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.

Updated: The political judiciary

From long being a pretty somnolent part of the bureaucracy, in the 21st century, Thailand’s judiciary has shown that it can move politics in particular directions. The judiciary has demonstrated a capacity for politicized decision-making that has supported rightist, royalist and military interests. Its double standards are now legendary.

Sure, sometimes a court makes a decision that goes against the political grain, but these are exceptions to what is now a rule.

The most politicized of judges, who do as they are required, get rewarded. The most recent is the appointment of Nurak Mapraneet as a privy councilor. He is a former president of the Constitutional Court. He became court president in 2007 following the 2006 military coup. During his tenure there, the Court dissolved six political parties, removed two prime ministers, nullified the 2014 election, banned scores of politicians, and accepted a king’s announcement as law. Quite a record and now he’s rewarded.

All of this is a preamble to an observation that the judicial system and the courts are again being used by the regime as a political weapon.

A couple of days ago, Thai Enquirer published a list of Thailand’s latest political prisoners. It is a list of list of university students, activists, and musicians who have been charged, since 18 July 2020, under Article 116 with sedition (21 persons) and Article 110 for committing an act of violence against the queen or her liberty (3 persons). It notes that “at least 60 other protestors have been charged for joining the pro-democracy protests between October 13 and October 24, according to TLHR and Amnesty International.” Many of these were charged with violating the emergency decree. Astoundingly, that number includes “two children, aged 16 and 17, and they will be prosecuted even though the severe state of emergency decree was lifted…”.

The courts get involved in these cases almost from the beginning. From a phase where those arrested were soon bailed by the courts, that has now ceased for those deemed to be “leaders.” It is as if an order has come from higher up, telling the judges not to release them. For example, there have been several instances where the political detainees have been granted bail and then immediately arrested on other charges. The most recent example is human rights lawyer Arnon Nampa. He was bailed by a Chiang Mai Court and then immediately re-arrested and transported to Bangkok by road to face another period in detention.

As was the pattern in lese majeste cases, we see the judiciary, police and corrections being used to punish, detain, and harass. We refer to this as “lese majeste torture.” The most awful example was the treatment meted out to Somyos Prueksakasemsuk. He’s now in jail and denied bail again. Also well aware of this tactic, having also been a lese majeste prisoner, is Akechai Hongkangwarn. He’s now denied bail on a spurious Article 110 charge.

Then there are the young “leaders.” Not only are they repeatedly denied bail, but the system ensures that they are treated to all the feudal rules of the prison system. While they have not yet had their heads shaved, they are given king-approved haircuts and made to wear prison uniforms and Panusaya Sithijirawattanakul has been made to “dye her hair natural black,” if those words from the Bangkok Post make any sense at all.

But none of this makes much sense. It is just a dictatorial regime acting under orders.

Update: Khaosod reports that police are looking to charge some 16 persons: “Deputy Bangkok police chief Piya Tawichai told the media yesterday the police were gathering evidence to prosecute the embassy protesters…. Maj. Gen. Piya said a number of laws were violated, such as the public assembly act and libel.” Pro-democracy activists Patsaravalee Tanakitvibulpon and Jatuphat Boonpattaraksa are among those being “investigated.”

It is not reported whether the police are taking similar action against the yellow shirts who protested at the same embassy before the pro-democracy thousands.

With 4 updates: The Dictator’s response II

At about the time that a mass of demonstrators began to march from the Victory Monument, via a couple of half-hearted police road blocks, to Government House, The Dictator, Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha took over Thailand’s national pool broadcasters to explain how he was a democrat.

It may be stating the completely obvious, but we want to point out the contradictions in The Dictator-cum-fake-Democrat general’s speech.

That speech included accusations against the protesters (or their leaders) as violent, extremists, “unThai,” a minority and mob who seek chaos, and anti-monarchists. He didn’t use those terms, but everyone knows the code.

Listening but not hearing

It is Gen Prayudh’s failures, his repression and his lies that, as the pro-regime Bangkok Post reported, led to an ultimatum: “protesters have given the prime minister three days to release detained activists and step down, or face a new round of demonstrations.” We use the official text of The Dictator’s speech, released and published by Thai Enquirer. Protesters have dismissed his (fake) entreaties as too little, too late.

