Charter drafters yesterday reversed their decision to include a prohibition on "hate speech" in the new constitution, arguing such a ban might restrict media freedom.
But Kamnoon Sidhisamarn, spokesman for the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), said this doesn't mean the media is free to make hate speeches against others in public. The media must still abide by the law on civil rights.
The CDC said laws banning hate speech might be abused by people in power to interfere with media freedom, he said. Additionally, members agreed another portion of the charter already prohibits the use of hate speech in a different way.
The hate speech provision would have outlawed the use of any language that provokes hatred or violence.
At yesterday's session, the charter drafters discussed cases in which hate speech in the media has led to violence.
They mentioned incendiary messages by a far-right group during the Oct 6, 1976, student uprising which incited violence.
Authorities cracked down on students protesting against the right-wing military government and the return of Field Marshall Thanom Kittikachorn, a military dictator who was prime minister from 1963 to 1973.
More recently, CDC members said the media helped whip up the political violence in Bangkok. In France, provocative cartoons in the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo led to a massacre in which armed gunmen killed 12 people.
But the CDC feared limiting media freedom would compromise the public's right to gain access to news and information, said Manit Suksomjit, deputy chairman of the CDC and former president of the National Press Council of Thailand.
"If we keep that part in the charter, some will use it honestly while others may use in a dishonest way," he said.
In another development, the CDC also agreed on a proposal to set up a new court to handle cases involving financial mismanagement, Mr Kamnoon said.
The court will be attached to the Central Administrative Court and the Supreme Administrative Court, he said.
Cases related to a lack of financial and budgetary discipline are not considered criminal offences but rather misconduct by state officials, he said. That's why they agreed such cases should go to a new court attached to the Administrative Courts.
The CDC, however, has yet to discuss punishment or impeachment of offenders, Mr Kamnoon said. Impeachment for people who offend in the area of finance and budgeting will be debated later when the CDC works on another portion of the charter.