Government slams international academics' support for lèse majesté reform

The Thai government has criticised foreign scholars for supporting a campaign led by Thai academics to amend the country’s controversial lèse majesté law, saying that the international scholars may not understand the unique meaning of the monarchy to Thai society.

At the same time Thai lawyers and academics who launched the reform campaign have faced an escalating backlash from the government and the military, as well as university authorities.

An open letter to Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, published on 1 February and signed by 224 academics and intellectuals from 16 countries, called for the amendment of Article 112 of Thailand’s criminal code, better known as the lèse majesté law, to bring it in line with international human rights standards.

Under the current law anyone who “insults, defames or threatens” the King, Queen, heir-apparent or regent may be punished with up to 15 years imprisonment.

The international scholars, who included Noam Chomsky and Cornell West, expressed “grave concern over the use of Article 112 and the erosion of the basic rights of those who face charges under it.

“Article 112 has become a powerful tool to silence political dissent, and in particular, any dissent interpreted as disloyalty to the monarchy,” the letter said.

Government criticism

But Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung insisted that despite international pressure, the government would not amend the law.

Chalerm was reported as saying in Bangkok Biz News on 2 February that while international scholars were free to express whatever they wanted, “whoever agrees with [the campaign against Article 112] can go back and fix those in their own countries” .

Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul said a government response to the scholars’ open letter was not necessary because the government would not amend the law anyway. He suggested that foreign academics might not have sufficient understanding of the Thai people’s high respect for the monarchy.

Tyrell Haberkorn, a research fellow at Australian National University, led the campaign to gather international signatures in support of the Campaign Committee to Amend Article 112 (CCAA112) launched by Thai academics and activists at Thammasat University last month.

She said the negative reaction of the Thai military, pro-monarchy political groups and the opposition since the CCAA112 launch itself demonstrated the need for solidarity from abroad.

CCAA112, led by seven lawyers from Thammasat University called the Nitirat (Enlightened Jurists) group, proposed a blueprint for reform of Article 112. But shortly after their proposals were made public on 15 January, effigies of group members were burned in a protest by royalist groups.

Military chiefs weigh in

Government-led condemnation appeared to be escalating after military chiefs called for the Nitirat group to be expelled from the country.

“Some issues should not be raised because they might create division in the country and anything that defames the monarchy or hurts the Thai people should not be brought up,” Thai Defence Minister General Yutthasak Sasripprapha was quoted in local media as saying.

Naval Commander-in-Chief Admiral Surasak Roonruangwong said "I think all the armed forces are following this group's [Nitirat’s] activities to see if it will affect national security. I agree with the majority of people that the campaign serves no purpose at all."

Academics have been alarmed by the escalation of verbal attacks.

Haberkorn said: “It is important to ask what kind of a signal, direct or indirect, it sends to citizens when the commander-in-chief of the army claims that seven law lecturers should leave the country because they drafted an amendment to a law.”

One of the international signatories of the letter, Kevin Hewison, a professor of Asian studies at the University of Northern Carolina at Chapel Hill, said: “The Nitirat group has repeatedly called for rational debate. In hindsight, that looks like a futile call as Nitirat and its proposals are simply a convenient focal point for a proxy battle in a much larger political conflict that is long-running and unresolved.”

Ban at Thammasat University

An angry debate has also engulfed Thammasat University. The university’s journalism alumni group wrote an open letter to the rector calling for a disciplinary hearing against the Nitirat group, saying what they did was illegal and a disgrace.

At the end of January, the university’s board announced a ban on any political activities linked to Article 112 on university premises, citing the safety and welfare of university staff and a fear that the university would be perceived as siding with one side or another.

Hewison, who is an expert on Thailand, said the decision by the Thammasat University administration was disappointing. “I believe that this is a retrograde step, not just for Thammasat, but for the deepening of democratic practices more generally,” he said in an email response.

“I have always thought of Thammasat University as a bastion of academic freedom and political rights. I know that there have been times when authorities and university administrators have attempted to limit or close this space. Such actions have usually been associated with dictatorial regimes,” Hewison said.

However, after widespread criticism and protests from Thammasat students and the public, the university’s Rector Somkit Lertpaithoon said he would ask management to reconsider the ban next week, as he did not want the university community to become even more divided.

"Thammasat University’s decision to ban from its campus an academic group working on reform of the lèse majesté law constitutes a violation of the human rights principle of academic freedom and should be revoked," Amnesty International said on 9 February.

"Passionate and even contentious debate and disagreement are the pillars of academic freedom. Where academic freedom is threatened by violence, the correct response is to redouble efforts at protecting it – not to suppress it by singling out a party for banning," Amnesty said.

Rakchat Wongatichart, vice-president of Thammasat’s student union, which opposed the ban on Article 112 activities, told University World News that a ban could lead to violence.

“Instead of keeping this in the academic realm for free and open discussion, the fact that they suppress this will result in more disaster.”

Haberkorn said: “Conversations about Article 112 and whether or not it should be amended are going to take place whether or not they are permitted to take place on the Thammasat University campus.

“Rather than shutting down discussion, [they should look at] what the university administration can do to make the university a safe, constructive and engaged place of debate.”