At this critical juncture in Thai history, lifting the sanctions against Thailand under Section 508 of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act would send a clear message to the Thai military government: We endorse human rights abuses, we endorse media censorship, we endorse the theft of American intellectual property and we endorse the overthrow of freely elected democratic governments.
I never expected so much sense out of the mouth of a member of the Republican party!
He was even prepared for the junta lie that “Thailand is a poor country and has no choice but to steal intellectual property” by noting that the junta bosses gave themselves a pay raise, increased the military’s budget by 67%, but reduced the public health budget.
I recently had the opportunity to spend a few days in the Srisaket village where I worked as a Peace Corps volunteer from 1968-1971. I had been back only sporadically, but after a brief visit last year, I vowed to go back and talk to folks, including the abbott of the wat. I was struck by a number of things, including the wat’s very explicit support for making Buddhism the official state religion, but the economic changes in the village and surrounding area and what seemed to be their link to Thaksin policies, was especially striking.
Briefly, what I found was an increasingly diversified economic structure in which villagers had formed 4-5 groups devoted to producing garlands for sale in town (the village is only 10 minutes from the provincial town). The sequence seems to have been as follows: Several villagers had noticed a vibrant market for garlands. Prior to Thaksin, they initiated cultivation of flowers (“dok mal”i and “dok phut”) with which to make the garlands. With Thaksin’s victory, they report visits by agro-extension agents who provided useful ideas on pest control, water use, etc. They used the million baht loan scheme to establish groups of 4 or so families, each of which planted these flowers. The groups functioned to organize the actual “weaving” of the garlands and, I believe, sale in town. I visited 3 of the groups – all women. I was also told that this activity now contributed to a significant portion of the families’ income. After Thaksin’s overthrow, they reported, the extension agents stopped coming. I pushed on the debt question: Didn’t these loans result in more debt due to consumer spending? The answer – admittedly from a very small sample of 3-4 people – was that yes, there was some debt increase, but 1) the number of consumer-driven cases was relatively small, and 2) at least the debt was at a lower interest owed to public rather than private lenders.
I should note that I approached this issue with great skepticism about the Thaksin policies.
I also pushed my respondents on whether their economic activities were consistent with the idea of a ‘sufficiency economy.’ The answer, universally, was: of course. The loans could be used to help increase diversity and self reliance – goals consistent with the sufficiency economy idea.
I’m planning to write up this visit as a short article and would appreciate suggestions as to suitable outlets.
And I’m eager to see more empirically based assessments of Thaksin policies.
Andrew Walker is posturing as usual. What Andrew Walker is saying to the Thai people is for this referendum they will be damned if they say NO and damned if they say YES. I think in Vegas parlance, they would call Andrew Walker’s gambit ‘hedging’ on all the outcomes: if the YES wins, Andrew will say ‘I told you so!’, and if NO ‘the people won despite the intimidation’.
Of course I remember in one thread Andrew Walker proudly proclaiming he trekked the Thai boondocks to track one village woman to give her opinion of ‘Sufficiency Economy’. That to Andrew Walker is slogging blood-and-sweat academic research! Bah!
To the Thai people I say just vote on your instincts.
Me? I want the NO to prevail simply because I do not want any appointees in the law-making body, the Thai parliament. Because a NO vote simply says I want the old 1997 Thai constitution back and both the junta and Thaksin should be able to defend themselves in any day of their reckoning. Deep inside I also want to test General Sonthi’s sincerity (he gave me and millions of Thais specific promises I hope he will not break) – – what will he do if the NO’s prevail?
So ignore this prolix Andrew Walker and his fixation on ‘sufficiency’ (belated stipends from Manchester City perhaps prompts his unending cry for sufficiency, who know?)! Andrew Walker is just like any other Red Shirt – – who publicly shout their outrage at the junta-authored constitution but in the meantime make endless cell phone calls wheeling and dealing themselves IN the next election and IN the next coalition.
But this one is specifically for Andrew Walker: Mr. Andrew Walker I have NOT heard nor read any of your personal sufficient outrage and condemnation, of Thaksin Shinawatra’s human rights abuses for his extrajudicial slaughter of thousands during Thaksin’s anti-drugs madness, that today still provoke the wrath of many HRW groups around the world, because these HRW groups believes, to which I agree, that Thaksin Shinawatra belongs to the select few human rights abusers of ‘the worst kind’, and Thaksin is still around unpunished and unrepentant.
He just visited the Central World Plaza. Local people were complaining a lot that he blocked the traffic etc. There is no way that they will ever accept him in what position ever.
Brave people of Bangkok should continue to fight against the military dictatorship. In fact, the military is scared it will lose its power in the next election.
