AI [Amnesty International] broke its long silence on lese majeste when Darunee’s case began in June this year. It criticised the court for ordering a closed trial of the proceedings, which a judge on the bench justified as a “matter of national security.”

But AI stayed clear of raising concerns if the law infringed on the right to freedom of expression. Public statements delivered earlier by HRW [Human Rights Watch] have also studiously avoided this fundamental right.

“We have felt that working in a more private capacity than in a public way is the most appropriate and the most effective response on the lese majeste issue to date,” says Benjamin Zawacki, South-east Asia researcher for AI. “There is an implicit knowledge of the sensitivity of this law.”

“There are competing interests at stake; one is the right to freedom of expression. But you have an institution here that has played an important role in the protection of human rights in Thailand,” Zawacki explained in an interview. “We can see why the monarchy needs to be protected.”

The Bangkok-based Zawacki admitted, however, that the law has been abused. “The lese majeste law, as is currently applied in the last three years, has been used for the suppression of free speech for largely political purposes and not for the protection of the monarchy, for which the law was drafted,” he says.

The Asian Human Rights Commission has been more outspoken.

And, in one of his email circulars, Jiles Ungpakorn writes:

In my view, there is little point in writing letters to the Thai authorities about this. However, what would be more useful is to write to Amnesty International and demand that they start taking up and campaigning for lese majeste prisoners in Thailand.

[UPDATE: This disgrace is getting some coverage in Australia.]

Don’t forget to take a minute to show your support for Suwicha Thakor. Details are here. We have already had some interest from Australian media. The more votes we get for “Suwicha” the more we can generate media interest in his fate.

Sydney’s Taronga Park Zoo is celebrating the birth on 3 July 2009 of a male calf to Thai elephant Thong Dee:

Australia has welcomed the first elephant ever born in the country with the arrival of a 100-kilogram (220.4-pound) male calf at a Sydney zoo, according to keepers. The calf, yet to be named, was born at the harbourside Taronga Zoo just after 3am (1700 GMT) to a 12-year-old Asian elephant named Thong Dee, the zoo’s director Guy Cooper said. “(Staff) were with her throughout the night and have been sleeping at the barn to support Thong Dee the instant she went into labour,” Cooper said. “She was quite magnificent and her success is a tribute to the incredibly hard work our elephant keepers have done to support our elephants as a true family unit,” he added. Thong Dee, formerly a Bangkok street elephant, was surprised by the birth, and needed to be calmed before she could be introduced to her son, said Cooper, adding that the calf was conceived naturally with the bull Gung under the zoo’s breeding programme. She greeted her baby by touching his trunk and he soon tried to suckle, which Cooper said was a good sign. “The early signs are good and we will monitor mother and calf very closely, providing every possible support,” he said.

The zoo has launched a competition to name the baby elephant.

Which got us thinking…

How about we have a campaign to name the young boy Suwicha (สุวิชา), after Thai political prisoner Suwicha Thakor? Most of you will remember that Suwicha Thakor was sentenced to 10 years in prison for posting digitally altered images of the king on the internet. It is an outrageous sentence, and would have been even longer if Suwicha had not pleaded guilty.

Both Suwicha Thakor and the baby elephant are going to spend a long time behind bars. But we have no doubt that the elephant will have a much more pleasant time of it than Suwicha.

You can go on-line to make your naming suggestion here. You are asked to provide a reason for the name — perhaps just a simple “Free Suwicha Thakor” would be appropriate. It may also be relevant that Suwicha means “one who possesses good knowledge”. On the zoo’s naming criteria — authentically Thai, suggesting happiness (what we might call hope and endurance), reflecting a family connection, distinctive sounding, and different to the other elephant names — it looks like a possibility.

If a large number of New Mandala readers take a minute or so to vote, we may be able to get a bit of publicity in Australia, and elsewhere. The naming competition closes on 25 July, so we need to be quick.

It may be a small contribution towards keeping Suwicha Thakor, and others suffering similar fates, in the international public eye. As the zoo’s website says, “from little things big things grow”.

The Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China is appalled to learn that our colleagues, the entire board of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand, have been accused of committing lese majeste, a crime which could carry a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

Police will investigate the 13-member board after a complaint was filed in connection with the selling of a DVD of a speech given at the FCCT by a former government minister. This speech was given two years ago.

This is a worrying development, because Thailand’s law on lese majeste is more and more used to restrict freedom of expression. Board member and BBC correspondent Jonathan Head has faced similar accusations in the past.

“The FCCC calls on the Thai authorities to respect freedom of the press and ensure that journalists can work there free of restraints,” said FCCC President Scott McDonald.

And from Japan:

The Board of Directors of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan [FCCJ] is appalled to learn that the entire board of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand (FCCT) has been accused of committing lese majeste, a crime that carries a maximum prison sentence of 15 years.

The FCCJ is also gravely concerned that in the recent past the Thai authorities have used the country’s lese majeste laws to restrict freedom of expression and have otherwise abused it for its own political ends.

The Board of the FCCJ is dismayed by reports that the 13-member Board of the FCCT will be investigated by police after a complaint was filed by a freelance translator.

To our knowledge, this is first time in recent history that journalists — and certainly foreign correspondents — have been collectively targeted for simply selling DVDs of a speech made at the FCCT by a former government minister.

We urge the Thai authorities to respect freedom of speech and provide guarantees that journalists will be permitted to carry out their duties free from intimidation.

The FCCT is the sole official representative of foreign correspondents based in Thailand, and we view any unwarranted legal action against the Board or any other member as not only attack on the rights of journalists in that country, but on correspondents throughout the world.

Internet user gets ten years in jail for posting content that “defamed” monarchy

Reporters Without Borders condemns the 10-year jail sentence which a criminal court in the northeast Bangkok district of Ratchada imposed today on Suwicha Thakor for posting content online that was deemed to have insulted the monarchy. Thakor has been held in Bangkok’s Klong Prem prison since 14 January.

“The charge of lese majeste has become a major tool of repression in Thailand,” Reporters Without Borders said. “The sentence passed on Suwicha Thakor violates online free expression and is out of all proportion to what he is alleged to have done. We call for his release and we urge the government to amend this law, which is being abused in an unacceptable manner.”

Thakor’s lawyer said he was accused of posting photos, videos and comments online which, according to the court, defamed the monarchy. He was found guilty on two counts under the lese majeste law and one count of causing “offence” under the Computer Act. The court gave him a 10-year jail term for each of the first two counts, for a total of 20 years but, as he pleaded guilty, this was halved.

Thakor said in court, after the verdict : “I am ill… I need help… I have three children.” Alluding to his father, wife and three children, he added : “I must remain in prison for 10 years, but there are five people who are dying.

Do any New Mandala readers know what Suwicha posted?

On the night of 31 August 2008 my life took an unexpected turn. I had spent months preparing for an interview in Melbourne with the InterContinental group. I was looking forward to working in the luxurious surrounds of the city’s newest five-star hotel.

“Do you have a case, sir?” asked the official at Bangkok Airport’s passport control, minutes before I was to walk into the departure lounge for the midnight flight to Melbourne. Within hours I was questioned, photographed and arrested by uniformed immigration officers, and taken to the Crime Suppression Division.

In a dark, damp cell I stripped off my clothes and laid them on the floor, fashioning a bed with my shoes as a pillow. Sleep was impossible: I was thirsty and hungry, confused and alone. In the morning I made a short court appearance, before being handcuffed and shuffled onto an overcrowded prison bus bound for the Bangkok Remand Prison.

A report on the article was in The Age today:

HE WAS shackled, propositioned by an inmate and weakened by fever in the cramped conditions of a Thai remand prison.  Shortly before he was freed, writer Harry Nicolaides was leafing through a book about escape artist Harry Houdini, which he says was provided by the Australian embassy. He was the subject of campaigns and prayer vigils, and said he met former champion boxer Jeff Fenech, who visited him at the Bangkok remand prison.

