International criticism of 112

From 112 Watch

DW reports that “Some European lawmakers are pressuring the EU to include tougher demands on Thailand to reform its taboo lese majeste law that imposes lengthy prison sentences on those who criticize the monarchy.”

Jordi Sole, a Menber of the European Parliament (MEP) and a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, observed that “European Union relations with Thailand will be strengthened under a cooperation and partnership agreement signed last December, and this is an ‘an excellent opportunity for the EU to push for higher standards of human rights in Thailand, including the demand to abolish Thailand’s draconian lese majeste laws’…”.

The Europeans aren’t the only ones, as the story highlights:

In March … Democrat US senators Edward J. Markey and Dick Durbin, the Senate Majority Whip, introduced a resolution that called on the Thai government to “repeal and cease the promulgation of laws and decrees that are used to censor online content and speech related to the electoral process, including Thailand’s lese majeste law.”

Meanwhile, in the European parliament, in discussing amendments to the new agreement, there were several suggestions regarding Article 112:

MEP Jordi Sole last month sought to include an amendment to the European Parliament’s draft report on the EU-Thailand cooperation agreement that “urges the Thai authorities to repeal its lese majeste provisions.”

Tonino Picula, another MEP and member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, proposed an amendment to call on the Thai government “to review the lese majeste law.”

A third MEP, Fabio Massimo Castaldo, wanted to include a reference that Thailand’s “democracy remains deeply flawed, the regime continues to employ authoritarian tactics, including arbitrary arrests, intimidation, lese majeste charges…”

It is not yet known if these amendments will be accepted. Presumably Thailand’s royalists in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are busy lobbying against such reasonable suggestions. But the European Commission is weak:

EU spokesperson Peter Stano said that the bloc “is closely following developments regarding the use of the lese majeste law in Thailand.”

“The European Union continues to reiterate in its dialogue with the Thai authorities the crucial importance of up-holding human rights and the rule of law, including the principle of proportionality,” he added.

As soon as one talks of rule of law in the same breath as 112, you know the royalist arguments will be that Thailand has rule of law and 112 is a part of that. Of course, any reasonable observer knows that when it comes to lese majeste, there is no justice and no rule of law.

Further updated: Election commissioners missing

Election commissioners are a joke. They are appointed by the regime and not expected to do much except support the regime.

Hence, as the 2023 election approaches, all six election commissioners have left Thailand on “study tours.”

Officials say “that during an election campaign they are urgently needed at home to do their job.” The officials mean the commissioners should work at their job. The commissioners clearly object as “work” is not in their terms of reference.

The six commissioners couldn’t care less about “work.” They care more about sucking the state teat dry and escaping work in Africa, Hungary, Slovakia, Germany, Switzerland, the US, New Zealand and Australia.

The EC is not serious and neither are its corrupt commissioners.

Update 1: Demonstrating the autocrat’s view that the public is composed of idiots or compliant dolts, the EC has responded to criticism. According to a Thai PBS report, the “EC’s Office said that the visit is in line with the plan to follow up on the preparations and management of elections being held in other countries.” This seems to mean absentee voting by Thais overseas for the Bangkok Post adds that the information the gallivanting commissioners gain “will be useful for adjusting the process or amending any regulations in the future…”.

And, of course, the Office of EC “consulted with the Foreign Ministry and received a written invitation from the Thai embassy or consulate in each respective country to make the official visit.” That must make it all above board… or maybe not.

But it gets worse, with the EC Office claiming that the “trips were set for between April 4 and April 24 so as not to overlap with their working days.” That’s three weeks on non-working days. The commissioners obviously get it very easy. Presumably they get allowances and pay while traveling in their non-working days.

And worse still, “each commissioner is accompanied by 4-5 officials.” So that’s 30-36 traveling at taxpayer expense. That all sounds like a snouts in the trough exercise to us.

Update 2:The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has galloped to the defense of the tourist election commissioners. The Nation reports that “officials from Election Commission (EC) and Foreign Ministry have gone overseas to ensure the mistakes made during the 2019 election are not repeated…”. Believe them? We might, but surely it would be better if the Ministry and the EC could arrange a congruent story between them.

