Thai Protests: The End of a Silent Era

Posted on 28 Jan 2021 by Rachel Tan

Disclaimer: The views expressed below are that of the individual author.

King, Maha’seccentricity and unconstitutional behaviour have undoubtedly added fuel to the fire that is the pro-democracy protests. Protests areled by mostly students fighting against the improper exercises of power committed by the Thai government and monarchy. The dissolution of the pro-democracy Future Forward Party, a critic of the prime minister and his administration, stirred anti-authoritarian sentiments in the younger generation who are tired of the inevitable conclusion dissentients meet. Protesters’ demands include the dissolution of parliament, the end of repression of dissidents, the creation of a new constitution and lastly, reformation of the monarchy. The three-finger salute, banned during the 2014 military coup, has returned as a symbol of the protests and the desire for proper democracy.

Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha is in his second consecutive term. In his first election, in 2014, he went against his promise that the military had no place in politics and initiated a coup against the government after 6 months of political unrest. The military administration, the National Council for Peace and Order, suspended the constitution and enacted an interim constitution that accorded broad and absolute power to the military. Its provisions guaranteed the military government unlimited authority to take action against any activity it deemed a threat to public order, security or the monarchy. In this case, the fundamental purposes of having and abiding by a constitution have been defeated. Leaders and national institutions have the power to vary its provisions in their favour and ultimately are placed above the law without being held accountable by any checks and balances.

The effect of the constitution, under which was meant to hold decision-makers amenable and to protect the freedoms of the people, has become so distorted that it instead curbs civil liberties and free speech. The former general was elected again in 2019 by a parliament monopolized by the military. Regarding the protests, Prayuth has simply ignored any calls for him to step down and dispassionately stated that the matter will be dealt by the staunchly pro-Prayuth parliament. Mysterious disappearances and killings of prominent political activists, journalists and lawyers are evidence of the government attempting to silence dissent. As a corollary of the merciless measures of repression, a general fear of speaking one’s mind has become ubiquitous throughout Thailand[MB1] .

However, this atmosphere of fear had already existed since 1908, when the lese-majeste law was enforced in Thailand’s first criminal code. The controversial section 112 penalises anyone who ‘defames, insults or threatens the king, the queen, the heir-apparent or the regent’ with an accompanying jail term of three to fifteen years. This sedition provision has been, to date, enshrined in twenty Thai constitutions that demand that the king be placed on a pedestal of ‘revered worship’ and that he be protected unreservedly from any accusation or action. Conveniently for law enforcement, there is no definition of what exactly falls under section 112, allowing a broad interpretation and therefore higher conviction rates. The atrocities do not end there. Those detained under this charge are frequently denied bail and are tried in closed military court where defendants’ rights are severely restricted with no way of appealing the decision. Since Prayuth had stepped into office, the increasing prosecution rates had alerted the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to the grave deprivation and violation of human rights happening before their very eyes. The weight of decades of repression of political activists was felt when an exiled critic of Prayuth’s administration disappeared while in Cambodia, with the government succinctly denying any complicity. In January 2019, the bodies of two exiled critics had washed up onto the bank of the Mekong River. Their bodies were filled with cement to prevent them from floating to the surface. It has become a painfully obvious pattern that where the law fails to stifle free speech, unthinkable and cruel assassinations are employed as a last resort to silence critics. Students at Thammasat University broke the long-observed taboo of speaking publicly about the monarchy when they read out their manifesto on a stage in front of an audience. Panusaya Sithijirawattanakul, one of the students directly involved, sits nervously in her dormitory, away from the dangerous gaze of police and the military junta who wish to see her prosecuted for harbouring chung chart, “hatred of the nation”.

There is a strong, albeit inaudible, desire of the general public to have the Thai monarchy unconditionally held accountable under the constitution. Although calls for the monarchy to abstain from politics and make sensible use of public funds are not special to countries that still preserve monarchical traditions, these ideas are revolutionary in the Southeast Asian country. Since King Vajiralongkorn acceded to the throne in 2016, he has been residing in Germany and has attracted criticism from both German institutions and the Thai people for unlawfully administrating official state affairs while on German soil. Despite critics exerting pressure on Angela Merkel to have the king labelled ‘persona non grata’, the German government is trapped in a political crisis where they would have to strike a difficult balance between respecting the rule of law and evading a diplomatic disaster. Moreover, the king’s wrongful diversion of $43 billion worth of royal assets, managed by the Crown Property Bureau on behalf of citizens, elevated the royal family to the upper echelon of wealth. With the army at his command, the king has access to his own personal defense in the event of a coup. The most unconstitutional of them all remains to be the fact that the king amended clauses allocating him power in the constitution and removed the stipulation for such power to be temporarily transferred to a regent whilst he was overseas. He made an elaborate show of power by shutting down public venues and facilities in order to expand the royal estate beyond its already-palatial presence. The 1932 revolution abolished absolute monarchy and sought to introduce democracy by establishing a constitutional monarchy. In hindsight, however, it seems that there has been no significant difference between the latter and former – what can we call the king’s exercises of power if not absolute and utterly unconstitutional?

The institution of the monarchy is deeply entrenched in Thailand’s history, culture and way of life. Another revolution may be needed to overhaul current monarchical practices and to properly hold the royal family accountable to the people. As to the issue of democracy, it is time that the world’s last military dictatorship ends, along with its inhumane violations of fundamental rights. The question of whether a repeat of history could be anticipated during such political turmoil hangs in the balance. Nevertheless, this remains uncharted territory and we can only speculate as to what could transpire.

Tags: thai_protest / global /

Share on: