When the government announced it was invoking a state of emergency last week, it made two swift promises. One was that there would be no restriction on peaceful protests. The second was a pledge to leave the media alone to do its job. The Foreign Ministry called in the diplomatic corps to reassure ambassadors of these promises. Within 48 hours, both of these solemn commitments were shattered.
The vow not to interfere with peaceful protests and demonstrations was made along with the actual invoking of the state of emergency. The full law actually allows police or other designated forces _ including the military _ to disperse crowds. But caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul assured the nation this part of the emergency law would not be used. "No force would be used to break up the protest," he said, specifying the Bangkok shutdown campaign under way by the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC).
But less than two days later, the Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order (CMPO) under caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yubamrung countermanded that stipulation. He published an order in the Royal Gazette making gatherings of more than five people illegal. He clarified it applied only to groups which seem to be trying to incite unrest.
Police chief Adul Saengseingkaew then listed 13 buildings and 25 roads banned to such groups.
As the first promise evaporated, the second solemn vow came under direct attack. This time, the action was indirect, and all the more sinister for that. Lt Gen Paradorn Pattanatabut, secretary-general of the National Security Council, announced that he would "invite" executives of certain television stations in for a closed-door conversation. He did not identify the stations, leaving that, too, to the public and the media to imagine. His only purpose, he stated, was to ensure that media reports do not lead to provocation and a breakdown of peace and order.
Lt Gen Paradorn's actions are a classic case of not only "shooting the messenger" but of intimidation. No reporter, photographer or editor ever wishes to receive an invitation to discuss media work with the NSC chief. But Lt Gen Paradorn has got the problem backwards. The media cannot provoke peace and order with truthful reports and honest analysis. On the contrary, the heavy hand of government censorship is a major breakdown of peace and order. Even worse is velvet intimidation that causes self-censorship.
Withholding facts and reporting from the public may bring momentary relief to the government. But decades of sad and violent experience prove that heavy-handed censorship causes far more problems. First and foremost, the lack of an honest media sparks the spread of rumours and propaganda. With nowhere to turn for truth, citizens become the unwitting carriers of malicious lies. Unlike press and TV outlets, which seek to impart factual reports and context, the rumours that spread in the absence of a credible media actually do try to provoke _ in Lt Gen Paradorn's words _ a breakdown of peace and order.
The government has information outlets it can use to broadcast and try to justify its actions. But it has no right to expect or to insist that all media will ignore other facts and opinions. Emergency or not, the media must pursue its only duty, which is to inform the public. The NSC, CMPO and other government offices should support a free and honest media, not attempt to gag it with censors or threaten it into self-censorship.