Monarchism and Foreign Affairs

We seem to have missed this free article from the the Journal of Contemporary Asia. From JCA’s blog:

“On His Majesty’s Service: Why is the Thai Foreign Ministry Royalist?” (DOI: 10.1080/00472336. 2022.2081930) is a new article by Pavin Chachavalpongpun of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies at Kyoto University in Japan.

This article is now available for free download. This offer expires soon.

The abstract for the article states:

In the final decade of the King Bhumibol Adulyadej reign, various state agencies lined up to defend the monarchy against political opponents. Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs was one of those state agencies expressing its disdain for elected governments dominated by Thaksin Shinawatra whose popularity was perceived to threaten royal power and prerogative and, hence, the stability of the throne. Beginning in 2006, Thai diplomats, serving and retired, joined anti-Thaksin movements calling for his resignation, which culminated in the 2006 military coup. The research question for this study is: Why is the Thai Foreign Ministry royalist? It is argued that the Foreign Ministry’s contempt of Thaksin was, at one level, due to its obligation to reinforce royal hegemony. At another level, the Foreign Ministry sought to protect itself in the face of Thaksin’s drastic bureaucratic reforms. This study traces the source of royalism among Thai diplomats. It explores the impact of the bureaucratic modernisation in the late nineteenth century, which further deepened ties between the Foreign Ministry and the palace. It also examines the characteristics of Thai diplomats as a privileged political caste whose status is sustained by its dependence on the monarchy. In the final part, the study discusses Thaksin’s control of foreign affairs, inevitably instigating a clash with the Foreign Ministry.

Doing the monarchy’s propaganda II

With Vajiralongkorn’s birthday companies, ministries, military and other posterior polishers sought to buff the royal ego as shiny as it would go.

The big deal for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which thinks of itself as royally-connected, is an ebook, A Legacy for All. The book is a repeat of other propaganda from the Ministry like its video “A Legacy for the People.” That effort sank without much trace, having only 700+ views at YouTube in over 10 months. The book might do better, especially as it has had heavy promotion in recent days. Both efforts target a foreign audience.

The “new” 152-page propaganda piece introduces itself:

The Department of Information, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is pleased to present you with this first ever E-book titled, “A Legacy for All,” which boasts a unique collection of articles and insights that reflect the wide range of royal initiatives and their legacy on national development. The articles are written by past and present diplomats, as well as practitioners directly involved with the implementation of royal initiatives which have been grouped under six important areas, namely, public health, sustainable development, water management, humanitarianism, foreign relations, and multiculturalism.

In fact, anyone who has repeatedly tortured themselves reading official propaganda knows that there’s not much that is “unique” about the collection of articles by former and serving diplomats, a priest, a privy councilor, and royal servants. There are chapters that regurgitate much of the constructed “legacy” of the previous king and the ideology associated with the dead royal grandmother, and so on. There’s a bit of polishing of the “legacy” of the king’s eldest daughter, suggesting she’s probably the “future” of the gene dead-end monarchy.

There are two things which stand out in the book.

First, it is evident in the book that there’s not much that can be said about Vajiralongkorn. He’s had a pretty undistinguished life and, as everyone knows, he’s not the brightest and he’s also not keen on displaying himself in the manner of his parents as they boosted the monarchy. About the best the Ministry can come up with for Vajiralongkorn is an essay on a 1992 trip to Bangladesh. The only other chapter that seeks to reflect on the current monarch is on Siam Bioscience and his alleged good deeds during the pandemic. Of course, there’s nothing on the controversy surrounding Siam Bioscience. As might be expected in a bum buffing exercise for a foreign audience, there’s no data and no questioning. The sore thumb is the brief mention of Princess Chulabhorn’s “Institute” going off and acquiring Chinese vaccine when her big brother’s company was meant to be churning out vaccine but wasn’t. The only hint at trouble is when reader’s are assured that her effort was “through an established procedure under the law,” kind of suggesting that it may not have been.

Second, reading across the essays, it is clear that the Ministry views the Thai people as a bunch of dolts incapable of thought or doing anything for themselves. Not surprisingly, the exceptions are Thai royals; each one mentioned is a polymath and magnificent in their “work.” We are not exaggerating. The impression given is that no ordinary Thai is capable of much at all, other than implementing royal advice and royal schemes. The people receive royal wisdom and those who adopt it prosper. Well, maybe not prosper, but get by.

The notion that all the people are children is not unusual in elite circles. It is also why the people repeatedly rise up to demand a say in their own country.

