Thailand‘s lèse-majesté laws are notorious. But do Thais care enough to get behind a push ahead of elections to amend the rules?
Public debate around Thailand’s lèse-majesté laws and related restrictions on freedom of expression appears to be growing, even as the country’s election-focused political parties steer clear of the issue in advance of July 3 polls.
The head of the Thai Army, Gen. Prayuth Chanocha, recently warned political parties against involving Thailand’s royal family in the election campaign. However, a number of separate civil society requests to amend the relevant section of the country’s Criminal Code are underway, with some writers and scholars – the latter known as the Nitirassadorn group – recently proposing amendments to the lèse-majesté laws, which would seemingly bring Thailand in line with constitutional monarchies elsewhere.
Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code concerns offences deemed to defame, insult or threaten the King, the Queen, the Heir Apparent or the Regent. Lèse-majesté carries a jail sentence of 3 to 15 years. Separately, Thailand’s Computer-Related Crimes Act makes it an offence to post online comments that endanger national security or come into conflict with Article 112 of the Criminal Code. Under the CCA and various emergency laws, tens of thousands of websites have been blocked in Thailand, prompting claims that freedom of expression is on the wane in the country.
It's unclear if the Thai public at large is interested in the issue or how much traction the amendment campaigns will gain. Whether or not the country’s political leadership, current or future, will address the issue is equally unclear. According to the Matichon newspaper, Thailand’s outgoing Minister of Culture and election candidate Niphit Intarasombat said that he doen't see any problem with the lèse majesté law.
'I've never seen Article 112 being used as a political tool, and over 99 percent of politicians have no problem with the law,' he said. 'Thailand still has a monarch as head of state and a unifying force, so we should have the law to protect the institution.'
However, Sulak Sivirak, an outspoken commentator who has been charged with lèse-majesté in the past, says that 'none of Thailand’s political parties can spell out what they mean by constitutional monarchy,' while dismissing the country’s political class as cowardly.
According to David Streckfuss, author of Truth on Trial, a study of Thailand’s lèse-majesté laws, the number of cases in Thailand has grown hugely in recent years.
'From 1990 to 2005, there were an average of five to six cases per year,' he said, speaking at Thailand’s Foreign Correspondent’s Club last month. Since then, however, he estimates that there have been more than 300 cases, which could be partly accounted for by the law’s provision that allows any citizen to make allegations against another.
According to former Thai Prime Minster Anand Panyarachun, who spoke at the same venue a week earlier, the key problem is that the current version of Article 112 allows any Thai to allege that someone insulted the monarchy. Anand headed the National Reform Committee set up after the 2010 anti-Government Red Shirt protests and ensuing street fighting in Bangkok.
Photo Credit: Khairil Yusof
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Bye Bye Apishit
When Thaksin’s sister wins we shall see a change
Kom
I’m okay with the part about prosecuting those who (may) threaten the lives of Royalty. But there are parts that should be modified, such as lessen the punishment for insulting the Royalty. One example was a foreigner who wrote a book titled “The King Never Smile.” I think he should have not been arrested and jailed for writing/publishing that book.
And from my point of view, Lese-Majeste law in Thailand has become a tool to destroy one’s political enemies.
The irony is that; I’ve noted that Lese-Majeste law is meant to protect Thai Royalty. However, it could work the other way due to the way it’s been used.
Frankly Speaking
I do not agree with insulting the monarchy. But it is part and parcel of a feee speech. The issue at hand is how the political parties use this to their advantage. You would have to be living under a rock in the Amazon jungle to
not know that the Thai Democratic party is the party of choice for the palace.
In Wiki Leaks there appeared to be a bias toward pro democratic party choice
coming from a monarchy that, claims to be above politics. They also see
the present prime minister as one who has little knowledge but can be controlled
by others in the party.
What is much more disturbing is that the present king has not made his
choice for successor, which will make the Thaksin debacle, seem like kids play
when the time comes for the changing of the guard. There is also this mai pen rai attitude that the south , a former stronghold of the democrat party is
still in there camp. The south of today is not the south of yesterday.
What Thailand faces on the eastern boarder and the southern portion of the country is much more than they can control. There is no free speech in Thailand
to be fair as well as frank. Whether its the monarchy or the politics