With Pragmatists in Control, What’s Next for the KNU? | The Irrawaddy Magazine

With Pragmatists in Control, What’s Next for the KNU? | The Irrawaddy Magazine
SAW YAN NAING / THE IRRAWADDY, December 27, 2012

Pragmatic leaders who won the Karen National Union’s (KNU) recent elections are expected to accelerate peace talks with the government and business development projects, but some Karen observers are urging caution to ensure benefits for local communities and not just the ethnic group’s leaders.

Three policy makers with close ties won key positions in the elections, which closed on Tuesday after a nearly month-long congress to choose new leaders.

Mutu Say Poe, the KNU’s former military chief, is now the organization’s chairman, while Gen Saw Johnny, a pragmatic commander, was elected as the military chief. The new general secretary is Kwe Htoo Win, who is known for being practical, friendly to ethnic alliances and knowledgeable about international affairs.

The three leaders are believed to have good relations with members of the government’s peace team, who are negotiating with the KNU after decades of war between the government’s army and ethnic Karen rebels fighting for greater autonomy and basic rights. The two sides signed a ceasefire in January.

In addition to speeding up the peace process, the KNU’s new leaders are expected to accelerate development projects in the region, including efforts to clear away land mines and resettle internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees.

But some observers say the KNU should proceed cautiously in the coming months.

Thierry Falise, a veteran Bangkok-based journalist and author who has covered Burma for more than 25 years, said that although the new leaders may want a quicker peace process, they should take time to guarantee the safety of civilians, the repositioning of government troops in rebel-controlled territory, and the implementation of the organization’s code of conduct.

After speaking with several KNU leaders and Karen civil society organization, Falise, who travels frequently in Karen State, said the code of conduct was seen as crucial for attempts to negotiate with the government peace team.

The KNU and government peace negotiators led by Aung Min, a minister of the President’s Office, signed the code of conduct in the Karen State capital Pa-an on Sept. 4 this year.

The code comprised 11 chapters and 34 detailed points which also consider the safety of civilians.

According to the agreement, the KNU and government must obey the code to cement a permanent ceasefire.

Saw Htoo Klei, secretary of the Karen Office of Relief and Development, a Karen relief organization that provides assistance to IDPs in KNU-controlled areas, said he was optimistic about the new leaders because they offered a range of experience in military, political and international affairs.

But some concerns have also surfaced that the KNU leaders will focus more on economic development than politics, as they are believed to have close ties with businessmen such as Ko Ko Maung, the managing director of Dawei Princess Company, a Burmese partner in the Dawei deep-sea port project led by Thailand’s largest construction company Italian-Thai Development.

The KNU’s former peace negotiator, David Taw, who passed away recently, was reportedly well connected to Hla Maung Shwe, a Burmese peace broker and vice chairman of Myanmar Egress, a leading Rangoon-based NGO.

Hla Maung Shwe is also vice chairman of the Myanmar Fishery Federation and an executive of the Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry.

David Taw, who was close to KNU chairman Mutu Say Poe, reportedly spoke with Hla Maung Shwe on the telephone after almost every peace talk. Some Karen sources speculate the discussions focused on development, businesses and NGO projects.

Karen sources also say that as peace talks continue, land has been purchased and seized on a large scale by Karen and Burmese businesspeople in southern Karen State, especially in Pa-an and Tenasserim Division, where the Dawei port is being built.

The multi-billion-dollar port project includes an overland route connecting it to Thailand that passes through territory controlled by a brigade of the KNU’s armed wing, the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA), and some local sources have speculated that KNLA leaders are eager to benefit.

Community-based organizations have complained that development projects and business investment are not transparent and lack the input of concerned civilians. As these projects continue, they point out, government troops remain in KNU-controlled territories and Karen civilians do not feel safe enough to return to their abandoned homes.

But if KNU leaders push forward quickly with these projects, one newly elected leader, Lt-Gen Baw Kyaw Heh, may present some resistance.

As the KNLA’s new deputy military chief, Lt-Gen Baw Kyaw Heh leads a group of 1,500 well-trained fighters and is known as more of a hardliner. Karen sources on the Thai-Burmese border said he would likely ignore KNU leaders if they tried to focus on development and business.

