One of the early promises of the military regime was full support for the development of a "digital economy". In fact, before the May 22 coup, no government, no business and only a few forward-looking groups and experts had even thought of such a goal for Thailand. Up until this point there have been no advances on the issue. And then last month, the entire concept of a digital economy took a huge step backward, with abject failure looming large.
Basically, the problem concerns a set of laws passed by the cabinet and awaiting action by the National Legislative Assembly. Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha introduced the 10 laws as a cyber package that would encourage a coherent start and fast development of the digital economy he had boosted. It was no such thing. The proposed laws deal with cyber security, and in the most negative way imaginable. They should be withdrawn and forgotten.
The bills have been debated and reviewed in the media, including special reports in this newspaper. The bills contain no protection for private information and conversations by citizens, but there are several proposed sections that allow for more government snooping and which ignore the anti-wiretapping regulations completely. There is also no proposal to help banks and finance companies protect the public's money, credit card and ATM card data.
There are many specific problems with this cyber law package. They boil down, however, to an attempt by the military government to take direct charge of all information in the country — starting with confidential, private and corporate information. A section of the proposed National Cybersecurity Law would allow government officials to seize, read and even publish any information that is transmitted by digital means. That covers a lot, starting with computers, email, the internet, "cloud" storage and most of today's telephones.
Each of the 10 proposed laws has loopholes that allow government eavesdropping, website shutdowns, seizure of private information, including financial records, and much more. Equally troubling is a provision in every bill granting legal immunity for any government official. This, of course, is an honest admission by the government and the law drafters that they will be up to some highly questionable, possibly illegal, shenanigans as soon as the bills are passed.
Under attack from virtually every part of society, bar the martial law administrators, the authorities tried to fall back on the oldest, hoariest justification around. The bills are necessary for national security, spokesmen have explained. They were honest enough, however, to admit within days that in truth, the new laws have nothing to do with developing a digital economy, or to help citizens and business move into the 21st century, where data and storage will be extremely important.
Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam went quickly to the real point. He claimed the proposed cybersecurity package would not even affect the government's policy on a digital economy. The laws are meant to bolster security — nothing more, nothing less. The honesty was refreshing, the reasoning disturbingly Orwellian.
The government is not disposed to taking any kind of advice from Washington right now, but it should carefully examine what the US is doing about a similar problem. President Barack Obama is trying to pass legislation that would force businesses to share more information about hacking and cyber-attacks. Business is resisting, because of revelations of government spying through the National Security Agency.
Instead of trying to ram through his proposals, Mr Obama called a meeting. He invited business and experts, and set up channels to keep the public information. This government should do no less with its cybersecurity bills.