Prachatai English

Computer crime law as lese-majesty substitute

prachatai — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:13:58 +0000

Asian Human Rights Commission

In recent days police in Thailand arrested and charged another person over causing a decline in the stock market by spreading rumours through the Internet about the king's health.

According to news reports, Tassaporn Ratawongsa, 42, a radiologist at the Thonburi Hospital was arrested on 18 November 2009 and charged under section 14 of the Computer Crime Act BE 2550 (2007) with distributing "false computer data in a manner that is likely to damage the country's security or cause a public panic". She is the fourth person to have been charged in this manner over rumours in October about the health of the king that caused the stock market to drop dramatically. The other three are Katha Pajariyapong, 37, and Thiranant Vipuchant, 43, both arrested on November 1; and, Somjet Itthiworakul, 38, arrested on November 3.

The four join the director of online independent news site Prachatai, Chiranuch Premchaiporn, who is facing a raft of charges over comments that readers posted to the site, not anything that she herself wrote or did, by virtue of section 15 of the same law that, "Any service provider intentionally supporting or consenting to an offence under Section 14 within a computer system under their control shall be subject to the same penalty as that imposed upon a person committing an offence under Section 14."

All of these accused face imprisonment of up to five years for their alleged offences. Another Internet user from Thailand who made the mistake of thinking that he had relative freedom to do as he pleased in cyberspace who is already serving his term is Suwicha Takor, who earlier in the year was given a 10-year sentence, reduced from 20 because of his guilty plea, for posting pictures deemed offensive to the monarchy.

It is in Suwicha's case that the intersection between what is superficially going on in these other cases and what is actually going on becomes obvious. Suwicha was sentenced to 20 years because he was convicted not only of so-called computer crimes but also of lese-majesty.

In fact, these other persons could also have been charged with lese-majesty under the Penal Code, but instead the authorities have chosen to target them only with the use of the new computer law.

Is the Computer Crime Act being used as a de facto lese-majesty law? Whether or not people in the administration have this as a policy, these cases suggest it is headed that way.

Throughout 2009 Thailand has attracted a huge amount of negative publicity over the cases against persons critical of its royal family, or persons claiming to act on the royals' behalf. Attempts to stifle this negative publicity have only backfired, generating even greater amounts of bad press and bad feelings. The extent of this sensitivity was impressed upon the Asian Human Rights Commission in May when the justice minister, Pirapan Salirathavibhaga, in a letter responding to interventions in the case of Suwicha denied that Thailand even has a lese-majesty law:

"Offences against the King, the Queen, the Heir-Apparent or the Regent are considered offences relating to the security of the Kingdom, not 'lese-majesty'... I am certain that each state as well as Thailand has its own way of interpreting what constitutes offences relating to national security. Therefore, whoever violates the law of the Kingdom will be fairly charged and prosecuted according to the law of the Kingdom."

The awkwardness of the minister's proposition, which is anyhow incorrect--the Oxford dictionary defines "lese-majesty" as the insulting of a sovereign, which is precisely one of the criteria for an offence against the king under section 112 of the Penal Code--speaks to the difficulties that the government of Thailand has been having with lese-majesty and suggests why it may be looking for other analogous categories of crimes.

The Computer Crime Act is an excellent substitute. The so-called law was passed in the final hours of the military-appointed proxy legislature following the 2006 coup, and as the AHRC made clear from the start, was designed as a tool to suppress dissent, not responsibly deal with Internet crime in Thailand. Its ambiguous provisions, notably the section under which all these persons have been charged, allow for the prosecution of any type of thought crime on the disingenuous pretext that the crime is one of technology rather than one of expression or of ideas. Therefore, the state can claim that it is bringing people to court for one type of crime, while sending a clear message to a society that the real offence is altogether different.

With fewer journalists and editors in Thailand willing or wanting to take up many issues of importance to the public, it is unsurprising that more and more people are turning to the Internet to communicate. The substituting of lese-majesty with computer crime offences may seem to the authorities to be superficially easy but it will not do anything to reduce the global interest in the role of Thailand's monarchy and future prospects for its lost democracy. On the contrary, by prosecuting these persons the government has only shifted from one type of high-profile crime to another. Internet offences are a subject of interest to hundreds of millions of web users all around the world, and it would be foolish of the authorities to think that by prosecuting these persons under the Computer Crime Act they will do anything to lessen the attention paid to the hand that the protectors of the monarchy in Thailand have in all of this. For its own good and the good of its kingdom, the government of Thailand would be smart to find a way to drop these cases as quickly and quietly as possible.

Online censorship and arrests of Internet users

prachatai — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 06:00:03 +0000

Reporters Without Borders

The legal tools that the authorities abuse to restrict free expression in Thailand are the 2007 Computer Crime Act and the lese majeste law (section 112 of the criminal code), which mainly targets Internet users. Harassment and intimidation are constantly employed to dissuade Internet users from freely expressing their views.

Two Internet users are currently in prison because of what they posted online.

Another Internet user arrested for talking about stock market fall

Thassaporn Rattawongsa, a doctor at Thon Buri hospital, was arrested by the Central Investigation Bureau yesterday at her home in Phaya Thai district. Aged 41, she is accused under Section 14 of the Computer Crime Act 2007 of posting “inaccurate information that threatened national security” because she wrote in her blog that the king’s poor health could have been to blame for the Bangkok stock market’s recent fall.