The KNU has dealt with internal divisions recently, with concerns that the group might split into two factions. Baw Kyaw Heh was reportedly ready to lead KNLA troops in northern Karen State and break away from the south, which was led by Gen Saw Johnny and Mutu Poe.

The leaders compromised, local sources say, for the “sake of the Karen people.”

Philippine Reds still eye stalemate | Asia News – Politics, Media, Education | Asian Correspondent

Philippine Reds still eye stalemate | Asia News – Politics, Media, Education | Asian Correspondent
Edwin Espejo Dec 26, 2012

In 2008, the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) boldly declared that it was aiming for a strategic stalemate in its guerrilla war with the Philippine government in five years.

In its statement to observe its 44^th founding anniversary posted on its website Sunday but dated December 26, the CPP is saying “it is making substantial progress in carrying out the strategic plan to advance the people’s war from the strategic defensive to the strategic stalemate.”

Today, however, its armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA), is still far away from that armed parity with the Philippine military.

New People's Army in Northern MIndanao. KEITH BACONGCO

“It currently operates in more than 100 guerrilla fronts and is striving to increase these to 180 within the next five years since 2010 or for a longer period if need be. There are efforts to assist regions that are lagging behind in order to keep them apace with the overall advance,” the CPP stated in reference to its 2008 target.

For the first time also, the CPP-NPA and its political umbrella, the National Democratic Front (NDF), is putting to rest military claims that the armed regulars of the communist have been reduced to a little over 4,000 from a high of 25,000 fully armed NPAs in the 1980s.

“The Aquino regime and its retinue of military officers keep on boasting that most areas of the Philippines have become insurgency-free…(the) fact is, that NPA armed strength in 1986 was only 6,100 rifles,” the CPP central committee said Monday.

But in Mindanao, the NPAs are gaining grounds where comrades elsewhere in the country are still struggling to rebuild their forces after two decades of ‘rectification movement.’

Rebel spokesman Jorge Madlos, a.k.a Ka Oris, said in an e-mailed statement that despite massive military operations in rebel strongholds in the island, they were able to increase the number of guerilla fronts from 39 in 2008 to 44 this year.

Ka Oris said 40 percent of its 44 guerrilla fronts now have company sized formations in addition to its 5 main regional guerilla units (sentro de grabidad).

He said the NPAs are growing at the rate of 10 percent every year over the last three years.
The CPP in Mindanao is also now building regional and sub-regional operational commands for the NPA, something that it used to have in the 1980s but decided to disband following ideological debate which led to the decimation of rebel ranks nationwide in the 1990s.

Rebel forces in the island, especially those in the Davao and Caraga regions, are again capable of launching undersized battalion formations for tactical offensives as they did in raiding Taganito Mines more than a year ago.

Lt. Gen. Jorge Segovia, commanding general of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Eastern Mindanao Command, however said rebel forces in the island could not be more than 1,500 fully armed regulars.

The CPP was re-established in December 26, 1968 led by University of the Philippines professor Jose Maria Sison and a motley group of intellectuals.

It is waging a Maoist-inspired protracted guerilla warfare that goes into “3 strategic stages” namely, strategic defensive, strategic stalemate and strategic offensive.

Forty four years after, the CPP is still in the strategic defensive stage.

The Philippine insurgency is the longest running of its kind in Southeast Asia.

Toothless Thai Human Rights Commission | Asia Sentinel

Toothless Thai Human Rights Commission | Asia Sentinel
Pavin Chachavalpongpun, 16 December 2012

An important agency is rendered toothless by its Quisling chairwoman

Amara Pongsapich, the chairperson of Thailand’s National Human Rights Commission. must have felt frustrated to hear that former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had been charged with murder in connection with his role in a military crackdown against pro-Thaksin protesters in 2010.

That is not because as the commission’s head she wanted to punish Abhisit for ordering brutal attacks on protesters during the April-May 2010 protests that wracked central Bangkok as part of her duty to defend human rights. It may be because she saw the need to protect Abhisit, the face of the Thai upper class of which she is a part.