With demonstrators seeking to create a more democratic Thailand, Gen Prayuth calls on them to “sacrifice … their personal desires for the greater good of their country.” That is, to compromise with his illegitimate regime for something less than the protesters want.

He positions himself as “a national leader” who must look after “everyone in this country…”, while taking on the “very extreme” and protecting “the nation” from “dark forces that may seek to damage our country…”. He claims to speak and act for the “huge silent majority” and to rule the country “based on principle, the law, and the will of parliament as the ultimate representative of the people.”

Of course, this is a large pile of buffalo manure that paints the protesters as an extreme minority making “mob demands.”

Gen Prayuth speaks of the need to “step back” from a situation where “violence begets more violence.” But have the protesters been violent? Of course not. The violence has been from the regime and yellow-shirted stooges.

For Prayuth, his big lie is that the protesters who have been violent:

Last Friday night, we saw things that should never be in Thailand. We saw terrible crimes being committed against the police using metal rods and huge cutting implements in brutal attacks, with the aim of severely wounding fellow Thais. But when we look deeper, we can also see that, beyond a small group of ruthlessly violent people with bad intentions….

How high?

Go back and look. Really? Maybe he’s confused. PPT has reviewed all of our collected media reports from that day and there are no reports of such violence by protesters that we can find. All the reports are of the police and their harsh actions to disperse the crowd, which Prayuth does mention, and seems to back away from such tactics.

But then The Dictator switches to “offences against institutions that are held in the highest respect.” He means the monarchy.

His “solution” to the problems he faces is “to discuss and resolve these differences through the parliamentary process. It is a slow process, but it is one that best avoids injury to our nation. We must show the maturity and patience to take the middle path.”

There’s a couple of problems with this. First, Gen Prayuth was not prepared to do this in 2014. Then, he overthrew and elected government, did not support elections, ditched the constitution and imposed a regime of draconian repression, filling parliament with his cronies and rigged the constitutional and electoral system. Why believe he’s had a change of mind? Second, the parliament that exists today is the bastard child of the military coup. It is stacked with an unelected senate that was selected by the junta – and Prayuth himself – and the “election” was rigged. How does Prayuth’s parliament find a way forward?

So, when Prayuth babbles about “respect the due process of law, and then let the will of the people be resolved in parliament,” he’s being completely disingenuous.

Mind. Clipped from a Reuters photo

Prayuth continues to base much of his “conviction” around the monarchy. That’s why he tells protesters to “turn down the volume on hateful and divisive talk.” As the protesters know, real reform must involve the monarchy. It must be discussed. The ultra-royalists fear this. They fear, as Prayuth does, that the foundation of the ruling order will be lost.

Update 1: In a demonstration of how empty Gen Prayuth’s speech was, within two hours of protesters giving him “a three day deadline to step down or face more demonstrations,” the protester who made the announcement, Patsaravalee “Mind” Tanakitvibulpon, was arrested. The arrest was live streamed. Today, she was released, the court having “deemed the charges were not serious and that she still needed to attend classes and exams, so bail was granted without having to submit any guarantees.”

Update 2: Mind was released on bail today.

Update 3: The state of emergency “in Bangkok, and related orders,” has been revoked “effective from noon on Thursday,” with The Dictator saying that “the violence that prompted it is over.” We remain baffled by that claim.

Update 4: Prachatai has reproduced the letter/demand protesters presented for The Dictator last evening at Government House. It reads:

“Whereas I, Prayut Chan-o-cha, have used arbitrary power, bought and sold votes, threatened to impose a gangster’s constitution, traded benefits and positions and used the institution of the monarchy as a justification to get hold of the position of the Prime Minister,

“In order to maintain the dignity of my family, the dignity of the position of Prime Minister and the dignity of the country and to express my respect for the people who hold sovereign power, I, Mr Prayut Chan-o-cha, Prime Minister, hereby resign from the position of the Prime Minister.”

With 3 updates: Voice TV shut down (but not quite)

While not unexpected, the regime has decided to shut down media broadcasting about and in support of the demonstrators. The first victim is Voice TV.