Her computer and other documents were seized at the time of her arrest. The police say she admitted to being the blogger who posted comments under the pseudonym of “Mom” but denied any interest in the stockmarket (she denies having any actions at all) and any intention of harming the royal family.

Dr. Thassaporn is the fourth Internet user to be arrested for blaming the stock market’s fall on the king’s health. The others are Somjate Ittiworakul, Thiranant Wipuchan and Katha Pajajiriyapong (http://www.rsf.org/Three-Internet-users-arrested-for.html).

Criticising lese majeste law is also lese majeste

Another blogger, Nat Sattayapornpisut, 27, was held under the Computer Crime Act from 15 to 27 October for allegedly sending “offensive” video clips to a blog called “StopLeseMajeste.” Although he has been released, no decision has been taken about his case and he faces the possibility of being detained again and prosecuted.

In fact, all Nat did was sent links to the videos to Emilio Esteban, 46, a British-born blogger based in Spain who has been campaigning for the repeal of Thailand’s lese majeste law since 19 April and who is the editor of the StopLeseMajeste blog. Esteban has confirmed this in a video posted on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkLI67EKfa0).

“Nat Sattayapornpisut is just a scapegoat in this case, as the Thai authorities are unable to arrest the person who posted the videos from Spain,” the press freedom organisation said. “When you criticise a law, you are not criticising the king or threatening national security.”

Other targeted Internet users

Praya Pichai, who was arrested in September 2007 for criticising the monarchy, is not longer detained and the authorities have dropped all charges for lack of evidence. But he remains under surveillance and the public prosecutor could still decide to prosecute him at any time until 2017 if he posts something online that causes displeasure.

[Prachatai: read stories about Praya Pichai and Ton Chan, the first two persons arrested under the 2007 Computer Crimes Act, via links below:
04/09/2007 Quiet arrest under Computer Crime Act
07/09/2007 Detained cyber figure gets bail
07/09/2007 Second person detained under Cyber Crime Act is found
08/09/2007 One released on bail, one still detained; authorities know nothing
17/09/2007 Second cyber crime detainee gets bail
17/09/2007 Update on the arrests under Cyber Crime Act
14/10/2007 Alleged cyber offenders go free as the prosecution did not pursue the case in court]

Suwicha Thakor is serving a 10-year jail sentence which he received on 3 April of this year for criticising the monarchy (http://www.rsf.org/en-petition30785-Suwicha_Thakor.html). His wife and children, who are still being kept under surveillance, are in financial straits as a result of his detention.

Thousands of sites blocked

The number of websites that are blocked in Thailand is put at 55,000. They include Fah Diew Kan, which is blocked intermittently, and many YouTube pages.

At least 16 people work full-time on Internet censorship from a “war room” set up in Bangkok. The Ministry of Information and Communications Technology claims to have closed 2,000 websites under the lese majeste law.

Thailand was ranked 130th out of 175 countries in the 2009 Reporters Without Borders press freedom index.

People’s Amended Declaration

prachatai — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:04:26 +0000

Harrison George

At the end of the People’s Dalliance with Democracy rally last Sunday, a Thai People’s Declaration to the World was read out and is available in Thai, Cambodian and English on the Manager website. Like all such declarations, it went through a few drafts before emerging in its current form.

Prachatai has been fortunate enough to come into possession of what appears to be a page from an earlier version, together with a number of handwritten comments and emendations. There is no indication as to who is responsible for either the draft or the comments but there seems little reason to doubt the document’s total lack of authenticity. The piece of paper was obtained, as always, from a highly impeachable source, and is available for inspection at the Prachatai office for a limited period until the waste paper bins are emptied.

This important historical text shows the remarkable progress that the PAD has made in projecting an image to the world which is quite unlike the jingoistic, incendiary and bloodthirsty claptrap that it dishes out to its Thai followers. However, readers are invited to view the script and form their own judgement.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[Draft]
5. We declare that the people of Kingdom of Thailand and the vulgar people of the Kingdom of Cambodia remain friendly neighbours.

[Comment]
We’ll let Gen Preecha Iamsuphan use the ‘vulgar’ bit in his speech. How about ‘the poverty-stricken beggars of the Kingdom of Cambodia’?

[Further comment]
OK, but ‘people’ and ‘beggars’ don’t balance. Why not let one of the warm-up speakers call the Cambodians poor? Saken, maybe. We can work in the beggars thing there as well.

[Amended version]
5. We declare that the Kingdom of Thailand and the Kingdom of Cambodia and its peoples remain friendly neighbours.

[Draft]
We, therefore, call upon non-human Hun Sen to cease his activities in conspiring against Thailand or we will close all 40 Thai-Cambodian border checkpoints, ban all flights to Cambodia from Bangkok, build a naval base at Koh Kut, deploy battleships, abolish the committee which oversees demarcation of overlapping sea areas, and officially declare our own marine map, and we could not care less what the Cambodians think because Cambodia would not have the nerve to fight us.