Thailand’s human rights situation has been in dire straits, particularly since the military coup of 2006. Amara was selected to chair the newly established human rights body at a critical time in Thai politics where violence had been repeatedly used against the people, but she has been a disappointment for many in Thailand.

The Human Rights Commission was established in 2009 and its members were appointed, rather than elected, thus raising questions pertaining to its accountability, impartiality and transparency. The commission was established during the Abhisit administration, suggesting that her appointment could have been politically motivated.

Indeed, it has been rather clear that the two are close allies. Amara has never been politically neutral since the beginning. Her inclinations and sympathy toward the People’s Alliance for Democracy, the royalist Yellow Shirts, has cast doubt upon her ability to lead an important organization that deals with justice spanning multi-political ideologies and alignments.

A former professor and dean of Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Political Science, Amara earned her doctorate in anthropology from the University of Washington. Her research interests have been in the sociology of religion, development and cultural change, society and culture, women studies, and ethnicity. Supposedly, she must possess a deep understanding of the way in which human rights are defined.

But in reality, Amara has never condemned the use of violence in the hands of the Abhisit government against the red-shirt protesters. Some 92 were believed killed and 2,000 injured. The NHRC has been silent all along. This poses a question of whose interests Amara has been protecting.

When the Yingluck Shinawatra government decided to employ teargas to disperse crowds in the latest anti-government rally led by an elderly former general in late November, Amara and her NHRC were fuming. She immediately released a statement reproaching the government’s measures in dealing with the demonstrators.

“The government was over-reacting and the use of teargas was unacceptable,” she said. It is important to note that only a few casualties were reported during the rally, a stark contrast to what happened during April-May 2010.

Since the charges against Abhisit have been brought out into the public, Amara has, as expected, made no comment, even when Abhisit denied all responsibility. The intimate connection between Abhisit and Amara could have a played a role in the human rights commission’s lackluster response regarding the continuing investigation of several cases related to the 2010 violence.

In the aftermath of the 2006 coup, Amara was invited to join a constitutional drafting committee sponsored by the Thai junta. The result is the 2007 constitution which, as many would argue, has remained largely “undemocratic. Considering that she was a political science professor who taught her students about political ethics, Amara’s decision to serve the junta in such committee seriously called into question her own ethics and integrity.

Allying with the traditional elite appears to have rendered many benefits to Amara. She is herself an elite. There is little evidences that she genuinely cares about the rights of the Thai people, especially those in the underclass.

In 2010, upon taking up her position at the NHRC, she beautifully reiterated her passion for human rights protection.

“I enjoy learning about people from different backgrounds, how they live, what they believe and what is important to them,” she said. “My work has exposed me to many of the issues facing indigenous peoples and minority groups – the hardship they experience, the lack of access to basic social services and, as a result, the many opportunities that are denied to them.”

These statements have proved flimsy. Under Amara’s leadership, the commission has refused to discuss one of the most pressing issues in Thailand: the lèse-majesté law and its impact on human rights. Lèse-majesté cases have continued to skyrocket. More people have been charged with Article 112 of lèse-majesté law, both Thais and foreigners. Some have received extremely harsh sentences. And the NHRC did not even show its concern.

The case of Amphon Tangnoppakul, known in Thailand as Akong, who was sentenced to 20 years in jail for allegedly sending four text messages deemed insulting to the Thai monarchy, failed to alert the NHRC of the serious human rights violations. Akong died in prison on cancer this May. No sympathy was sent out to his family from Amara.

The NHRC has shown a marked lack of interest in many other cases involving political prisoners, as well as harassment against Thai academics in Thailand who spoke critically of the monarchy. This is a sad story indeed as Amara is also a one-time academic.

This year alone, the NHRC has enjoyed a hefty Bt173.59 million budget (US$5.67 million) for its works on the promotion of human rights. Yet, a big question is how Amara can justify the spending of this budget when the human rights situation has continued to deteriorate.

As evidence of further damage the reputation of her agency, Amara, at year’s end, has offered human rights awards to a number of dubious personalities, ranging from a celebrity monk, a controversial forensic pathologist and a detainee in a Phnom Penh prison who was arrested by Cambodia for provoking a conflict between the two countries.

