Amnesty International Names Thailand's First 'Prisoner Of Conscience'

[webfact]

Amnesty International names Thailand's first 'prisoner of conscience'e'

By Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation

For the first time in several years, Amnesty International acknowledged yesterday that there was at least one prisoner of conscience in Thailand. This was declared in the agency's recently released 2011 report on human rights, which details how the freedom of expression is being curbed through the use of the emergency decree, the lese majeste law and the Computer Crime Act.

Wipas Raksakul, a businessman who was arrested last April for allegedly violating the lese majeste law by forwarding a message on Facebook, has been classified by Amnesty International as a "prisoner of conscience".

A reliable source, who personally knows the Rayong-based businessman, told The Nation that Wipas is out on bail but "does not want to make news for fear that his family might be affected". This information could not be independently confirmed as of press time.

Amnesty International, which has been championing human rights since it was founded in 1961, defines prisoners of conscience as those "who have been jailed because of their political, religious or other conscientiously-held beliefs, ethnic origin, sex, colour, language, national or social origin, economic status, birth, sexual orientation or other status".

The actual number of those detained under the lese majeste law has not been made public and is not easily obtainable, but Khon Kaen-based expert David Streckfuss claims that the figure might be in the hundreds.

Meanwhile, key members of the Thai chapter of Amnesty International are unsure if Wipas is the first to be classified as a prisoner of conscience since the end of the communist insurgency three decades ago.

Alex Bamford, an adviser to the Thai arm of the agency who spoke at the symposium held at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand to launch the annual report, admitted that he did not know why others detained under the lese majeste law were not classified as prisoners of conscience.

"It's a question I ask Amnesty [international] as well," Bamford said, adding that some members of the agency believe that actions against the lese majeste law might be "counterproductive". However, he did not elaborate.

Mentioned in the report, but not classified as prisoner of conscience, was Chiranuch Premchaiporn, director of the online newspaper prachatai.com. Chiranuch, who is out on bail after being arrested under the Computer Crime Act last year for comments posted on the prachatai.com webboard that were deemed offensive to the monarchy, also spoke at the symposium.

"There are many questions regarding lese majeste, but people don't dare question it in public," she told the audience.

She said the public was being forced to keep its mouth shut due to fear of the "big brother" and it was being inundated with "monopolistic and self-righteous messages".

"Every law is made by humans, so humans should be able to question it," she concluded.

-- The Nation 2011-05-14

[anterian]

""Every law is made by humans, so humans should be able to question it,"

This is both the most sensible and simplest comment I have read on the LM laws.

[frenchcaptainbob]

""Every law is made by humans, so humans should be able to question it,"

This is both the most sensible and simplest comment I have read on the LM laws.

I respect those courageous enough to stand against oppression and quest for freedom.

I respect Amnesty International, at least from their Official status.

I don't put any personal judgement concerning the cases reported in Thailand, as I have not been instructed of the files from BOTH sides. Besides it would be a PRIVATE opinion only, as I'm not liable to mess within the Judiciary System of Thailand. I should better mess with the one in my OWN COUNTRY...

I call the attention of AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL, not to focus only on third world countries, who always will be shown as the BAD ones in the school yard...

In the so called BIG NATIONS, the abuses to their nationals, is as much as big. The Laws are NOT to reflect of the citizens, but drafts to sqeeze the citizens. Eventually the Law will not even be referred to.. Or it will be forgotten. Or just ANYTHING NOT LEGAL.

I'm speaking not of what I heard from " a good information source ". I'm speaking of what I know and what I see, and what I saw...

Ever read a Judgement from a French Tribunal ? It's not refering, assume Law so and so, article that number. Nope. It's a NOVEL, standing on thin air. The Judges are nominated for Lifetime. They cannot be prosecuted. They got their own discipline council, where the board is changed from time to time, AMONGST themselves.

Who is going to put any critics on that BIG country ? ( Officially the place , as a leading example, for Human Rights...) I am a French National. France is currently a DICTATORSHIP. Do you hear me ? Who gave you the black glasses not to see thru, when it comes to this country ?

Bin Laden was shot dead without notice. Where is civilisation in that ? Anyone should allowed to stand for an INDEPENDENT and FAIR Tribunal, and have a devoted defender and barrister.