If they want to increase the number of votes, they could just allow rural people to exercise their voting rights in their place of residence, rather than having to return to their home provinces. But I suspect these aren’t the votes they want to increase.
Here are the full details of the seminar by Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn
Human Rights Governance Under Thailand’s New Constitution
Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn
Venue: Sparke Helmore Law Theatre 1
Date: Monday 6 August, 2007 12:30-2.00
On 6 July Thailand’s appointed Constitution Drafting Assembly unanimously endorsed a new draft constitution. Nineteen million copies are currently being distributed to all households in Thailand, and a national referendum follows on 19 August. The draft does have vocal critics, but approval is generally expected. The 1997 constitution, scrapped after the military coup on 19 September 2006, was Thailand’s most progressive ever in guaranteeing protection of human rights. How does the new constitution compare with this? And how successful is it likely to be in guaranteeing actual enforcement of human rights?
Professor Vitit, from the Law Faculty at Chulalongkorn University, is one of Thailand’s foremost legal academics. He has written extensively in academic publications and the media, particularly in the area of human rights. He has also served in various capacities with the United Nations, including as Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (1990-1994), and currently as Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Here is an open letter from the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship:
For Press Release:
An open letter to International organizations throughout the globe
August 2nd, 2007
Bangkok, Thailand
Dear Sir,
As this letter reaches you, the eight principal leaders of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship, an umbrella organization striving for the restoration of Democracy in Thailand in its true and full spirit, are sequestered in a high security prison at Bangkok Remand Custody, Ngam Wong Wan Rd, with lesser privileges than common convicts.
The incidents that led to the conviction itself are testimony to the ghastly new chapter that is being written in the history of this nation of peace-loving, affable people-that of violent repression of individual freedom, open practice of deceit by the state and unlawful manipulation of the judiciary and the press, making a mockery of the chance for a life of decency for the common man.
On July 22nd 2007, there was a large gathering of peaceful demonstrators in front of General Prem Tinasulanonda’s residence. Throughout its history of the last several decades, Thai people have always had the right to protest, and gatherings multiples in size of what was present on the evening of July 22nd have been allowed to protest with no violent interventions by the state.
On this particular evening however, the government in an act of brazen ruthlessness, designed to cover its shame, disrupted the peaceful gathering by hitherto unprecedented use of force in the form of tear gas, pepper spray and baton charges, leading to chaos, confusion and tears and often grievous injuries for the protestors. In another sign of the pervasive control of the government on all institutions, the local media’s reporting was biased to a shocking extent, providing no light from reliable quarters on what actually happened at the protest, that evening. We would like to present actual video footages with narrative in English of the incident, which provides reportage free from the attack by the government censor.
Later on July 26th 2007, the nine leaders of The United front of Democracy against Dictatorship were present on invitation by the Judge at the Criminal Court, Ratchadapisek Road, Bangkok expecting to make a statement on police accusations. In an act of Machiavellian deviousness though, the government found it opportune to detain all the leaders at the court and later subject them to imprisonment for 12 days at the Bangkok Remand Custody, Ngam Wong Wan Rd. This act bears testimony to the complete subversion of all public institutions by the government. First the executive, then the press and now the judiciary too, leaving no hope for redemption at all for the people. Also the betrayal of trust through which the arrests have been achieved is of very deep concern as never before has the state so undermined its own credibility and brazenly lied with intent to cheat, on so trivial an accomplishment as arresting nine citizens.
Below is the list of leaders who have been sentenced to jail:
Chatuporn Promphan, Jakrapob Penkair, and Nattawut Saiku, PTV executives;
Veera Musikapong, PTV’s President; Viphuthalaeng Pattanaphunthar, spokesman for the Saturday Voice against Dictatorship; Dr.Weng Tojirakar, adviser to the Confederation for Democracy; Manit Jitjanklab, former Chief Justice of the Criminal Court;
Apinant Vinyachai, former Thai Rak Thai Member of Parliament And Jaran Ditthapichai, Human Rights Commissioner (Mr.Jaran later bailed himself out with 200,000 Thai Baht)
However taking control of and misusing all public institutions, pales in comparison with the attempt to control the very germinating and sustaining framework that defines and governs these institutions. The government is well aware of the illegal means it used to usurp power, and its motive now is to legitimize and secure its hold by re-writing the constitution. The constitution is the principal authority that sets rights and duties for the citizens, and the notion of having a constitution with no inputs and debates from representatives of the people is a crime and an incorrigible fallacy. To add insult to injury, the government has made it unlawful to have any kind of debate on the proposed constitution, and has resorted to mandates and large scale coercive campaigning to ensure a majority in favor of the proposed constitution in the referendum.
We urge you to take a principled stand against this grave injustice being committed against Thai people and their future generations, and support us by posting formal independent observers of the fairness of the referendum to accept the constitution which will take place on August 19 either through the United Nations or through your own country or organization.
