First, it’s good that ABC does real journalism in Thailand. Not enough of this. However, it’s very bad that ABC acts as if by doing so it has done anything whatsoever illegal.
I’m not the least bit impressed with ABC making a big brouhaha about pulling its correspondent out of Thailand in advance of the screening, as if by practicing journalism anyone had broken any laws.
The effect of this kind of admission is to give credence an immoral law. This is a problem because Thai people can’t run and hide. Some Thais may have done and said the same things that ABC now “admits” could be a crime. Where does that leave brave Thais?
Foreigner broadcasters would do well simply to practice journalism, which is not a crime. By acting as if they broke a law, Australian organization sets a bad precedent.
Paul Handley, the Economist, and a certain Australian academic blog set a much better example. They speak the truth without acting as if speaking the truth — practicing journalism or scholarship — is a ever a “crime”.
ABC should act as if it represents a mature world-leading democracy and set a bloody example!
It apparently IS rocket science to find a copy of this program. All pirated copies–include the one at mediafire.com –have apparently been quickly removed. None on YouTube apparently survived, either.
If anyone can find it online outside of Australia, please post.
At no stage was I “under strict instructions to avoid overt criticism of the King”, as stated in the report on the Crikey website. In my nearly two decades as a journalist at the ABC I have NEVER received any “instructions” of this type. I suggest in future you do not rely on the Crikey website for any form of verifiable reportage. The reporter did not contact me for clarification or confirmation, and what he’s written is absolute crap.
Mark Willacy
Tokyo
I think all this talk about the succession is a canard designed to distract from the sordid realities of Thai money politics and the gangsters who control it. Thailand’s feudal structure is based on decentralizing power into the hands of gangster cliques who form alliances and political parties for reasons that have little or no ideological significance. Chinese Thai business families function like mafioso undermining what is left of a democratic system that has consistently failed to cope with the kinds of local pressures that can be brought to bear to influence voting, particularly outside Bangkok. In a situation where the entire mechanism of democracy has been thoroughly subverted the reliance of the people on the monarchy and even the military becomes a little more understandable. Both institutions claim, and in my opinion actually have broad based ethical approaches to their public actions. In western societies these sources of unaccountable authority would naturally be viewed with suspicion. The fact that they have such credibility in Thailand stems I think from the comparisons that people make with the all too easily elected criminally corrupt placemen who populate the parliament. Abhisit’s popularity probably owes more to his lack of a godfather status than any of his other political skills. If only other leading members of his government could be thought of the same way. But with Thailand’s biggest pimp as Commerce Minister I think its safe to say its only by focusing on the Oxford educated part of the leadership that the Democrats gain any credibility at all.
If the reds and their allies, albeit more accidentally than by design, manage to introduce a kind of left wing politics into Thai public discourse then, simply by creating a politics based on an ideology, they will have moved Thai politics forward a bit. An ideologically based system of corruption, cronyism and patronage would surely be a step forward. Not a big step perhaps but it might over time bring about a gradual improvement. Of course Thaksin was taking politics in this general direction before he was deposed. It seems fair to assume then that the forces of reaction in Thailand fear the emergence of any kind of modern political party far more than interventions through coup, mediation by the King or violent conflict. The Reds represent a new politics based on ideas would undermine all the traditional sources of authority in Thailand and this is why they are united and determined to prevent this happening…
(Ironically, if the Red’s could be shown to be the creatures of a traditional godfather grouping then I think they would be treated much more sympathetically by the media too. The anti-Thaksin rhetoric shores up the impression of a godfather pulling the strings from a distance thus bringing them back into the normal political spectrum in Thailand… )
There are some self-professed gurus of Thai history out there. How long has Bhumibol been on the throne? And how long have generations of the Junta been meddled in Thai politics? when Sarit Thanarat died with massive corrupted wealth, Bhumibol was only about to find his footing. Was Sarit the first corrupt military man?
Use your own brain. Don’t read too much from biased republicans and historians with personal history (6 October) with Bhumibol. I want to LOL- Paul Handley’s book is widely read among the UDD rurals- NO, wake up self imagined, self-professed experts! It’s all about them wanting to bring back their elected leader, Thaksin Shinnawatra. Go to talk to them, mean really go to talk to them. Over two-thirds of the red-shirts are still loyal to the king, and the rest don’t mind the monarchy. The republican sentiment is very low in the UDD main rally (the republicans are with Red Siam; they are very very small in number).