Further updated: Buffalo manure human rights

The Thai Enquirer reports that the military-backed regime, headed by a coup plotter as unelected prime minister has made the absurd claim that “Thailand is ready to commit to promoting and protecting human rights in the country and abroad…”.

This regime, constructed on the military murder of scores of protesters in 2010, on the bodies located and still missing of those forcibly disappeared, and which has detained and jailed thousands, made this outrageous claim “ahead of the UN’s upcoming Third Cycle Universal Periodic Review (UPR)…”.

Ratchada Thanadirek, the regime’s deputy spokeswoman lied: “The government is committed to working with the international community to voluntarily declare its commitments, consider feedback and listen to proposals…”.

How high?

Ratchada built a pile of stinking buffalo poo, saying the “current administration is working to revise its laws to match the international human rights instruments, including anti-torture law, laws against inhumane punishments, and laws that protect against enforced disappearance.”

These are all crimes that this regime has engaged in, regularly. It is a false claim, it is a gross untruth. It is made as it continues to lock up protesters and jail people under Article 112, a draconian law that “protects” the monarchy from criticism and scrutiny and permits the jailing of political dissidents.

As the article explains:

The statement comes at a time when the Thai government is being criticized at home and abroad for its arbitrary arrest and detention of pro-democracy protesters.

Over a dozen student protesters have been arrested and denied bail for leading street protests against the Prayut Chan-ocha administration and calling for reform of Thailand’s conservative institutions.

Films, art exhibitions, and even nationally recognized artists have been punished and/or censored by the government for speaking in support of the demonstrators or on political issues….

The Prayut administration has implemented a Covid-related state of emergency protocol that bans large-scale gatherings. This emergency act has been used to detain, arrest, and crack down on unarmed protesters.

Built on murders, lies, deceit, rigged laws and elections, and repression, this is a corrupt regime.

Update 1: For something far more realistic and factual, try the CIVICUS and the Asia Democracy Network (ADN) call for UN member states to raise serious concerns about Thailand’s civic freedoms.

Diplomats in training

Update 2: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been a useful tool for the regime. Populated by royalists, for decades it has polished royal posteriors, often with amazing contortions that make its people look like pretzels. The latest official contortionist is Nadhavathna Krishnamra, a Foreign Ministry representative speaking to the UN Human Rights Council.

Facing questions from Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland, among others, about those charged with lese majeste, including more than a dozen children, Nadhavathna defended lese majeste. It was asserted that the law “protects the monarch and therefore national security, and that royal insult cases were carefully handled.” Everyone knows this is buffalo manure. Nadhavathna trotted out more of the regime’s buffalo poo: “It reflects the culture and history of Thailand, where the monarchy is one of the main pillars of the nation, highly revered by the majority of Thai people…. Its existence is closely linked to safeguarding the key national institutions and national security.” Blah, blah, blah excrement.

Not Chinese whispers

The Chinese often vow that they never intervene in the domestic politics of another country. But they seem unable to meet their self-mandated rule. In recent days, the Chinese Embassy in Bangkok “issued a statement, accusing some individuals and organizations in Thailand of attempting to discredit the Chinese-made Sinovac vaccine…”. The statement claimed this was “harmful to the good wishes of China to support Thai people in the fight against the pandemic.”

In a Facebook post on Friday, the spokesman for the Chinese Embassy said: “Every dose of the Chinese vaccine represents the genuine friendship of the Chinese government and people toward the Thai government and the Thai people…”.

China was mainly carping about Thai politicians and activists.

The regime’s response was a marvel. So rapid was the response that it might have been coordinated with the Chinese. If not, the words were almost the same. None other than Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai “expressed concern that criticism of the Sinovac Covid-19 vaccine for political benefits could affect the relationship between Thailand and China.” Opposition MPs were chastised.

He was supported by the director-general of the Department of Disease Control, Opas Karnkawinpong. Opas sounded like a regime mouthpiece when he “said the China-made Sinovac vaccine has helped Thailand control the pandemic since the start of the Covid-19 outbreak last year, when the world was facing a vaccine shortage crisis due to huge demand and inadequate supply.”

We wonder what the Chinese think about the debate over Chinese-made Antigen Test Kits (ATKs), some two million of which are being delivered?