[Comment]
What’s with all these threats? Where do they come from?

[Further comment]
It’s just a rewrite of what Dear Leader SL said last July when we were ramping up the Preah Vihear rhetoric. Has our policy changed on this?

[Further comment]
No, but that was for a Thai audience. Maybe we should tone it down a bit for international circulation. And lose the ‘non-human’. We can let the students or artists or somebody use that line on the night instead.

[Further comment]
It’s not just Hun Sen, it’s also Despicable Criminal Devil Incarnate Thaksin Shinawatra as well.

[Further comment]
Good point. But for the purposes of this declaration only, we’re just calling him ‘Fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra’. A bit wimpish, I know, but the word from our Dear 5 Leaders is that what works for our lot won’t sway international public opinion. All part of the compromise of becoming a proper political party, I suppose.

[Amended version]
We, therefore, call upon Mr. Hun Sen to cease his activities in conspiring with Fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra in turning Thailand into an enemy of Cambodia.

[Draft]
6. Following in our ancestors footsteps, we, the people of Thailand, continue to be at peace with our neighbours and the world.

[Comment]
Whose ancestors? Half our lot walk round with t-shirts saying they’re Chinese. And aren’t we going to be singing all about the wars with the Burmese and that? What tradition of ‘peace with our neighbours’?

[Further comment]
Foreigners won’t know anything about Thai history. Even less than the average Thai. We can get away with this, so let it stand.

[Draft]
We are dedicated to cooperating with the peoples and governments of nations around the world in protecting world peace, human rights, and the wellbeing of mankind.

[Comment]
If they can swallow that they can swallow anything. Leave it in.

About author: Bangkokians with long memories may remember his irreverent column in The Nation in the 1980's. During his period of enforced silence since then, he was variously reported as participating in a 999-day meditation retreat in a hill-top monastery in Mae Hong Son (he gave up after 998 days), as the Special Rapporteur for Satire of the UN High Commission for Human Rights, and as understudy for the male lead in the long-running ‘Pussies -not the Musical' at the Neasden International Palladium (formerly Park Lane Empire).

Triumph labour leaders bailed

prachatai — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:12:36 +0000

Two leaders of the Triumph labour union, who were charged with inciting unrest and blocking roads during their protests at Government House and Parliament in late August, have been granted bail with academics from Chulalongkorn University as guarantors.

On 18 Nov, Triumph labour union Secretary-General Bunrod Saiwong and advisor Jitra Kotchadet, together with their lawyer from the Lawyers Council of Thailand, went to Dusit Police Station, following arrest warrants issued on 27 Aug.

They were charged with gathering in a group of 10 or more people and inciting unrest under Sections 215 and 216 of the Criminal Code, and blocking roads under Section 108 of the Land Traffic Act.

They denied all charges.

Pitch Pongsawat and Suda Rangkupan offered their positions as lecturers at the Faculty of Political Science and the Faculty of Arts of Chulalongkorn University respectively as bail guarantees, which were set by police at Bt100,000 each. The police agreed to bail.

The case has been forwarded to the prosecution.

Sunthorn Bunyod, a labour activist, who has been issued an arrest warrant on the same charges, did not show up, as he could not be contacted, according to the union leaders.

About 100 union members also came to give their leaders moral support.

Jitra said that the charges would not affect their decision to hold further protests, because they believed they did nothing wrong. And they would not resist further police arrests. Workers have no other choice than staging rallies to make their demands.

Freedom of assembly is a constitutional right, and their gatherings are peaceful; if the government does not want to see any protests, it must solve the problems of the workers, she said.

Section 215 of the Criminal Code on leading or ordering public unrest carries a maximum of 5 years in prison or a 10,000 baht fine or both, and Section 216 for ignoring police orders to cease unrest carries a maximum of 3 years in prison or a 6,000 baht fine, or both.

Section 108 of the Land Traffic Act penalizes offenders with a maximum 500 baht fine.

A call for all parties to stop criminally offending the children, protecting their rights and for all children in the restive situation to be protected

prachatai — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:33:23 +0000

Cross Cultural Foundation

At least two major incidences happened with children in November 2009. On 16 November, around 17.00, a school bus was hit by gunshots fired from a motorcycle on the road between Panare-Saban, Moo 4, Ban Hua Klong, Tambon Bannok, Panare district, Pattani. Three children from 12-18 years were injured including two boys who suffered two gun wounds on their limbs, and a 12-year-old-girl on her knees. They have been hospitalized and been safe. At the crime scene, four used 11mm bullets were found, but no culprits determined.

Another incidence took place on 8 November 2009, around 21.30. The assailants came by on a motorcycle and shot with heavy weapons including AK47 into a food stall near Phor Mong Pondok School in Moo 3, Tambon Phor Ming, Panare district, Pattani. The food stall was then crowded with students after the prayer. Phor Ming is also an ancient and famous pondok school in Pattani. Two students, 19 and 20 years old, were shot dead, and three students injured including two, 23 years and 19 years, who suffered from severe shots in their legs and abdomen and needed operations and an eight year old girl who was slightly injured. All of them have been hospitalized at the Panare Hospital and been safe. No reasons have been identified for the shootings against the students.

