Asia Provocateur: Bangkok's foreign media corps: it's time for accountability

Asia Provocateur: Bangkok's foreign media corps: it's time for accountability:
28 September 2012

In the UK a very interesting debate is developing regarding the BBC's useless reporting of the wholesale changes the present government are making to the UK's National Health Service (NHS).

Suffice to say the BBC is getting a pretty rough ride from a lot of critics. Out in front is the Open Democracy organisation who have produced a withering and damning critique of BBC reporting on NHS changes entitled “How the BBC betrayed the NHS: an exclusive report on two years of censorship and distortion.”

As the title suggests Open Democracy accuse the BBC of omitting key facts, distorting the debate, not allowing alternative views adequate space and of outright censorship. They also accuse the BBC of being too close to the government and of acting in an almost collusive fashion with private medical companies set to benefit from the end of the NHS.

Open Democracy write

There are a number of theories on why the BBC consistently refused to explain the NHS reforms in adequate terms or detail. For instance, a number of senior BBC staff have links with the healthcare industry. As Media Lens note, Dr Mike Lynch OBE, a member of the BBC’s executive board, has links to a number of firms in the health sector, including Apax Partners, “one of the leading global investors in the Healthcare sector”. BBC Chairman, Lord Patten, is on the board of Bridgepoint, a private equity firm with substantial healthcare interests

For me the BBC’s handling of NHS reforms mirror some of the failures of Bangkok’s international media corps. Omission, self-censorship, a failure to take into account alternative viewpoints and analysis and a familiarity with only one position that appears like a collusion and damages claims to neutrality.

We are very tough on our media in the UK if they fail to report accurately. Journalists and the media are not untouchable and absolutely must be criticised. The collective whinging from the foreign media in Bangkok when they are scrutinised is revealing of the “amaart-style” mindset that appears to have developed among them. They have cultural and social power and should be held to account. It's a healthy and democratic thing to do.

Thailand: Act to Bring Justice for 2010 Violence | Prachatai English

Thailand: Act to Bring Justice for 2010 Violence | Prachatai English
September 22, 2012

Independent Commission Finds Both Sides Responsible, Urges Accountability

(New York, September 22, 2012) – The Thai government should act on the findings of an independent inquiry and prosecute all those responsible for rights abuses during the 2010 political violence, Human Rights Watch said today.

The report of the independent Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT) is Thailand’s first ever independent inquiry of political violence that detailed violence and abuses committed by state security forces and opposition “Red Shirts.”

The TRCT report, released on September 17, 2012, concluded that excessive and unnecessary lethal force by the Thai army and armed elements among the protesters were responsible for at least 90 deaths and more than 2,000 injuries during political confrontations from March to May 2010. Human Rights Watch found in its May 2011 report “Descent into Chaos” that both government security officials and elements of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), including the “Black Shirts,” were responsible for the violence, though the government forces were responsible for the large majority of deaths and injuries. The TRCT urged the government to “address legal violations of all parties through [the] justice system, which must be fair and impartial.”

“The TRCT report should end once and for all the denials by all sides about who was responsible for the deaths and destruction of property during the 2010 political violence,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “It is clear that high-ranking figures on each side were to blame, and now it is up to the government to prosecute all those responsible, regardless of political affiliation or position.”

The police and the Justice Ministry’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI) found strong evidence that soldiers were implicated in at least 36 of the 92 deaths during the 2010 political violence. On September 17, 2012, the Bangkok Criminal Court ruled in a post-mortem inquest that UDD supporter Phan Khamkong was shot and killed by soldiers during a military operation near Bangkok’s Ratchaprarop Airport Link station on the night of May 14, 2010.

While failing to provide the names of those responsible for abuses, the commission presented substantive findings backed by forensic evidence and testimonies of witnesses and victims showing that high numbers of casualties among unarmed demonstrators, volunteer medics, reporters, photographers, and bystanders occurred in the government’s designated “live fire zones” around the protest sites in Bangkok.

The commission said that the joint civilian-military Center for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) – established by then Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and chaired by then Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban – authorized security forces to use war weapons and live ammunition in military operations to contain and disperse the protests without sufficient measures to monitor and control the use of lethal force.

The TRCT also found that heavily armed “Black Shirt” elements connected to the UDD were responsible for deadly attacks on soldiers, police, and civilians. The findings, however, did not provide details about the identity and command structure of these militants. In addition, the commission examined incidents in which “Red Shirt” guards and supporters committed violence. The report also found some UDD leaders incited violence with inflammatory speeches to demonstrators, including urging their supporters to riot, carry out arson attacks, and loot.

Under domestic and international pressure, Abhisit’s government established the TRCT in July 2010 to investigate the causes and consequences of the political violence and make recommendations for action. The current government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has repeatedly and publicly vowed support for the TRCT and promised to consider its findings.

However, both governments have politicized the justice process, Human Rights Watch said. The Abhisit government summarily charged hundreds of UDD protesters with serious criminal offenses, but at the same time failed to file charges against any government officials or military personnel.

The Yingluck government, which has the backing of the UDD, has taken a similarly one-sided approach, focusing criminal investigations primarily on cases in which soldiers were implicated while dismissing evidence of violence by the “Black Shirts.”

Immediately after the release of the TRCT report, the UDD leadership and their supporters, including those holding positions in the government and the parliament, emerged in large numbers to dismiss the TRCT findings and assert that there were no armed elements within the UDD. These assertions were made despite the fact that incidents of “Black Shirt” violence, and violence committed by some UDD protesters, were captured on videotape and in photos and widely reported at the time by witnesses.

On August 16, 2012, the army commander-in-chief, Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha told the DSI to stop accusing soldiers of having killed UDD protesters and not to report publicly on the progress of its investigations. Rather than order General Prayuth to end his interference in the criminal investigations, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung announced on the same day that soldiers would be treated as witnesses in the investigations and that they would be fully protected from criminal prosecution. Under pressure, this position has since been adopted by the DSI.

“While politicians and military officers involved in the 2010 violence spend their time trying to ensure they are immune from prosecution, the victims and their families are denied justice,” said Adams.