The government claims “a court backed its order to close down ‘all platforms’ of … [Voice] TV channel…”. Ministry of Digital Economy and Society Deputy Permanent Secretary Putchong Ntethaisong “said Voice TV must now shut down all of its broadcasts, whether on air or social media, due to violations of the emergency decree.”

He added that “the court is also deliberating on the shutdown order for three other media sites: The Standard, The Reporters, and Prachatai.”

Putchong went on to accuse “Voice TV and three other media agencies of spreading information that could cause unrest in the country, which is banned under the Severe State of Emergency imposed by PM Prayut Chan-o-cha…”. Of course, by “spreading information,” the regime means news that for several nights via YouTube has been a largely uninterrupted and without much editorial comment.

The regime does not want people to see what’s happening. Worse, it could be that it wants to prevent the broadcast of any further state crackdown.

Update 1: Thai Enquirer quotes The Dictator:

Speaking after the cabinet meeting, Prayut said that a much-reported gag order on some news agencies were to prevent the spread of “fake news” which has exacerbated the conflict within the country.

Prayut said the order was necessary to maintain peace.

“Any agency that has to be shut down will be shut down as according to the continuous police procedures and I am not violating anyone’s rights,” he said.

“My job is to prevent any harm done on the country and to stop the efforts to incite unrest and create a rift within the society,” he said.

Of course, he’s lying. There’s been no “fake news” that we have seen, except from the likes of Nation TV. And, he’s violating everyone’s rights to protect himself, the king and his regime.

Update 2: Voice TV continues to broadcast, vowing to defy the military-backed regime.

Update 3: The broadcaster continued last evening, with several live broadcasts from spots where protesters congregated. In one of these, a vigorous statement of commitment to the promotion of democracy was a message to the regime.

Updated: The regime goes lower I

It is widely reported that the regime is trying to censor news and even withdraw or block content that is about the pro-democracy uprising. See, for example, The Isaan Record. However, some of these reports have been removed. We are not sure what this means.

The censorship is aimed at media that have rallied behind the protesters and some that livestream the protests. This includes Voice TV, The Standard, The Reporters, and Prachatai. There is also a move to block the protesters official social media pages.

Such desperate and oafish moves are likely to fail, incite more protests and may be defied.

Update: There are now social media reports that the regime is sending out police to collect “dangerous” publications, including some academic works on the 1932 revolution. How low will it go?

The Dictator must go

Clearly, Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha’s time is up.

Yet the Bangkok Post, which has been atrocious in its reporting of the pro-democracy protests, seeks to throw Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha a lifeline, saying that The Dictator:

… appeared to tone down his stance against protesters.

Government spokesman Anucha Burapachaisri said on Sunday the prime minister recognised the right to protest but said demonstrations must be held in accordance with the law.

“The government is willing to listen to everyone ‘s problems and continues to solve problems in all areas,” the spokesman quoted him as saying.

The tone seemed friendlier than on Saturday, when according to the spokesman, Gen Prayut warned people not to attend gatherings and violate the law.

Perhaps the Post is hoping that the ruling class can retain its preferred leader?

Some reports are that Gen Prayuth is open to “discussions” with protesters. Well, he has many of their leaders held in custody. So maybe he could start there? But, seriously, the time for talking with The Dictator is probably gone. Now it is time Gen Prayuth went. Perhaps exile in Germany?

Meanwhile, the Thai Enquirer lists some of the draconian measures introduced by the military-backed regime.

A recently imposed new order has also made it illegal for people to take and post selfies of the protests on their personal social media.

Those found in violation could face 2 years jail term and a fine of up to 40,000 baht.

Local news has reported that more than then ten individuals have already been arrested for violating the selfie-rule as of Friday.

Some of these selfies appear associated with defaced portraits of the king and queen.

More rules:

The new state of emergency rules allows authorities to arrest and detain suspects for up to 30 days without charge – suspending habeas corpus.

The police can also confiscate any communication tools, including smartphones and weapons or products that are being used to support actions that are in violation of the emergency orders.

News outlets can be temporarily shut down if they produce fake news or information that can lead to conflict. The state will decide what is and is not fake news.

Soldiers are allowed under the emergency decree to be mobilized in quelling dissent.