Though the victims shall receive treatment and are safe and they shall be entitled to compensation as persons affected from the unrest, it seems the shootings and use of heavy weapons has been taking place recklessly. It also shows how loose the security system is despite the presence of strong security personnel, but none of the culprits have been arrested and no lead identified. Eventually, it is possible that they might not be brought to justice. The incidences have compromised safety of all children in the Southern border provinces. A school which is supposed to free of any armed conflict has now turned into a battle field where both physical and psychological violence is waged against the children, teachers, families and communities.

Any threat against survival and rights of a child in a restive situation has to be addressed in order that she shall be free from any harm inflicted by whatever side during the armed conflicts. All parties must be working toward creating a safe environment for children when they are at home, in school and during their travelling.

In its Concluding Observations released on 17 March 2009, the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in consideration of the report by Thailand as per the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC/C/THA/CO/2), proposed in recommendation no. 28 that;

“The Committee urges the State party (Thailand in this case) to make every effort to reinforce protection of the right to life, survival and development of all children within the State party, particularly with respect to former child soldiers and to children in the southernmost provinces of the country, through targeted policies, programmes and services. The Committee also urges the State party to protect all children from the consequences of the civil unrest and to ensure their reintegration in society. It also urges the State party to develop, in collaboration with non-governmental and international organizations, a comprehensive system of psychosocial support and assistance for children affected by violence and conflict.”

The Cross Cultural Foundation condemns any individual or group which creates and abets violence against children in such a situation and demand that;

1) The state shall make all efforts in earnest to bring promptly the perpetrators to justice based on the rule of law. Careful review of the two incidences must be done to ensure that the perpetrators shall be arrested and face justice process regardless if the violence was committed as a result of the intention to create insurgency or other reasons. Psychological remedies and all assurances must be provided for the children, families and communities to instill trust in the operation of the state.

2) The state shall make attempts to instill awareness on the rights of the child to community leaders, army, police and civilian forces, both armed and unarmed, so that they have understanding about child rights, particularly the child rights as provided for by the Conventions to which Thailand is a signatory.

3) The state and civil society shall organize a series of activities for community leaders and education personnel as well as children in communities and educational institutes to make them aware of the importance of the protection of children.

4) The security agencies shall work to create a safe environment for children at all times and all places i.e., at home, in school and on the way to school during the armed conflict situation. For example, all military equipment, tanks, heavy weapons and military vehicles must be removed from any educational institute. Officers designated to provide guard and protection for the students and teachers should change their dress code to reduce the chance to become a target of attack by the insurgents.

Recommendations on the justice system in the trial of security related cases in the Southern border provinces

prachatai — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:05:14 +0000

Muslim Attorney Centre, Cross Cultural Foundation

Since three special laws have been enforced in the three Southern border provinces including the Martial Law Act B.E.2457 (1914) and the Emergency Decree on Government Administration in States of Emergency B.E. 2548 (2005) covering the provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat and the Internal Security Act B.E. 2551 (2008) covering the districts of Chana, Thepha, Nathawee, and Sabayoy in Songkhla, almost all of cases related to insurgency are related to the enforcement of special laws.

The special laws have circumscribed many basic human rights and fair trial of the persons held in custody should enjoy including having someone he trusts or his chosen lawyer present during the inquiry, etc. Therefore, the judge needs to be strictly following laws and regulations when taking evidence derived from the enforcement of special laws that the confession and evident retrieved from unlawful act shall not be admissible. The judiciary is the only body to review the power. The following recommendations are therefore concerned with human rights abuse as a result of the enforcement of the special laws and how the roles of the judge should be in order to uphold human dignity, and people’s rights and liberties.

Martial Law Act B.E. 2457 (A.D.1914)

The power to have a person held in custody for not more than seven days according to Section 15 bis intends to provide for the inquiry according to the necessity of the military purpose. But in reality, such detention power has been misused and the person held in custody has been subject to torture and being forced to make confession or to incriminate other persons or to tell where he obtained the firearm used in the insurgency.

Recommendation

When a habeas corpus case is filed with the Court, the Court should exercise its power in full to review the executive power. It should set to adduce evidence to be examined in the Court and arrange for remedies should the torture of the person held in custody did happen as per Section 32 of the 2007 Constitution.

Emergency Decree on Government Administration in States of Emergency B.E. 2548 (A.D.2005)

Sections 11(1) and 12 provide for judicial review. The provisions allow mutatis mutandis the application of the Criminal Procedure Code concerning the issuance of warrants and ISOC Regulation . The two laws can be applied when a warrant is to be issued and when the Court is asked to extend the detention.

Recommendation

1. The issuance of Emergency Decree warrant

1.1 Regarding the evidence submitted by the official seeking the arrest warrant, the Court should call on them to provide the evidence and review the reasons cited for the request for the warrant. It should review if the evidence was derived from an incriminating statement made by another accomplice, or from other sources. It has been found in several cases that after the case has been submitted by the public prosecutor to the Court, the facts concerning the reasons for the arrest differ from those mentioned in the request for the Emergency Decree warrant.

1.2 Measures should be meted out and the officials holding a person in custody should be required to make a report showing the current condition of the person held in custody. The information can then be keyed into the Court’s database and it shall help to prevent issuing the same warrant repeatedly for the same person and helps in terminating the warrant.