Nicolaides’ crime was to have offended the Thai monarchy in a book called Verisimilitude, written years earlier. In a 5000-word essay published today by The Monthly magazine, Nicolaides describes his life in the cramped and often brutal conditions at the jail, where he was confined in August after being arrested at Bangkok Airport. In prison, he mixed with drug lords, sex offenders and refugees from around the world. He said men were hospitalised after being beaten for breaking prison rules, and bodies of dead inmates were dumped, or left to hang from the rafters where they committed suicide. Prisoners queued for contaminated food, earned three dollars a month for performing menial tasks in a ramshackle workshop, and were placed in leg irons for their trips to court.

“Nothing can prepare a person for the experience of being shackled,” he said in the article. “In front of us was a giant iron pincer bolted onto a slab of wood the size of a sleeper. Each of us selected a pair of heavy, rusted leg chains.” After describing how brackets were fitted and clamped around his ankles, Nicolaides said his real fear was that with a slip of the wrist, his ankles could be crushed like walnuts in a nutcracker. He said the prison had a population of ladyboys – young men who applied make-up and sought sexual encounters. Nicolaides said he received a colourful illustrated letter one night from a ladyboy who confessed “intimate desires”.

Despite the appalling conditions of the prison, Thai inmates loved their ruler. At the ceremony where he was pardoned, Nicolaides bowed before a portrait of the Thai king, and gave thanks for the monarch’s benevolence. 

The case of Internet user, Mr.Suwicha Thakhor, who was arrested on January 14, 2009, has been detained in KlongPrem prison, and denied bail twice. Eventually, he was prosecuted to the court by public prosecutor on March 26, 2009.  Since the accused has pleaded guilty therefore no trial will be taken.  The verdict is scheduled on April 3, 2009 at 9 am. onwards at the Criminal Court, Ratchadapisek Road.  This will be the first verdict against Internet user under Computer Crime Act 2007 which related to act against national security.  The accusation based on serious charges related to three major laws.

2007 Constitution Article 8, 9

Section 8. The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated. No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action.

Section 9. The King is a Buddhist and Upholder of religions.

Penal Code Article 33, 83, 91, 112

Section 112. Whoever defames, insult or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years.

Section 33. For the forfeiture of a property, the Court shall besides having the power to forfeit under the law as specially provided for that purpose, have the power to forfeit the following properties also, namely: (1) a property used or possessed for use in the commission of an offence by a person; or (2) a property acquired by a person through the commission of an offence.  Unless such property belongs to the other person who does not convince at the commission of the offence.

Section 83. In case of any offence is accrued by commission of the person as from two persons upwards, such accomplishes deemed to be principals shall be punished as provided by the law for such offence.

Section 91. If it appears that any offender has committed the several distinct and different offences, the Court may inflict upon such offender the punishment prescribed for each offence. But, whether there shall be increase of the punishment, reduction of the punishment or reduction in the scale of the punishment, or not, the total punishment of every offence must not exceed the following determination:

(1) ten years in case of the severest offence to have the rate of the maximum punishment of imprisonment not exceeding three years;

(2) twenty years in case of the severest offence to have the rate of the maximum punishment of imprisonment exceeding three years upwards, but not more than ten years;

(3) fifty years in case of the severest offence to have the rate of the maximum punishment of imprisonment exceeding three years upwards, unless in the case where the Court inflicts upon the offender the punishment of imprisonment for life.  

Computer Crime Act 2007 Article 3, 14, 16

Sections 14(1), 14(3), 14(5) of the 2007 Computer Crime Act, which pertain to crimes which “involve import to a computer system of forged computer data, either in whole or in part, or false computer data, in a manner that is likely to cause damage to that third party or the public; that involves import to a computer system of any computer data related with an offence against the Kingdom’s security under the Criminal Code; that involves the dissemination or forwarding of computer data already known to be computer data [which are illegal].