We thank you for your time in reading this letter, look forward to your support and reiterate our most intense and abiding passion towards working to restore true and full democracy to the Kingdom of Thailand.
With Best Regards,
The United front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD)
Vichai, while now I am quite sure how I should judge all the other posters on here thanks to your perceptions, I am not sure where you stand with what you want to happen in Thailand. Maybe a farang just wouldn’t understand? 🙁
[…] Commission, the referendum is only one task among others that have to be fulfilled. There are, as I noted in my first post about Chachoengsao, a large number of local elections that require […]
“pyramid of electoral organisation” > Not too long ago, Pasuk/Baker were great fans of “jao pho.” Since the last Thai Studies conference, they have started talking about this pyramid. Wonder where they got this from.
“In other words, vote “yes” or you won’t get an election!” – Andrew W.
Andrew Walker and the Red Shirts are REALLY not that intimidated too easily by PM Surayud of all people or by that bungling General Sonthi. Andrew Walker cannot just resist to invoke dark meanings to harmless sentences from Surayud or Sonthi, as usual.
The Thai people will vote YES or NO according to what they ‘sense’ are good or bad for their economic well-being and sense of personal and family security.
Except for the TRT red shirts. Those TRT red shirts have been cultured to behave a certain way during election time. Because all those TRT party men are already too busy dealing and bargaining to be included in the election or be part of the potential winning ‘coalition’, that red shirt ranks respond accordingly. And I can already sense the Red Shirts pockets are bare, waiting for refills, and thus the YES vote for the Reds it must be!
When the lowly Red Shirt can see their mentors, patrons and leaders already huffing and puffing for the election to come, they quickly get the message and they agree. Election cash social welfare benefit happy-days are here again hep-hep-hurray! Of course YES!
I am therefore not hopeful that my NO will prevail in the next referendum.
Comment on Midnight University’s campaign against the new Constitution:
Given the concerted campaign by the military and state bureaucracy in favour of the new Constitution (as reported on NM) it seems a foregone conclusion that it will be passed in the up-coming referendum. So I think the academics’ campaign against the Constitution can be seen rather as one of those things that Thai academics love to do: make the grand statement, the noble gesture, claim the moral high-ground. The only way that a no-campaign would have any possibility of real success would be if the academics were to ally themselves with the Thai Rak Thai political networks (assuming they are still effective) in a coordinated political campaign, which, even if it were possible in the current security environment, would be something the academics would never deign to do. The academics don’t mind working for the bureaucracy, or the CNS for that matter, but they would never wish to be seen to ally themselves with politicians – the elected representatives of the people – whom they regard with great disgust.
But even though the no-vote campaign is probably a lost cause I think that the Constitution is already doomed by the illegitimate, undemocratic process in which it was drafted and put to referendum. It will go down in history as the “dictators’ Constitution”, illegitimately conceived as a result of a coup, in the same way that, despite its many anti-democratic provisions the 1997 Constitution was characterized as Thailand’s “most democratic ever”, given the relatively more open, transparent process in which it was drafted. Like other products of inbreeding it is unlikely to have a long life. In fact, the whole drafting and referendum process has been so flawed, and has been seen to be so flawed, that it is likely to provide a pretext for a future political crisis. So no doubt the academics will have other opportunities to demonstrate to us their Constitution-drafting skills. (Now if they could just omit those archaic articles relating to the monarchy they might convince even me of their commitment to democracy, “rights” and “freedom”).
Re. Midnight University’s support for a “people’s democracy”, well this is a bit rich coming from the MU academics. Their record over the course of 2006 and 2007 should be closely examined, in particular the writings of its leading figures, Nidhi Eeoseewong and Kasien Tejapira. As I have already stated on NM, Nidhi has a long and consistent record of downplaying the importance of elections, and of showing a deep disdain for politicians. Kasien introduced and popularized the appalling concept of “electocracy” in order to attack Thaksin’s democratic legitimacy. Both have repeatedly demonstrated that they have little regard for political legitimacy that comes from an electoral mandate. MU academics enthusiastically joined the campaign to oust Thaksin even though it did not support the call for Article 7 of the 1997 Constitution to impose a royally-appointed PM. In other words, they campaigned against a democratically-elected PM who was extremely popular with the electorate – “the people”. MU academics were among those who often made the comparison between Thaksin and Hitler, in order to show that elections can produce “tyrants”. In my opinion this anti-election stance, reproduced in the media, did enormous damage to the legitimacy of the Thai Rak Thai government and was a key factor contributing to the campaign to overthrow it. But now the MU network wants to protest about the Constitution’s provisions for a half-appointed Senate and the bureaucratic control of politicians, when before September 19 they themselves were issuing thalaengkans and writing newspaper columns read by hundreds of thousands of people diminishing the significance of elections and expressing their contempt for politicians – the elected representatives of the people!