2. Extension of the detention

2.1 Concerning the extension of the detention, the Supreme Court’s Regulation on the criteria and procedure concerning the issuance of court writ or criminal warrants B.E. 2548 (2005) should be applied. It should be required that the person held in custody be brought to the Court so that the judge may ask if the person held in custody objects to the extension or not. Currently, the Court held on to paragraph 2, Article 3.7 of ISOC Regulation which does not require the official to bring the person held in custody to the Court.

2.2 Regarding the report made by the official and submitted to the Court, an emphasis should be placed on how efforts have been made to change the attitude of the person held in custody. It has often been found that the official making the report simply cite phrases from Article 3.7 of ISOC Regulation without giving detail.

2.3 The Court should arrange for the review of the termination of the Emergency Decree warrant, since it happens that the official requesting for the warrant has failed to delete the warrant record of a person, even though he has been arrested and released after having gone through the detention invoking the Emergency Decree. As a result, the person may be intercepted in a checkpoint while travelling, and may be barred from traveling abroad. Otherwise, the old warrant is used as a threat to coerce a person to participate in a state project and the person may be promised that the warrant shall be revoked if he cooperates.

The Criminal Procedure Code

1. In reviewing the request for the extension of the detention, the Court should abide by strictly Article 47 and 48 of the Supreme Court’s Regulation, particularly, when the request is for transferring the person to be held custody in another place which is not in a prison. It is necessary to have a hearing of such a request. In security related cases, it happens that the inquiry officials bring the suspect for inquiry at some inquiry center and the suspect is not given the chance to have a chosen lawyer to be present during the inquiry.

2. The practice of video conferencing should be stopped when the Court reviews the request for the extension of the detention. The Court should require that the person held in custody be brought to the Court in person and allowed to say in front of the Court if he objects the detention.

3. The Court should strictly review the taking of evidence since evidence in security cases has often stemmed from the enforcement of special laws. It happens that the evidence derived at the inquiry level is simply hearsay evidence or an incriminating statement made by another accomplice. It may also come from the obscure procedure of asking the alleged offender to identify a person from a photo.

4. The Court should not allow examination in other Court. The amendment of Section 230 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been made to prevent the examination of evidence in another court except when it is really necessary (according to Judge Charan Bhaktithanakul, “necessary” means when the witness is sick or becomes disabled only). It also complies with the Constitution that the Court has to examine the witness at the courtroom and Section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code has therefore been amended to require that the Court shall pay the necessary and reasonable travelling expenses, allowances and lodging house rent to the witness appearing in court.

5. The Court should give special attention to the review of evidence since at this level the Court may discover who the witnesses of prosecution are, who the eyewitnesses are, etc. In security-related cases, it happens that there have not been many eyewitnesses, but hearsay evidence. The Court should review the circumstance and uses it to consider if a temporary release should be granted to allow the accused to prepare effectively for his defence.

6. In motions submitted to the Court including the habeas corpus complaints, objection to the extension of the detention, preliminary examination of the file of prosecution submitted by the public prosecutor, and the post mortem inquest, the Court should exercise its power more actively to call in oral, material or documentary evidence in order to acquire the fact as much as possible. It will help the Court to deliver the most impartial and factual order especially if the defendant has no legal representation.

The Internal Security Act B.E. 2551 (A.D.2008)

According to Section 21 , the Court should assign the roles in the inquiry of the alleged offenders to various competent officials including the inquiry official, ISOC Director, and public prosecutor and the lawyer should be given a chance to be present during the inquiry. According to the ISA, none of the civil society organizations or the lawyers can take part in the inquiry process and may not help to ensure if the execution of power complies with the rule of law.

General recommendations

• There should be more senior judges or judges with extensive experience to hear security related cases and the number of judges should be in balance with the number of cases. At present, there are over 545 security related cases with 548 persons held in custody in prison and have not been granted temporary release, as of August 2009.

• The Court should be provided with the chance to try to come to terms with basic issues in the Court and to listen to the views of civil society organizations and people, in addition to the views from the state and security agencies.

• The justice process in security related cases should be non-discriminatory, i.e., the public prosecutor should apply the laws strictly equally between the official and people. There have been cases where the officials were able to claim they were engaged with governmental duties and asked to postpone the hearing many times.

• The hearing schedule should be allowed for flexibility and successive hearing. It happens that the hearing can be postponed if the witness of prosecution is not available. The witness may claim he has been transferred to somewhere else, or has to return to his domicile. All the postponements have caused redundancy of the trial. And the accused may have to be subject to prolonged detention.

• The public prosecutors should help to screen the cases. They should be courageous to stop short of prosecuting a case with weak evidence. They should also heed to statistics of cases concerning the charges of being a member of secret society or a member of a criminal association which have often been dismissed by the Court. The statistic showed the high percentage of acquitted cases that prosecuted by public prosecutors at the criminal court (the court of first instance and the appeal court) and the number of weak prosecution files seemed to reaffirm the policy of preventive detention of suspects rather than prosecuting the accused persons with reasonable ground of evidences.