The "terrorists" are being held for a "Lifetime" CUSTODY in Guantanamo. Are you going to tell me this is just NORMAL ?

BE FAIR TO ANYONE, PLEASE !!!!

[Emster23]

LM is a little too Taliban for my tastes. Freedom isn't freedom if there are thought crimes.

Watching Daily Show animation on big wedding for William, I thought "lock them up and throw away the key" if anything remotely like that was shown in LOS.

[dunkin2012]

should I do one similar to Mr Chxxx here?

forever nothingness!!!!!!!

[letitbe]

LM is a little too Taliban for my tastes. Freedom isn't freedom if there are thought crimes.

Watching Daily Show animation on big wedding for William, I thought "lock them up and throw away the key" if anything remotely like that was shown in LOS.

I hardly think its a terrible violation of human rights not to be able to insult or not respect a high honourable person. Try not respecting a judge in court in UK or USA and see how quickly you will be punished. Its about only thing here you cant speak with an open mind but I don't see that as a terrible thing. You also cant in UK or USA discuss many issues for fear of PC police coming and getting you. Amnesty should concentrate more on major breaches of human rights such as Government killings while Mr T was around which is well documented.

[letitbe]

LM is a little too Taliban for my tastes. Freedom isn't freedom if there are thought crimes.

Watching Daily Show animation on big wedding for William, I thought "lock them up and throw away the key" if anything remotely like that was shown in LOS.

I hardly think its a terrible violation of human rights not to be able to insult or not respect a high honourable person. Try not respecting a judge in court in UK or USA and see how quickly you will be punished. Its about only thing here you cant speak with an open mind but I don't see that as a terrible thing. You also cant in UK or USA discuss many issues for fear of PC police coming and getting you. Amnesty should concentrate more on major breaches of human rights such as Government killings while Mr T was around which is well documented.

[otherstuff1957]

The LM law is deeply flawed, both in concept and execution. I'd like to see a Thai politician actually have the balls to suggest getting rid of it.

[dunkin2012]

""Every law is made by humans, so humans should be able to question it,"

This is both the most sensible and simplest comment I have read on the LM laws.

if this question is in the set"How many yrs in Jail + Grant no bail?"

[animatic]

The only ones really at risk of LM charges are those that trafic in public LM content and such.

You can say a lot of things in Thailand, but don't insult the monarchy. I think you can easily go through an entire life without insulting the monarchy. Those that do, KNOW about the laws and choose to flaunt them.

I do think the Pratachai SysAdm is getting a raw deal by not being able to keep up with trafic from nutters on her site.

This AI Prisoner of Conscience caught on a Facebook issue may or may not be guilty due to the strange nature of FB and it's sharing and settings.

He might have known someone posting LM topics and commented, and that comment alone was enough to make it APPEAR, to a less computer literate sort, as if he intentionally passed it around, when that was not his intention.

Edited May 14, 2011 by animatic

[mca]

LM is a little too Taliban for my tastes. Freedom isn't freedom if there are thought crimes.

Watching Daily Show animation on big wedding for William, I thought "lock them up and throw away the key" if anything remotely like that was shown in LOS.

I hardly think its a terrible violation of human rights not to be able to insult or not respect a high honourable person. Try not respecting a judge in court in UK or USA and see how quickly you will be punished. Its about only thing here you cant speak with an open mind but I don't see that as a terrible thing.

Well you're talking about 2 different things here. Insulting and speaking with an open mind. Let's take Prince Charles for example. It's one thing for somebody to call him a jug-eared fool. That's just insulting. It's quite another thing saying why you think his thoughts on GM crops are wrong. That's speaking with an open mind.

There are plenty of topics in Thailand worthy of voicing an opinion that don't come even close to insulting or disrespect yet you won't find too many (if any) people willing to open their gobs in public.

[dominique355]

I would like to add my opinion but frankly speaking, I am afraid to do so.

And that's what this LM law is all about: To put fear in the people's mind so they won't tell what they think.

[wlcart]

Did anyone notice the elephant in the room?