In fact, what is particularly striking to me are the SIMILARITIES between the discourse of the MU academics and the CNS: their belittling of elections; their abhorrence of politicians; their loathing for capitalism (remember Sonthi’s statement that one of the reasons for the coup was to overthrow a “capitalist dictatorship”); their idealism about local, culturally autonomous, self-sustaining communities (which, taken together with their anti-capitalist stance is not so different from “sufficiency economy” theory); and their fear and mistrust of the outside world, especially the farang.
Sounds great. I’d like to translate one of those epic folk ballad CDs from Sipsongpanna where two people in their Sunday best accompanied by a little flute sing from memory an ancient history in hte middle of the forest. I really love those songs when my wife and mother-in-law play them at home, but it would be even funner to understand what they mean.
I don’t know what the problem is. After I received my copy of “щ╗ДхоЭф╣ж” (huang baoshu/The Little Yellow Book), I read it and saw the error of my ways. Through the wise words of the NLA, my mind and heart were washed and purified. I now devote all my time to studying and applying the treasured CNS-thought in my life!
Studying the glorious CNS-thought brings about enlightenment to the work unit, resulting in production improvement that offsets the time lost in studying it.
Any attempt to counter the theories set forth in щ╗ДхоЭф╣ж is evil deviationism! Those Thais who do not carry the щ╗ДхоЭф╣ж with them at all times and, thus, are not able to produce it when asked by the Recificiation Committee of the Ministry of Culture , are obviously deviationist counter-revolutionaries, and should be beaten and sentenced to many years of hard labor.
The fact that the CNS generals think that its OK to order 400,000 armed forces members and police officers and their families (Historicus #23) to vote a particular way in the referendum, so clearly demonstrates that these generals have no interest in democracy.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Tough talk in the US
At this critical juncture in Thai history, lifting the sanctions against Thailand under Section 508 of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act would send a clear message to the Thai military government: We endorse human rights abuses, we endorse media censorship, we endorse the theft of American intellectual property and we endorse the overthrow of freely elected democratic governments.
I never expected so much sense out of the mouth of a member of the Republican party!
He was even prepared for the junta lie that “Thailand is a poor country and has no choice but to steal intellectual property” by noting that the junta bosses gave themselves a pay raise, increased the military’s budget by 67%, but reduced the public health budget.
Can rural people be trusted with debt?
I recently had the opportunity to spend a few days in the Srisaket village where I worked as a Peace Corps volunteer from 1968-1971. I had been back only sporadically, but after a brief visit last year, I vowed to go back and talk to folks, including the abbott of the wat. I was struck by a number of things, including the wat’s very explicit support for making Buddhism the official state religion, but the economic changes in the village and surrounding area and what seemed to be their link to Thaksin policies, was especially striking.
Briefly, what I found was an increasingly diversified economic structure in which villagers had formed 4-5 groups devoted to producing garlands for sale in town (the village is only 10 minutes from the provincial town). The sequence seems to have been as follows: Several villagers had noticed a vibrant market for garlands. Prior to Thaksin, they initiated cultivation of flowers (“dok mal”i and “dok phut”) with which to make the garlands. With Thaksin’s victory, they report visits by agro-extension agents who provided useful ideas on pest control, water use, etc. They used the million baht loan scheme to establish groups of 4 or so families, each of which planted these flowers. The groups functioned to organize the actual “weaving” of the garlands and, I believe, sale in town. I visited 3 of the groups – all women. I was also told that this activity now contributed to a significant portion of the families’ income. After Thaksin’s overthrow, they reported, the extension agents stopped coming. I pushed on the debt question: Didn’t these loans result in more debt due to consumer spending? The answer – admittedly from a very small sample of 3-4 people – was that yes, there was some debt increase, but 1) the number of consumer-driven cases was relatively small, and 2) at least the debt was at a lower interest owed to public rather than private lenders.
I should note that I approached this issue with great skepticism about the Thaksin policies.
I also pushed my respondents on whether their economic activities were consistent with the idea of a ‘sufficiency economy.’ The answer, universally, was: of course. The loans could be used to help increase diversity and self reliance – goals consistent with the sufficiency economy idea.
I’m planning to write up this visit as a short article and would appreciate suggestions as to suitable outlets.
And I’m eager to see more empirically based assessments of Thaksin policies.
Sufficiency democracy in action
Andrew Walker is posturing as usual. What Andrew Walker is saying to the Thai people is for this referendum they will be damned if they say NO and damned if they say YES. I think in Vegas parlance, they would call Andrew Walker’s gambit ‘hedging’ on all the outcomes: if the YES wins, Andrew will say ‘I told you so!’, and if NO ‘the people won despite the intimidation’.