For decades in Thailand, the concept of “reconciliation” has been promoted not to bring communities together, but to protect powerful politicians and military leaders from being held accountable for wrongdoing. In the name of “reconciliation” there were no independent investigations into the crackdowns on students and pro-democracy protesters in 1973 and 1976, which led to the deaths of well over 100 people. The complete findings of a government inquiry into the bloody 1992 repression of protesters calling for an end to military rule have never been released. In each of these cases, in the name of “reconciliation,” amnesty was given to those responsible for abuses.

Human Rights Watch warned that the push for a new National Reconciliation Bill by the ruling Pheu Thai Party and its coalition partners may become a convenient device for denying justice to victims of human rights abuses. Early drafts of that bill contain a proposal for a broad amnesty for leaders and supporters of all political movements, politicians, government officials, and members of the security forces involved in the 2010 violence.

The TRCT report warned that amnesty should not be rushed and should not be the ultimate objective of reconciliation. It concluded that the principle of justice must be taken into account to address the needs of victims and affected persons, accountability of perpetrators, and encouragement that perpetrators provide reparations and publicly take responsibility for their actions.

“Impunity has long been institutionalized in Thailand, with each side protecting their own while paying little regard for justice,” said Adams. ”The TRCT findings should serve as an important encouragement for the victims of violence and their families to oppose attempts by politicians and military leaders to whitewash deadly abuses.”

Asia Provocateur: Bangkok's foreign media and the re-distribution of the Bangkok Post's lies

Asia Provocateur: Bangkok's foreign media and the re-distribution of the Bangkok Post's lies:

25 September 2012

UPDATE: Zoe Daniel has accused me of committing defamation with this blog post and is threatening to sue me. Just to be clear I am not accusing Ms. Daniel of lying, nor suggesting she has lied in her reports. I can see why she might think the orginal title of my blog may convey that so have amended it, accordingly.  I stand by assertion that members of Bangkok's foreign media corps have almost certainly lied and continue to do so in regards to the cover-up that is being perpetuated for the Bangkok Massacre in 2010. I also don't know why Zoe can't just answer my question and, instead, reverts to false accusations of rudeness and an hysterical over-reaction with threats to sue. Would it be reasonable to ask Ms.Daniel if she has something to hide?

Had a very revealing twitter exchange with ABC’s (Australian Broadcast Company) Bangkok correspondent Zoe Daniels aka @seacorro this morning (see below).

To be fair Zoe is not the worst of Bangkok’s toadying international media corps but, like most of them, does seem to overly rely on obvious Yellow-tinged English language sources such as the Bangkok Post and seems a bit in hock to those charming Democrat Party people who lunch at the FCCT. (What's also odd is so few of these long-term foreign correspondents ever quote or translate a Thai newspaper source - they're often more balanced and certainly offer a much broader view than the Post or the Nation -  I'm just a blogger and I can cite Thai news, so why can't the well-paid/resourced international media?)

Yesterday, after violent far-right Yellow Shirt extremists were caught on camera attacking a peaceful gathering of Red Shirts, the Bangkok Post ran a short piece with some photographs. It contained a couple of lines from “reporters” (AKA as liars) who decided, in true Bangkok Post style, to make some stuff up about what had happened there.

Zoe, usually a reliable source, decided to tweet a link to this Bangkok Post article but failed to point out that the Post is controlled by the Democrat Party and is sympathetic to the Yellow Shirts. Zoe could’ve tweeted links to other sources that offered an alternative view to the Bangkok Post but didn’t. 

Given that almost every single Thai language newspaper blamed the Yellow Shirts for starting the violence, something backed up by this video clip which shows a Yellow Shirt guard trying to calm down his own activists as they start the violence, and this report which states that at least one Yellow Shirt was armed with a pistol, it’s my view that Zoe, by only offering the Bangkok Post’s version, was not giving a balanced, truthful or fair representation of what occurred yesterday.

So I decided to ask Zoe directly what happened. My questions were direct and to the point. In the end Zoe, instead of answering any of my questions, accused me of being “uncivil”, “rude” and “antagonistic” and then blocked me. I don’t believe I was any of those things and can only conclude she’d been “caught out” and didn’t have an explanation.

It’s my view that the foreign media in Bangkok still have some very serious questions to answer about how they've portrayed events over the last few years. It’s also my view that many of them have knowingly lied about what happened during the Bangkok Massacre in 2010 and have been unwavering in their support for the Democrat Party and the Thai elites. 

They portray one very obviously partial version of events as neutral and consider any alternative to be biased. They very clearly don’t like being questioned on this and routinely seek to personally denigrate and exclude anyone who dares to criticise them. They stand accused of being complicit with a cover-up of crimes against humanity and the journalists/media who realise this is happening but say nothing are equally as bad. It is a collective failure for which they have collective responsibility. 

I didn't really want to single Zoe out and, as suggested above, don't think she is the worst, but the twitter exchange below is instructive in that it reveals the mindset of your typical Bangkok foreign correspondent. They struggle when it comes to their being questioned on anything.  No wonder Zoe ended up blocking me - I had her in a corner and it was obvious flight was better than answering me.

"Me to @seacorro am curious if you consider the Bangkok Post a reliable news source.

‪Zoe to @andrewspoooner I'm skeptical of most sources except my own eyes

‪ Me to @seacorro So the jury system should be trashed and investigations are pointless then? I mean they don't witness anything firsthand.

Me to @seacorro Once again > Are the BKK Post a reliable source? I would say v obviously not. Does ur skepticism stop with them?

Zoe to @andrewspoooner Andrew. don't pick a fight with me for no reason, thanks.

Me to @seacorro A direct question is not a fight unless you feel defensive. You cite BKK Post as a source. Surely you must think they are credible

Zoe to @andrewspooner No, I linked to photographs on the Post website, those who read the article can make their own decisions. Goodbye

Me to @seacorro That wasn't just photographs but a report as well. The BKK Post are not "neutral" in anyway and shouldn't be portrayed as such

Me to @seacorro I get this sense that BKK international media corps really don't like be questioned. They get overly defensive. Can't think why.