Dr Witoon Danwiboon, managing director of the Government Pharmaceutical Organization, has been engaged in sniping with doctors and others about a kit that doesn’t have US approval over worries about accuracy. Never mind, the regime’s Thai Food and Drug Administration has approved it. The Chinese company that makesthe SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests, Beijing Lepu Medical Technology, touts its effectiveness and accuracy.

What caught our attention was the World Medical Alliance, “the company authorised to purchase 8.5 million kits for the government,” threatening. Siriya Thepcharoen, described as “an executive with the World Medical Alliance,” said: “We will file legal action against any person devaluing our product with fake information.” As far as we can tell, Siriya’s experience is in real estate.

But the idea of piling in for profit is well established.

Silk purses from a festering sow’s ear

The failures of the regime and the monarchy on Siam Bioscience and vaccination is not what the regime and palace had hoped for; they hoped for a propaganda victory. They wanted to role back growing anti-monarchism.

This means that regime tools have to go to work and concoct a victory for the monarchy and the royal family.

A recent example of this is from the royalist clique controlling the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Tana Weskosith, who is Deputy Permanent Secretary, has come up with “A Modern Monarch in Action: Mobilising Relief in a Pandemic.” This laudatory tale is posted at the MFA’s propaganda/PR site Thailand NOW, “operated by the Thailand NOW editorial team and is supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.”

It begins with the usual blarney: “Friends of Thailand might be familiar with anecdotes about the Thai monarchy that has stood fast alongside the Thai people through thick and thin — from combatting poverty throughout the ages to fighting the COVID-19 pandemic since last year.”

Anecdotes indeed, but “through the ages” is just hyperbolic buffalo manure.

Looking after his own. Royal Household Bureau via Khaosod

The virus reference is startling, but is the reason for the royalist drivel peddled by the MFA.

The level of false claims comes with the statement that “the King and Queen … have continued to take this mission on board in all types of situations, whether they be during a crisis or in times of peace.”

The king has only been on the throne since 2016, and he spent most of this time in Germany, only returning to Thailand when he felt his throne was under threat last year. For much of his reign and, indeed, in recent months, he’s been invisible.

Tana recycles the claim that the “Royal Family works [with]… a simple but practical rationale, that all Thai people should have access to basic public services even in the most remote areas of the country, so that they are able to earn a decent livelihood in good health and happiness.”

This is nonsensical. The royal family has, like most royals, been interested in maintaining its position and building its wealth. The dead king spoke out against notions of social welfare. Like all rightists, the monarchy and the current king have willingly backed the military’s political domination and its murder of political opponents.

Tana recognizes that Vajiralongkorn has been pretty much invisible, so he makes the claim that the royal family “has been continuously devoting their energy and personal funds behind the scenes…”. The compulsory royal news on radio and television that drearily promote the royals suggests that Tana is simply making this up. And he babbles about “centuries” of such concern, and goes on to repeat the propaganda associated with all the royals from early in the 20th century.

But he then gets going on the pandemic, proudly declaring:

The King’s Father, His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej The Great, through the Crown Property Bureau, funded the establishment of Siam Bioscience Co. Ltd. in 2009, to specialise in manufacturing biopharmaceuticals.

Perhaps Tana thinks that linking the dead king to Siam Bioscience will reduce the justified criticism of the company.

He makes a remarkable claim:

The company’s excellence has since been internationally recognized…. Subsequently, in 2020, the British-Swedish pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical company, AstraZeneca, in its fast quest to set up a manufacturing base for its COVID-19 vaccines in Southeast Asia, found that Siam Bioscience was the only qualified choice as its local partner to produce AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines for Thailand and Southeast Asia.

As far as we know, there is no evidence for this claim. This information is simply unavailable, with the whole enterprise being remarkably opaque. Tana quotes James Teague, Country President of AstraZeneca (Thailand) Ltd. on the highlighted claim, but these comments do not shed any light on why the small and inexperienced company was chosen. The guess can only be that it was chosen due to its royal connection.

Siam Bioscience. From the linked article

Why, with all this claimed royal effort, has the AZ vaccine rollout been such a disaster? Tana “explains” that:

… [d]espite these efforts, Thailand, as with many other countries, is temporarily facing a shortage of vaccines. This can be attributed to inequitable distribution of vaccines around the world, as well as an overall shortage of vaccine supplies, caused by circumstances in the global vaccine industry and supply chains….