• There should be more public prosecutors to cope with a large number of cases. With insufficient number of public prosecutors, the cases might have to be often postponed.

New guidebook reveals darker side of tourist sites in Shan State

prachatai — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:11:10 +0000

Shan Women’s Action Network

A guidebook launched today gives tourists an alternative view of Shan State by providing a pictorial exposé of the deliberate neglect, destruction and reinvention of local cultural and historical sites.

The majority of war-torn Shan State is off limits to tourists, but some areas are open to foreign travelers. Forbidden Glimpses of Shan State, compiled by the Shan Women’s Action Network, gives a unique insight into these areas.

The guide depicts how Burma’s military regime is erasing the last remaining palaces of the 34 former Shan principalities. This includes the demolition of the historic Kengtung Palace in 1991 to make way for a garish modern hotel.

The destruction of remnants of former Shan self-rule is contrasted with the regime’s construction of new monuments that extol ancient Burmese kings and numerous replicas of the “Shwedagon” pagodas across Shan State. Photos of these lavish structures are juxtaposed with images of historic local Shan temples that have been desecrated and left derelict during the Burma Army’s ongoing scorched earth campaigns.

“We have not only been robbed of our rights, lands and resources. The regime is also robbing us of our culture and history,” said SWAN spokesperson Moan Kaein. “We want visitors to open their eyes to the repression going on around them, even in the cultural sites they are visiting,”

The brief guide also shows scenic areas off-limits to visitors which are threatened by the regime’s development plans, and locations of Shan jails where prominent Burmese political prisoners are being incarcerated far from their homes.

The book has been launched to coincide with the Shan New Year, celebrated this year on November 17, 2009. English, Shan, Burmese and Thai versions of the book can be viewed on www.shanwomen.org

Fierce PAD nationalism on stage

prachatai — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:59:35 +0000

The People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) took to the stage at Sanam Luang with intense nationalism. Fiery nationalist rhetoric was stressed and repeated, while decades-old nationalist anti-communist songs were played throughout. The ‘Hun Sen Model’ was the latest term introduced to characterize the Cambodian leader. A larger rally was called for 5 Dec.

On 15 Nov, on stage with a pink backdrop which read in Thai ‘Unite the Strength of the Land. Protect Nation, Religion and King’, and in English ‘Fight for Thailand. Fight for our King’, the event started around 4 pm with some lesser known speakers.

Prasert Lertyaso called for the beheading of Hun Sen, General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, and Thaksin Shinawatra, alluding to an old Thai saying of shedding blood to wash royal feet. He banished Thaksin’s supporters to Phnom Penh and Dubai.

Saken Sutthiwong said that Cambodia was afraid that [Thai] F16 fighter jets would miss their targets and bomb Angkor Wat and Prear Vihear instead, because they earn their living from those ‘old stones’. Afterwards he sang ‘Ayutthaya’ and ‘Bang Rajan War’ songs which are about defending the country from its enemies, the Burmese in this case. He said he wanted Cambodia to get rich, so it could take its tens of thousands of beggars back home. Cambodian people are poor, as can be seen on TV when they storm through the border checkpoint like hell breaking loose. Thailand is not like that, because the Thai people have the King and Queen, he said.

Then some students came up to condemn Hun Sen and Thaksin, the traitor. They vowed to fight to the death to protect the Nation, Religion and King. A group of artists also read a statement, referring to both men as ‘non-human’.

After the playing of the ‘Siamanussati’ song, whose words were penned by King Vajiravudh, the sixth King of the Chakri Dynasty and the current King’s uncle, a Royal Cadet School classmate of core PAD leader Gen Chamlong Srimuang, Gen Preecha Iamsuphan, who had led yellow shirts in raucous protests near the Prear Vihear site in September, spoke to the crowd that it was time to get rid of traitors, as they all had appeared before their eyes. ‘We have to quickly finish them off for the sake of our beloved King and ancestors, so that Thais stop quarrelling with one another because of these scoundrels.’

He said that he heard a government spokesperson say on radio that Jakrapob Penkair had smuggled weapons across the northeastern Thai border to start a revolt.

The retired general said the Thai army had fought those ‘vulgar Cambodians’ at the Aranyaprathet border, and he himself had attacked them with bombs. He would not mind if there was another war. If the army does not fight, he will fight with his bare hands.

Khamnoon Sitthisaman, ASTV Manager columnist and non-elected senator, gave a brief history of how Hun Sen came to power, and concluded it with the term ‘Hun Sen model’: getting support from a foreign military power [Vietnam], supporting an ‘unprepared’ royal to become king, having the new king appoint him a royal, using a communist organizing system to control a political party and the people to take power under the guise of western democracy (elections), centralizing political and economic powers and opening the country for western capitalists to exploit its natural resources.

He said this was probably what the Thai ex-prime minister wanted to emulate.

He speculated that Thaksin would intensify his political campaign from December this year to early next year, when Parliament is closed. The red shirts would also intensify their movement, besieging or even seizing Government House. Thaksin would probably take a ‘long march’ from Cambodia, enveloped by a red-shirted mass. All this would be supported by the ‘underground operations’ of a certain retired general [another classmate of Gen Chamlong, Gen Panlop Pinmanee, who has switched sides from the PAD to support Thaksin].