Amara needs to reconsider her role as the leader of the commission. Her performance has let many of her compatriots down, as well as those who are monitoring the Thai human rights situation in the outside world.

(Pavin Chachavalpongpun is associate professor at Kyoto University’s Centre for Southeast Asian Studies.)

US Pivot Heightens Asian Disputes by Richard Javad Heydarian -- Antiwar.com

US Pivot Heightens Asian Disputes by Richard Javad Heydarian -- Antiwar.com
Richard Javad Heydarian, December 15, 2012

With newly re-elected President Barack Obama having chosen Southeast Asia as his first foreign destination, where he also attended the much-anticipated pan-Pacific East Asia Summit, the U.S. has underscored its commitment to its so-called strategic ‘pivot’ to the Asia-Pacific region.

Months after the 2011 U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq, President Obama signaled the formal launch of the pivot in a November speech to the Australian parliament: “As a Pacific nation, the United States will play a larger and long-term role in shaping this region and its future.”

The U.S. already has around 320,000 troops stationed in the region, as well as 50 percent of its formidable global naval assets. Under the pivot strategy, the U.S. is set to commit several thousand additional troops and increase its naval strength by another ten percent in the coming few years.

The Obama administration has repeatedly denied that the pivot is a containment strategy aimed at Beijing, arguing it is simply a logical ‘rebalancing’ towards the region in light of Asia’s stunning economic growth and the increasing importance of maintaining U.S. interests there.

However, more than two years into the so-called U.S. pivot, many strategic commentators across the Pacific have raised major questions as to its real intentions, actual impact, and practicability, given the United States’ deep fiscal constraints ahead of scheduled defence-spending cuts.

Reacting to lingering uncertainties over the U.S. strategy, China, which views the pivot as an act of provocation, as well as other countries in the region such as Vietnam, Philippines, and Japan, have stepped up their territorial claims in the Western Pacific – indirectly testing America’s resolve to uphold its strategic commitments.

In this sense, the pivot – purportedly to reinforce the United States’ role as an ‘anchor of stability and prosperity’ in the Pacific – has ironically contributed to greater uncertainty, turbulence, and belligerence vis-à-vis the festering maritime disputes.

In a recent op-ed for the Singapore-based daily The Straits Times, Barry Desker, the dean of the Singapore-based S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), called for ‘mutual restraint’ by all disputing littoral states to ‘diffuse’ tensions, while contending that all parties are “guilty of occupying uninhabited islands and land features.”

And a recent report by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group says: “With tensions on the rise, Manila is eager to pursue closer military cooperation with the U.S., and Hanoi (as a strategic partner) is keen to carefully bring in and balance U.S. influence in the region.
“If these countries frame any U.S. assistance as being directed against China, it will be harder for the former to persuade the latter that it will not get involved in territorial disputes.”

The pivot can be traced as far back as the 2010 ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in Hanoi, where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton injected the U.S. into the centre of decades-long territorial disputes in the South China Sea by announcing that her country had a ‘national interest’ in the freedom of navigation across the Western Pacific, including the South China Sea.

As a result, allies such as Japan and the Philippines have repeatedly sought U.S. re-assurance vis-à-vis existing bilateral mutual defence treaties, especially in the event of military confrontation with China over disputed maritime features in the Western Pacific.
The Philippines and Vietnam are mired in bitter maritime disputes with China over a whole host of features in the Spratly and Paracel chains of islands in the South China Sea, while Japan is contesting China’s claim to the Senkaku/Diaoyu chain of islands in the East China Sea.

Meanwhile, Washington’s allies in Northeast Asia, Japan and South Korea, are locked in a separate territorial dispute over the Takeshima/Dokdo islands in the Sea of Japan.

In last month’s Australia-U.S. Ministerial Meeting, Clinton sought to calm Chinese nerves by stating, “We (the U.S.) welcomed a strong, prosperous and peaceful China, which plays a constructive role in promoting regional security and prosperity… We do not take a position on competing territorial claims in the South China Sea.”

The U.S. Navy also invited China to join the large-scale, U.S.-led ‘Rim of the Pacific Exercise’ by 2014.