Edited May 14, 2011 by wlcart

[Canexpat]

Thnaks to TV.com posting this article. I was not even aware of the danger one could open themselves upto in Thailand for liking or sharing an item on faceBook with their friends, while in Thailand, and will definitely be more circumspect in the future. I have been reading thaivisa for a little over a year now on a near daily basis and it has been extremely educational to me on how to conduct myself while in Thailand.

[gregb]

The LM law is an interesting situation. I have no problem with the law perse, only that it seems to be being abused right now due to the political divisions in the country. Of course, since it is illegal to republish the material that led to an LM case, we never know the extent to which the accused mentioned above actually transgressed.

Speech against certain groups is restricted in many countries for a variety of reasons. In Germany for example, questioning the holocaust is considered a jailable offense, just as LM is here in Thailand. I am not supporting the merits of that argument, only pointing out that speech along these lines was made illegal because it was deemed offensive to certain people and harmful to the social cohesion of the country. The fact is, the royal family, and the King in particular, are revered in Thailand, and those same laws which seem to be OK in the West when the purpose is to promote social harmony, are not necessarily bad in Thailand simply because we don't share the same cultural traditions, or understand how deep the feelings go. (Yes, I know holocaust deniers are crackpots and LM offenders are simply good citizens being persecuted. The very fact that I know this shows that it is a cultural issue. An alien from outer space would not have any such preconceived notions, and would have trouble seeing the distinction.)

Since I have no idea on the particulars of the case, I can not say whether this person really is a prisoner of conscience, or whether he is a seditious criminal. I know these same arguments invariably come up when holocaust deniers get jailed for their positions, but Amnesty International could hardly call one of them a "prisoner of conscience" because of the cultural stigma against it. On the other hand, if you listen to how vehemently their supporters defend them, you could be forgiven for believing they are truly being dealt a grave injustice. But when you strip away the bias, there is not really any difference between the cases, only perception and cultural sensitivities.

It is important to keep a healthy degree of skepticism and objectivity when considering how to move forward, and I'm not sure I trust that Amnesty International is acting purely altruistically in this case. NGOs often have political views that negatively influence their otherwise genuinely good intentions. The primary problem right now is still the political division in the country. The number of LM lawsuits as of late is simply a consequence of that issue. Perhaps rather than worrying about the law, which might not be the entirely evil construct it is made out to be, we should concentrate on resolving the rift within society, so that there is no reason to abuse the law for political gain.

It is quite easy to avoid falling afoul of the LM laws. And most Thais seem quite happy with the law as it is, so I am not sure how much harm it is really doing. But the abuse of it on both sides for political gain is something that needs to be corrected. Let's have a civil war if we must to resolve this problem, but stop dragging the royal institution into the fight.

[Insight]

The LM law is deeply flawed, both in concept and execution. I'd like to see a Thai politician actually have the balls to suggest getting rid of it.

True, but higher up the scale IMO is MP immunity. Unfortunately it's highly unlikely you'll see people in their masses campaigning against either.

[Voltaire]

There is a Latin expression which says "the times are changing and we should change with the times". This was appropriate for the Romans so I think it appropriate for Thailand too. Not as long ago as the Romans, Voltaie-the famed French Parliamentarian and Philosopher, when replying to an opponent in the French parliament- said " I most heartedly disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"!

I can't help thinking that the Blackadder style "bumping -off" of Pheu Thai prospective members of parliament is somehow intrinsically linked to the past, present, and perhaps sadly the future of Thai politics and society? I think Thai people are "waking up" to the political problems in their country.

When parliament has been dissolved in the UK and a general election called, this legally means that the country does not have a PM and there are no members of parliament until they have been elected or new members have been elected. Is this the case in Thailand?

[Orac]

Though I am an admirer of what Amnesty do I cannot help but think the Thai branch needs to put a bit more effort in if they are going to garner the publicity they require - for a start by making sure that their first prisoner of conscience is actually a prisoner since the OP suggests this guy is actually out on bail.

[rubl]

I would like to add my opinion but frankly speaking, I am afraid to do so.

And that's what this LM law is all about: To put fear in the people's mind so they won't tell what they think.

No idea what you'd like to say, so no idea whether or not it would relate to LM issues. As others indicated lots can be said without having any relation to LM.

So speak out! The only thing we need to fear is fear itself. Stay cool and keep smiling.