Me to @seacorro And, as I said, why are you guys so defensive and evasive when asked difficult questions? You have a responsibility.

Zoe to @andrewspoooner Because you are rude and antagonistic. Unnecessary for civil discussion."

Anyone can follow my lively twitter discussions here at @andrewspoooner

‘Big gaps’ remain in Philippines-China ties | Philippine Daily Inquirer

‘Big gaps’ remain in PH-China ties | Philippine Daily Inquirer
Michael Lim Ubac, Philippine Daily Inquirer, September 24th, 2012

No one blinked during the talks between Philippine Interior Secretary Manuel Roxas and Chinese Vice President Xi Jingping on their countries’ territorial dispute in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) on Friday.

Despite the reports of the willingness of both sides to improve their relations, the Philippine Daily Inquirer learned Sunday that “substantial gaps” continued to separate the Philippines and China in their search for a solution to their dispute over Panatag Shoal in the West Philippine Sea.

“There was a mutual assertion of sovereignty,” a Malacañang official said in an interview with the Inquirer, explaining the “mutual expressions of positions and viewpoints” by both sides during the meeting between Roxas and Xi.

President Benigno Aquino sent Roxas as his special envoy to the China-Asean (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Expo in Nanning, China, tasking him with conveying to Chinese President Hu Jintao through Xi the Philippines’ desire to improve relations with China and help find a peaceful solution to the territorial dispute between the two countries.

Mr. Aquino himself was to deliver that message to Hu in a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) leaders’ summit in Vladivostok, Russia, on September 9, but the meeting fell through due to a conflict of schedules.

The Palace official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the issue, said Roxas and Xi took “divergent positions” in their discussion of the Panatag Shoal dispute.

Not giving up

When asked if China insisted on its claim of sovereignty in almost the entire West Philippine Sea, the official said “neither side was expected to give up its claim.”

Without elaborating, the official described the extent of disagreement between the two countries as a “chasm,” indicating that China refused to recognize the Philippines’ rights to Panatag Shoal and that the Philippines insisted the shoal was within its exclusive economic zone.

The Philippines and China are also disputing ownership of other islands, reefs and atolls in the Spratlys chain in the middle of the West Philippine Sea. But Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia and Taiwan also claim those parts of the sea believed to be sitting on vast deposits of oil and gas. The West Philippine Sea also has rich fishing grounds and shipping routes where half of the world’s cargo passes.

Roxas report

Roxas will explain what really happened in Nanning on Monday, when he reports to the President, the Palace official said.

Both Roxas and Mr. Aquino were out of the country Sunday. The President flew to Bandar Seri Begawan in Brunei Sunday for the wedding of Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah’s youngest daughter, Princess Hajah Hafizah Sururul Bolkiah. Both the President and Roxas were expected to return to Manila Sunday night.

The Palace official said that what Roxas achieved in Nanning was the reestablishment of direct links to China’s leadership, as Xi is widely expected to take over from Hu in a leadership change next year.

“After mutual expressions and positions were stated, no conclusions were drawn. Both sides will consider, then talk again,” the official said.

Gains achieved

A statement released by Malacañang on Saturday highlighted gains achieved during the meeting, saying the “Philippines and China expressed a mutual desire to resolve the outstanding issues concerning both countries while moving forward with their bilateral relations.”

Presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, who accompanied Roxas to the meeting, said “the Chinese vice president expressed appreciation to President Aquino in sending Roxas which showed the importance of the bilateral relations of the two nations for the Philippines.”

“This showed the importance that President Aquino attaches to Philippines-China relations,” Lacierda quoted Xi as saying.

Lacierda said Roxas “faithfully delivered President Aquino’s message to the Chinese government.”

Roxas told Xi that Manila hoped to have friendly relations with Beijing and overcome difficulties caused by the territorial row, Lacierda said.

Multifaceted relations

Another Palace press officer, deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte, spoke of a “thawing of relations” between the Philippines and China in a radio interview Sunday.

Valte said the administration recognized that the Philippines had a “multilevel relationship” with China and that it wasn’t talking to China about the West Philippine Sea dispute only.

She mentioned tourism and trade as part of the Philippines’ “good working relationship” with China.

The Philippines, she said, will continue to work on the “different facets” of its relationship with China despite the territorial dispute in the West Philippine Sea.
 
Relations revived

Valte acknowledged that the relations between the two countries had been soured by the dispute, but said that their bilateral relations had been “revived.”

To improve the relations further, Valte said the administration would continue to pursue a peaceful resolution of the territorial row in the West Philippine Sea.

And the Philippines will “refrain from doing anything” that will cause a flaring anew of tensions in the sea, she said.

Originally posted: 9:06 pm | Sunday, September 23rd, 2012

Vietnam convicts 3 bloggers for anti-gov't posts | The Jakarta Post

Vietnam convicts 3 bloggers for anti-gov't posts | The Jakarta Post

Chris Brummitt, The Associated Press, September 24 2012

 

Vietnam issued jail sentences ranging from four to 12 years on Monday to three bloggers who wrote about human rights abuses, corruption and foreign policy, intensifying a crackdown on its citizens' use of Internet to criticize the government.

The cases are particularly high-profile examples of the Communist government's attempts to stifle challenges to its authority on the Internet, which has emerged as the major avenue for dissent in the Communist-ruled country of 87 million people. US President Barack Obama has mentioned one of the defendants, and the mother of another died after setting herself on fire to protest her daughter's plight.

The defendants, two men and one woman, are founding members of the "Free Journalists Club", a group of citizen journalists who posted their work on the Internet. They were found guilty of spreading "propaganda against the state."

Nguyen Van Hai, who has written under the pen name Dieu Cay or "Tobacco Pipe," got 12 years, Ta Phong Tan received 10 and Phan Thanh Hai got four years, according to defense lawyer Ha Huy Son.

The trial in Ho Chi Minh City lasted less than 6 hours. The country regularly convicts dissidents, but sentences have generally been around 5 years.