Yet an unconvinced China, under its new leadership, has nudged up its claims. Recently, authorities in the southern Chinese Island of Hainan have issued new laws, whereby beginning next year, they will have the authority to intercept and board any foreign vessel seen to violate China’s ‘sovereignty’ over all claimed features in the South China Sea.

In response, Secretary-General of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Surin Pitsuwan warned that such a decision “…has increased a level of concern and a level of great anxiety among all parties, particularly parties that would need the access, the passage and the freedom to go through.” Beijing subsequently insisted that the new authority was not aimed against sea-borne commercial traffic.

China’s new passport design, incorporating disputed territories in the South China Sea under the country’s official map, has also sparked renewed concerns among some of its southern neighbours.

In the face of what it sees as Chinese provocations, however, a deeply divided ASEAN has failed to make any meaningful progress in crafting a legally-binding regional Code of Conduct to resolve disputes, as strongly urged by Washington.

If the pivot is seen in Beijing as a provocation, it has also encouraged greater assertiveness on the part of some of its neighbours.

While the Vietnamese have stepped up their energy exploration projects in disputed territories, and the Japanese government decided to purchase from its private owner one of the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea, the Philippines has pushed to upgrade its military ties with the U.S., Canada, Australia, Japan, and South Korea to defend its own claims.

“While we are all aware that the U.S. does not take sides in disputes, they do have a strategic stake in the freedom of navigation, unimpeded commerce, and the maintenance of peace and stability in the South China Sea,” Filipino President Benigno Aquino stated at last month’s East Asian Summit, prodding further U.S. involvement in the South China Sea disputes.

How Washington will react to these kinds of pressures, particularly given its own fiscal challenges that have already resulted in nearly 500 billion dollars in cuts to its projected military budgets over the next ten years, adds yet another level of uncertainty to the calculations of the contending parties in the region.

Already, the pivot is being attacked by the U.S. right as insufficient. “This reallocation of military and diplomatic resources was supposed to guarantee stability in a region seeking to balance China’s rise. In reality, this strategic shift is less than it appears,” argued Michael Auslin in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. “In reality…it won’t solve Asia’s problems and may even add to the region’s uncertainty by over-promising and under-delivering.”

This article was originally published at IPS News.

Asia Provocateur: Abhisit rumour: Willing to be a coup Prime Minister?

Asia Provocateur: Abhisit rumour: Willing to be a coup Prime Minister?

Andrew Spooner, 12 December 2012

A rumour is circulating in Bangkok that Thai Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has made it very clear he would be willing to be installed as Prime Minister again if a military coup was used to topple the present, democratically elected government of Yingluck Shinawatra.

Abhisit was Thai PM from 2008 to 2011 but hasn't won any of the three elections he has led his party into and leads a party that hasn't even been the largest in the Thai Parliament since 1992.

Whilst unsubstantiated the rumour that Abhisit would be willing to be a "coup PM" has some foundation given Abhisit's route to power in 2008 which involved support from the neo-fascist PAD, the army and a political party which was conjured out of thin air in order to give Abhisit a large enough "coalition" to take the PM seat.

Abhisit then clung to power for 30months using 10s of 1000s of troops to crush pro-democracy protests in 2009 and 2010 which called for fresh elections to test Abhisit's mandate (his Democrat Party was crushed in the 2011 election). Almost 100 civilians died and 1000s were injured as a result and Abhisit has recently been charged with murder.

Given his record it's pretty clear Abhisit is a Democrat who doesn't believe in democracy. So the question remains: would he be willing to be a Coup Prime Minister?

I have written to a member of the team of a senior Democrat Party asking them if they wish to respond to this post. I will publish their response here should they make one.

Asia Provocateur: When Boris Johnson met the Butcher of Bangkok; yet more Abhisit lies

Asia Provocateur: When Boris Johnson met the Butcher of Bangkok; yet yet more Abhisit lies

Andrew Spooner, 11 December 2012

As noted by several other posts in this blog Abhisit's visit to London hasn't gone terribly well.

Only last week the Butcher of Bangkok, former Thai PM, Abhisit Vejjajiva, was charged with murder relating to the death of an unarmed protester in Bangkok in 2010 after he ordered a bloody military crackdown on pro-democracy protests that resulted in almost 100 deaths. (WARNING The video footage here and here of clearly unarmed protesters being shot by Thai soldiers is harrowing and very graphic).

