Home / News / Urgent Appeals / THAILAND: Human rights defender faces preliminary decision in libel case

THAILAND: Human rights defender faces preliminary decision in libel case

June 21, 2004

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM

21 June 2004

---------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-73-2004: THAILAND: Human rights defender faces preliminary decision in libel case

THAILAND: Freedom of speech; Democratization of media; Human rights defenders
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) wishes to draw attention to the fact that tomorrow, June 22, the preliminary decision will be given in a civil suit of extreme importance for all persons concerned with freedom of speech in Thailand. The case is a libel suit filed by Shin Corp, Thailand's biggest telecommunications and media company, which is owned by the family of the Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, against Ms Supinya Klangnarong, Secretary General of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform. The libel case was issued after Ms Supinya observed that Shin Corp's profits have skyrocketed since Mr Thaksin became Prime Minister.

The case is deeply disturbing as Ms Supinya's remarks were made out of concern for public interest in issues of media ownership and freedom of speech in Thailand. If Shin Corp is given leave to proceed with the suit, it will legitimate the use of the judicial system in Thailand as a means to silence public dissent and further intimidate Thailand's civil sector, which has already been subjected to numerous threats and attacks in recent years.

AHRC calls for you to send letters, make emails and phone calls to Shin Corp's Boonklee Plangsiri, Chairman of the Group Executive Committeem, asking Shin Corp to withdraw the case against Ms Supinya. You may also send letters of support to Ms Supinya directly.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
-----------------------------------------------------------

DETAILED INFORMATION:

On 16 July 2003, the Thai Post newspaper published an article in which Ms Supinya Klangnarong, Secretary General of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform (CPMR), observed that the profits of Shin Corp had increased enormously since its founder, Mr Thaksin Shinawatra, had become Prime Minister of Thailand. In the article, Ms Supinya pointed out that since Mr Thaksin founded his Thai Rak Thai political party five years earlier, his company's profits had increased four times over, and were projected to increase many times still. She gave details—based upon sound research—of how Mr Thaksin had used the political system to manipulate business in favour of Shin Corp. She also noted that Shin Corp's business interests were all in public communications—mobile phones, satellite transmissions and television—and therefore matters over which there should be public debate as matters of national concern. Additionally, she pointed out that the profits from Shin Corp were being channelled back into the Thai Rak Thai company, effectively integrating Mr Thaksin's political and commercial interests into a single highly powerful enterprise.

After the report was released, Shin Corp filed a libel suit for about ten million Thai Baht (US$222,000). The case has been in preliminary hearings since 1 December 2003, and the court will decide on whether or not the case may proceed to the full court. If Shin Corp succeeds in taking the case to the next stage, it will have serious implications for Ms Supinya personally, and for efforts to democratize media in Thailand overall. For Ms Supinya, it will hamper her efforts to lead the campaign for desperately needed and long-overdue media reform in the country, as her time and resources will be spent fighting an arduous court battle. For others in the country concerned with freedom of speech and media reform it will legitimate methods used by the government and powerful commercial interests to pursue persons through the courts who have spoken against them out of concern for the public good and free expression.

It should be noted that only Shin Corp has sued Ms Supinya. Neither the Prime Minister nor his Thai Rak Thai party has denied her allegations that a connection exists between Mr Thaksin's political and commercial enterprises.


ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

The television and radio media in Thailand have been under a government and military monopoly since their introduction to the country. Although the new Constitution of Thailand introduced in 1997 set in place provisions for the democratization of these media, these provisions have not been realized. The only television station not controlled by the government or military is owned by Shin Corp. Radio stations have been started by local communities, but the government has threatened them with closure on the grounds they are "illegal". In fact it is the government itself that has failed to introduce a licensing regime in accordance with the new Constitution. There is what the CPMR has identified as a new media monopoly emerging between the commercial and government sectors, as media concessions are issued to Shin Corp and other businesses close to senior politicians, thereby defeating the purpose of the constitutional reforms. Shin Corp in particular has totally dominated all sectors of the commercial media in Thailand, as it owns 24 companies running telecommunications, television, radio, internet, satellite and other communications throughout the country, and even into neighbouring Cambodia, Laos and Burma. The result is that outside a limited number of newspapers and low distribution journals, there remains virtually no independent media in Thailand, thereby greatly damaging the prospects for opening discussion on serious violations of human rights and other concerns currently faced by the people there. In particular, there are no avenues for the expression of popular concerns from the local level in Thailand, and as such the country continues to be dominated by an elite urban-centred discourse inimical to the furtherance of human rights in the country.