The United States, which is seeking closer economic ties with Vietnam but also pressing it on human rights, quickly criticized the sentences. Obama mentioned Nguyen Van Hai's case in a May speech that called for greater freedom for media around the world.

"The government's treatment of Dieu Cay appears to be inconsistent with Vietnam's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights relating to freedom of expression and due process," it said in a statement.

Nguyen Van Hai criticized the government for its handling of tensions with neighboring China over disputed islands in the South China Sea.

Tan, a former police officer, wrote a blog called "Justice and Truth" that criticized police abuse of power. Her mother self-immolated in protest of the case against her in late July.
International rights groups have condemned the trial and called for the release of the defendants.

"Vietnam's arbitrary use of vaguely worded national security laws to imprison critics of the government means bloggers are bearing the brunt of this assault on freedom of expression," Brad Adams, Asia director at the New York-based Human Rights Watch, said in a statement last week.

Bomb leaves six dead in Thailand's restive south | BBC News

Bomb leaves six dead in Thailand's restive south | BBC News
BBC News, 21 September 2012

At least six people have been killed and 40 others injured by a bomb explosion near a market in Thailand's restive south, police say.

The bomb went off after gunmen opened fire at a shop in Sai Buri district, Pattani province, drawing in onlookers, officials say.

The incident happened after Friday prayers in the mainly Muslim region.

A separatist insurgency in Thailand's south has killed more than 5,000 people since it flared up again in 2004.

Successive Thai governments have launched initiatives to try to end this conflict, some using military force, some offering negotiations.

But none has made any progress with an entrenched, village-based insurgent movement which has no public face and makes no claims or demands, reports the BBC's Jonathan Head in Bangkok.

The Thai security forces have demonstrated little capability to fight such a movement, which remains attractive to young Malay Muslim men, and has been able to prosper from the corruption and lawlessness that is characteristic of Thailand's border regions, adds our correspondent.
 

Noynoy Screws up the Scarborough Shoals Issue | Asia Sentinel

Noynoy Screws up the Scarborough Shoals Issue | Asia Sentinel 
Asia Sentinel, 21 September 201

Philippine president dispatches loose cannon to Beijing, gets wounded

President Benigno S. Aquino III is enjoying a surge of popularity at home, with a 78 percent approval rating against only 4 percent negatives, but his latest foray into foreign policy and relations with China has made the Philippines look silly abroad.

The gambit has also shown some of its politicians to be more interested in domestic political games than in seriously representing the nation in dealings with its giant neighbor. It also suggests that Aquino is two-faced about the seas issues, claiming to take a tough line to defend Philippine waters while cozying up to those wanting peace with China at any price.

In an attempt to calm relations with Beijing in the wake of China’s effective seizure of the Scarborough (Panatag) shoal, which lies 120 miles off the coast of Luzon, and deny its rich fishing grounds to Philippine fishing boats Aquino decided on a back-door approach. But instead of entrusting this mission to a seasoned diplomat, or even a well-regarded politician he somehow chose Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, a 41-year-old first-term senator who is better known for having led a failed coup attempt in 2003 against then-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Trillanes, then a senior grade lieutenant, led 321 soldiers to take control of the Oakwood Towers in Makati City to protest government graft and corruption. He was detained after the mutiny was quelled and spent seven years in prison.

Trillanes claimed to have very good contacts in China, although why that should be has not been explained. However he was given the imprimatur as the President’s back-channel envoy and dispatched to Beijing in August. Despite his lack of proven credentials, the naïve Aquino had been listening to Trillanes for several months and allowed him to go despite knowing that the senator, who was the first lawmaker eve to be elected from his jail cell, was known to be hostile to Foreign Minister Albert del Rosario. He had been quoted in July as saying that Rosario was a “war freak” anxious to obtain US help and thereby worsen relations with China.

Once in Beijing, according to notes of a meeting with him believed taken by Sonia Brady, the Philippine ambassador to China, Trillanes appeared to act more as a Manchurian candidate than an envoy trying to smooth relations with China without compromising the Philippine stance on the shoal, which lies well within the Philippines Exclusive Economic Zone. He expressed strong disagreement with Philippine official policy.

Trillanes thus completely undercut the role of Foreign Minister del Rosario who complained that back channeling could be useful in some circumstances but in this case was counterproductive. Del Rosario was forced to defend himself publicly against Trillanes and got no support from Aquino, who kept quiet about the whole mess he created.

Malacanang suggested the fuss was mainly a feud between senators, with Senator Juan Ponce Enrile accusing Trillanes of being a traitor.

Trillanes then attacked Manuel Pangilinan, one of the country’s top businessmen, for allegedly encouraging closer US involvement, fanning del Rosario’s alleged anti-China stance and having ulterior motives relating to oil interests on the Recto bank.

Pangilinan was naturally infuriated and threatened to move his operations to Hong Kong, where his First Pacific is a major investment management and holding company with operations in telecommunications, infrastructure, food products and natural resources.

Aquino himself tried and failed to meet Chinese President Hu Jintao at the recent APEC summit in Vladivostok, hoping to discuss the jurisdiction issue but in the wider context of China-Philippine relations.

So now, in the wake of the Trillanes mess, Aquino has had to send Interior Secretary and former Senator Mar Roxas as his special envoy to meet Xi Jinping, President Hu’s heir-apparent.

But the whole episode has shown that while Aquino may be honest and likable his judgments of people and issues leaves much to be desired. And it shows how China must see the Philippines as a pushover, with nationalist rhetoric always undercut by politicians with pecuniary or political interests which transcend the national interest.

Protesters rally for release of lese majeste prisoners | The Nation Thailand

Protesters rally for release of lese majeste prisoners | The Nation Thailand
Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation, September 20, 2012

Twenty opponents of the lese majeste law held a 112-minute vigil outside the Criminal Court yesterday to condemn the postponement of lese majeste detainee Somyos Prueksakasemsuk's sentencing. The verdict has been postponed to December 19.

The protesters wore black eye masks reading "release political prisoners", while one placard read "justice delayed is justice denied".