From UCL students cancelling and then reinstating his appearance at the university, to his bizarre claim that he was "invited to speak by the UK Parliament", followed by his butt-clenchingly bad interview with the BBC's Mishal Husain it's not been a great few days for Mark.

But there's more. With Abhisit there are always more misrepresentations and lies to debunk and the latest is his visit to the Greater London Authority (GLA) and the Mayor of London.

As we can see from Abhisit's Facebook page here (screengrab below) he seems to be suggesting that his GLA visit was was some kind of very important high profile official visit.

Well, it will probably come as no surprise to readers here that Abhisit misrepresented this too.

I was in contact with the Mayor of London's press office during the day and they confirmed that Abhisit and the Mayor's meeting was not official in any way, shape or form.

This was a private meeting between two men, Mr Vejjajiva and Mr Johnson, who were at school together.

The well-known and respected blog on London politics, Snipe London also picked up on the story with a headline that said

Boris welcomes former Thai PM despite murder charge

So what was Abhisit actually doing in London? He had no real official engagements apart from the ones he made up in his head and just to seemed flit around in a desperate attempt to appear relevant. It's quite a sad and sorry spectacle and one can only hope that he gets the chance to spend plenty of time in the future defending himself from that troublesome murder charge.

Asia Provocateur: Abhisit's invitation to speak to Parliament debunk: official UK Parliament response.

Asia Provocateur: Abhisit's invitation to speak to Parliament debunk: official UK Parliament response

Andrew Spooner, 10 December 2012

Brief post but just had a response from the UK Parliament's press office. And it is unequivocal. Abhisit was not invited by Parliament nor was he invited to speak to Parliament nor was the person who invited him, chair of the Thailand All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG), Roger Godsiff MP, even an official representative of Parliament. That he and Korn claimed they were invited by Parliament is quite risible. They were invited to a simple reception inside the Parliament building hosted by an MP. 

With regards to your query, foreign politicians often address parliamentarians at meetings of APPGs or receptions, but this should not be taken as an invitation to address Parliament as a whole, as APPGs have no official status within Parliament.  An Address to Parliament normally takes place as part of a state visit, and involves a speech to both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.  A formal address is a comparatively rare event, and you can see a listing of some of the most recent ones here:http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-04092.pdf. 

Korn: more lies about his and Abhisit's "invitation to speak at the UK Parliament" | Asia Provocateur

Korn: more lies about his and Abhisit's "invitation to speak at the UK Parliament" | Asia Provocateur

Andrew Spooner, 9 December 2012

Yesterday I blogged about Korn's grandiose Facebook claims that Abhisit and he had been invited by the UK Parliament to speak there during a reception hosted by the Thai Children's Trust.

As stated yesterday after checking both the Thai Children's Trust and Parliament website I could find no mention of either Korn or Abhisit's attendance or invitation.

Korn has recent form on bizarre statements and claims with tasteless, oddball comparisons of the democratically elected government of Yingluck Shinawatra to "Hitler".

Korn's team have now reacted to my claims and published a photo of Korn's invitation to attend a reception at Parliament. The event is hosted by Roger Godsiff, the Labour Party MP who is chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Thailand.

Very obviously this invitation is not from the Parliament nor is it one to speak. It is a simple reception invitation from an MP acting as a host. Receptions like this are being hosted several times a day in the UK Parliament with a huge range of people being invited.

So let's reiterate: an invitation to a reception at Parliament is absolutely not an invitation from the UK Parliament to speak and to claim that it is is completely absurd. In fact, over the last two months I've personally been invited to two similar receptions and at no time did I make the ludicrous claim I'd been invited to speak at the Parliament.

 Korn also claimed Abhisit was invited by the parliament to speak. I will ask the Parliament press office tomorrow if the Parliament has invited either Korn or Abhisit to speak. I will also inform Roger Godsiff MP that Korn deliberately misrepresented his invitation to Thais and claimed it was a parliamentary invite to speak when it was just a basic invitation to a reception.

