The 13 year-old “threat” to national security

Thai Lawyers for Human Rights has a story about “Pink,” who is “one of the young activists who has been subjected to excessive surveillance and harassment by the authorities. Pink has been … followed. The authorities followed her everywhere including her house and school.”

Read all of it. Here’s a sample:

Clipped from TLHR

Pink found out that she is the only one that is being placed under excessive surveillance. “Strangely, many of my friends that went to greet the king, none of them had to be under surveillance like me. Nowadays, I have to share my locations to my friends wherever I go. I am paranoid to go somewhere alone.”

The consequence of her activism made her name appear on the list of persons of interest. The youngest person ever to be considered a threat to national security.

When children become threats to national security – the monarchy – then you know that the regime, its ruling class, and its royalist ideology are crumbling. The problem is that those who control the wealth and the arms will fight long and hard to protect their wealth and power.

Updated: Cyber-snooping

A few days ago we posted on agreements between the military-backed government and the cyber agencies of China and Israel.

On the agreement with Israel, a new revelation of cyber-snooping in Thailand aimed at political and monarchy reform activists, shows the use of the Pegasus spyware developed by Israeli security firm NSO.

Clipped from Popular Mechanics

The report states:

At least 30 Thai activists involved in pro-democracy protests were victims of Pegasus spyware during a government crackdown on dissent, according to an investigation by a group of internet watchdog organisations.

The individuals – who include academics, activists and civil society leaders – were monitored by an unnamed entity using the Israeli-made software during the past two years, according to the results of a forensic investigation released on Monday.

The results of the investigation came out yesterday in a seminar in Bangkok. See more here, including links to the report and the list of those who, so far, have been identified as victims.

Canada’s Citizen Lab and Thai NGOs iLaw and DigitalReach investigated “after six Thai activists received notifications from Apple in November 2021 advising that they had been the victims of ‘state-sponsored attacks’ intent on distributing malware.”

Citizen Lab “could not definitively tie the spyware attack to the Thai government but its investigators concluded there is at least one known Pegasus operator currently in Thailand.” NSO says it only sells the spyware to governments:

Emilie Pradichit, founder of the Manushya Foundation, a Bangkok-based human rights non-profit, said it would be “no surprise” for the Thai government to target its critics with spyware.

“The government’s goal is to truly put an end to the pro-democracy movement by exhausting activists physically and mentally in order to maintain the establishment in power,” Pradichit told Al Jazeera.

“Now, more than ever, we must mobilize and join forces to resist Thailand’s digital dictatorship and ensure pro-democracy activists remain strong and brave and can care for themselves as a priority.”

Update: After initial denials, the regime has admitted it uses Pegasus. In a surprise, Minister of Digital Economy and Society, Chaiwut Thanakamanusorn, “said in parliament late on Tuesday that he is aware of authorities using spyware in “limited” cases but did not specify which government agency used such software, which programme was used or which individuals targeted.” We all know who is being targeted -the regime/monarchy’s opponents. Chaiwat admitted this when he said the program was used in matters regarding national security. That’s now code for the monarchy.

And we can guess that the users are the military/ISOC/palace associated units.

National security and cybersecurity

We had a couple of posts on “national security” recently and feel the need to continue on that theme following two recent agreements signed by the regime. Both articles are deeply disturbing when it is considered that both partners have long records of human rights abuses.

One article in the Bangkok Post reports that Thailand’s National Cyber Security Agency has signed an MOU with the National Cyberspace Administration of the People’s Republic of China…”. When authoritarians come together on something like this, it should be deeply troubling.

According to the report, the “purpose of the MOU is to develop cooperation in the field of cybersecurity between the the NCSA and CAC through exchanges of information, skills and experiences. This in turn will support technological innovation, economic growth and social development. In Chinese-style officialese, it is said that promoting cooperation in cyber affairs “will help achieve peace and stability in cyber dimensions, reduce the risk of cybercrimes and increase opportunities for economic growth and prosperity through digital commerce.”