Thaksin’s initial expected outcome is a House dissolution. His political party will get a majority of seats, and an amnesty will be granted to all sides, bringing the country back to where it was before the 19 Sept 2006 coup. If this fails, and if circumstances allow, a people’s revolution might be called, the senator said.

‘I believe what Gen Prem Tinsulanonda has said, that the country is sacred. I believe in the power of the Emerald Buddha. I believe in the power of the City God. I believe in the law of karma,’ he said.

He ended his speech by reading a couple of lines from an anti-communist song ‘We Fight’, written by the present King.

Sondhi Limthongkul said the nation was important because it was composed of religion and the King. When people have faith in religion, religion is strengthened and so is the monarchy. Religion and the King will never be separable.

Thailand exists today because of the blood of its past soldiers, kings and queens. Sondhi raised as an example Queen Suriyothai, who died for the King, her husband, and for Siam.

He said when he vowed to fight for the King four years ago, he was reproached and ridiculed.

‘His Majesty is a virtuous king. He would not hold a grudge against anybody, no matter who speaks ill of him, no matter who performs a ritual inside the Emerald Buddha Temple. Despite his disapproval, he has to endure. We have our duty to protect Nation, Religion and King. As I have always told you, His Majesty has no one else to count on, except us,’ Sondhi said.

The nation is composed of religion and the King. Whenever the King is weak, religion will also be weak, and there will be no more nation, he said.

Sondhi said that in the previous week he had had lunch with the ambassador of an unnamed European country. He explained Thailand’s present political situation to the diplomat through the allegory of an ancient Siamese king and his corrupt prime minister. The prime minister served the king for 6 years, and embezzled the royal treasury. The king confiscated his wealth and sent him into exile, as a light punishment.

The prime minister gave some of his embezzled money to his minions in Siam to stir up agitation in the country. He even caused rifts among members of the royal family. He eventually sought help from the Khmer King.

Sondhi said he asked the ambassador what he thought should be done. The ambassador told him that there would be no other choice than to finish him off once and for all, and the King of Siam had to wage a war and conquer the Khmer Kingdom.

He called for a much larger gathering on 5 Dec, the King’s birthday, to form a line starting from the Chitralada Palace to the Grand Palace, to show the world that they love the King.

Then they played 'Scum of the Earth', a staple anti-communist song which was given heavy airplay during the war against the communists in the 1970s, and 'The Highest Dream' whose words were inspired by 'The Impossible Dream' of the Broadway play 'Man of La Mancha', with a melody composed by King Bhumibol.

Pipop Thongchai, another PAD leader, read a statement entitled ‘The Thai People’s Declaration to the World’. Translations of the statement in Cambodian and English were also read.

After a couple more speakers continued to revile their enemies and arouse nationalist sentiments, the demonstrators rose to sing ‘Salute to the King’ and the Royal Anthem, and dispersed around 10.50 pm.

Hainan garment workers take on European lingerie giant ‘Triumph’

prachatai — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:36:58 +0000

Chinaworker, Hong Kong

Women workers at a garment factory in Hainan, southern China, began a strike on Wednesday 11 November to press their demands on pay and vacations after management announced drastic cuts in bonuses. Around 3,000 workers at the Hainan Youmei Underwear Co., Ltd in Haikou City, the provincial capital, gathered outside the plant. The factory is wholly owned by German-Swiss lingerie giant Triumph International, one of the world’s leading manufacturers of women’s underwear.

“The strike started after the management said a worker could not get year-end bonus if her production efficiency failed to reach 50 percent of the average level last year,” Mo Xiaohui, a worker at the plant told Xinhua. “That was impossible for most of us as the production dropped sharply in the financial crisis.”

“The boss wants to cut our bonus worth about 700 yuan (102 U.S. dollars), even if our monthly salary is as low as between 500 yuan and 600 yuan (73 to 88 U.S. dollars),” said a worker named Li Guihua. “It’s going too far.”

By Friday the company agreed to pay all workers their bonus, but workers decided to continue their strike over their other demands, Han Lirong, head of the firm’s official (state-controlled) union, was quoted as saying. Workers across China’s manufacturing sector, many of them migrants without job protection or rights to medical insurance and pensions, have suffered pay cuts this year as the global capitalist crisis has battered China. The government’s stimulus measures have helped save the rich, big companies and corrupt officialdom, but have not benefited factory workers and the poor.

“Now we have to go on strike as we have long been asking the company to accept our demands,” Mo said.

In addition to protesting over the threatened cut in bonuses, the Triumph workers are demanding the company raise wages to the minimum national standard and provide employees with normal levels of leave. Huang Xueyan, the company’s personnel manager, said the negotiation was hard as workers would not select representatives to talk with the management. This is not surprising! It just shows the difficulties facing workers during labour disputes in China, where genuine independent trade unions are outlawed. The Haikou workers have undoubtedly decided not to put forward individual representatives for fear of victimisation by the company or by the state – on grounds that their strike “undermines stability”.