Military camps can serve as makeshift prisons.

Speaking of “fake news,” the junta’s poodle that it the reports that Army chief Gen Narongphan Jitkaewtae “dismissed a report on social media claiming the army had seized parliament…”.

It may not have “seized” parliament, but soldiers were sent to Parliament House and sealed it off. As the same report says, the Army was “deployed to guard important locations such as the Government House and parliament building.”

The soldiers used were brought from Kanchanaburi and Chachoengsao provinces, brought “to support police work in law enforcement under the emergency decree.”

Poodle Post also reports on the police/regime response on the accurate claims that they use water laced with chemicals in their water cannon. Police say “they followed international standards for crowd control and that water sprayed from cannons did not contain dangerous chemicals.”

Thinking himself too clever by half, Pol Maj Gen Yingyos Thepchamnong, spokesman for the Royal Thai Police, emphasized: “No dangerous weapons were used in the operation against a crowd of around 2,000…”. We are not sure which crowd he was looking at, but he adds: “The water sprayed at the crowd contained blue dye so that officers could identify rally participants for possible arrest later.”

Reporting him a third time on the same point, the Post says: “Pol Maj Gen Yingyos said the water did not contain dangerous chemicals or cause harm to the lives of demonstrators.”

But, then, he helpfully “acknowledged that some people might experience skin irritation. He said police officials could not confirm exactly what chemicals were used.”

There it is! They used chemicals but reckon they don’t know what they are! Seriously? Lies, deceit, and more. What a hopeless regime.

The Guardian on Thailand’s absolutist monarch

The Guardian has an editorial on Thailand that deserves to be widely read. With apologies to the publisher, we reproduce it here in full (including hyperlinks):

The Guardian view on Thailand’s protests and the king: the end of deference

Demonstrations reflect a longstanding appetite for democracy – but challenging the monarchy breaches a taboo

Thailand is often described as coup-prone, given the numerous military takeovers since the end of the absolute monarchy in 1932. It would be as accurate to call it democracy-hungry. Thais have periodically fought to determine their own future, despite the risks.

Early on Thursday, the government declared a “severe” state of emergency in Bangkok, in response to months of protests culminating in a mass rally on Wednesday. It banned gatherings of more than four people and the publication of information that could “create fear” or “affect national security”. Thousands immediately surged into the streets, angered by the arrest of protest leaders. The fear of a harsher crackdown is well-founded given the brutal repression of previous movements, including the 1976 massacre at Thammasat University. The UK and others must press the regime to respect the rights of protesters.

Prayuth Chan-ocha’s administration, a military junta that laundered itself into an elected government via a rigged system, is both incompetent and authoritarian. Even dissidents who have fled the country have been harassed, disappeared or killed. Unhappiness has been fuelled by Covid-19’s destruction of the tourism sector, on which the country is heavily dependent. Protestors demand the prime minister’s resignation and the redrafting of the constitution. But they have also broken new ground by demanding reform of what was previously taboo, thanks to heavy penalties for discussing it: Thailand’s royalty. Anon Nampa, the lawyer who helped kick the movement off and is now detained, warned: “If we don’t fix the monarchy, we can’t fix anything else.”

While his father, who died in 2016, was seen touring provincial development projects, King Maha Vajiralongkorn is better known for his personal life, including the ruthless treatment of ex-wives. He resides largely in Bavaria with a female entourage; Germany’s foreign minister says it has “made it clear that politics concerning Thailand should not be conducted from German soil”.

But the king has also centralised both wealth and power, taking direct command of troops, insisting on constitutional changes and taking personal ownership of the Crown Property Bureau’s holdings – estimated at $40bn [PPT: way too low]. While millions are unemployed, $1bn of this year’s government budget will go to the monarchy. Cue previously unthinkable scenes, with protestors giving a three-fingered salute to the royal motorcade in reference to the Hunger Games and to liberty, equality and fraternity.

Yet the institution’s revered status had already begun eroding. While the last king was seen as a pillar of stability, he consistently sided with the forces of conservatism. Anti-monarchism began to emerge among the largely poor and rural “red shirts” who supported the ousted and controversial prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra. Strikingly, however, there now seems to be a nascent realignment between this movement and another with which it has often clashed: the urban, largely middle class pro-democracy movement often rooted in universities and NGOs, and which most recently swung behind Future Forward, a now-dissolved pro-democracy party.