Photo by Prainn Rakthai

Somyos has been detained for 17 months now and his bail request denied 11 times.

Inside the court yesterday, another lese majeste and Computer Crimes Act detainee, 41-year-old Surapak Phuchaisaeng, became the first such prisoner to be prosecuted and tried under the Yingluck Shinawatra administration.

Surapak, whose trial was in its second day yesterday, is accused of being behind a Facebook page with a name that is deemed defamatory to the King. "I shall rule through…" is part of the title of the account, which cannot be revealed in its entirety by The Nation for fear of violating the lese majeste law.

Surapak, who was arrested on September 2 last year, told The Nation that it is "disgusting" that he has to wear shackles and prisoners' garb even though no concrete evidence has been produced linking him to the Facebook page, which is still active even though he is in prison. His bail request has been denied about half a dozen times now.

"Think about it. This is Thailand! The justice process never protects the people, only the elite," Surapak said as prosecution witness Pol Major Niti Inthurak, an officer at the Computer Crimes unit, told the court that it was not the police force's job to trace the suspect's IP address.

Surapak, who hails from Nong Khai province and is a computer programmer, said he had lost lots of job opportunities while in prison, adding that prosecutors would never be able to prove that he was linked to the Facebook account.

He is scheduled to testify in court tomorrow.

Free Somyot Now | Prachatai English

Free Somyot Now | Prachatai English
September 19, 2012

Joint statement 

 

Human rights and labour organizations today urge that magazine editor and human rights defender Somyot Prueksakasemsuk be immediately released from 17-month pre-trial detention.  If convicted, he faces up to 30 years in prison under Article 112 of the Criminal Code (the lèse-majesté law) for the publication of two articles deemed insulting to the monarchy.  The group further called on the Thai authorities to uphold international standards of freedom of expression, and to stop using Article 112 and arbitrary detention to criminalize or restrict free speech.

The outcome of Somyot’s trial is a litmus test of Thailand’s commitment to protect the rights to freedom of opinion and expression, the group said

Somyot has been held in prison since his arrest in April 2011, five days after he launched a petition campaign to collect 10,000 signatures required for a parliamentary review of lèse-majesté law.  Lengthy pre-trial detention of Somyot clearly violates Thailand’s obligations to refrain from arbitrary detention.

On 18 September, the Thai Criminal Court cancelled a court hearing in his case scheduled for 19 September, prolonging his pre-trial detention indefinitely.  The Criminal Court did not provide reasons for the cancellation or a new date for the hearing.

Background

Authorities have turned down Somyot’s eleven requests for release on bail. In denying him provisional release, the court has not provided adequate justifications, as required by Section 40(7) the Constitution and Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which restrict pre-trial detention to exceptional circumstances, and by the International Covenant on Civil Political Rights (ICCPR), which Thailand has ratified.

During the past two years, Thai courts have repeatedly denied bail to alleged lèse-majesté offenders. The UN Human Rights Committee, which oversees compliance of States with the ICCPR, has reminded States that pre-trial detention may, in itself, be a violation of the rights to liberty and presumption of innocence.

Thailand’s lèse-majesté law prohibits any word or act, which “defames, insults, or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent, or the Regent”. The law overrides the Thai constitution and places the country in contravention of its international legal obligations to uphold international standards of freedom of expression. Thai civil society groups, families of those prosecuted under the lèse-majesté law, and United Nations human rights experts have repeatedly called for a public debate on reform of the lèse-majesté law. When Thailand’s human rights record was examined in October 2011 during the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council, its member states addressed more than a dozen recommendations to amend or repeal both the lèse-majesté law and the 2007 Computer Crimes Act that criminalizes online defamation under the same provision.  Four of the alleged lèse-majesté offenders, including Somyot, have pending requests to the Constitutional Court to rule on the constitutionality of Article 112.  On 19 September, Somyot was expected to learn if the Constitutional Court had ruled on whether Thailand’s lèse-majesté law complies with guarantees of freedom of expression and the press in the 2007 Constitution.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression “reiterate[d] the call to all States to decriminalize defamation” in his report (A/HRC/17/27) to the UN Human Right Council in May 2011. The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders guarantees the right “[t]o submit to governmental bodies and agencies and organizations concerned with public affairs criticism and proposals for improving their functioning and to draw attention to any aspect of their work that may impede the realization of human rights.” Thailand has increasingly criminalized writers and editors of publications that carry articles deemed offensive to the monarchy.

Vietnamese Disarray: Two Leaders and a Nation | Asia Sentinel

Vietnamese Disarray: Two Leaders and a Nation | Asia Sentinel
Khanh Vu Duc, 19 September 2012

The economic deterioration of Vietnam provides the perfect setting for regime change, with a scandal-ridden prime minister seeking to hold onto his position

The economic nightmare that has befallen Vietnam has resulted in much finger-pointing, with President Truong Tan Sang and his supporters putting Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung in the crosshairs.

Over the past decade, Vietnam benefited greatly from economic reforms and a wealth of foreign investment. During the heyday, it was all too easy for the country’s leadership and the Communist Party to hide the waste and corruption behind skyrocketing economic growth.

Today, however, all of that is over. The waste, corruption, and poor management that have been the norm are now the target of government crackdowns, if only to maintain legitimacy in the eyes of the people. A power struggle between the prime minister and president, state enterprises deep in the red over senseless business endeavors and the arrests of banking officials have all signaled to the Vietnamese people that these are uncertain times.

The path for two leaders

If Prime Minister Dung can survive a challenge to his leadership, one could expect the prime minister to consolidate and strengthen his position within the party by marginalizing President Sang and weeding out his supporters. Rather than taking this challenge as an impetus to change, the prime minister will likely use it as an excuse to double down and stay the path. Now more than ever, Vietnam cannot risk instability, which President Sang would be accused of bringing about. For better or worse, Prime Minister Dung’s vision will serve as the vision for Vietnam.

Should Sang succeed in ousting the prime minister, Dung’s allies would be purged from public office and replaced with the president’s people. Whether the prime minister’s allies would be arrested or simply exiled from public service is unknown; however, the arrest of the prime minister would prove to be a bold move on the president’s part in demonstrating to the people his intent to rid the government of corruption.