I don’t care much about monarchy, just want to be fair, can you people with so much hate and anger do so? Some of you sound like babies whose life ended at teenage years. Grow up boys!!!!
Today on Ch 7 Thai TV news report included footage of the “man in black”, so hysterically proclaimed by Nation & Bkk Post as one of those “terrorists” mentioned by Suthep – standing behind Nattawut in exactly same attire as on the photo. Nattawut was saying that – the speculations about him being “terrorist” are groundless, because he is just UDD security guard – and that time he was carrying weapons collected from soldiers. the fact that man is not trying to hide but was shown on TV already tells for itself – if he was a “terrorist” (or “ronin”) he certainly won’t be seen at all, even taken photo of. Bkk Post (or Nation) has quoted some Thai national special forces saying that “those people would be hard to find” – while this guy is not hiding at all. he is still doing his guard job.
however Nattawut presented some other photos of obviously a soldier, dressed in red-shirt, associating with army too – and Nattawut challenged why gov. / Media do not bother to mention this guy or to arrest and question him?
another curious thing : today on main UDD stage there was one guy speaking, apparently comrade of Seh Daeng (who BTW has also visited the main stage) and he was saying among other things that now there are at least 53 generals who are aligned with the faction which is opposed to Prayuth.
(what mostly attracts my attention is – that this matter about divide in army is apparently widely discussed both in MSM and even on main UDD stage & broadcasted ont their PTV)
lastly, I think this post is interesting, providing some additional info, just few points to quote here:
“philosophical conflict between professional soldiers, the democratic soldiers and the royalist soldiers…
massive re-alignment in the Thai military…
The wider result is off course a weak chain of command and a deterioration level of professionalism…
… a great deal of money is in waiting …
The problem for the military is that it is not professional and too political …
Many of BBC : Hardtalk/Fox : American Idols clips have been put on Youtube so outside their country can watch it and I think that’s the reason why do we have internet for because we don’t have to care much about copyright.
Please, youtube it.
You can split it and put it anonymously(register new email and using proxy).
If you really want to share it with the world it’s not that hard!!!
Re. extradition you are correct – Australia’s extradition treaty with Thailand only covers certain crimes that the two governments have jointly agreed are in fact crimes – eg. drug smuggling, murder, money laundering, etc.
Australia has never agreed to extradition on grounds of LM, or any other Political “crime”.
No Australian government would ever agree to such – the electoral backlash would be too great.
Indeed it is a gross afront to our democracy that,
as you say :
“Under the lese majeste laws ….., he faces prosecution in Thailand – wherever he may have committed the so-called crime.” In other words this Thai law invades our freedom of speach, outside Thailand.
As a sidebar to Wotdemocracy?’s comment, an article by Sawai Boonma in today’s Bangkok Post is worth looking at. Key extract:
“With modern communications, the glaring differences in incomes and standards of living are there to be seen daily by the poor and the highly indebted. They see unfairness and are easily persuaded to do things which otherwise they would not even consider doing. Worse, a large segment of the better-off is getting richer by engaging in shady business practices and in many cases outright criminal activity; they start by using political connections and corruption as grease but have recently taken control of the political process itself. Most provinces, municipalities and local administrative districts are now largely controlled by politico-business oligarchies. Each oligarch uses a system of patronage to maintain its base.
Sometimes they fight but they also collude, especially at the national level. This collusion has been made easier by modern technologies and especially by the culture of corruption and indifference that I wrote about on July 9 and Nov 11.
As a result, Thailand is now practically divided into fiefdoms controlled by shady people with money.”
It seems to me Tarrin #35 is taking a puff at some of the people here who express mildly royalist opinions. That doesn’t particularly worry me as an individual, as I too have significant reservations about the role of this monarchy in the modern world. But I think you are being a bit unfair on some of the pro-monarchists on this site. They are NOT the people who are abusing this law. I’d say many of them have fairly transparent reasons for respecting the current incumbent. You may well have a great deal more to lose from those who appear (right now) to be on your side.
The past, present and future use/misuse of the LM law for repressive purposes is not restricted to PAD supporters. Indeed, which side in this conflict doesn’t claim to be monarchist. (Well, a few of the old communists perhaps.) All that stuff about Stalin on the cover of the Thaksin rags is just political posturing and slapstick. Once Peua Thai gets back into power, the anti-monarchism will die a death – as they will again get stuck into their long-term plan to subvert a weak succession for their own purposes. They have a very real interest in creating a monarchy they can manipulate. And I’m sure the LM laws will continue to serve them very well in that purpose.
