At least 80 people were killed during the latest clashes in Thailand. But the confusion and danger that are present in various parts of Bangkok do not explain why several Thai and foreign journalists have been shot since April. Two are dead. The tense political situation also doesn’t justify the leadership’s blocking of more than 4,000 anti-monarchy websites.
As we at Reporters Without Borders recently stated in regards to the Thai government’s actions, “The right to information is more important than ever when a country is in crisis.” Yet several reporters have been gunned down and the Internet is falling prey to censorship. So far, around 4,500 websites have been blocked in an attempt by the regime to institute partial censorship of news about the nine-week crisis. Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s Twitter account has also been blocked since May 19.
On that same day, the leadership’s Centre for Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) blocked Facebook and Twitter, which had been functioning as alternative sources of news after TV stations began broadcasting government-controlled programming. Also that day, the Bangkok headquarters of Channel 3 was set on fire by anti-government protesters, and the two biggest English-speaking dailies, the Bangkok Post and the Nation, sent their employees home at 3 p.m. due to fears that their offices could be attacked by Red Shirts. At this point, almost all local journalists avoid going into the streets to cover the situation because of concerns about the risks.
Gathering Info in a Tough Environment
Journalists have been gathering information via social networks, the telephone, and from people trapped in the Wat Pathum Wanaram temple. (It adjoins the square where the Red Shirt protestors had gathered.) Only a few foreign reporters are still on the ground. Here is a video interview with Italian photo-journalist Fabio Polenghi in which he explains the varying treatment of local and foreign reporters:
Sadly, Polenghi died on May 19 during the army’s assault on the Red Shirts in Bangkok.
As of today, two reporters have been killed and several injured since mid-March. In testimonies obtained by Reporters Without Borders, foreign journalists also reported feeling targeted. Arnaud Dubus, a reporter for the French daily Libération and for Radio France Internationale, told us, “This is the first time in Thailand that I feel that foreign journalists are really targeted.”
The Geneva Convention forbids journalists from being military targets. Thailand was elected to the United Nations Human Rights Council on May 15, and now it is violating humanitarian and international law principles.
Online Crackdown Goes On
Blocking Twitter and Facebook is nothing new for Thai authorities. Since at least 2009, this has been a regular practice among the Thai police. So far, one blogger, Suwicha Thakor, has been jailed for his online activities. In April of last year, he was given a 10-year jail sentence by a criminal court in the northeast Bangkok district of Ratchada. This was for posting content online that was deemed to have insulted the monarchy. Thakor has been held in Bangkok’s Klong Prem prison since January 14.
One challenge is that the Internet is not well regulated in Thailand. The country’s Computer Crimes Act, which was adopted in 2007, is too vague. That means the ongoing trial of Chiranuch Premchaiporn, the editor of the Prachatai news website, could create a legal precedent. She is facing up to 50 years in prison for failing to act with sufficient speed to remove “offensive” comments about the monarchy that were posted on the site.
Arrested on March 31, Chiranuch was released after three hours when her sister guaranteed the 300,000 bahts (6,000 euros) in bail demanded by the judicial authorities.
“In normal times I would be more confident about this initial hearing,” she told Reporters Without Borders. “I hope the court will make allowance.”
Under the Computer Crimes Act, owners and editors of websites can be prosecuted when they publish comments that are deemed to have broken the law. The owners are regarded as being as responsible as the commenters themselves.
Chiranuch’s website, as well as its Facebook page and Twitter account, has repeatedly been blocked by the Centre for Resolution of the Emergency Situation since the start of Thailand’s political crisis. The Prachatai news website was founded in 2004 — when the now deposed Thaksin Shinawatra was still prime minister — with the aim of being an alternative source of news. Its news section receives more than 20,000 visitors a day, while its forum receives about 30,000.
The harassment of netizens is widely spread and does not stop at Thai borders. In 2006, Anthony Chai, an American citizen from California, was interrogated by Thai officials in Thailand and again later in the U.S. for allegedly insulting the monarchy in 2006. Originally from Thailand, Chai was granted U.S. citizenship in the late 1970s. He faces possible arrest if he returns to Thailand. “What if now the U.S. is allowing a U.S. citizen to be interrogated by foreign agents on U.S. soil?” he said. You can read more about Chai’s case here.
(For more on Thailand and other countries’ “lese majeste” laws against insulting the monarchy, see this previous story on MediaShift.)
Clothilde Le Coz has been working for Reporters Without Borders in Paris since 2007. She is now the Washington director for this organization, helping to promote press freedom and free speech around the world. In Paris, she was in charge of the Internet Freedom desk and worked especially on China, Iran, Egypt and Thailand. During the time she spent in Paris, she was also updating the “Handbook for Bloggers and Cyberdissidents,” published in 2005. Her role is now to get the message out for readers and politicians to be aware of the constant threat journalists are submitted to in many countries.
