[I have received the following statement from Ji Ungpakorn of the Faculty of Political Science at Chulalongkorn University.]
The lèse majesté case against Jakrapop Penkair (regarding his August 2007 speech to the Foreign Correspondents’ Club) raises some important questions for Thai society:
- Do Thai citizens have the right to discuss the role of the Constitutional Monarchy?
- Who uses lèse majesté and to what purpose?
- Do we have a Constitutional Monarchy, as stipulated in the Constitution, or do we really have an Absolute Monarchy?
- What does it say about the Democrat Party and the Peoples Alliance for Democracy that they are using lèse majesté in this way?
First I must make it clear that I have never once voted for Thai Rak Thai or Peoples’ Power Party. However, I must confess the sin of having on one occasion voted for the Democrats before the economic crisis of 1997. I was stupid then and will not do it again.
Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?
I believe that among those who have been attacking him, most care little about the content of his speech. At the same time most Thais of varying opinions will not have read the transcript of his original speech in English, which is available on the internet in a government website.
Jakrapop discusses the changes in the role, power and legitimacy of the institution of the monarchy through the ages, from Sukotai up to the present. In the case of the present King, Jakrapop says that there is a mix of all things from the past plus the new role of being a King in Democracy. The problem with this, according to Jakrapop, is that it causes confusion and is the catalyst for confrontation with the ideals of Democracy. This is because powerful people in the Patronage System, who are not the actual monarch, promote the idea that “Thai-style Democracy” must be “Democracy under the guidance of the King”.
In my view such “Guided Democracy” is the same as Dictatorship and we have had experiences of this system under Sarit in Thailand and Sukarno in Indonesia. Therefore Guided Democracy must be totally different from “Democracy with a Constitutional Monarchy”, which is the present system stipulated by the Thai Constitution.
Jakrapop goes on to say that the problem with the system of patronage is that it implies inequality among Thai citizens. In my view this means that the Patronage System is counter to the Constitution. Jakrapop believes that those in high places connive to distort statements made by the King. He accuses the head of the Privy Council and some top judges, who he says, do this for their own political purposes. That is why they like the old style Patronage System and want us to believe in Guided Democracy.
None of what Jakrapop said at the FCCT can possibly be termed lèse majesté.
It is my view that Jakrapop is a politician of the business class who has no commitment to social justice. That is why he loves Thaksin and Samak and has worked with both these politicians who abuse Human Rights. So I do not care a damn about Jakrapop’s personal plight.
But if he is found guilty of lèse majesté, this will mean that:
- Thai citizens do not have the right to discuss the role of the Constitutional Monarchy.
- Powerful groups of people will continue to use lèse majesté in their faction fights with opponents and not in order to defend the Monarchy.
- Although we have a Constitutional Monarchy, as stipulated in the Constitution, the conservatives in the Thai ruling class want us to believe that we really have an Absolute Monarchy.
- The Democrat Party and the Peoples Alliance for Democracy are happy to use lèse majesté in this way because they have absolutely no commitment to Democracy and basic freedoms. They should be condemned for this.
Democracy and Freedom are important and beautiful things. We must fight to protect them.
12 responses so far ↓
1 ex-Democrat // Jun 2, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Agree with Ji’s comments.
I would like to add: The Democrat party is being badly led and Abhisit should step down as its leader. It has gone from being a party of hope for institutional change to one of a bunch of clowns who seem to think the public is paying them to solely discredit the PPP. Why it has chosen to do this when the PPP doesn’t need any help in discrediting itself is beyond me. Instead its only reason for being seems to be to embarass the embarassment. Pointless.
Democrat Party my ass.
2 Kate G. // Jun 3, 2008 at 3:19 am
Thank you, Dr. Ji, for a clear and bold (in this context) statement.
3 jonfernquest // Jun 3, 2008 at 10:08 am
Ji Ungpakorn: “Who uses lèse majesté and to what purpose?”
People who can’t fight back in any way and are getting real desperate.
It’s one of those weapons of the weak (James Scott). It’s the proverbial Ramkhamhang bell.
When people get frustrated from a lack of rule of law, will they be ruled by law?
Was there really any deep probe and action on all the infelicities of the drug war?
Does the dismissal of the DSI chief in charge of the Ample Rich case mean that this tightest case against Thaksin will never proceed? et, etc…
Does a democratic mandate license you to do whatever you want?
Ji Ungpakorn: “Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?”
The real question might be whether Jakrapop actually cared about what he was going to say.