[animatic]

There is a Latin expression which says "the times are changing and we should change with the times". This was appropriate for the Romans so I think it appropriate for Thailand too. Not as long ago as the Romans, Voltaie-the famed French Parliamentarian and Philosopher, when replying to an opponent in the French parliament- said " I most heartedly disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"!

I can't help thinking that the Blackadder style "bumping -off" of Pheu Thai prospective members of parliament is somehow intrinsically linked to the past, present, and perhaps sadly the future of Thai politics and society? I think Thai people are "waking up" to the political problems in their country.

When parliament has been dissolved in the UK and a general election called, this legally means that the country does not have a PM and there are no members of parliament until they have been elected or new members have been elected. Is this the case in Thailand?

The quote from Mr. François-Marie Arouet is well served sir.

To answer your question.

There will be a Caretaker Government composed of the former PM who disolved parliament, and his cabinet.

This group will be in charge of limited general administration and emergency administration, plus a primary function of properly running the election parallel to the Election Commission. Continuing until such time as a new government is chosen by the MPS in parliament, but with a specific time limit.

If that time limit is breached by inability to preform it's election functions, the caretaker government and Acting PM must go to at the palace, and be reappointed by HRM to another term as 'Caretaker Government'. Or, if not reappointed, to be replaced by appointees of HRM choosing.

This last is what happened to Thaksin in 2006, he failed to properly run the election, his time expired, HRM appeared to have not renewed his mandate. Thaksin went to the palace with a blustery speech on departing, and returned in apparently cowed silence, till the next day, when he announced his resignation and the appointment of his Deputy PM to the acting PM spot.

He retired for a week, and then returned and took the PM position back unilaterally, and never visited the palace to be confirmed as Acting PM. This was one of the crucial causes of the 2006 coup, IMO, as he went to the United Nations in NY presenting himself as Full Prime Minister of Thailand, in spite of numerous warnings that it was beyond his prerogatives to do so.

Edited May 14, 2011 by animatic

[Scott]

One inflammatory post has been removed. Please keep your remarks to the topic and not the poster.

[Cnxforever]

LM is a little too Taliban for my tastes. Freedom isn't freedom if there are thought crimes.

Watching Daily Show animation on big wedding for William, I thought "lock them up and throw away the key" if anything remotely like that was shown in LOS.

I hardly think its a terrible violation of human rights not to be able to insult or not respect a high honourable person. Try not respecting a judge in court in UK or USA and see how quickly you will be punished. Its about only thing here you cant speak with an open mind but I don't see that as a terrible thing. You also cant in UK or USA discuss many issues for fear of PC police coming and getting you. Amnesty should concentrate more on major breaches of human rights such as Government killings while Mr T was around which is well documented.

I think you are a bit naive if you believe this is about not showing respect or insult someone! This is about using LM laws to get rid of opponents - political - or otherwise. This is about the fascist message that Hitler used - "either you are with us - or you are against us!! And if you are against us we will come and get you!

The good news is that this has backfired - the people who seek to strike fear have achieved nothing but decent. I notice that Thais who have previously kept quite about this topic have lively discussions about it now - and the very people who run around and proclaim that "only they" love the monarchy and if you don't join them you must be against it - have achieved exactly the opposite - driving people away........

People are fed up with a minority claiming to "protect the monarchy" and using LM laws for political gain against their opponents.

And as for the "government killings" you write about here - the very same people who murdered unarmed civilians under Thaksin are still around - they have been murdering again - and most of them have been promoted since!

[eagleflyinghigh]

It is a good sign of long overdue change that this article can appear in THE NATION.

To relativize such laws same some posters do is absolutely unacceptable. It is in breach of human rights - period!

Also the law itself constitutes a danger for a highly revered and important institution and the person who is supposed to be protected by the law does neither approve it nor did he make it. This most probably knowing very well it might be the cause one day of the fall of the institution itself.

Absurd and just a tool for the ruling elite to get rid of undesirables.

[geriatrickid]

The issue that Amnesty is highlighting is the political use of the LM law and the manner in which ithe allegation and charge is leveled when it serves some special interest group's agendas. . The constant leveling of allegations of LM reminds me of the McCarthy era when the label communist was too readily affixed to people.