Triumph International’s record

Triumph International, which has its global headquarters in Switzerland, had an annual turnover of 1.6 billion euros in 2003, with 38,691 employees in 120 countries. The company is no newcomer to accusations of labour abuses and union-busting. In June this year it closed down two factories in the Philippines and halved its Thai workforce as part of a global ‘restructuring’ plan. The moves were widely seen as a ploy to smash the unions at its operations in these countries. Earlier this year, the company’s wholly-owned subsidiary Body Fashion Thailand, dismissed union president Jitra Kotshadej for taking part in a national television debate wearing a t-shirt with the text ‘Thinking differently is not a crime’.

Workers from the Philippines and Thailand units of Triumph International, supported by Hong Kong trade unions and migrant groups, staged a protest in August 2009 outside the company’s offices in Kowloon Bay, Hong Kong. They were protesting about Triumph’s closure plan with the retrenchment of 1,663 workers in the Philippines, and the loss of almost 2,000 jobs in Thailand.

“When it comes to profit, Triumph International is so fast to extract wealth from us but when it comes to obligation and responsibility, they are now running away.” Isabelita dela Cruz, a spokeswoman and union representative from the Philippines. “We cannot wait for any longer because our families and children in the Philippines and in Thailand are suffering and live in miserable condition. Many of our children stop schooling and soon we will be ejected from our homes.”

Solidarity needed!

chinaworker.info is appealing for international support and solidarity for the women strikers in Haikou. They are pitted against a notoriously exploitative company and fighting courageously under a political regime that bans strikes and often resorts to severe repression. Solidarity action could include sending letters, faxes and emails of protest to the company (address below) or staging protests outside company offices or stores selling Triumph underwear.

chinaworker.info gives its permission for this article to be reproduced and used as an information leaflet in connection with solidarity action.

Triumph International global headquarters:

Promenadenstrasse 24

Bad Zurzach 5330

Switzerland

Phone: 49 89 51 11 80

Triumph International Asia headquarters:

32/F One Kowloon

1 Wang Yuen St Kowloon Bay

Kln Hong Kong

Business Tel (852) 2341 2211

Business Fax (852) 2793 5181

Mahachai’s Migrants from Burma Accept Nationality Verification But Plead for More Information From Governments … Chiangmai’s Shan Migrants Reject the Process Outright

prachatai — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:47:32 +0000

Human Rights and Development Foundation (HRDF)

Since December 2008, the Royal Thai Government (RTG) has increasingly stressed its policy that migrant workers from Burma currently in Thailand must enter a nationality verification process (NV). NV is apparently required to change migrant’s status from persons who illegally entered Thailand to persons who are legally resident here, as well as to allow migrants to legally work and receive legal protection equal to Thai persons. Despite RTG having set a 28th February 2010 deadline for migrant workers to complete this process, most of these workers from Burma, as well as their employers and most of civil society, continue to be greatly confused by and/or unaware of the nature of the NV process and its complex 13 steps.

On 15 November, 2009, the Migrant Worker Rights Network (MWRN), an organisation made up of migrant workers from the Samut Sakorn area, with support from HRDF’s Migrant Justice Programme, organised a seminar entitled “Benefits and Challenges of Nationality Verification for Migrant Workers from Burma” at Wat Pomvichian Chotikaram, Ampur Muang, Samut Sakorn Province. More than 350 migrant workers participated in this seminar. Speakers at the seminar were: Mr. Wanchai Saakhonmanirat, Samut Sakorn Employment Office; Ms. Wandii Siibuaiam, Advisor to Samut Sakorn Fisheries Association; Ms. Sirigon Lirtchayothit, Raks Thai Foundation; Ms. Masan Sanmoo, a migrant worker who completed the NV process with a broker; and Mr. Arthi Akhai, a migrant worker who completed the NV process without a broker. The meeting was presided over by Mr. Surapong Kongchantuk from the Lawyers Council of Thailand.

During this meeting, the panel of speakers exchanged views on as well as explained the NV process. This allowed migrants who attended the meeting to understand the process much better than they previously had done. During the final part of the meeting, migrant participants had an opportunity to ask questions about NV and exchange views on their confusions or worries relating to the process. Most migrants commented on their lack of confidence in the Burmese Government’s style of working, which is the main reason why NV is proceeding so slowly. Participants also expressed concern and confusion about taxation policies of both the RTG and the Burmese Government for migrants who have completed NV. In addition, migrants discussed rumours that have been spreading within their communities; concerns about the overall high costs of completing the process; general confusion over exactly what the 13 steps of the NV process are; and concerns that there did not seem to be a clear policy by the RTG to address the status of children of workers who complete NV.

During the closing session of the meeting, when asked whether they would take part in the NV process or not, more than 90% of the participants said they agreed with NV and were willing to enter the process. However, participants pleaded with the RTG to immediately launch a more meaningful NV information dissemination campaign, given they and their communities continue to be confused by the details of the NV policy.

This meeting’s conclusion sharply contrasts with discussion in a similar meeting on NV held in Chiangmai on 9th November 2009, hosted by the Workers Solidarity Association (WSA) and the Migrant Workers Federation (MWF), and also supported by HRDF’s MJP. At the close of this meeting, almost all 250 Shan migrant workers in attendance rejected the existing NV process and instead demanded the Burmese Government allow NV to take place in Thailand.