At the beginning it looks like he doesn’t know what he’s going to say yet, but it’s clear he’s very angry, having just got out of jail.
My favorite part is when Jonathan Head hands him the noose. Here Jacky boy, you want to go back to jail?
It reminds of this very noir’ish TV drama rerun from the 1960s where this ghoulish middle-aged couple were trying to lure a young woman into climbing up on to a chair and put a noose around her neck and then hang herself. I don’t know how it ended, because I turned off the channel. Too terrible and frightening.
4 Reg Varney // Jun 3, 2008 at 10:55 am
Congratulations Ji. A most useful intervention.
Even before he is charged, the message of the case is that anyone who publicly criticizes the monarchy or Prem is potentially in trouble. As various military leaders explained, private comment is fine [from members of the elite?], but if you go public, that is more than they can stand.
I suspect that this speech will be seen as an important statement of opposition to the monarchy.
5 Sidh S. // Jun 3, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Excellent observation jonfernquest.
I’ve read the English transcript, and as a person with political aspirations/ambitions (and an extremely smart, articulate and intellectual person), I am surprised Jakrapob said that knowing the Thai votes he’s canvassing. Maybe this inability to empathize with the electorate also contributed to his loss both in 2005 and 2007 elections?
On the other hand, this was clearly not meant for the Thai voters’ ears, but at least for PMThaksin – to express his loyalty and for PMThaksin’s continued patronage (the irony of it all, really). He was richly rewarded ofcourse in PMSamak’s government, but has proven quite interventionist (to put it mildly) in public and private medias. And maybe, as jonfernquest implied, the LM card was played (which also implies the very sad state the Thai ‘rule of law’ and ‘checks and balances’ is in – which I think is more fundamental than debates about LM’s abuses).
In that case, it is not about criticism of the monarchy’s or PMPrem’s role (which at least academics such as AjarnJi – or AjarnSomsak here – still, I understand, have space to do), but rather real politics at work. Or it might simply be, as someone said earlier, a confused Jakrapob with too many hats to wear. Here, it was a difficult one between intellectual integrity and political ambition – and Jakrapob did indeed seem to have hung himself (especially once his patron refused to back him up)…
6 Reg Varney // Jun 3, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Or maybe Jakrapob just said what he believed at the time, having just been released from detention. Maybe he spoke this way because he was just so pissed off by the patronage system and those who keep it in place? I think he was spot on, at least in general terms. He hardly sucks up to Thaksin, referring to him as a sleepwalker in terms of policy and politics. He says that he thinks Thaksin generally meant well but that he got himself offside by sleepwalking into the consequences of the 1997 constitution and the reforms that brought. I think J. spoke his mind in a way that others have been unwilling and too gutless to do.
7 jonfernquest // Jun 4, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Sidh: “…very sad state the Thai ‘rule of law’ and ‘checks and balances’ is in – which I think is more fundamental than debates about LM’s abuses…”
Yes, yes, yes, too many constitutions is confusing. If I changed the way I did my work everyday (workflow, procedures), I would never get any work done. Yet among all the chaos things are happening, like Thailand is quickly becoming a world leader in biofuel production and adoption with the new accelerated E85 programme. Some compromise is necessary, so as not to fritter away the nation’s resources in an unending political fight. Jakrapob’s ruthless machiavellian approach to managing the media was just pouring more gasoline on the flames. Some people just did what had to be done.
The other line that ran something like, some of you who love Thailand really aren’t going to want to hear this. Maybe he should stick to speaking Thai in his speeches so he can have better control over what he says and avoid language that is going to be, perhaps unintentionally, offensive to most Thais.
8 jonfernquest // Jun 4, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Does anyone know where the the “Jakrapob Code” article by Anant Laulertvorakul of Chulalongkorn University can be found online? Referred to recently in an article:
“…Anant Laulertvorakul, a Thai language expert at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Arts…wrote the “Jakrapob Code” analysing the core idea behind the ex-minister’s speech.
The thought-provoking article, which clarified Mr Jakrapob’s attitude toward the monarchy brought this 40-year-old lecturer instant fame at a local political forum.
Even though the “Jakrapob Code” generally cast the ex-minister in a negative light, Mr Anant insisted he does not belong to any political camp. Nor does he mean harm to anyone.
The lecturer is also an expert on etymology – a rare linguistic branch which studies the origins and historical development of words.
He found Mr Jakrapob’s speech very interesting and spent three nights working on it, resulting in the 10-page article.