Ex-Thai PM to Face Murder Charges for Crackdown | The Irrawaddy Magazine

Ex-Thai PM to Face Murder Charges for Crackdown | The Irrawaddy Magazine
THANYARAT DOKSONE / AP WRITER| December 7, 2012 


BANGKOK—Investigators say they plan to file murder charges against Thailand’s former prime minister and his deputy in the first prosecutions of officials for their roles in a deadly 2010 crackdown on anti-government protests.

The protests and crackdown left more than 90 people dead and about 1,800 injured in Thailand’s worst political violence in decades. Former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s Democrat Party, now in the opposition after being ousted in elections last year, and “Redshirt” supporters of the ruling Pheu Thai Party have blamed each other for the bloodshed since.

Department of Special Investigation chief Tharit Phengdit said Thursday that investigators found Abhisit possibly culpable in the death of a taxi driver because he allowed troops to use war weapons and live ammunition against protesters.

Abhisit and former Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, who was in charge of the ad hoc security agency set up to contain the protests, will be summoned Wednesday to be formally charged. The courts must accept the case before it can go to trial.

Democrat Party spokesman Chavanond Intarakomalyasut called the decision “an abuse of government’s power to threaten its opponents.” He noted that it was done while parliament is in recess so the two men’s immunity from arrest is lifted.

Tharit denied that the decision is politically motivated and said the case is significant “for society because the deaths were inflicted by an act of government officers.”

The deaths occurred during the red shirts’ nine-week anti-government protest in the heart of the capital that had sought to force Abhisit to call early elections. Central Bangkok was garrisoned by soldiers until they moved in to crush the protest on May 19, 2010.

The protest was staged primarily by supporters of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted by a 2006 military coup after being accused of corruption and disrespect to the monarchy. His supporters and opponents have vied for power since then, and Thaksin’s sister Yingluck Shinawatra now leads the government.

A Criminal Court inquest recently found that taxi driver Phan Kamkong was killed by guns used by military personnel during the crackdown.

Chavanond alleged that the inquest was a one-sided trial in which the accused could not defend themselves and that no one was pinpointed as the shooter.

He insisted the security body set up to contain the protests issued no order to use force against or kill civilians, only to keep order in dealing with “black shirts,” armed men who served as guards for the demonstrators.

“To use the court’s inquest to conclude that the two men had the intention of murder was groundless and against the law,” Chavanond said.

He said both Abhisit and Suthep “are ready to prove their innocence,” and that “those who brought up false charges will have to take responsibility.”

DSI chief Tharit said factors leading to the planned charges include the continuing use of force over time and the killing of civilians without resorting to other methods of controlling protesters.

VIDEO: On King's birthday Thai royalists threaten Red Shirt street vendor | Asia Provocateur

VIDEO: On King's birthday Thai royalists threaten Red Shirt street vendor | Asia Provocateur

Andrew Spooner, 5 December 2012

As 1000s of Thais gather today in Bangkok to pay homage to the Thai king on his 85th birthday it didn't take long for the more fanatical royalist element to make their feelings known.

A single female street vendor near Kasetsart University had the temerity to sell a few products showing the picture of the elected Thai Prime Minister, Yingluck Shinawatra and to wear some red coloured clothing.

As can be seen from the following video, the vendor was surrounded by an enraged mob who screamed abuse and attempted to damage the vendor's goods.

This is fairly typical behaviour from Thailand's royalists who have a long record of using extreme violence, threats and intimidation against those who dare to dissent against the dominant royalist view.

Luckily, on this occasion, a police office steps in to protect the woman. In the past, royalists such as the Red Guar, have been involved in terrible massacres such as the one at Thammasat University in 1976.

UPDATE: It seems like the video has now been removed. We do, however, have a photo of the vendor being attacked below and the screen grab of the opening frame of the original video. The first picture is from a bizarre Facebook site called "Dislike Yingluck for Concentration Citizen" and includes various death threats by a variety of Thai royalists. One by a Ta Piyawan states in Thai that the vendor should be "detained" and then taken away where, after the royal celebrations, the vendor can suffer some "harsh treatment" and turned into "fertiliser".

UPDATE 2: We've now found another source of the video of the attack (h/t to "Dan") on the Red Shirt vendor. It's quite clear that the crowd is whipped up into quite a frenzy. Maybe it's only a matter of time before the royalists start hanging people from Bangkok's trees again?