View Comments (41)
Sithao Kratai,
Let's be more specific:
First of all, keep in mind that sometimes, wikipedia is biased and it is not always the best source media to get all the information and some pages needs to be update too. Sometimes, we cannot even post some valid facts or edit it because on some pages, wikipedia only wanted neural perspective and sometimes it fails to offer information that is critical to the Thai military and its monarchy.
Secondly, unlike British's parliamentary system, the Thai parliamentary system is just symbolic and has no power over the head of state who is an unelected, undemocratic, aristocratic monarch. The Thai monarchy essentially have absolute power to rule the country in every aspects. In other words, the thai king does not rule the country in a symbolic manner and he has his royal puppets managing the country for him.
Anyway, check these facts out because Thailand also falls into these classifications:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Thailand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutions_of_Thailand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej#Crisis_of_1992
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej#2008_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej#L.C3.A8se_majest.C3.A9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A8se_majest%C3%A9#Thailand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privy_Council_of_Thailand#The_Privy_Council_of_Thailand
http://www.worldpress.org/Asia/2514.cfm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_Never_Smiles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-sufficient_economy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_May_%281992%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Thailand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Thailand_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat#Role_and_position_of_the_King
"Thai Royal Power Controversy"
http://www.2bangkok.com/news05t.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_monarchy
Thus, Thailand is just technically constitutional monarchy with powerless, symbolic parliamentary simply because of the presense of constitutions but it is still an effective Absolute Monarchy because the constitutions are corrupted and undemocratic such as article#3 which allows the Thai king to exercise such power over the national assembly, judiciary system, military, and over Thai citizens and even approving lese majeste.
Sorry but this important case is far from over and discussion about monarchy's role shall continue possibly leading to French Revolution in Thailand due to many oppressions by its leaders. The struggle for Thai Democracy and Human rights shall go on.
By the way, I am assure that you would agree with us about making Thailand a more democratic stable country that respects human rights more and ending this dictatorial ruling system and its censorships.
Cheers! :)
Right! Let's end this Thai dictatorial ruling system and allow Thai Democracy so the Thai people could cherish their freedoms and have a better and happier life!!!
Democracy shall prevail!
Cheers!
I agree too with Mr. Republican! This notorious dictatorial ruling system established by the Thai aristocrats/elites and their king must come to an end in order to save Thailand's Democracy and the rights of its citizens!
Good Luck!
Cheers!!
Rhetoric, propaganda and echoes.
No one is listening.
Take a look around, the room has been empty since my second comment.
It's time for you to report back to HQ for re-assignment!
Aha!
I can hear that!
Someone is definitely watching.
Sithao,
Rhetoric, propaganda and echoes????
Instead of discrediting on purpose, do you have any proof that the facts and links that we posted are simply rhetoric, propaganda and echoes, Mr. Sithao??? No Proof at all??? Well, too bad, you just lost the debate. Looks like you are just good in trolling just like the king's hired elite trolls.
At least, we are happy to enjoy our rights like being able to express ourselves!
Thank you for all of your comments. I just want to clarify Reporters Without Borders' position on this topic.
Lately, most of the testimonies we received from reporters are telling that they have been shot at or at least targeted by the army.
HOWEVER, in the press releases and reports the organization published so far, reporters have been victims of both the army and the red shirts. We are of course asking for investigations in the murders of Hiro Muramoto and Fabio Polenghi.
We have no intention of telling who is right in that conflict and to take a political stance on it. We greatly regret that, ONCE AGAIN, reporters are victims of the conflicts because of their job.
The only way to get true information on what is exactly happening is to let them work and report.
I find the original report to be biased and muck-raking. Sorry, but that's me being blunt.
The report appears to have been written by someone not based in Thailand during all the various troubles of the last four years (starting with the anti-Thaksin protests and near-riots prior to the 2006 coup). The reporter also forgets the open season that existed on journalists throughout the Thaksin reign, kicked off when he bought Thai terrestrial TV station iTV and sacked dozens of journalists and presenters who had been critical of him throughout his election campaign of the year 2000. The article also makes no mention of the numerous cases he brought against individual junior reporters for libel in a lesse majeste manner as the PM of Thailand. Nor does it mention the 2,500 people executed extra-judiciously in his so called war on drugs (including infants as young as 3 months old killed by police bullets - Thaksin was once a policeman too, and no policeman has ever been charged for these killings).