Thailand’s establishment has so far proved incapable of grasping that the age of deference is over. It is not surprising that the elites resist change in a country with possibly the highest wealth inequality in the world, where the richest 1% control almost 67% of assets. But nor is it feasible that the rest will be content with their meagre lot. Until a better political and economic settlement is reached, the strains will continue to grow. The monarchy’s position is now one of them.

AHRC on emergency decree

We are late posting this, but consider it important:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-022-2014
January 23, 2014

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

THAILAND: Human Rights at Risk as State of Emergency Declared

Under the Emergency Decree on Government Administration in a State of Emergency (2005), the government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra decreed a State of Emergency in Bangkok and surrounding areas on January 22, 2014. The Emergency Decree gives blanket powers to state actors to take a wide range of actions to resolve the State of Emergency, including making arrests, censoring the press, restricting movement and using armed force and will be in force for 60 days. The announcement of the Emergency Decree has come after over two months of protracted, contentious protests by the People’s Democratic Reform Council (PRDC) led by former deputy prime minister, Suthep Thaugsuban, against the government. The goal of these protests has been to oust the current government and replace it with an appointed council. At times the protests have become violent, particularly against those perceived as government supporters or other critics. While the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is aware of the threats posed to human rights, as well as the rule of law in a broad sense, by the PDRC protests, we would also like to condemn the declaration of the Emergency Decree and warn that it creates a legal vacuum in which the government can violate human rights in the name of security.

The protests of the PRDC are one more round in the ongoing political conflict that began with the September 19, 2006 coup in Thailand. This conflict, often framed in terms of the royalist-nationalist “Yellow Shirts” against the populist “Red Shirts,” is a heterogeneous conflict about who has a right to participate in the governance of the country. In total, since the protests began in November 2013, 10 people have been killed and over 100 injured. While these deaths and injuries are still being investigated, preliminary reports suggest that causes have included clashes between the PDRC and Red Shirt activists, clashes between the PDRC and state security forces, and instances of bombing and shooting in the area of the protests.

Although the PDRC is a new organization which emerged in late 2013, many of the leaders and participants are Yellow Shirts. This round began as protests in Bangkok against the draft amnesty bill in early November 2013 and then expanded to a wide call for the resignation of the PM Yingluck government and replacement of it by a royally-appointed People’s Council of “good people” to “reform” the country before holding new elections. On December 9, 2013, amidst the rising protests, PM Yingluck dissolved parliament and new elections were scheduled for February 2, 2014. The PDRC, however, was not satisfied. They have vowed to continue their protests occupying different parts of Bangkok and provincial halls until their demands for “reform” are carried out before new elections are held. The PDRC has not fully or clearly defined what they mean by “reform,” nor what would satisfy them enough to end their protests. Although the PDRC has claimed to be fully nonviolent, and has employed some tactics of civil disobedience, their rhetoric and actions also contain a violent undercurrent. In areas of Bangkok occupied by the PDRC, citizens who wish to enter the area may be prevented from doing so by the PDRC guards or subject to search and harassment. In a report carried by Prachatai online newspaper, two men who were detained by the PDRC describe being interrogated and viciously beaten because they were judged to be Red Shirts [ click here to read the Thai-language report]. The kind of violence these two men were subject to suggests that despite its claims to civil disobedience, the PDRC is becoming a para-state organization. In this respect it is not unique: since the 2006 coup, and particularly since 2009, there has been use of violence by para-military elements on all sides of the conflict. In addition to violating the human rights of those are victimized by this violence, this also damages the broader context of the promotion and consolidation of human rights and the rule of law, which all sides claim to support. The AHRC therefore calls on all civilian parties in this conflict to respect human rights and refrain from using violence.