That would seem laughable. But, like his bosses and other royalists, he knows that no criticism of the royals can be made. Nothing but buffalo poo for them.

Putting Siam Bioscience aside, Tana highlights other “contributions” ascribed to the mostly missing-in-action royals. He highlights and lists royal “donations.” As far as we can determine, such claims tend to be discounted when some research is done. Many of the “donations” are government-funded.

In short, Tana is weaving a royal silk purse from a festering sow’s ear.

Official human rights nonsense

Thanks to a reader for pointing out a recent op-ed by academic Mark S. Cogan at the Southeast Asia Globe.

“Thailand’s human rights narrative runs contrary to reality, even at the UN” has the following sub-header:

Despite cases of lèse-majesté piling up and pro-democracy protesters facing serious charges like sedition, Thailand’s third time through the Universal Periodic Review later this year will most likely be as inconsequential as previous UN human rights inspections.

Thailand is due to have its human rights record examined in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in n November. This is Thailand’s third UPR. Cogan states that:

Back in February, in preparation for this upcoming human rights review, Thailand’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Don Pramudwinai gave remarks during the 46th Session of the Human Rights Council, noting that Thailand would “recommit to our common core values in the promotion and protection of human rights”.

He adds that Don’s perspective has little to do with human rights as practiced in the country. In fact:

[p]ublic statements on Thailand’s human rights contributions often boast about the kingdom’s accomplishments…. But these … often mask Thailand’s true record on the ground – a record stained by draconian measures to cripple individual freedom of expression, curb press freedom, and silence regime critics.

Don’s “remarks” were meant “to ensure that the narrative on human rights was crystal clear to the UN – there were no human rights challenges in Thailand…”.

He and other Thai diplomats have almost Pavlovian retorts to any challenges, pointing to the “perceived failure to understand what it means to be Thai, [a] … lack of familiarity with the situation on the ground, or the more nationalistic refrain that highlights Thailand’s unique status as a country in Southeast Asia that has not been colonised.”

Cogan recounts a meeting between Don and three UN officials after the 2014 coup where he went to great lengths “trying to ensure that the trio also understood Thai culture and tradition, the Foreign Minister paused and remarked: “Actually, in summary, Thailand has one of the best human rights records in all of Southeast Asia.” He then “corrected himself and said: ‘No, no, no, Thailand has the best human rights record in Asia’.”

Not even Don believes such nonsense.

Lese majeste is of especial concern. Cogan notes that:

… for its second cycle UPR in 2016, the Thai government compared its lèse majesté law (Article 112) as comparable to libel law for commoners, adding that it is “not aimed at curbing people’s rights to freedom of expression or academic freedom” and it was implemented in “accordance with due legal process and those convicted are entitled to receive royal pardon”.

It is troubling to PPT that several human rights protectors and the media in Thailand now regularly refer to lese majeste as “royal defamation,” which seems to accept the authoritarians’ narrative. We say, call it by its name.

Lese majeste has seen hundreds locked up, including for Article 112 convictions that don’t even fit the law. As Cogan reminds us, “… Prawet Praphanukul, a human rights lawyer, [was]… locked up in prison after being held at the 11th Army Circle base in Bangkok…”. He spent 16 months in prison on lese majeste and sedition charges and when he was finally sentenced, the lese majeste charge was simply not mentioned, probably because, at that time, the erratic king was trying to minimize political damage.

Famously, Prawet bravely rejected the royalist courts. When he appeared in court in 2017 he stunned the court by stating: “Thai courts do not have the legitimacy to try the case. Therefore, I declare that I do not accept the judicial process in the case.” Prawet added that he would not participate in the case nor grant authority to any lawyer to represent him.

Clipped from Prachatai

More recently, Cogan reports, various UN experts were deeply alarmed over the harsh sentence of Anchan Preelerd, a 60-year old former Thai civil servant. She was given a 43-year sentence. In fact, she was sentenced to a mammoth 87 years in prison, with the sentence reduced because she finally agreed to plead guilty because she had already spent three years in prison pending her trial.

Yet the puppet-like Ministry of Foreign Affairs is straight-faced when it declares the lese majeste law is not “aimed at curbing people’s rights to freedom of expression nor the exercise of academic freedom or debate about the monarchy as an institution.” It “went on to suggest once again that the law exists to “protect the dignity of royal families in a similar way a libel law does for any Thai citizen.” That’s buffalo manure, and every single Thai knows this.