At this point, I know you will start saying this is paranoid fantasy. My answer to that is that most people would never have believed that Thaksin would create this much trouble for this country, back when he first started running for PM. But he has. And he cannot entirely shrug off the blame for that on ‘jealous people’ alone. At one point he had the establishment eating out of his hand. Why did it go sour? Probably at the point where he began to think of them as irrelevant. We’d all like to think they are sometimes, but if you are going to be a realistic Thai PM you have got to work with these people. If there is a real need for change, there is also a need to gradually convince the elite that the time for change has come. He messed it up completely. Those who foresaw this happening, are now forgotten. With Thaksin, you can always be sure that at least some of your worst fears will eventually come true. You don’t have to buy into every single crackpot theory about the man, to realize he is deeply-flawed. Sooner or later, he always produces the hard evidence for you.
A very good reason to repeal this law, or drop it altogether is, to starve both sets of succession terrorists of something they can continually abuse to strike fear in the rest of the population. But here’s the real kicker. Once we have had the inevitable election, we will still be faced by a government that wants to keep the LM laws. Thaksin has not invested huge amounts of cash in this civil war just to let the more extreme redshirt idealogues call all the tunes in his next government. (‘His’ by proxy almost inevitably. Old tricks die very hard here.) The red shirts are only the goon squad in this succession war. After the election, it will be all about Peua Thai. And I’m sure they are all avid flagwavers – who will be only too keen to hypocritically hide behind the institution when it is convenient.
You might as well kiss your LM repeal plans Goodbye right now Tarrin! They are practically pushing up the daisies already. And if the Democrats manage to squeeze water out of stone, the scenario will be much the same anyway.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
ABC TV on Thai politics
Thanks Mark,
We appreciate the clarification. Please don’t hesitate to offer any other insights that might be relevant here.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
First, it’s good that ABC does real journalism in Thailand. Not enough of this. However, it’s very bad that ABC acts as if by doing so it has done anything whatsoever illegal.
I’m not the least bit impressed with ABC making a big brouhaha about pulling its correspondent out of Thailand in advance of the screening, as if by practicing journalism anyone had broken any laws.
The effect of this kind of admission is to give credence an immoral law. This is a problem because Thai people can’t run and hide. Some Thais may have done and said the same things that ABC now “admits” could be a crime. Where does that leave brave Thais?
Foreigner broadcasters would do well simply to practice journalism, which is not a crime. By acting as if they broke a law, Australian organization sets a bad precedent.
Paul Handley, the Economist, and a certain Australian academic blog set a much better example. They speak the truth without acting as if speaking the truth — practicing journalism or scholarship — is a ever a “crime”.
ABC should act as if it represents a mature world-leading democracy and set a bloody example!
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
It apparently IS rocket science to find a copy of this program. All pirated copies–include the one at mediafire.com –have apparently been quickly removed. None on YouTube apparently survived, either.
If anyone can find it online outside of Australia, please post.
ABC TV on Thai politics
At no stage was I “under strict instructions to avoid overt criticism of the King”, as stated in the report on the Crikey website. In my nearly two decades as a journalist at the ABC I have NEVER received any “instructions” of this type. I suggest in future you do not rely on the Crikey website for any form of verifiable reportage. The reporter did not contact me for clarification or confirmation, and what he’s written is absolute crap.
Mark Willacy
Tokyo
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
Frank Anderson once told of how to get around this censoring for the SBS report. Can he remind us?
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
For those asking how to view this ouside thailand please follow the instructions on #25.
Also I notice PPT has a post on this subject you might check
http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/
Its not rocket science
Kasit – role of the monarchy may be revamped
Khun Submarine, thank you very much for the link. I watched it twice, and have today forwarded it to my friends and colleagues.
My thank goes also to Jom Petchbradab, one of very few professionals left in the Thai media.
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
I think all this talk about the succession is a canard designed to distract from the sordid realities of Thai money politics and the gangsters who control it. Thailand’s feudal structure is based on decentralizing power into the hands of gangster cliques who form alliances and political parties for reasons that have little or no ideological significance. Chinese Thai business families function like mafioso undermining what is left of a democratic system that has consistently failed to cope with the kinds of local pressures that can be brought to bear to influence voting, particularly outside Bangkok. In a situation where the entire mechanism of democracy has been thoroughly subverted the reliance of the people on the monarchy and even the military becomes a little more understandable. Both institutions claim, and in my opinion actually have broad based ethical approaches to their public actions. In western societies these sources of unaccountable authority would naturally be viewed with suspicion. The fact that they have such credibility in Thailand stems I think from the comparisons that people make with the all too easily elected criminally corrupt placemen who populate the parliament. Abhisit’s popularity probably owes more to his lack of a godfather status than any of his other political skills. If only other leading members of his government could be thought of the same way. But with Thailand’s biggest pimp as Commerce Minister I think its safe to say its only by focusing on the Oxford educated part of the leadership that the Democrats gain any credibility at all.