Thai Group helping lese majeste detainees upset with media, govt | The Nation

Thai Group helping lese majeste detainees upset with media, govt | The Nation
Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation on Sunday December 2, 2012

Nearly half a year ago, a group of family members affected by the controversial lese majeste law decided to form The Network of Family Members and Peoples Affected by Article 112.

This, they believed, was necessary as they felt not enough is being done to guarantee justice for those detained under the law while censorship and the curbs to freedom of expression are not adequately raised and discussed in society.

When the network launched itself, only Thailand's two-English language newspapers paid interest while the Thai-language papers ignored their formation. It is symptomatic of how the media and society warily treat the issue of lese majeste law, said 45-year-old Sukanya Prueksakasemsuk, wife of lese majeste detainee Somyos Prueksakemsuk.

"There are more foreigners who pay attention to the formation of our network," said the mild-speaking Sukanya, a private company employee, who had to learn about political activism from scratch after the group was formed to partly help her husband who has been behind bars for more than a year without bail. Sukanya cited a German radio journalist interviewing the group and a journalist from France. "Hardly any Thai media," she added.

That hasn't stop the group, with 18 members, to meet once a month and hold activities highlighting what they believe to be infringement of basic legal rights such as the denial of bail to most lese majeste detainees, and more.

One new member of the group knows this well; Surapak Phuchaisaeng was released from prison just at the end of last month after the court threw out his lese majeste case due to insufficient evidence. Surapak, 40, a computer programmer, was denied bail eight times while fighting the case.

He said that while he was in prison, the network visited him and other prisoners of conscience twice or three times a week, offering food and bringing news about the outside world as well as moral support that sustained him and others. The support the network proved invaluable, he said.

"I decided to join the network myself [after being released from jail] because we share the same predicament," Surapak, who is still trying to recover from life in jail, told The Nation on the phone from Buengkarn province. Surapak criticised the recent decision by the Pheu Thai-dominated Parliament to refuse to debate a proposed amendment of the law as an act of "cowardice" and said people will probably have to wait for a new parliament.

"What kind of system does this country have if Parliament dare not discuss laws pertaining to the monarchy institution?" asked Surapak, adding that in the future the network will seek

to identify political parties that will openly support the amendment of the law, which now

carries a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment.

Sukanya said even if there's very little or no hope to see the law amended, she and others hope that the seven prisoners of conscience, including her husband, will have the right to get bail. She visited her husband once a week and clung to the hope that Somyos will be found not guilty when the court will hand the verdict on December 19, so she can celebrate the New Year with him.

Somsak 'Pessimistic' about Lese Majeste Law Fight | Prachatai English

Somsak 'Pessimistic' about Lese Majeste Law Fight | Prachatai English
Pravit Rojanaphruk, December 1, 2012

Well-known Thammasat historian Somsak Jeamteerasakul said he was both surprised and appalled by the decision of police to forward his lese majeste police complaint case to the Office of the Attorney General (OAG).

Somsak, who lectures at Thammasat University, said on the phone that since the complaint lodged against him was made by the “influential” Thai Army, the case which first surfaced last year, is unlikely to be dropped.

He insisted that he did not violate the controversial lese majeste law, which carries a maximum imprisonment term of 15 years, because he criticized Princess Chulabhorn who is not an heir apparent and thus not protected under the law.

Somsak requested and was permitted to defer his appearance to the OAG from to a date yet to be set in December in order to prepare his legal fight. “The prosecutor could arrest me [on that day], however,” said Somsak. “Lese majeste is a kind of legal case that has no way out. I look at it very pessimistically.”

The historian also criticized the House of Representatives and the Yingluck Shinawatra administration for not doing anything to amend the law, thus allowing the climate of fear to persist.

He said members of the campaign to amend to law must have been caught “clueless” by the recent rejection by the House to even debate the law. “The government is totally silent. The government has not even left a room,” said Somsak, who enjoys a large following for his writings critical of the law and the monarchy institution.

There are currently at least seven people detained under the law with hundreds more in the process of possibly being charged or having received police complaints made against them.