Cogan concludes: “Thailand’s third time through the Universal Periodic Review, because of its predetermined narrative about its own human rights record, will most likely be as inconsequential as its previous UPR.” Sadly, he’s right. In the years since the 2014 coup, Thailand’s human rights situation has deteriorated into a dark age.

Enforced disappearance and regime lies

Readers may have noticed a report at Thai Enquirer where a regime official liar spokesperson from the hopelessly compromised Ministry of Foreign Affairs,

categorically denied the allegations and said that the country “prioritized the safety and well-being of all its nationals…. The allegations that Thailand has a campaign that forcibly [neutralizes] dissents are baseless, including allegations of the involvement of the government in enforced disappearances….

If it wasn’t so serious, this would be laughable. This lie comes in response to a recently released report from Freedom House. Here’s what Freedom House reported:

Clipped from Thai Alliance for Human Rights website

The Thai government is allegedly behind multiple assassinations and unexplained disappearances in Laos, renditions from Cambodia, Malaysia, and Vietnam, as well as an assault in Japan. The campaign appears to be a dissent-quelling strategy of the military-dominated government that first came to power in a 2014 coup,296 with the first documented case in 2016. It targets a narrow profile of individuals: all 11 people in cases documented by Freedom House were viewed by the government as engaging in anti-state actions in some form, including violating Thailand’s draconian lèse-majesté law. All participated in some form of political activism and all but one engaged in blogging or journalism, with YouTube, radio, and social media platforms being the most common mediums.

Freedom House documented fewer cases of transnational repression by Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam, but campaigns by all three took place in Thailand. Thailand detained and rendered two Cambodian exiles in 2018 at the apparent request of the Cambodian government, and Laos is reportedly responsible for a rendition and an unexplained disappearance in Thailand. A prominent Vietnamese blogger and government critic was rendered from Bangkok in 2019. Separately, four Vietnamese activists in Cambodia suffered an acid attack in 2017, believed to have been ordered by Vietnamese authorities. Vietnam has also operated farther afield. Trinh Xuân Thanh, a Vietnamese businessman, asylum seeker, and
former Communist Party official, was kidnapped from Berlin’s Tiergarten park in 2017 along with a companion. The pair were rendered to Vietnam, where Thanh was sentenced to two life terms in prison. Vietnamese authorities apparently dispatched a seven-person intelligence team to carry out the operation.

Tanee Sangrat, a spokesman at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, declared: “It is not a crime to criticize the government and any insinuation that the government pursues enforced disappearances because of the victims’ anti-state activism is unfounded.”

Either Tanee is an unskilled liar or as thick as a brick. The number of arrests of the past 7-8 months have been enormous. We know that dullard puppets like Tanee will say that no one was arrested for criticizing the regime but for other “crimes.” But this fools no one. This is a corrupt and authoritarian regime, and, apparently also populated by dopes.

Floating on air

Tanee Sangrat is a spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and, in a now familiar defense of the indefensible, recently wrote to the South China Morning Post. He decided/was ordered to do this in response to critical reporting of demonstrations.

The letter has a measured tone, hitting the right notes, but full of distortions and fabrications. We won’t go through them all. but we will comment on the position taken on the monarch.

After babbling about the regime “respecting” freedom of expression, the monarchy comes in when Tanee says this is limited “to ensure that the exercise of such rights does not infringe upon the rights, safety or dignity of others.” Of course, those final words are code for censorship of discussion of the monarchy, which has now led to some 40 lese majeste charges.

How high?

Referring to the “demands of the protesters” as “political by nature,” the usual buffalo manure is dumped: “It would be wrong to involve the monarchy, which is above politics.”

And it gets piled higher:

The monarchy does possess moral authority built on mutual trust and respect between the institution and the people. This moral authority is so deeply recognised and revered that some political factions have tried to take advantage of it for their own gains. This must be avoided.

In other words, the monarchy cannot be discussed because it is somehow cultural, floating in some rarefied air, rather than a significant power in Thailand’s political economy.

This kind of disingenuous response to critical commentary is deadly, boringly familiar. It does suggest that not much has changed for the regime or for the palace.