If the reds and their allies, albeit more accidentally than by design, manage to introduce a kind of left wing politics into Thai public discourse then, simply by creating a politics based on an ideology, they will have moved Thai politics forward a bit. An ideologically based system of corruption, cronyism and patronage would surely be a step forward. Not a big step perhaps but it might over time bring about a gradual improvement. Of course Thaksin was taking politics in this general direction before he was deposed. It seems fair to assume then that the forces of reaction in Thailand fear the emergence of any kind of modern political party far more than interventions through coup, mediation by the King or violent conflict. The Reds represent a new politics based on ideas would undermine all the traditional sources of authority in Thailand and this is why they are united and determined to prevent this happening…
(Ironically, if the Red’s could be shown to be the creatures of a traditional godfather grouping then I think they would be treated much more sympathetically by the media too. The anti-Thaksin rhetoric shores up the impression of a godfather pulling the strings from a distance thus bringing them back into the normal political spectrum in Thailand… )
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
There are some self-professed gurus of Thai history out there. How long has Bhumibol been on the throne? And how long have generations of the Junta been meddled in Thai politics? when Sarit Thanarat died with massive corrupted wealth, Bhumibol was only about to find his footing. Was Sarit the first corrupt military man?
Use your own brain. Don’t read too much from biased republicans and historians with personal history (6 October) with Bhumibol. I want to LOL- Paul Handley’s book is widely read among the UDD rurals- NO, wake up self imagined, self-professed experts! It’s all about them wanting to bring back their elected leader, Thaksin Shinnawatra. Go to talk to them, mean really go to talk to them. Over two-thirds of the red-shirts are still loyal to the king, and the rest don’t mind the monarchy. The republican sentiment is very low in the UDD main rally (the republicans are with Red Siam; they are very very small in number).
I don’t care much about monarchy, just want to be fair, can you people with so much hate and anger do so? Some of you sound like babies whose life ended at teenage years. Grow up boys!!!!
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
I had no trouble downloading the video in Thailand!
War at Khao San
Today on Ch 7 Thai TV news report included footage of the “man in black”, so hysterically proclaimed by Nation & Bkk Post as one of those “terrorists” mentioned by Suthep – standing behind Nattawut in exactly same attire as on the photo. Nattawut was saying that – the speculations about him being “terrorist” are groundless, because he is just UDD security guard – and that time he was carrying weapons collected from soldiers. the fact that man is not trying to hide but was shown on TV already tells for itself – if he was a “terrorist” (or “ronin”) he certainly won’t be seen at all, even taken photo of. Bkk Post (or Nation) has quoted some Thai national special forces saying that “those people would be hard to find” – while this guy is not hiding at all. he is still doing his guard job.
however Nattawut presented some other photos of obviously a soldier, dressed in red-shirt, associating with army too – and Nattawut challenged why gov. / Media do not bother to mention this guy or to arrest and question him?
another curious thing : today on main UDD stage there was one guy speaking, apparently comrade of Seh Daeng (who BTW has also visited the main stage) and he was saying among other things that now there are at least 53 generals who are aligned with the faction which is opposed to Prayuth.
(what mostly attracts my attention is – that this matter about divide in army is apparently widely discussed both in MSM and even on main UDD stage & broadcasted ont their PTV)
lastly, I think this post is interesting, providing some additional info, just few points to quote here:
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
Actually, many of those ABC copyright videos are already on YouTube but just not this episode.
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
Can please someone from australia do this video on youtube or a other website? Please post the link here …
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
David Brown //Hmmm… also copyright ABC…
and 27 mins
Many of BBC : Hardtalk/Fox : American Idols clips have been put on Youtube so outside their country can watch it and I think that’s the reason why do we have internet for because we don’t have to care much about copyright.
Please, youtube it.
You can split it and put it anonymously(register new email and using proxy).
If you really want to share it with the world it’s not that hard!!!
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
Any update on availability outside Australia?
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
Adding my voice to requests for someone to youtube this!