[Lite Beer]

Correction

Yesterday's news article "Amnesty International names Thailand's first 'prisoner of conscience'" by Pravit Rojanaphruk contained an incomplete definition of the term 'prisoner of conscience'.

Prisoner of conscience (POC), which was coined by the human rights group in the early 1960s, refers to anyone imprisoned because of their race, religion, colour, language, sexual orientation, belief, or lifestyle so long as they have not used or advocated violence.

Also, the name of the adviser to Amnesty's Thailand chapter is Alec Bamford and not Alex Bamford, as stated in the article.

The writer regrets any misunderstanding caused.

-- The Nation 2011-05-15

[chainarong]

No true democracy has restrictions on freedom of speech, restrictions are never the less imposed because people just can't help themselves , this might involve religion, race, sex and a pilither of other stuff , point is , protection is needed to ensure that peoples lives are not destroyed by print or word, this balancing act becomes obscured, when you go into big Daddy territory Thailand, all heads of state regardless of country should be to a called to account, this depends on the subject at hand and whether it can be constructed as libel or plain fantasy or real life , generally like mine, opinions are like arsoles, everyone has one.

[dunkin2012]

No true democracy has restrictions on freedom of speech, restrictions are never the less imposed because people just can't help themselves , this might involve religion, race, sex and a pilither of other stuff , point is , protection is needed to ensure that peoples lives are not destroyed by print or word, this balancing act becomes obscured, when you go into big Daddy territory Thailand, all heads of state regardless of country should be to a called to account, this depends on the subject at hand and whether it can be constructed as libel or plain fantasy or real life , generally like mine, opinions are like arsoles, everyone has one.

What are ya mumbling 'bout? Are ya serious?

There is no such thing as freedom of speech.

forget it!

[MengWan]

No true democracy has restrictions on freedom of speech

... And, since each country in this world has "restrictions" on freedom of speech, the conclusion is that there's no "true" democracy down there ?

One famous french humorist said "la dictature, c'est ferme-ta-gueule, la démocratie c'est cause-toujours"

(ie dictatorship is shut your mouth, democracy is you can talk since it is useless)

But, as a parody, I would like to ask the question of what is better between "false democracy" or "false dictatorship" ?

:jap:

[krangeek]

No true democracy has restrictions on freedom of speech

... And, since each country in this world has "restrictions" on freedom of speech, the conclusion is that there's no "true" democracy down there ?

One famous french humorist said "la dictature, c'est ferme-ta-gueule, la démocratie c'est cause-toujours"

(ie dictatorship is shut your mouth, democracy is you can talk since it is useless)

But, as a parody, I would like to ask the question of what is better between "false democracy" or "false dictatorship" ?

:jap:

Would you care to name which particular countries have 'restrictions' on freedom of speech? I was showing a Thai friend some of the many conspiracy theories circulating Youtube and related to the US. He was aghast. He said 'But isn't Youtube American?' 'Yes, I replied, but we can say what we like in the West, not so here'.

I believe you are confusing 'restrictions' with 'defamation'. Of course if you are famous/wealthy enough, you have access to redress in Court. Only the wealthy can, and do, sue for personal defamation, much like the US. But at least they don't get imprisoned for voicing their opinions on their Heads of State.

Edited May 15, 2011 by krangeek

[rubl]

No true democracy has restrictions on freedom of speech

... And, since each country in this world has "restrictions" on freedom of speech, the conclusion is that there's no "true" democracy down there ?

One famous french humorist said "la dictature, c'est ferme-ta-gueule, la démocratie c'est cause-toujours"

(ie dictatorship is shut your mouth, democracy is you can talk since it is useless)

But, as a parody, I would like to ask the question of what is better between "false democracy" or "false dictatorship" ?:jap:

Would you care to name which particular countries have 'restrictions' on freedom of speech? I was showing a Thai friend some of the many conspiracy theories circulating Youtube and related to the US. He was aghast. He said 'But isn't Youtube American?' 'Yes, I replied, but we can say what we like in the West, not so here'.

I believe you are confusing 'restrictions' with 'defamation'. Of course if you are famous/wealthy enough, you have access to redress in Court. Not so here.

There's 'freedom of speech' and 'freedom of though' which is not the same. Read up on both, wiki has some with the usual references to read even more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_thought

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country