On the other hand, should there be a settlement between the two leaders, one could expect more power sharing and more input in government from President Sang and his supporters, all under the guise of increased accountability. Prime Minister Dung’s position within the government and party would be severely weakened, as the president would undoubtedly demand concessions, lest the prime minister face a political coup d’état. The Communist Party, in attempt to maintain control over the country, would sooner throw the prime minister under the bus than endure the black eye that would result from a public intraparty war.

An institutional problem

Regardless of the outcome, what is certain is that this so-called struggle for accountability will do little to aid the Vietnamese people, whose fortunes are unlikely to change. The power struggle is simply that--a power struggle, not one born out of a desperate need to reform Vietnam. This struggle is not one that will benefit the masses but the family and friends of those individuals in power. This is ultimately a struggle of the ruling class, not the proletariat; and when the dust finally settles, it will be business as usual.

It is not the individuals that need changing but the institution itself. Although the Communist Party today remains communist in name only, the organization is notorious for its lack of transparency, which has led Vietnam down this path of financial disaster. Corruption and poor management remain hidden from view until it is too late, at which point the wealthy few can hide while the working majority are left holding the bag labeled “debt.” A patronage system allows family and friends to reap the benefits of having people in high places, rather than having the best person for the job.

A change in leadership would do little to fix the problems that plague Vietnam today. Corruption and poor management is not the cause of Vietnam’s ailments; it is a symptom. The cause has been and remains the Communist Party itself and its ability to operate with impunity. A change in leadership must follow with a change in government and government policy.

A second look

For almost four decades, the Communist Party of Vietnam has provided stability, whether in poverty or prosperity. During the early days when ideology governed the country’s affairs, the people were poor and hungry. However, because they were poor and hungry, they were too distracted to challenge the party. When the country boomed, the people experienced an awakening of sorts--with a little bit of luck and a little bit of hard work, they could be rich, or at least better off than they were yesterday.

The party assumed credit for this success and impressed upon the people its work in helping the nation. The party was good for Vietnam. Whatever else the party had done or was involved in on the side, properly or improperly, the party had led the country out from poverty to prosperity. No one would complain as long as the country continued to prosper. But now, as the economy slows and foreign investment dwindles, the people are fed just enough, rich just enough, to look at their leaders with a critical eye.

Although the economic downturn and power struggle have provided an opening for the people to demand real change in government, the party remains too intertwined in Vietnamese society for it to simply roll over and die. In all likelihood, change will first come from within the party rather than from without, but whether said change will benefit the people remains questionable.

With more than 60 percent of the Vietnamese population born after the Vietnam War, these are people born into families whose greatest difficulties at time were putting food on the table. Now, these same people, many of whom have families of their own, face an entirely different set of challenges--climbing the social ladder, a climb that cannot be achieved in a struggling economy. They have seen the light at the end of the tunnel but are now seeing that light fade away due to the government’s mismanagement.

Much like weeds, cutting the head will achieve nothing; one must remove the roots. Maybe it is time for the Communist Party to step aside.

(Khanh Vu Duc is a Vietnamese Canadian lawyer in Ottawa who researches on international relations and international law. He is a frequent contributor to Asia Sentinel.)

Asean mulls 'new political channels' to address maritime disputes | The Jakarta Post

Asean mulls 'new political channels' to address maritime disputes | The Jakarta Post

Asia News Network (Rasmei Kampuchea Daily) | World | Thu, September 20 2012

 

ASEAN lawmakers are considering setting up an advisory group of high-level parliamentarians to create "new political channels" to address disputes in the South China Sea.

The proposed body, which would advise ASEAN, is included in a draft political resolution being discussed at the annual meeting of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) in Indonesia this week.

The meeting got underway on the island of Lombok on Sunday and is scheduled to last until Saturday. It follows the failure of ASEAN foreign ministers to adopt a joint statement at their annual meeting in Phnom Penh in July in the absence of a regional consensus on the South China Sea.

China has territorial claims in the South China Sea that compete or overlap with those of ASEAN members Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam.

The "Resolution on the Situation in the South China Sea" is among 11 resolutions expected to be adopted by the ASEAN lawmakers meeting this week.

According to the draft, AIPA lawmakers are "deeply concerned" about the "escalation of conflict among the claimant states arising from the overlapping jurisdictional and territorial claims in the South China Sea."

It resolves "to consider to establish an AIPA Eminent Persons Group composed of high-level representatives from AIPA Member Parliaments to create new political channels for negotiation and to provide advice to ASEAN in its efforts to find a durable solution of disputes in the South China Sea."

It also requests all member parliaments to "develop preventive diplomacy through dialogues and political negotiation to avoid the disputes escalating into conflicts among the parties concerned."

At the same time, it encourages ASEAN members and China "to expedite the negotiation and conclusion of a regional code of conduct."

It also urges "all claimant states to clarify their claims and to reiterate their full commitment to peacecul solution of disputes in the South China Sea in accordance with universally recognised principles of international law including the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea."

The draft resolution does not mention the failure of foreign ministers to issue their customary joint communique in July. But it notes "with appreciation" the Six-Point Principles on the South China Sea that were adopted and released after the meeting in Phnom Penh.

Senior ASEAN foreign ministry officials are expected to discuss the South China Sea issue at a retreat in Thailand next month ahead an East Asian Summit chaired by Prime Minister Hun Sen in Phnom Penh in November.

The Bush Administration’s Oft-Repeated (and Now Challenged) Waterboarding Claims | Common Dreams

The Bush Administration’s Oft-Repeated (and Now Challenged) Waterboarding Claims | Common Dreams
Cora Currier, ProPublica, September 18, 2012

For many years, Bush administration officials have said that the CIA waterboarded only three terror suspects. Despite nearly endless revelations and investigations about the U.S.'s treatment of detainees, there has never been evidence contradicting those claims. But that changed earlier this month.