Such notions, pasted onto Thailand’s national security infrastructure that is unusually focused on the monarchy and political opponents, the impression is of deeper cooperation between authoritarian regimes on cyber-snooping and political repression. We have posted plenty on Thailand’s cybersecurity. Tech site The Register has this recent news on China’s.

Another article at the Bangkok Post reports an MOU with the Israeli National Cyber Directorate, “to enhance cyber security collaboration and protect the public from cyber threats.” The Israeli ambassador to Thailand said: “Israel has been fighting in wars for so many years, and when we are fighting a war, we know who the enemies are. We know where the borders are. But cyber attacks don’t have locations or borders and this isn’t something we can deal with alone. If we want to deal with it effectively, we have to collaborate and learn from each other…”. On Israel’s cyber-snooping, see an example here.

Thailand’s National Cyber Security Agency secretary-general, Gen Prachya Chalermwa (of course he’s a general!), said “his organisation was established to prevent, cope with and mitigate any risk from cyber threats, especially in protecting the country’s critical information and infrastructure.” That is all well and good as there’s plenty of reason to deal with cybercrime. But, Thailand doesn’t fight external wars; it goes in for domestic political repression.

Regime work: rigging elections, more security, spying on kids, and economic sabotage

It has been quite a week. Below we link to some of the regime’s most recent machinations.

Perhaps the biggest story was the remarkable about face by government parties on party lists for the next election (if we get that far).

As Thai Newsroom reports, “lawmakers faithful to Prime Minister [Gen] Prayut Chan-o-cha today (July 6) dumped the mixed-member-majority system and instead endorsed the mixed-member-proportional system for use in the next general election, fueling the criticism that the executive branch has unduly interfered in the business of the legislative branch.” As the Bangkok Post explained it via a headline, “Parliament chooses MP calculation method favouring small parties.” This is little more than vote-rigging in the manner of the period before the 2019 election. More than that, even the deputy secretary-general of the Election Commission “said the calculation formula of dividing 500 would be problematic because it would result in the number of list MPs exceeding the official number of list MPs set by the constitution.” Constitutionalism seldom bothers the regime. Why is this being done, especially as the government parties had to backflip on their earlier position? The Bangkok Post is succinct: “The move came after the use of 500 received the green light from Prime Minister [Gen] Prayut…, in what is seen as a bid to prevent Pheu Thai from winning a landslide in the next poll, sources said.”

On “national security,” it is reported in The Nation that “Cabinet on Tuesday approved a draft royal decree to exempt enforcement of the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) on agencies related to national security, public safety, tax collection, international cooperation and legal procedures.” That means that “national security” agencies can continue to abuse the population. Added to this, the Royal Thai Air Force is expanding its capacity for cyber snooping. While this is said to be a move that “aims to enhance the RTAF’s non-combat operations, which include disaster mitigation, as well as search and rescue efforts,” in Thailand it can be expected that the cyber unit will target regime opponents and those it considers anti-monarchist.

While on “national security,” Thai Enquirer reports on police (and, PPT would add, military) surveillance of students. It refers to a recent event:

1. No Coup 2. Liberty 3. Democracy

On Monday, a uniformed officer was spotted inside Ramkhamhaeng University telling university students to change the questions on their survey.

The question that disturbed the officer was, ‘should Prayut continue to run the country?’

The answers were overwhelmingly, NO.

The police saw it as their duty to prevent this.

It got worse when some royalist regime supporting university “administrator” wander out “to ask the university students to conduct another activity that is more ‘creative’ than this.” And, worse still, “on Tuesday when two uniformed officers were spotted inside Triam Udom Suksa School.” In this instance, the police were there to support the royalist regime supporting administration in its increased repression of teenagers: “The officers were there to monitor a protest against uniform and hairstyle regulations.

It seems that all students are now threats to “national security.”