Of course I remember in one thread Andrew Walker proudly proclaiming he trekked the Thai boondocks to track one village woman to give her opinion of ‘Sufficiency Economy’. That to Andrew Walker is slogging blood-and-sweat academic research! Bah!
To the Thai people I say just vote on your instincts.
Me? I want the NO to prevail simply because I do not want any appointees in the law-making body, the Thai parliament. Because a NO vote simply says I want the old 1997 Thai constitution back and both the junta and Thaksin should be able to defend themselves in any day of their reckoning. Deep inside I also want to test General Sonthi’s sincerity (he gave me and millions of Thais specific promises I hope he will not break) – – what will he do if the NO’s prevail?
So ignore this prolix Andrew Walker and his fixation on ‘sufficiency’ (belated stipends from Manchester City perhaps prompts his unending cry for sufficiency, who know?)! Andrew Walker is just like any other Red Shirt – – who publicly shout their outrage at the junta-authored constitution but in the meantime make endless cell phone calls wheeling and dealing themselves IN the next election and IN the next coalition.
But this one is specifically for Andrew Walker: Mr. Andrew Walker I have NOT heard nor read any of your personal sufficient outrage and condemnation, of Thaksin Shinawatra’s human rights abuses for his extrajudicial slaughter of thousands during Thaksin’s anti-drugs madness, that today still provoke the wrath of many HRW groups around the world, because these HRW groups believes, to which I agree, that Thaksin Shinawatra belongs to the select few human rights abusers of ‘the worst kind’, and Thaksin is still around unpunished and unrepentant.
Thailand’s crown prince
He just visited the Central World Plaza. Local people were complaining a lot that he blocked the traffic etc. There is no way that they will ever accept him in what position ever.
Condemnation of treatment of protestors
Brave people of Bangkok should continue to fight against the military dictatorship. In fact, the military is scared it will lose its power in the next election.
The nationwide campaign
If they want to increase the number of votes, they could just allow rural people to exercise their voting rights in their place of residence, rather than having to return to their home provinces. But I suspect these aren’t the votes they want to increase.
Odds and ends
р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ 23
р╣Гр╕Щр╕Бр╕гр╕Ур╕╡р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Ър╕▒р╕ер╕ер╕▒р╕Зр╕Бр╣Мр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕ер╕Зр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╣Ар╣Зр╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕гр╕Ур╕╡р╕Чр╕╡р╣И
р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╕Чр╕гр╕Зр╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕Зр╕Хр╕▒р╣Йр╕Зр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕вр╕▓р╕Чр╣Др╕зр╣Й
р╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Бр╕Ор╕бр╕Ур╣Ар╕Ср╕╡р╕вр╕гр╕Ър╕▓р╕ер╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕вр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕кр╕╖р╕Ър╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕кр╕▒р╕Щр╕Хр╕Хр╕┤р╕зр╕Зр╕ир╣М
р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕Юр╕╕р╕Чр╕Шр╕ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╕▓р╕К 2467 р╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕з р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Др╕Ур╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕бр╕Щр╕Хр╕гр╕╡р╣Бр╕Ир╣Йр╕Зр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕Чр╕гр╕▓р╕Ъ р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╣Ар╕гр╕╡р╕вр╕Бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕╕р╕бр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╣Ар╕Юр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕Чр╕гр╕▓р╕Ъ р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕нр╕▒р╕Нр╣Ар╕Кр╕┤р╕Нр╕нр╕Зр╕Др╣Мр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕вр╕▓р╕Чр╕Вр╕╢р╣Йр╕Щ
р╕Чр╕гр╕Зр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕вр╣Мр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕кр╕╖р╕Ър╣Др╕Ы р╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕зр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Бр╕▓р╕ир╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Кр╕Щр╕Чр╕гр╕▓р╕Ъ
р╣Гр╕Щр╕Бр╕гр╕Ур╕╡р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Ър╕▒р╕ер╕ер╕▒р╕Зр╕Бр╣Мр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕ер╕Зр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕гр╕Ур╕╡
р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕бр╕┤р╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╕Чр╕гр╕Зр╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕Зр╕Хр╕▒р╣Йр╕Зр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕вр╕▓р╕Ч
р╣Др╕зр╣Йр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕зр╕гр╕гр╕Др╕лр╕Щр╕╢р╣Ир╕З р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Др╕Ур╕░р╕нр╕Зр╕Др╕бр╕Щр╕Хр╕гр╕╡
р╣Ар╕кр╕Щр╕нр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕Щр╕▓р╕б р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕кр╕╖р╕Ър╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕кр╕▒р╕Щр╕Хр╕Хр╕┤р╕зр╕Зр╕ир╣М
р╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ 22 р╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕Др╕Ур╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕бр╕Щр╕Хр╕гр╕╡р╣Ар╕Юр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╣Ар╕кр╕Щр╕нр╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╣Ар╕Юр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╣Ар╕лр╣Зр╕Щр╕Кр╕нр╕Ъ р╣Гр╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕Ир╕░р╣Ар╕кр╕Щр╕нр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕Щр╕▓р╕бр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Шр╕┤р╕Фр╕▓р╕Бр╣Зр╣Др╕Фр╣Й р╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╣Ар╕лр╣Зр╕Щр╕Кр╕нр╕Ър╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕з р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕нр╕▒р╕Нр╣Ар╕Кр╕┤р╕Нр╕нр╕Зр╕Др╣Мр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕кр╕╖р╕Ър╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕кр╕▒р╕Щр╕Хр╕Хр╕┤р╕зр╕Зр╕ир╣Мр╕Вр╕╢р╣Йр╕Щ
р╕Чр╕гр╕Зр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕вр╣Мр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕кр╕╖р╕Ър╣Др╕Ы р╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕зр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Бр╕▓р╕ир╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Кр╕Щр╕Чр╕гр╕▓р╕Ъ
р╣Гр╕Щр╕гр╕░р╕лр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Бр╕Чр╕Щр╕гр╕▓р╕йр╕Ор╕гр╕кр╕┤р╣Йр╕Щр╕нр╕▓р╕вр╕╕р╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕н
р╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Бр╕Чр╕Щр╕гр╕▓р╕йр╕Ор╕гр╕Цр╕╣р╕Бр╕вр╕╕р╕Ър╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕зр╕╕р╕Тр╕┤р╕кр╕ар╕▓р╕Чр╕│р╕лр╕Щр╣Йр╕▓
р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╣Гр╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕Чр╕гр╕▓р╕Ър╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕зр╕гр╕гр╕Др╕лр╕Щр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕нр╣Гр╕лр╣Й
р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╣Ар╕лр╣Зр╕Щр╕Кр╕нр╕Ър╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕зр╕гр╕гр╕Др╕кр╕нр╕З
Odds and ends
Here are the full details of the seminar by Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn
Human Rights Governance Under Thailand’s New Constitution
Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn
Venue: Sparke Helmore Law Theatre 1
Date: Monday 6 August, 2007 12:30-2.00
On 6 July Thailand’s appointed Constitution Drafting Assembly unanimously endorsed a new draft constitution. Nineteen million copies are currently being distributed to all households in Thailand, and a national referendum follows on 19 August. The draft does have vocal critics, but approval is generally expected. The 1997 constitution, scrapped after the military coup on 19 September 2006, was Thailand’s most progressive ever in guaranteeing protection of human rights. How does the new constitution compare with this? And how successful is it likely to be in guaranteeing actual enforcement of human rights?
Professor Vitit, from the Law Faculty at Chulalongkorn University, is one of Thailand’s foremost legal academics. He has written extensively in academic publications and the media, particularly in the area of human rights. He has also served in various capacities with the United Nations, including as Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (1990-1994), and currently as Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Condemnation of treatment of protestors
Here is an open letter from the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship:
For Press Release:
An open letter to International organizations throughout the globe
August 2nd, 2007
Bangkok, Thailand
Dear Sir,
As this letter reaches you, the eight principal leaders of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship, an umbrella organization striving for the restoration of Democracy in Thailand in its true and full spirit, are sequestered in a high security prison at Bangkok Remand Custody, Ngam Wong Wan Rd, with lesser privileges than common convicts.
The incidents that led to the conviction itself are testimony to the ghastly new chapter that is being written in the history of this nation of peace-loving, affable people-that of violent repression of individual freedom, open practice of deceit by the state and unlawful manipulation of the judiciary and the press, making a mockery of the chance for a life of decency for the common man.
On July 22nd 2007, there was a large gathering of peaceful demonstrators in front of General Prem Tinasulanonda’s residence. Throughout its history of the last several decades, Thai people have always had the right to protest, and gatherings multiples in size of what was present on the evening of July 22nd have been allowed to protest with no violent interventions by the state.
On this particular evening however, the government in an act of brazen ruthlessness, designed to cover its shame, disrupted the peaceful gathering by hitherto unprecedented use of force in the form of tear gas, pepper spray and baton charges, leading to chaos, confusion and tears and often grievous injuries for the protestors. In another sign of the pervasive control of the government on all institutions, the local media’s reporting was biased to a shocking extent, providing no light from reliable quarters on what actually happened at the protest, that evening. We would like to present actual video footages with narrative in English of the incident, which provides reportage free from the attack by the government censor.