Human Rights Watch recently released a report detailing the accounts of 14 Libyan men who claim they were detained and, in some cases, subject to harsh interrogations by the U.S. before being transferred back to Libyan prisons, where they also faced abuse.

One man, Mohammed Al-Shoreoiya, provided a detailed account of being waterboarded "many times" while in U.S. custody in an Afghan prison between 2003 and 2004. Another man described a similar form of water torture, conducted without a board.

None of the men's accounts could be confirmed, but as the New York Times noted, the detainees did not seek out Human Rights Watch, and their descriptions of their treatment, including waterboarding, are consistent with CIA procedural documents that have been made public.

The CIA first confirmed waterboarding in February 2008, when then-CIA director Michael Hayden told a Senate committee that "only three detainees" had been waterboarded — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zabaydah, and Abd Al Rahim al-Nashiri. No one, he said, had been subjected to the process since 2003. That claim has been repeated by former President George W. Bush and top officials from his administration. Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has also noted that the military did not waterboard.

A spokesman for the CIA told ProPublica that "the Agency has been on the record that there are three substantiated cases in which detainees were subjected to the waterboarding technique under the program."

Here are top Bush administration officials stating, again and again, only three detainees were waterboarded [emphasis added]:

George W. Bush

Of the thousands of terrorists we captured in the years after 9/11, about a hundred were placed into the CIA program. About a third of those were questioned using enhanced techniques. Three were waterboarded.
– November 2010, in his memoir, Decision Points.

President Bush also repeated the line in interviews that fall with the Times of London and Fox News.

Dick Cheney, former vice president

It is a fact that only detainees of the highest intelligence value were ever subjected to enhanced interrogation. You've heard endlessly about waterboarding. It happened to three terrorists.
-- May 21, 2009: Dick Cheney, in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute.

In 2009, Cheney made the same claim in another speech and in interviews with the Washington Times, CNN and CBS. In 2011, he mentioned it again in a speech at AEI.

Donald Rumsfeld, former defense secretary

[Michael Hayden] looked at all the evidence and concluded that a major fraction of the intelligence in our country on al Qaeda came from individuals, the three, only three people who were waterboarded... no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo by the U.S. military. In fact, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo, period. Three people were waterboarded by the CIA, away from Guantanamo and then later brought to Guantanamo.
-- May 3, 2011, in an interview with Fox News.

Rumsfeld repeated the line that year in interviews with CNN, CBS, the Associated Press, Charlie Rose and in a speech in February 2012.
Michael Hayden, former CIA director

Let me make it very clear and to state so officially in front of this committee that waterboarding has been used on only three detainees. It was used on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, it was used on Abu Zubaydah, and it was used on Nashiri. The CIA has not used waterboarding for almost five years. We used it against these three high-value detainees because of the circumstances of the time.
–Feb. 5, 2008, in testimony to a Senate committee.

Hayden also reiterated the three-person figures in a memo circulated that month to CIA employees and on Meet the Press that March. He repeated it again in an interview with Newsweek in 2009.
John Yoo, former Justice Department official

Waterboarding we think is torture, but it happened to three people. The scale of magnitude is different....We've done it three times."
--June 1, 2008, in an interview with Esquire Magazine.

Yoo also said three people had been waterboarded in a June 2008 congressional hearing.
Karl Rove, senior adviser to Bush

[Coercive techniques] were used against some thirty hard-core terrorist detainees who had successfully resisted other forms of interrogation. Only three were waterboarded.
–March 2010, in his memoir, Courage and Consequences.

Michael Mukasey, former attorney general

The fact is that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding — he was one of three people who were waterboarded — did disclose the name — the nickname actually, which was the name that this courier actually used — in the course of the questioning that took place after enhanced interrogation techniques.
--May 17, 2011, in remarks at the American Enterprise Institute.

Jose Rodriguez Jr., former director of the National Clandestine Service at the CIA

In fact, only three detainees: Mohammed, Zubaydah and one other were ever waterboarded, the last one more than nine years ago.
-- May 10, 2012: Jose Rodriguez Jr., in an op-ed on CNN.com

Rodriguez also mentioned the figure in interviews this spring with Fox News and the New Yorker.

Bill Harlow, who co-authored Rodriguez' book on interrogations, said that Rodriguez stands by his statement. "These procedures were not done without extensive documentation and authorization, as part of an officially approved program, and all the documentation there shows three individuals," Harlow said.

The other officials we've cited did not respond to requests for comment.

President Obama came into office proclaiming a ban on torture, stating that waterboarding was unequivocally a form of torture, and making the infamous "torture memos" public. But the administration has said no one would be prosecuted for waterboarding or other interrogation methods previously sanctioned by the government, and announced last month it would close the last two investigations into CIA abuse.

A Justice Department spokesman would not comment on whether the government ever investigated the Libyan cases. Laura Pitter, the author of the Human Rights Watch report, said that none of the men she interviewed said they had been contacted by U.S. investigators about their detention.

The CIA spokesman said that he could not comment on specific allegations, but that "the Department of Justice has exhaustively reviewed the treatment of more than 100 detainees in the post-9/11 period — including allegations involving unauthorized interrogation techniques — and it declined prosecution in every case."

© Copyright 2012 Pro Publica Inc.

Vietnamese president urges military to study modern warfare | Vietnam News

Vietnamese president urges military to study modern warfare | Vietnam News
Vietnam News, September, 18 2012

HA NOI (VNS)— President Truong Tan Sang asked the National Defence Academy to study global military science, especially modern and hi-tech warfare issues, to advise the Party, State and the army and benefit its training.

He made this request when speaking at a ceremony to start the new academic year at the Academy in Ha Noi yesterday.

While congratulating the academy's staff and soldier and officer students on beginning a new school year, Sang also praised the academy for helping thousands of senior officials of the Party and State further improve their knowledge of defence and security matters.

As a dynamically developing region, Southeast Asia is encountering factors that cause instability, especially sea disputes between several regional countries, said the President.

He mentioned the hostile forces' acceleration of the "peaceful evolution" strategy, riots, "self-evolution", "self-transformation" and their use of the issues of democracy, human rights, nation and religion to sabotage national independence and socialism in Viet Nam.