Did anyone mention independent central banks? Not in Thailand. Thai Enquirer reports that Finance Minister Arkhom Termpittayapaisith “on Wednesday told the Bank of Thailand (BoT) to prepare to address the weakening of the Thai baht, which has fallen against the US dollar to its lowest level since December 2015.” Dutifully, the Bank of Thailand immediately announced it “will hold a media briefing on the policy interest rate and the baht on Friday at 10.30am, as the local currency trades at its weakest level in more than six years against the United States dollar.” If the regime is controlling the Bank of Thailand, the country’s in trouble.

Holidaying elsewhere

An example of the regime’s economic “capacity” was provided with the quite bizarre Tourism and Sports Ministry thought bubble to introduce dual tariffs for hotels. In a situation where the regime is now desperate to get tourists back to Thailand, the ministry “plans to ask hotel operators to implement a dual-tariff structure under which foreign visitors may be charged rates similar to pre-pandemic days while locals may continue to enjoy discounted rates…”. A government spokesperson reckoned this would “maintain our standards of rates and services for foreign tourists, which affects the perception of country’s tourism brand…”.

We’d guess that if this addled idea goes ahead it would likely prove a disincentive for some tourists. We’d also guess that hotels are better at price-setting than the regime.

National security censorship

“National security” is a term that authoritarian regimes love. Why? Because invocations of “national security” censors and shuts down debate and limits dissent.

We know, for example, that the monarchy (and, hence, lese majeste) is considered a matter of “national security.” Judges regularly deny bail on the basis that the alleged crime is a matter of “national security.” The regime goes to UN bodies declaring Article 112 a matter of “national security.” Doing so covers up the failures of the monarchy and the repression of the regime.

In an interesting case of shutting down debate, the regime’s politicians are threatening opposition politicians with legal sanction if they debate a matter of “national security.” This time, it’s not the monarchy, but the border.

Clipped from Thai PBS

Thai PBS reports that the “Government chief whip Nirote Sunthornlekha has warned the opposition that the plan by some of its MPs to question the government over last week’s incursion by a Myanmar MiG-29 jet into Thai airspace, over Tak province, may undermine the country’s national security…”. Nirote declares that parliament discussing matters of “national security” “could be deemed a criminal offence.”

Given that the prime minister Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha declared the incursion as no big deal, and Nirote agrees, it would seem that parliament discussing the matter is, somehow, a big deal. What is it that Nirote and political masters want covered up?

Royalist regime fighting for the past

While not a new revelation, Marwaan Macan-Marker’s article at Nikkei Asia is revealing of change on the monarchy. The royalists are fighting to restore what increasingly looks like the past. But it isn’t clear if they can prevail, at least in the short- to medium-term, given the huge resources the military-backed regime has been expending on shoring up a declining monarchy.

He explains:

Self-crowned

On a recent visit to a cinema in Bangkok, I was reminded of the dual role that movie theaters play in Thailand. One, of course, is to show films, local and foreign. The other is to reinforce in the audience a belief that their monarch serves as a unifying pillar in the Southeast Asian kingdom. That lesson plays out just before the main feature, when the screen in the darkened auditorium displays a message requesting the audience to stand as the strains of the king’s anthem fill the hall, accompanied by images of the king’s achievements….

The response of audiences — standing up for the anthem — was almost universal until the death of King Bhumibol Adulyadej in late 2016 ended a 70-year reign.

We think this is something of an overstatement. We recall that in the mid-1970s, when the royal stuff came on at the end of the film, many bolted for the exits to escape the hagiographic kitsch. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, audiences at movies and concerts often waited outside until the royal propaganda was finished and then rushed to their seats. But back to the story today:

But something quite different is now going on in cinemas….

[A]t Siam Paragon, a high-end mall in Bangkok’s upmarket shopping district…, [w]hen the familiar request to stand flashed across the screen to the strains of the royal anthem, only a middle-aged Thai couple stood up. The rest of the audience, which mostly consisted of younger Thais, sat impassively through the entire anthem as if it were perfectly normal.

