In the 31 months since the military takeover, and amid progress both real and asserted, one of the biggest setbacks has been to freedom of speech and information. Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha ordered a clampdown on the media on the day of his May 22, 2014 coup. Since then, no relaxation of censorship has occurred, and many other steps have been ordered. Expressing opinions in public can prove dangerous, and laws such as the recent Computer Crime Act amendment continue to restrict or inhibit both personal and media freedoms.
Last week, in its end-of-year summary, the Thai Journalists Association (TJA) labelled 2016 as "the year of government interference" in the media. No fair person could disagree. Continued tightening of controls on internet providers, ever-increasing arrests for even unremarkable criticism of the government and extended use of the lese majeste law are clearly evident.
The junta's own National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) proposed actual licensing of the media. This is a weapon of the world's worst regimes. The NRSA "media reform" clearly aims to allow government intimidation of the media, if not outright control. Gen Prayut promoted government spokesman Sansern Kaewkamnerd to become a three-star general and put him in charge of disseminating information, in what has been described sarcastically as the formation of a "Ministry of Truth".
Then, near the end of last year, Prime Minister Prayut used yet another Section 44 declaration to undermine reform of the broadcast media. Instead of reverting to popular control, as long envisaged, Gen Prayut ordered that military and government agencies retain control of 537 TV and radio station frequencies for yet another five years -- ironically, a junta licence to continue propaganda broadcasts.
This decision directly involves one of the most criticised and greatest beneficiaries of the ever-lengthening military government era, the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC). Had the prime minister not signed a Section 44 exception, the NBTC would have gained control of the spectrum to return it to its rightful owners, the Thai people. But if the NBTC turned out the loser over this relatively minor issue, it has gone from one success to another in assuming the powers of censorship.
In the last week of 2016, NBTC secretary-general Takorn Tantasith "asked" Thai internet providers to block 36 specific websites. The URLs for the sites came from a visiting group, the National Federation of Motion Pictures and Contents Associations. This is a lobbying and pressure group set up by various Thai film and video providers. The list of 36 websites is supposedly made up exclusively of pirates who stream movies and shows on the internet illegally. Mr Takorn provided no public proof of law-breaking, yet in effect demanded ISPs block the websites merely on his say-so, because film makers asked him to.
It was not even the most controversial or extra-legal decision by Mr Takorn and the NBTC last week. They did not request, but commanded the cessation of broadcasts by the Dhammakaya temple sect. Previously, the NBTC ordered the sect to stop its dual-channel, multi-language broadcasts for 30 days, on the dubious ground that the temple broadcasts were calling on disciples to block police raids.
The latest permanent shutdown order cited alleged incitement by the Dhammakaya stations, creating conflict that was leading to a threat to national security. The NBTC decision cited various laws and regulations. The bottom line, however, is the NBTC acted as a censor once again without using the law.
When the regime makes the accusation of a threat to national security, it at least prosecutes, allowing a legal defence. The NBTC, by operating outside the courts and justice system, is arguably acting outside the rule of law.