The State leader said that as the country's and the army's leading defence training and military science research centre, the Academy needed to further improve the quality of education and scientific research to produce regular, proficient and sharp-thinking officers for the country.

Sang also said he believes that the academy will continue to make more contributions to national defence in the future. — VNS

Asia Provocateur: A celebration of the life of Thai political prisoner Amphon Pt. 1

Asia Provocateur: A celebration of the life of Thai political prisoner Amphon Pt. 1

16 September 2012

Political prisoner Amphon Tangnoppakul (aka Ah Kong), died in a Bangkok prison hospital May 8th 2012. He had been sentenced to a 20year prison term after a Bangkok court decided he couldn’t “prove his innocence” in a case relating to four SMS messages sent to an aide of the then Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjijva, that were deemed to defame the monarchy.

But Ah Kong was, of course much more than a political prisoner. This former truck driver from the working class Bangkok suburb of Samut Prakan was a dearly loved husband, father and grandfather.

Despite this affection Ah Kong died in terrible circumstances – left alone in pain in a prison hospital, his family and loved ones denied a chance to say their final goodbyes.

On 26^th August 2012 Ah Kong’s funeral rites were concluded and he was cremated.

                           

To mark the final stage of his passing, Ah Kong’s wife, Rosmalin (aka Pa Ou) put together a traditional Thai “funeral book” entitled "O Love" to celebrate this kind and gentle man’s life.

I’ve been lucky enough to receive permission from Pa Ou to translate and serialise Ah Kong’s funeral book here on this blog.  I didn’t complete the translation myself and wanted to gratefully thank the person who worked very hard to get this English version to me but whom wishes to remain anonymous.

Once the serialisation is complete I will be working with others to place the entire book onto its own website.

As a mark of respect to Pa Ou and the family I would ask anyone who wants to reproduce this text to please ask me first via email (asiaprovocateur@gmail.com) however, everyone is more than welcome to link to the serialisation.

Amphon Tangnoppakul

Born 1 January 1950
Died 8 May 2012

----------------
O Love

Rosmalin Tangnoppakul

--------------

O Love
Is it really sweet
Or does it torment the heart
Love has a hundred wiles
O Love, how it beguiles
Lures us under its spell
[video link to song here]

“Ah Po” asked me to sing the song “O Love” on the day of our wedding, Coronation Day 1968. That day I sang it without microphone; as for Ah Po, he practiced and practiced singing “Lesson Before Matrimony”, but when the time came he still couldn’t sing it.

When we were married I was 17. Ah Po wasn’t even 20 yet. At the time there was a phrase people said that has stayed in my mind ever since: “Their two ages combined isn’t even 40.” When you hear it you immediately know--I’ve never forgotten when we were married just how young we were.

Ever since we had grandchildren, most people called my husband “Ah Kong”{1}, but our children’s friends called him “Tia”{2}. As for me, sometimes I called him Ah Kong like the grandkids, but if it was the two of us I still called him “Po” or “Ah Po”, which was his Chinese nickname. He called me “Ou”.

Ah Po was born 1 January 1950 at Khlong Suan subdistrict, Bang Bo district, Samut Prakan province. Just across the bridge on the other side of a canal was Chachoengsao province.

Ah Po’s ancestors came over from China during his grandfather’s time. That is, his was the generation that came over first. Later on Ah Po’s father came over, and then his mother followed later. Their family had a lot of children, eight in all. Ah Po was the third child. The oldest son but the third child.

As far as I know, when Ah Po’s ancestors first came over they worked at a rice mill. They weren’t the owners, they were just employees. Later, his father opened a coffee shop near the market people call “Khlong Suan 100-Year Market”, and it remained primarily a coffee shop ever since.

As they started to grow up, many of the children moved away to find work, and sent money back home to support their parents. To this day the family coffee shop is still in business--Ah Po’s younger sister took it over. His mother and father are both deceased. His father passed away more than ten years ago, and his mother just passed away while Ah Po was in prison, not long before my own mother passed.

Ah Po completed grade 7 at a Thai school, but he also studied at a Chinese school, as most children of Chinese immigrants in the area did. The Chinese school rotated between houses; you had to bring your own desk. The desks were made of old-style milk crates, pine wood hammered together into a desk you could sit at and carry with you.

Ah Po could speak Chinese because his family mainly used Teochew. His mother and father only spoke Chinese. When he went to Chinese school it was to study reading and writing. Though he spoke Thai since he was small, he didn’t speak it very clearly.

When he first began courting me, he still pronounced “Pepsi” as “Peksi”!

After we got together, Ah Po only spoke Thai. Towards the end he could even speak some Isan{3}. As he spoke less Chinese he may have forgotten some of it, but if he met other Chinese he would have a chance to speak it. He tried to teach the kids and grandkids, but no one was interested.

When Ah Po began working he started in a lumber mill in Chonburi province. Ah Po was 16 or 17. At first he was a hired hand, doing whatever work he was told, like an apprenticeship. Later he practiced driving at the factory until he knew how, and became a driver, delivering the lumber. He was still being paid on a monthly basis, but not much. The pay in those days wasn’t much, but goods were cheap then, too.

When we were first courting Ah Po would buy gold for me; a saleung{4} cost only 100 baht{5}.

-------
Translator’s notes
{1} “Ah Kong” is a Teochew Chinese term for “granddad”. The term “Ah” is a prefix used with Chinese names and kinship terms.
{2} “Tia” is a Teochew Chinese term for “dad”.
{3} Isan is the northeastern region of Thailand, where dialects closely related to Lao are spoken.
{4} A saleung is a traditional Thai weight measure for gold and other precious metals, equal to 3.75 grams, or ¼ of a traditional 15-gram baht. Not to be confused with the Thai currency that uses the same unit names. (In colloquial Thai saleung is also used to refer to the 25 satang coin, or ¼ of one-baht coin.)
{5} 100 baht would have been worth around US$5 in the 1960s, or US$35 today after adjusting for inflation.