The AHRC is concerned that the Emergency Decree may create the conditions for the government to violate rights, rather than protect them. The Emergency Decree gives authorities wide powers, including arbitrary arrest and detention, the setting of a curfew, and the curtailing of the circulation of news and other information. When the announcement was made on Monday, January 21, 2014, caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul explained that the decree was being used in order to use the law to address the violations of law committed by the PDRC demonstrators and for democracy to progress in Thailand. As the AHRC has repeatedly documented in the case of three southernmost provinces of Thailand, which has been under the Emergency Decree since July 2005, the decree creates a dangerous legal vacuum in which arbitrary detention and torture have frequently occurred, and in which redress is frequently difficult (see AHRC End Emergency Decree in Thailand). In a statement submitted to the UN Human Rights Council in May 2010, the Asian Legal Resource Center (ALRC), the sister organization of the AHRC, noted that the Emergency Decree was used by the Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva government to arbitrarily detain and interrogate its critics (ALRC-CWS-14-01-2010). Despite the state intentions of the current government to use the Emergency Decree in the service of protecting democracy, the very form of the law makes this impossible. Therefore, the Asian Human Rights Commission also reiterates its calls, made since the time of the decree’s introduction, that this measure be revoked and for the government of Thailand to use only ordinary laws, consistent with international human rights standards, in dealing with political exigencies.

Risk and the emergency decree

The Yingluck Shinawatra government, forced by increasing violence and the promise of more, has used the emergency decree. The Nation states:

THE CARETAKER cabinet yesterday imposed an emergency decree covering the capital and its outskirts for 60 days. This will give officials more power to handle the anti-government protest, which it claims has been a cause of violence, death and injury.

From Bangkok Post

From today, the entire capital and Nonthaburi, plus parts of Pathum Thani and Samut Prakan will be under emergency law.

To enforce the decree, the authorities have set up a so-called Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order (CMPO), replacing the Centre for the Administration of Peace and Order, to keep order.

Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul will supervise the CMPO’s policies, with caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung as director in command of the centre. Police chief General Adul Saengsingkaew and the Defence Ministry’s permanent secretary Nipat Thonglek have been named as operating directors.

The decision to impose the decree was made by caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and some members of her Cabinet, including Surapong and Chalerm, sources said. In a sign of possible disagreement, there were only military representatives instead of commanders present at the meeting yesterday, sources said. With a lack of military chiefs at the centre, the police under Adul will be at the frontline.

Yingluck said she had instructed operations officials to exercise utmost restraint when handling the protest. Asked if the situation would turn violent, like in 2010, she said the government would mostly have the police force overseeing operations. Protesters should not be worried, as police would operate in accordance with law.

As a footnote, we notice that The Nation actually has sources for this story, unlike this one, which appears to be imaginative and designed to provoke.

PPT reckons this is a risky strategy, but probably unavoidable in current circumstances. This comment was made in an agency report:

A state of emergency “is a very risky move from a government that has generally been conciliatory of protesters”, said Kevin Hewison, director of the Asia Research Centre at Australia’s Murdoch University. “The risk is escalating violence to goad the military to take sides.”

The anti-democracy lot will consider the emergency decree as a sign that they are beating the government and a sign of weakness. They will look for every opportunity to force the military into conflict with the government. Indeed, pretend academic Panitan Wattanayagorn pointed out in The Nation’s story: “If the soldiers are put under police command, it will be problematic…. I have never seen troops being placed under police [control].” Unhappy military brass will find it easier to side with the anti-democracy movement.

Putting Chalerm in this position is provocative. The anti-democrats will view this as a challenge. Indeed, Suthep Thaugsuban, leader of the anti-democrats, has already “scoffed at the invocation of the emergency decree…”. The Bangkok Post reports:

He said his supporters are not afraid and the rallies will continue.

“Is there anything that is an emergency in this country?” he said. “We have been protesting for three months already. Why declare an emergency now?”

Addressing the crowd at the Pathumwan stage on Tuesday night following the decision by the caretaker government to invoke a state of emergency, the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) chief vowed to defy all orders issued under the emergency decree.

This approach is also risky as it can lead to escalations of conflict, and the emergency law can lead to human rights abuses if the authorities are unleashed on demonstrators, as Suthep and his little buddy Abhisit Vejjajiva did in 2010.

Readers can locate posts on the Suthep/Abhisit use of the emergency decree at PPT.

 

Saturday red shirt rally

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

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

From The Nation

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

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

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

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

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