The article was circulated to readers via e-mail and newspapers, which ran his article in full.”
http://www.bangkokpost.com/020608_News/02Jun2008_news09.php
[BTW This is a good example of where there might be convergence between English and Thai media in the future. Using Thai language Google to find the article is problematic unless you know how to do reverse transliterations. Internet technology could allow this to happen instantaneously. Between European languages at least Google's translation facilities really facilitate communication. (I've read whole scholarly tomes with specialised knowledge in German and French this way.) Hopefully NECTEC will have something like this for Thai soon.]
9 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Jun 4, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Here’s the link to the article as originally appeared on Manager website.
http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000061329
Here’s the link to the sript of the TV program host by Chermsak Pinthong on Manager’s ASTV where the author ดร.อานันท์ เหล่าเลิศวรกุล unvealed his “analysis” for the first time.
http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000060229
Here’s the link to some backgrounds (and photo) of the author, together with an “expose” by a Thaksin supporter. (Anan was one of royalist anti-Thaksin academics in the Faculty of Letters Chula: there’re quite many of them during the anti-Thaksin campaign of 2005-6 and since. I even heard some say they have “links” with “เจ๊” – DON’T ask me, whose pseudonym!)
http://www.prachatai.com/webboard/topic.php?id=687910
In my opinion, the article is not as good as the author and all those royalists claim. Above all it’s not much of a “linguistic/etemological” analysis. In fact, this is a “chicken-stolen” (ลักไก่) claim. Consider, for example, the following superficial pseudo-”academic sonding” interpretation of Jakkrapob’s use of “ระบบอุปถัมภ์” :
คุณจักรภพ ใช้คำว่า patronage หรือ patronage system ในความหมายที่แตกต่างกัน 2 นัยยะ ดังนี้
นัยยะที่ 1 :
patronage system คือ “ระบบที่ยอมรับความแตกต่างของฐานะของคนในสังคมระหว่างผู้ใหญ่กับผู้น้อย ผู้ใหญ่และผู้น้อยมีส่วนช่วยเหลือเกื้อกูลกันและอำนวยประโยชน์แก่กัน”
ตามนัยยะนี้ ระบบอุปถัมภ์เป็นระบบ win-win ทั้งผู้เกื้อกูลและผู้รับประโยชน์เกื้อกูล ส่วนผู้ที่ไม่ win ด้วย คือ ผู้น้อยคนอื่นที่ไม่ได้รับประโยชน์เกื้อกูลด้วย ดังนั้นระบบอุปถัมภ์จึงไม่ใช่ระบบที่ยืนอยู่บนความคิดเสมอภาค แต่ก็ไม่ถึงกับขัดหรือแย้งกับอุดมการณ์ประชาธิปไตยในลักษณะที่จะอยู่ร่วมกันไม่ได้ ประการสำคัญตามนัยยะนี้ ระบบอุปถัมภ์ไม่ใช่อุดมการณ์ทางการเมือง ไม่ใช่ระบอบการปกครอง แต่เป็นระบบความสัมพันธ์ของคนในสังคม และไม่ใช่ระบบที่มีอยู่เฉพาะในประเทศไทย ปัจจุบัน จีน เกาหลี ญี่ปุ่น และหลายชาติของเอเชียก็ยังมีระบบนี้อยู่
10 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Jun 4, 2008 at 10:45 pm
In my view, Mr. Anan should stick to his teaching of Bali-Sansakrit languages and not attempting to show off his very poor understanding of sociological-political theory.
11 Sidh S. // Jun 5, 2008 at 8:36 pm
jonfernquest, maybe you raised the issue affecting many bi-lingual, multi-lingual people. They have different cultural personas depending on the language spoken (at least I do). What Jakrapob failed to do is to prioritize personas – especially if he considers himself a politician, that must cater to the voting public, first and foremost. His actions does provide evidences that suggest that he care less about winning in his electorate than about getting PMThaksin’s patronage, which gets him straight into the cabinet without having to win the election. His controlling of the media also suggests that, at the very least, he shouldn’t be based in a Bangkok constituency – where meddling with the media is often unpopular. At the end of the day, maybe he is only a smart opportunist who’s contradicting words and actions caught up with him. This is unfortunate, as he is one highly talented person (well, as is PMThaksin).
12 Frank G Anderson // Aug 10, 2008 at 11:59 pm
http://www.bangkokpost.com/080808_News/08Aug2008_news05.php
Are they serious? Increase the penalties? Now we are beginning to get an idea of who really is in charge, as if it were not obvious before.
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.