… The display of silent defiance has gathered momentum in recent months; it has been noted by many Thais on social media and is discussed openly….

For the moment, the government appears at a loss on how to respond to this discreet but public challenge to the cinema reverence ritual. Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the ex-army chief and former junta leader, has appealed to young people not to give in to peer pressure.

Yet, Thai cinemas have emerged as a new frontier for a generational zeitgeist. They have given a decisive answer to the question of whether or not to stand, something that seemed inconceivable just two years ago. From this perspective, Thai cinemas provide an inflection point in which the simple act of going to the movies becomes a political statement.

The royalist response to this anti-monarchism – or at least the rejection of the palace propaganda – is deepening. As they have for many years, it is the regime and the military are taking the lead.

Former red shirt, now paid turncoat, Seksakol/Suporn Atthawong, a vice minister attached to the Office of Prime Minister continues his boss’s conspiracy theory-inspired campaign against NGOs. Amnesty International is his main target. He claims – and it is a lie – that “NGOs that are supporting the three-hoof mob [he means the 3-finger salute] to destroy the country’s stability and abolish the royal institution…”. He means the monarchy.

He salivates over the AI target:

Amnesty International is an illicit organization that must be held accountable for its actions, and must be prosecuted to the fullest…. We should not give in to organizations that undermine national security.

Here, by national security, he means the monarchy. What did happen to his lese majeste charge? Oh, yes, he sold himself to the military rightists.

As in so many other places struggling with authoritarianism,

Seksakol’s gambit is typical of Thai ultra-royalist fringe politics. But as his position in the prime minister’s office attests, the fringe has migrated gradually to the center and the top of the Thai governing establishment since the military coup led by Prayut 2014. Facing a legitimacy deficit, Prayut’s current military-backed administration (direct military rule technically ended with the holding of a flawed election in 2019) has relied heavily on the blunt force of Thailand’s controversial lese majeste law, which outlaws any critical comment about the king or the monarchy, to silence critics and quash protests.

The regime is planning to stay. Forget all of the parliamentary realigning. This is about maintaining the political status quo well into the future through another rigged election. And just to help it along, the regime has extended its state of emergency. Thailand has been under this kind of draconian control for most of the period since the 2014 coup. This situation allows the military, police, ISOC and the judiciary to keep a lid on anti-royalism.

How it deals with the more passive rejection of the monarchy and the regime requires more propaganda, more surveillance and more repression. It means keeping Thailand in its past and rejecting the future. All in the name of the monarchy.

Defeating and defending the young

With the mainstream media becoming increasingly quiescent under the current regime, for English readers, Prachatai and Thai Enquirer are critical sources of reliable information on Thailand’s politics. In this post, PPT looks at two recent Thai Enquirer pieces. Each reflects on the current political crisis.

In the first article, Erich Parpart and Cod Satrusayang observe that:

General Prayut Chan-ocha and his military-backed government are jailing the country’s future leaders for their own benefit. There is no use denying it anymore. But in doing so they are jeopardizing our country’s future while protecting themselves from criticism.

The government has now detained at least 20 pro-democracy protest leaders and activists. Most have been charged with lese-majeste and denied bail or have had their bail revoked while waiting for trial.

In fact, we’d argue that while there is clearly benefit to the regime, the real benefit is to the monarchy and the monarch. It is the military scratching the king’s back for the protection his position provides to a broad ruling elite. So when the regime claims attacks on the monarchy are a threat to national security, they mean to their security and that of the business-monarchy-military ruling elite.

That’s what they imply when they say: “Keep in mind, these jail sentences and arrests aren’t done to protect the public good…”, but protect a rotten regime, populated by those who should be in jail and some who have.

The article notes that many of those jailed are among Thailand’s best and brightest; indeed the country’s future. But now it is they who are rotting in jail.