Kasit – role of the monarchy may be revamped
According to NYT Mr. Kasit also said a nationwide dialogue should include talks about changing the nation’s lèse majesté laws.
NYT “Government Distances Itself From Thai Monarchy Comments”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/world/asia/15thai.html
Reflections on Eric Campbell’s royal report
Thomas Hoy#7
Re. extradition you are correct – Australia’s extradition treaty with Thailand only covers certain crimes that the two governments have jointly agreed are in fact crimes – eg. drug smuggling, murder, money laundering, etc.
Australia has never agreed to extradition on grounds of LM, or any other Political “crime”.
No Australian government would ever agree to such – the electoral backlash would be too great.
Indeed it is a gross afront to our democracy that,
as you say :
“Under the lese majeste laws ….., he faces prosecution in Thailand – wherever he may have committed the so-called crime.” In other words this Thai law invades our freedom of speach, outside Thailand.
War at Khao San
As a sidebar to Wotdemocracy?’s comment, an article by Sawai Boonma in today’s Bangkok Post is worth looking at. Key extract:
“With modern communications, the glaring differences in incomes and standards of living are there to be seen daily by the poor and the highly indebted. They see unfairness and are easily persuaded to do things which otherwise they would not even consider doing. Worse, a large segment of the better-off is getting richer by engaging in shady business practices and in many cases outright criminal activity; they start by using political connections and corruption as grease but have recently taken control of the political process itself. Most provinces, municipalities and local administrative districts are now largely controlled by politico-business oligarchies. Each oligarch uses a system of patronage to maintain its base.
Sometimes they fight but they also collude, especially at the national level. This collusion has been made easier by modern technologies and especially by the culture of corruption and indifference that I wrote about on July 9 and Nov 11.
As a result, Thailand is now practically divided into fiefdoms controlled by shady people with money.”
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/36049/on-the-fast-track-to-becoming-a-failed-state
ABC TV on Thai politics
It seems to me Tarrin #35 is taking a puff at some of the people here who express mildly royalist opinions. That doesn’t particularly worry me as an individual, as I too have significant reservations about the role of this monarchy in the modern world. But I think you are being a bit unfair on some of the pro-monarchists on this site. They are NOT the people who are abusing this law. I’d say many of them have fairly transparent reasons for respecting the current incumbent. You may well have a great deal more to lose from those who appear (right now) to be on your side.
The past, present and future use/misuse of the LM law for repressive purposes is not restricted to PAD supporters. Indeed, which side in this conflict doesn’t claim to be monarchist. (Well, a few of the old communists perhaps.) All that stuff about Stalin on the cover of the Thaksin rags is just political posturing and slapstick. Once Peua Thai gets back into power, the anti-monarchism will die a death – as they will again get stuck into their long-term plan to subvert a weak succession for their own purposes. They have a very real interest in creating a monarchy they can manipulate. And I’m sure the LM laws will continue to serve them very well in that purpose.
At this point, I know you will start saying this is paranoid fantasy. My answer to that is that most people would never have believed that Thaksin would create this much trouble for this country, back when he first started running for PM. But he has. And he cannot entirely shrug off the blame for that on ‘jealous people’ alone. At one point he had the establishment eating out of his hand. Why did it go sour? Probably at the point where he began to think of them as irrelevant. We’d all like to think they are sometimes, but if you are going to be a realistic Thai PM you have got to work with these people. If there is a real need for change, there is also a need to gradually convince the elite that the time for change has come. He messed it up completely. Those who foresaw this happening, are now forgotten. With Thaksin, you can always be sure that at least some of your worst fears will eventually come true. You don’t have to buy into every single crackpot theory about the man, to realize he is deeply-flawed. Sooner or later, he always produces the hard evidence for you.
A very good reason to repeal this law, or drop it altogether is, to starve both sets of succession terrorists of something they can continually abuse to strike fear in the rest of the population. But here’s the real kicker. Once we have had the inevitable election, we will still be faced by a government that wants to keep the LM laws. Thaksin has not invested huge amounts of cash in this civil war just to let the more extreme redshirt idealogues call all the tunes in his next government. (‘His’ by proxy almost inevitably. Old tricks die very hard here.) The red shirts are only the goon squad in this succession war. After the election, it will be all about Peua Thai. And I’m sure they are all avid flagwavers – who will be only too keen to hypocritically hide behind the institution when it is convenient.
You might as well kiss your LM repeal plans Goodbye right now Tarrin! They are practically pushing up the daisies already. And if the Democrats manage to squeeze water out of stone, the scenario will be much the same anyway.