Ms Supinya set up the CPMR to advocate media reform and counter these trends on the basis of provisions in the new Constitution intended to liberalise and democratize electronic media in Thailand. As the spokesperson and leading figure of this forerunning organization for media reform in Thailand she poses a threat to those who would see a government and big business monopoly

For other reports on the case and background, see the following sites:
ABC (Australia) News: http://www.abcnews.net.au/asiapacific/location/asia/GAPLocAsiaStories_1006728.htm
Asia Media: http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=5363
Committee to Protect Journalists: http://www.cpj.org/attacks03/asia03/thai.html
CorpWatch: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=9333
WACC: http://www.wacc.org.uk/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=1412

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please phone call or send a letter/fax/email to the Shin Corporation and demand them to drop the suit filed against Ms Supinya Klangnarong. AHRC suggests you to intervene into this case as quickly as possible as the preliminary decision about this case will be given in a civil suit on 22 June 2004 (tomorrow).

Sample letter:

Mr. Boonklee Plangsiri
Chairman of the Group Executive Committee  
Shin Corporation Plc.
414 Phaholyothin Road
Samsennai, Phayathai
Bangkok 10400
Thailand

Dear Mr. Boonklee Plangsiri,

Re: THAILAND: Shin Corp. Libel case against Ms Supinya Klangnarong

As a person concerned with freedom of speech in Thailand, I strongly urge the Shin Corporation to drop the suit filed against Ms Supinya Klangnarong, Secretary General of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform (CPMR).

According to the information I have received, the preliminary decision will be given in a civil suit filed by your Shin Corp against Ms Supinya Klangnarong on 22 June 2004. The libel case was filed after Ms Supinya observed that Shin Corp's profits have skyrocketed since Mr Thaksin Shinawatra became Prime Minister.

I want to bring to your attention that her case is not merely a personal matter but is related to the democratization of media in Thailand overall. In fact, her activity for long-overdue media reform is linked to the realization of the new Constitution of Thailand introduced in 1997, which set in place provisions for the democratization of these media. However, until now the only television station not controlled by the government or military is owned by Shin Corp. Similarly, radio stations that have been started by local communities have been threatened by the government with closure on the grounds that they are "illegal". Under these circumstances, Ms Supinya has identified Shin Corp as a new media monopoly emerging between the commercial and government sectors, as media concessions are issued to Shin Corp and other businesses close to senior politicians, thereby defeating the purpose of the constitutional reforms.

Media reform on the basis of provisions in the new Constitution is essential for opening discussion on serious violations of human rights and other concerns currently faced by the people in Thailand. If the case will be taken to the next stage, this will have serious implications not only for Ms Supinya personally, but for all efforts to democratize media in Thailand.

Therefore, I strongly urge the Shin Corp. to drop the suit against Ms Supinya immediately. As a media corporation you have a social responsibility to uphold freedom of speech, and therefore I request you to take part in media reform and create a better environment for democracy.

Yours sincerely


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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

Mr Boonklee Plangsiri
Chairman of the Group Executive Committee  
Shin Corporation Plc.
414 Phaholyothin Road
Samsennai, Phayathai,
Bangkok 10400
Thailand
Tel:  (662) 299-5000
Fax: (662) 271-1058
E-mail: investor@shincorp.com

PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:

1. Mr. Thaksin Shinawatra
Prime Minister
Government house,
Pitsanulok Road, Dusit District,
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Fax: +66 2 282 8631
Email: thaksin@thaigov.go.th, govspkman@mozart.inet.co.th

2. Mrs. Sudarat Keyuraphan
Deputy Leader
Thai Rak Thai Party
237/2 Ratchawithi Road
Suan Chitralada
Dusit, Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Tel: (662) 668-2000
Fax: (662) 668-6000
Email: sudarat@sudarat.com, spokesman@thairakthai.or.th

3. Professor Saneh Chamarik
Chairperson
The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand
422 Phya Thai Road
Pathurn Wan District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Fax: 662 219 2940
Email: commission@nhrc.or.th

4. Ms. Hina Jilani
UN Sepcial Represetative of the Secretaary-General on Human Rights Defenders
C/o OHCHR-UNOG, 1211 Geneva 10,
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 917 9006

MESSAGES OF SUPPORT MAY ALSO BE SENT TO:

Supinya Klangnarong
Secretary General
CPMR
409 Soi Ratchada 14
Huay Kwang
Bangkok 10320
THAILAND
Tel & Fax: +66 2 691 0437 to 0439
Email: cpmr40@hotmail.com


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-73-2004
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.