on the thinking and activities of monarchy reform protesters in the context of an upcoming election: “the general election will be the first since the 2020-2021 protests, leaving the door open to a hopeful democratic consolidation, or further consolidation of control by Thailand’s conservative elites.”

Yean Arunpreechawat is cited as concluding that “the monarchy as the main factor behind [Gen] Prayut[h Chan-ocha]’s lasting popularity in Thailand today: “Most people have grown tired of [Prayut’s] economic mismanagement, but will continue to vote for him so long as he gets the support from the King…”. Yean forgets the military and the tycoons in this assessment (at least as quoted), and we doubt the monarchy has this much impact on votes – Thaksin Shinawatra proved that.

From DW

We think Get Surariddhidhamrong gets closer to the mark: “Political viability relies on the monarchy, which makes it harder for political parties to seek a platform independent from monarchical approval … the people must rise up against this and drive this change so that political parties can take the next steps.”

Meanwhile, in the context of a new generation of voters, Sirabhob Attohi makes the important point about “the crucial role played by the protests in introducing Thai youths to the country’s decades-old democracy movement.” Sirabhob observes:

Many of us were too young when the Red Shirts protests started, or even during the 2010 protests. In this sense, this was our generation’s awakening, it helped us realize we can strive to demand better for our democracy and our society.

Get’s observation on the deep structural roots of royalist conservatism:

… the current political offer remains unable to address the most pressing issues facing Thailand’s fragile democracy today. “The rule of law needs to be restored before youths can trust the government again, and this can only be addressed through structural change…”.

Uprooting that is difficult when conservatives, with the military and monarchy, oppose change.

Mad, dumb, and more

Now that the police have arrested Aniwat Prathumthin, aka “Nara Crepe Katoey”, Thidaporn Chaokuwiang, aka “Nurat”, and Kittikhun Thamkittirath, aka “Mom Dew,” and charged all three with Article 112 offenses, the Royal Thai Army has lifted restrictions on trade with Lazada.

If we weren’t so used to dumb-assed “explanations” from the lot in green, the statement by Army Deputy Spokesperson Col Sirichan Ngathong “said yesterday (Monday) that the lifting of the boycott was … in line with the further relaxation of restrictions, to allow business to resume normal operations and reopen the country to overseas arrivals.” What’s that got to do with monarchy and Article 112? We can only imagine that there may have been pay-offs, whispers in ears emanating from the Chinese Embassy, or orders from the boss. Or maybe all of them. We will never know.

Senate Speaker Pornpetch Wichitcholchai is supposed to have legal training. But he’s also a “good” person, meaning he enjoys being a dumb-ass with impunity. He’s defended his Senate colleagues – also “good” people – who employ dozens of their relatives. He says it “is not illegal.”

Pornpetch says “certain positions in public office may require someone, who the senators can trust, to fill.” We recall that Alexander MacDonald reported similar nepotism and the same “explanation” back in the 1940s (look for his Bangkok Editor on Library Genesis). Thai Enquirer has him saying: “[Nepotism] is not wrong because it is not against the law.” Taken aback, “reporters acknowledged that even though nepotism was not technically illegal, wasn’t it still morally wrong?” No, Pornpetch retorted, “nepotism, in government, is not morally wrong.”

Having trusted relatives means they are not likely to blow the whistle on their relatives as they supp at the public trough. It’s a family protection racket.

While on “good” people, we must mention a letter to the SCMP by Wiwat Salyakamthorn, said to be president of the World Soil Association and former vice-minister of agriculture and cooperatives of Thailand. You might have thought the sufficiency economy fertilizer might have leached away. But you’d be wrong. There’s now an effort to attribute everything that’s ever happened in Thai agriculture to the dead king and his “idea.” More, there’s an effort to transfer sufficiency economy to King Vajiralongkorn.

Wiwat claims: “Much of Thailand’s resilience in food security is due to … King Bhumibol Adulyadej’s development projects for the betterment of the Thai people’s livelihoods based on his philosophy of sufficiency economy.” Yes, farmers are all Thaksin-voting dolts. Only the royals know, and although Vajiralongkorn would have trouble growing a flower, Wiwat comes up with this guff: “Building upon his father’s legacy, His Majesty King Maha Vajiralongkorn Phra Vajiraklaochaoyuhua has guided the Thai people in applying the Khok Nong Na model to ensure that resilience of the food system remains one of Thailand’s crowning achievements in the years to come.”

That’s enough for today!

Updated: Lazada madness

Back in May, royalists went berserk over a TikTok advertisement produced for the Chinese firm Lazada, screaming lese majeste.

On 16 June 2022, the police arrested Aniwat Prathumthin, aka “Nara Crepe Katoey”, Thidaporn Chaokuwiang, aka “Nurat”, and Kittikhun Thamkittirath, aka “Mom Dew,” and charged all three with Article 112 offenses. Aniwat has also been charged under the computer crimes law.

The three were arrested by Technology Crime Suppression Division police, Thidaporn in Ayutthaya, Aniwat at Don Muang airport, and Kittikhun in Bangkok’s Wang Thong Lang district. Each was released on bail of 90,000 baht.

The charges stemmed from a “Lazada clothes shopping clip features Thidaporn in traditional Thai costume and sitting in a wheelchair, while Aniwat was seen accusing Thidaporn, who plays her aristocratic mother, of stealing her clothes.”

The video immediately drew criticism from ultra-royalists who claimed the video mimicked royals, including Princess Chulabhorn who is sometimes seen in a wheelchair. The royalists also reckoned the advertisement mocked the disabled, but that was a smokescreen for their real complaint based on their own hypersensitivity on things royal. Their immediate reaction led to a hashtag campaign on Twitter to boycott Lazada, a call taken up by the Royal Thai Army, Royal projects and foundations, among others.

Clipped from Thai PBS

Lazada issued an apology, as did “Intersect Design Factory, the company which hired the influencers to promote the Lazada sales campaign…”. It was serial campaigner and royalist activist Srisuwan Janya who lodged a complaint with the Technology Crime Suppression Division police, “accusing Aniwat of offending a member of the royal family.”

Aniwat refused to “issue a public apology or show regret has only added fuel to fire.” Quite correctly, but further angering ultra-royalists, in a television interview, Aniwat said that “anyone has the right to wear a traditional costume,” and that “the so-called reference to a Royal was imagined by the netizens.”

Army chief Gen Narongpan Jitkaewtha quickly announced “that he has banned members of all military units to stop buying goods from Lazada. He also banned all Lazada delivery trucks and motorbikes from entering Army compounds.”

Joining the royalist pile-on, Prime Minister Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha expressed his “concern about the clip on May 7 and noting that Thais love and respect the monarchy.” Meanwhile, the “Digital Economy and the Society Ministry also instructed the Police Technology Crime Suppression Division to check if the TikTok clip violated any laws.”

Aniwat had earlier gained online followers “among youngsters fed up with General Prayut Chan-o-cha’s style of governance. She has openly pushed for the PM’s resignation and often criticized his supporters.”

Of course, Princess Chulabhorn is not covered by Article 112 but that has never stopped bizarre lese majeste cases in the past.

Update: Coconuts Bangkok reports on the arrest of Kittikhun “a transgender blogger and  model known as Mom Dew, [who] was being held Thursday afternoon at the Technology Crime Supression Division in Bangkok’s Lak Si over a complaint that she impersonated the Queen Mother Sirikit in an ad campaign that was quickly pulled after it aired last month.”

Like Chulabhorn, Sirikit is not covered in Article 112. To refresh memories, Article112 of the Criminal Code states, “Whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years.”