The VDO clips of this incident are also available at
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6365511586023055978
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2668428720748269088
Later on July 26th 2007, the nine leaders of The United front of Democracy against Dictatorship were present on invitation by the Judge at the Criminal Court, Ratchadapisek Road, Bangkok expecting to make a statement on police accusations. In an act of Machiavellian deviousness though, the government found it opportune to detain all the leaders at the court and later subject them to imprisonment for 12 days at the Bangkok Remand Custody, Ngam Wong Wan Rd. This act bears testimony to the complete subversion of all public institutions by the government. First the executive, then the press and now the judiciary too, leaving no hope for redemption at all for the people. Also the betrayal of trust through which the arrests have been achieved is of very deep concern as never before has the state so undermined its own credibility and brazenly lied with intent to cheat, on so trivial an accomplishment as arresting nine citizens.
Below is the list of leaders who have been sentenced to jail:
Chatuporn Promphan, Jakrapob Penkair, and Nattawut Saiku, PTV executives;
Veera Musikapong, PTV’s President; Viphuthalaeng Pattanaphunthar, spokesman for the Saturday Voice against Dictatorship; Dr.Weng Tojirakar, adviser to the Confederation for Democracy; Manit Jitjanklab, former Chief Justice of the Criminal Court;
Apinant Vinyachai, former Thai Rak Thai Member of Parliament And Jaran Ditthapichai, Human Rights Commissioner (Mr.Jaran later bailed himself out with 200,000 Thai Baht)
However taking control of and misusing all public institutions, pales in comparison with the attempt to control the very germinating and sustaining framework that defines and governs these institutions. The government is well aware of the illegal means it used to usurp power, and its motive now is to legitimize and secure its hold by re-writing the constitution. The constitution is the principal authority that sets rights and duties for the citizens, and the notion of having a constitution with no inputs and debates from representatives of the people is a crime and an incorrigible fallacy. To add insult to injury, the government has made it unlawful to have any kind of debate on the proposed constitution, and has resorted to mandates and large scale coercive campaigning to ensure a majority in favor of the proposed constitution in the referendum.
We urge you to take a principled stand against this grave injustice being committed against Thai people and their future generations, and support us by posting formal independent observers of the fairness of the referendum to accept the constitution which will take place on August 19 either through the United Nations or through your own country or organization.
We thank you for your time in reading this letter, look forward to your support and reiterate our most intense and abiding passion towards working to restore true and full democracy to the Kingdom of Thailand.
With Best Regards,
The United front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD)
Sufficiency democracy – you read it here first!
[…] constitutional referendum is the junta’s first demonstration of sufficiency democracy in […]
The nationwide campaign
Vichai, while now I am quite sure how I should judge all the other posters on here thanks to your perceptions, I am not sure where you stand with what you want to happen in Thailand. Maybe a farang just wouldn’t understand? 🙁
*forms a boy band*
All quiet in Chachoengsao
[…] Commission, the referendum is only one task among others that have to be fulfilled. There are, as I noted in my first post about Chachoengsao, a large number of local elections that require […]
Guns and other weapons at a Manau festival
Thanks. Looking forward to reading it.
Guns and other weapons at a Manau festival
Jon, I’ll send a PDF to Nich to post on the site.
A free debate?
“pyramid of electoral organisation” > Not too long ago, Pasuk/Baker were great fans of “jao pho.” Since the last Thai Studies conference, they have started talking about this pyramid. Wonder where they got this from.
The nationwide campaign
“In other words, vote “yes” or you won’t get an election!” – Andrew W.
Andrew Walker and the Red Shirts are REALLY not that intimidated too easily by PM Surayud of all people or by that bungling General Sonthi. Andrew Walker cannot just resist to invoke dark meanings to harmless sentences from Surayud or Sonthi, as usual.
The Thai people will vote YES or NO according to what they ‘sense’ are good or bad for their economic well-being and sense of personal and family security.
Except for the TRT red shirts. Those TRT red shirts have been cultured to behave a certain way during election time. Because all those TRT party men are already too busy dealing and bargaining to be included in the election or be part of the potential winning ‘coalition’, that red shirt ranks respond accordingly. And I can already sense the Red Shirts pockets are bare, waiting for refills, and thus the YES vote for the Reds it must be!
When the lowly Red Shirt can see their mentors, patrons and leaders already huffing and puffing for the election to come, they quickly get the message and they agree. Election cash social welfare benefit happy-days are here again hep-hep-hurray! Of course YES!
I am therefore not hopeful that my NO will prevail in the next referendum.