The authors yell: “Free them, free the shackles that bind our thinking, it’s the only option.”

If Erich and Cod look at the leaders of the future, Caleb Quinley looks at the Thalugas protests, emphasizing the economic interests that drive them.

Firecrackers and ping pong bombs versus armed police, “dressed head to toe in black body armor carrying nonlethal firearms…. The sound of their boots echoed through the narrow halls of Din Daeng’s slum community…”.

Violence escalating: “It’s dangerous now…. But how else are they [the government] going to hear us?”

The young demonstrators have set fires to glittering massive portraits of the Thai King scattered throughout the city,  targeted police bunkers, and fired large fireworks into the dark.  In response, police have implemented a zero tolerance policy for unrest, unleashing rubber bullets, water cannons, and tear gas, detaining hundreds since September.

Caleb states: “The economic fallout from Covid is at the heart of the anger.” It is Thalugas “doing whatever it takes for the government to hear them.” Some want “respect” from the regime; to be heeded. They feel “they have been neglected for far too long.”

There are “increasing arrests and police brutality,” but this “group of young men are still raging on.” Many of them are “facing extreme economic difficulty [and] say they have nowhere else to turn. It’s ultimately all about raising the pressure to help their communities.”

Communities are always split, but for many locals, “these young men are white knights taking on an unfathomably powerful enemy.”

Piling on computer-cum-lese majeste charges

About a week ago, PPT posted on the prosecutor’s delay in the computer crimes-cum-lese majeste case against “Niranam_”, a Twitter name (meaning “Anonymous”). He is a 20-year-old Twitter user, accused of insulting the country’s monarchy.

Since Vajiralongkorn took the throne there has been a winding back of the use of the lese majeste law and, for the last couple of years, no cases that anyone has reported on. However, this change coincided with a rise in computer crimes and sedition charges against those accused of “insulting” the monarch and a string of enforced disappearances and murder of exiled anti-monarchy critics

In congruence with these trends, Prachatai reports that already arrested over a tweet about King Vajiralongkorn, “Niranam_” is now slapped with “7 more charges over tweets about the late King Rama IX and the King Rama X, seen as a threat to national security.”

The “threat” seems to be that “Niranam_” had tens of thousands of followers and especially teenagers.

The report states that “[i]f found guilty on all 8 charges, Niranam_ faces a maximum of 40 years in prison (maximum 5 years for each charge).”

He is now charged with uploading “false data” that included “photos of the two kings.” The charge is that there was “photo doctoring with the intention of undermining the monarch … tantamount to an offence against national security.”

Police are reportedly still investigating and then the state prosecutor will decide on which cases will go to court.

With the regime facing rising discontent and the absent king facing protests in Germany it seems that the knee-jerk regime/palace response is demonstrate its capacity for terror and repression through making examples of people like “Niranam_” and Wanchalearm Satsaksit.

The Dictator’s face

Spoofing The Dictator is a crime in Thailand. It is treated so seriously that an international manhunt has resulted in arrests.

We have no idea whether Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, self-appointed president premier of Thailand, actually spat that those complaining about fuel prices should put water in their tanks. He might not have said it, but over his more than four years of unfettered power he’s said many silly, nasty and/or threatening things. He often barks emotionally at reporters.

But when he gets lampooned in social media, police are poked into action to save the murderous general’s “face.”

It is reported that a “Cambodian man has … been arrested in Phnom Penh after allegedly posting fake news about the Thai prime minister on the internet while six Thais have been detained in Bangkok for sharing it…”.

It may or may not be “fake new” – thanks Donald – or it may be something else again. But The Dictator is apparently furious, unable to sleep and as agitated as hell. He can’t believe that anyone could treat him so badly.

A pity about all of those red shirts murdered by troops he commanded, but from The Dictator’s perspective, these were beings less than people. He, however, is great and good and can’t possibly stand these social media spoofs, lampoons, “fake news,” clickbait or anything that shaves a layer off his “face.”

