Differences Of Legal Opinion Aired At Forum On Defamation Of Royalty

[Guest Reimar]

LESE MAJESTE

Differences of legal opinion aired at forum on defamation of royalty

By PRAVIT ROJANAPHRUK

THE NATION ON SUNDAY, Published on March 22, 2009

Royalist says unsparing use of law not in interest of monarchy as institution

The broad use of lese-majeste law is not beneficial to the monarchy, says Prof Thongthong Chandrangsu, a well-known royalist, expert on royal history and former dean of Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Law.

"I don't see the letter of the law as problematic, but the application of it is when used in an all-encompassing way. That is my honest opinion," said Thongthong, one of the speakers at a first-ever two-day symposium on lese-majeste law with well-known royalists like himself as speakers on the same panel with well-known critics of the law such as historian Nidhi Eiewsriwong and Thammasat University political scientist Kasien Techapira.

The symposium, which ends today, was jointly organised by Thammasat University's Public Law Diploma Programme, Chiang Mai University's Law Faculty, Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Political Science and Mahidol University's Office for Human Rights and Social Development Studies.

Thongthong put a theoretical question by asking what would happen if police, prosecutors and judges played it safe when some lese-majeste case, which carries a maximum imprisonment sentence of 15 years, was being filed.

He added that anyone who felt someone was acting or speaking inappropriately about the monarchy, or was uncomfortable about someone's attitude towards the monarchy, might simply file a lese-majeste suit, which made the application of the law "problematic".

However, he opposed a suggestion by someone in the audience at Thammasat University's Faculty of Law to only allow the Office of the Secretary to His Majesty to file or approve lese-majeste suits as tending to drag the monarchy directly into the conflict.

Nidhi said Thailand had yet to reach a consensus on the dividing line between the protection of the monarchy and the protection of citizens' rights to freedom of expression, with the debate as to what aspects of royal authority should be maintained and what should not having been discussed since the end of absolute monarchy in 1932 with no satisfactory consensus.

Nidhi said the "sacred space" where the monarchy was revered must be reduced to fit a democratic system.

"If the sacred space is too large it will occupy and reduce the public's space," he concluded. Nidhi also urged certain political groups to stop using the fear of republicanism as a political weapon, saying that never in the modern history of Thailand had republicanism been a viable alternative.

Kasien was concerned about growing state coercion of citizens to protect the monarchy, saying reverence for the monarchy should spring from the monarchy's own benevolence.

"Those who support the protection of the monarchy principally through coercion damage the monarchy ... They may unknowingly shift towards fascism in the name of monarchy," he said, adding that the fact that Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had acknowledged that there were problems with the application of the law and the consensus amongst many academics about the matter should be sufficient sign that something needed to be done.

At least three Thais are known to be currently detained in relation to lese majeste, and Magsaysay Award winner and human-rights lawyer Thongbai Thongpao said there was a need to keep proper and reliable data on who was being put in prison because of the law.

"There's no file on those tried under lese-majeste law," said Thongbai, who added he had not wanted to come and speak for fear of breaking the law. Thongbai pointed out that punishment under the law had been made more severe in 1978, after a coup by Admiral Sangad Chaloyu, when the maximum sentence was changed from seven years to 15.

"The wording of the law is also copious and has since been further expanded in interpretation. Some have even said that praising the monarchy in some circumstances could be construed as sarcasm. It's not easy to reform the law either, because it would be problematic to make it more specific."

Janjira Eiammayura, head of Thammasat University's Public Law Diploma Programme, urged more "mature and well-rounded" discussion on the topic to find a solution.

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

Note: Because of the nature of this article this thread is closed. In case someone like to add some comment, please contact an Admin or Moderator by PM and sent the comment and the Admin or Moderator will add the comment to the thread with credit's to the writer if the comment didn't breaches any rule..

Thanks for your understanding. Reimar, Moderating Team Thaivisa