Referendum interview with Attachak Satayanurak
Comment on Midnight University’s campaign against the new Constitution:
Given the concerted campaign by the military and state bureaucracy in favour of the new Constitution (as reported on NM) it seems a foregone conclusion that it will be passed in the up-coming referendum. So I think the academics’ campaign against the Constitution can be seen rather as one of those things that Thai academics love to do: make the grand statement, the noble gesture, claim the moral high-ground. The only way that a no-campaign would have any possibility of real success would be if the academics were to ally themselves with the Thai Rak Thai political networks (assuming they are still effective) in a coordinated political campaign, which, even if it were possible in the current security environment, would be something the academics would never deign to do. The academics don’t mind working for the bureaucracy, or the CNS for that matter, but they would never wish to be seen to ally themselves with politicians – the elected representatives of the people – whom they regard with great disgust.
But even though the no-vote campaign is probably a lost cause I think that the Constitution is already doomed by the illegitimate, undemocratic process in which it was drafted and put to referendum. It will go down in history as the “dictators’ Constitution”, illegitimately conceived as a result of a coup, in the same way that, despite its many anti-democratic provisions the 1997 Constitution was characterized as Thailand’s “most democratic ever”, given the relatively more open, transparent process in which it was drafted. Like other products of inbreeding it is unlikely to have a long life. In fact, the whole drafting and referendum process has been so flawed, and has been seen to be so flawed, that it is likely to provide a pretext for a future political crisis. So no doubt the academics will have other opportunities to demonstrate to us their Constitution-drafting skills. (Now if they could just omit those archaic articles relating to the monarchy they might convince even me of their commitment to democracy, “rights” and “freedom”).
Re. Midnight University’s support for a “people’s democracy”, well this is a bit rich coming from the MU academics. Their record over the course of 2006 and 2007 should be closely examined, in particular the writings of its leading figures, Nidhi Eeoseewong and Kasien Tejapira. As I have already stated on NM, Nidhi has a long and consistent record of downplaying the importance of elections, and of showing a deep disdain for politicians. Kasien introduced and popularized the appalling concept of “electocracy” in order to attack Thaksin’s democratic legitimacy. Both have repeatedly demonstrated that they have little regard for political legitimacy that comes from an electoral mandate. MU academics enthusiastically joined the campaign to oust Thaksin even though it did not support the call for Article 7 of the 1997 Constitution to impose a royally-appointed PM. In other words, they campaigned against a democratically-elected PM who was extremely popular with the electorate – “the people”. MU academics were among those who often made the comparison between Thaksin and Hitler, in order to show that elections can produce “tyrants”. In my opinion this anti-election stance, reproduced in the media, did enormous damage to the legitimacy of the Thai Rak Thai government and was a key factor contributing to the campaign to overthrow it. But now the MU network wants to protest about the Constitution’s provisions for a half-appointed Senate and the bureaucratic control of politicians, when before September 19 they themselves were issuing thalaengkans and writing newspaper columns read by hundreds of thousands of people diminishing the significance of elections and expressing their contempt for politicians – the elected representatives of the people!
In fact, what is particularly striking to me are the SIMILARITIES between the discourse of the MU academics and the CNS: their belittling of elections; their abhorrence of politicians; their loathing for capitalism (remember Sonthi’s statement that one of the reasons for the coup was to overthrow a “capitalist dictatorship”); their idealism about local, culturally autonomous, self-sustaining communities (which, taken together with their anti-capitalist stance is not so different from “sufficiency economy” theory); and their fear and mistrust of the outside world, especially the farang.
Shan conference in London, December 2007
Sounds great. I’d like to translate one of those epic folk ballad CDs from Sipsongpanna where two people in their Sunday best accompanied by a little flute sing from memory an ancient history in hte middle of the forest. I really love those songs when my wife and mother-in-law play them at home, but it would be even funner to understand what they mean.
A free debate?
I don’t know what the problem is. After I received my copy of “щ╗ДхоЭф╣ж” (huang baoshu/The Little Yellow Book), I read it and saw the error of my ways. Through the wise words of the NLA, my mind and heart were washed and purified. I now devote all my time to studying and applying the treasured CNS-thought in my life!
Studying the glorious CNS-thought brings about enlightenment to the work unit, resulting in production improvement that offsets the time lost in studying it.
Any attempt to counter the theories set forth in щ╗ДхоЭф╣ж is evil deviationism! Those Thais who do not carry the щ╗ДхоЭф╣ж with them at all times and, thus, are not able to produce it when asked by the Recificiation Committee of the Ministry of Culture , are obviously deviationist counter-revolutionaries, and should be beaten and sentenced to many years of hard labor.
Hu er hei yo, the East is Yellow!
A free debate?
The fact that the CNS generals think that its OK to order 400,000 armed forces members and police officers and their families (Historicus #23) to vote a particular way in the referendum, so clearly demonstrates that these generals have no interest in democracy.