As a journalist who has been in Thailand since before Thaksin started his year 2000 election campaign, I remember his pre-election declaration that he would serve as PM for only the first two years of that term if he won, then hand over to a more experienced politician and return to his business interests. I remember too that two years later he said he would only serve up to the next election then hand the party to someone else. And that after that election he said he would serve only one more year as PM before handing over.
Even after he had been forced into holding a snap 3rd election in early 2006, and had the election thrown out by the Electoral Commission for failing to give the opposition time to campaign (they boycotted all constituencies and Thaksin had to pay for proxy opposition candidates), he still clung to power as a "caretaker" PM after the courts dissolved Parliament over the fiasco.
Throughout all of this, Thaksin continued his persecution and prosecution of all journalists who spoke against him - this is when Sondthi L (editor and owner of Manager magazine and other media) raised up the fledgling yellow shirt movement. Previously the pair had been best friends and business partners.
Thaksin was ousted as CARETAKER PM by the coup, due to the combined concern over mega-fraud regarding sale of his telecoms empire to a Singapore state enterprise, and because it was clear to everyone in the country that without a coup, he was going to become the next Marcos or Kim Jong Il.
Even the rural poor were sick of him at that point ... and everyone in the media even more so - he'd even gone so far as to arrest two British reporters from the Far Eastern Economic Review for simply translating the King's Birthday Speech into English (without comment or opinion attached) and tried to charge them with Lesse Majeste. It is common knowledge that it was the King himself who ordered charges dropped and the reporters released - another loss of face to Thaksin.
When the Red Shirt troubles broke out this year in Bangkok, it was obvious from the outset that reporters were going to be casualties. Freelance amateurs wandering around live-fire zones without body armour or helmet, sprinting between opposing parties sniping at each other, even rushing blindly into scenarios with the first sound of an explosion and getting caught by second or third grenades. All far too eager to get some photos - and it was mostly photographers that got injured. Hiro Muramoto was also a photographer, as was the other Japanese journalist killed in Rangoon during the last protests there.
With hindsight, I wonder now about those green armbands issued to reporters by the Red Shirt "internal police" - were they for identifying journalists for their own protection, or to make them targets? Why did the government press division not issue similar body-wear identification to journalists? Why did so many journalists dress in ways that did not seggregate them from the protestors? (Press vest/waistcoat badged over-wear).
Prior to the Ratchaprasong occupation, during the April night battle between Red Shirts and army, several reporters recorded video footage, posted it to YouTube, and expressly showed that most of the firing was coming from within the Red cordon zone, heading out to the army ranks. Most of their video shows the army firing high (well over protesters heads), and therefore the press casualties that night most probably came from red shirt ammunition.
Freedom of speech may be a right in some countries, it is a privilege in others, yet some of the freedom expressed above could be seen as incitement to cause civil unrest and further violence within Thailand - no-one here outside of Thaksin's supporters, wants that to happen - as demonstrated by survey, poll, and interview results after the bomb in Bangkok this last Sunday. And that preference includes the press corps, as well as the public.
I suggest the republicans above read this -
http://www.gazlannathai.com/eye/2008/12/who-is-behind-the-bombings-of-pad-in-bangkok/
BritJourno
April 10's incident happened at the Democracy Monument. It was true the soldiers sent to drive Red Shirts protesters were shooting into the sky to warn protesters. Soldiers were retreating because it was getting dark. But, without any warning soldiers were attacked with M79 grenades and AK 47 bullets. When the soldiers waved their arms and tried to retrieve their fallen comrades, they were met with more grenades and bullets. Those were the 'terrorists/men-in-black' PM AV of Thailand was referring to. Terrorists do not honour 'Rules of Engagement' ceasefire in combat.
The Queen's soldiers were left with no choice but fire three single-shot in self-defense as they retreat. The soldiers could have killed more protesters had they not being professionally trained. Dr. Desmond Ball, a military expert's interview by ANU, 'Thaiand in Crisis part2' would be a good place to go to understand the what went on in Thailand Apr-May 2010.
That was no massacre of protesters only armed with catapults and 'bang fai' firework as claimed by the shyster Mr Robert Amsterdam. A lawyer paid by the fugitive exPM Thaksin Shinawatra to 'repack' his soiled image. It was a mini war going on. There are two good articles written in Asia Times that will shed light to the realities of the political crisis here in Thailand.
An offer of an election was given to the Red Shirts, twice. They refused it because the current govt get to appoint the military chief that supports the King. The almost all Thai people love the King because this he loves his subject. It is the right of the Thai people. We have laws to protect what we believe is right. What will happen to a Thai who go your country and fly your national flag upside down? So let us not violent each others' rights.