Police are working with another increasingly dictatorial regime to arrest and extradite “Heng Ratanak, 21, of Cambodian nationality.” He’s “accused of importing into computer systems false information that may undermine national security or cause panic among the public under the computer crime law…”.

National security? What a farce. All of this to save the boss’s face!

But it doesn’t stop there.

Police have also summoned “six Thais who allegedly shared the article.” All have been arrested. They face a “charge of knowingly propagating or forwarding false digital information that may damage national or economic security, or cause panic among the people.”

That’s the power of dictatorship and The Dictator. He wants to teach them a lesson, just as he taught the red shirt protesters a lesson.

The Dictator losing face is dangerous.

Get rid of the horrid monarchy law

A Nation Editorial deserves attention as a call for reform of the despot’s political law of choice, the lese majeste law. It has been used brazenly to repress.

PPT has posted hundreds of times on the misuse of this law. It has been used in ways that are unconstitutional and unlawful. Persons have been convicted for what they did not say, for what they did not write. Some have been convicted for “crimes” against persons not covered by the law. Mothers and children have been convicted. Disabled and sick persons have received long sentences. Persons have been convicted on forced guilty pleas when they were not guilty. Sentences have been huge and the treatment of prisoners on lese majeste charges has been tortuous and unlawful. It has been used against political opponents and against some who have fallen out of favor in the palace itself.

The editorial states that “Somyot Pruksakasemsuk’s release after years in prison affords a chance to reflect on deeply unfair abuses of the law.” We could not agree more.

It says his “release from prison on Monday … should prompt the authorities to review the draconian lese majeste law, which was designed specifically to protect the monarchy but continues to be misused for political ends.”

Of course, it was “designed specifically” protect the military and politico-business elite. It protects a system and a configuration of power, not the monarchy on its own. The monarchy is the keystone for a repressive power structure that sucks wealth to those associated with the military-monarchy-tycoon elite or, as some say, the amart.

On the particular case, the editorial states that Somyos was jailed as a political opponent. It states that “[i]t was not and is not illegal to be aligned with the red shirt movement supporting former premier Thaksin Shinawatra and his regimes’ policies. And it was unfair for Somyot to have been identified as anti-monarchy without evidence.”

It reminds us that Somyos was arrested and jailed by the Abhisit Vejjajiva regime “as he was circulating a petition calling for Article 112 of the Penal Code – the lese majeste law – to be amended.” Indeed, Somyos was targeted because he opposed the very law that was used against him. The amart have a sense of purpose when opposing those who endanger the power structure.

The editorial states:

Article 112 is quite straightforward. It says anyone who defames insults or threatens the King, Queen, heir-apparent or regent shall be imprisoned for three to 15 years. The authorities’ case against Somyot was that he had published in his magazine two articles by Jit Pollachan, a pseudonym used by an exiled politician. The law was applied beyond its intended scope and meaning. The two articles merely mentioned the roles of the monarchy. There was no inherent insult to the monarchy.

Indeed, a majority of lese majeste cases fall into similar “misuses” of the law. But that’s the point. Lese majeste is designed to be used in these ways to protect the power structure.

It continues:

Thus, cases are often handled as though Thailand was still an absolute monarchy rather than a nation under the modern rule of law. People charged with lese majeste are routinely denied bail and held in pre-trial detention for months. Somyot was denied bail 16 times.

As the editor of a periodical, Somyot should have been protected by the Printing Act and the Constitution’s safeguards covering freedom of expression. But the Constitutional Court ruled in October 2012 that lese majeste breaches represented threats to national security and thus overrode any such protection.

When the editorial concludes by observing that “Somyot’s case should give all citizens pause for thought. Political reform is badly needed, and this unfair practice in particular has to be rolled back,” it makes a point that is very significant. It will scare the regime and those who benefit from this law.