Prayut won’t bow to early poll demands
Journos say colour similar to police
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has refused to bow to the demands of proelection activists calling for a swift general election, saying the poll will not take place until early next year.
Speaking after yesterday’s cabinet meeting, Gen Prayut brushed aside the activists’ demand that the government hold an election this year.
“I already said that things must go according to my schedule. That is in early 2019. No earlier than that. I have to stand by my word. It has been delayed for three to four months due to legal technicalities,” Gen Prayut said.
The demonstrators, known as “People who want an election”, and led by the Democracy Restoration Group (DRG), tried to pressure the government into holding a general election by November this year as previously promised by the prime minister despite a more recent proposal of a new February 2019 date.
The activists are also demanding the NCPO step down before the poll and that the military should stop supporting the council.
Gen Prayut said the government has tried to be lenient with the protesters and has listened to their views.
Still, the government has to enforce the law to maintain social order, but law enforcement is not used against people who hold different opinions, Gen Prayut said.
“You can think differently, but you must not break the law,” he said.
Demonstrations were permitted within the scope of the law, and those who breached the law would face tough legal action, the prime minister said.
“Endless demonstrations will slow the pace of the growing economy. The security and the safety of people and property are the highest priority,” Gen Prayut said.
The rally calling for a swift election ended as police surrounded the demonstrators and arrested 14 protest leaders as they approached Government House yesterday afternoon.
Deputy national police chief Srivara Ransibrahmanakul said that the detained protest leaders have been charged with violating Section 116 of the Criminal Code for sedition; violating Section 215 of the Criminal Code which involves a gathering of 10 people and more to make threats or commit acts of violence to cause disturbances in the country; and Order No.3/2015, which bans political gatherings of five or more people.
The protest leaders are Rangsiman Rome, Sirawith Seritiwat, Piyarat Chongthep, Wiset Sangwitsit, Ekkachai Hongkangwan, Chokchai Phaiboonratchata, Arnon Nampa, Chonticha Jaengrew, Nattha Mahatthana, Khiri Khanthong, Phutthaising Phimchan, Viroj Trongngamrak, Pattarapol Chankhot and Prasong Wangwan.
Pol Gen Srivara said the protest leaders would be held for questioning, but he did not say when they would be released.
The rally started at Thammasat University’s Tha Phrachan campus on Na Phra Lan Road on Monday evening when demonstration leaders broke into the university by cutting open a lock on the gate.
After the demonstrators were blocked by police from leaving the university for a march to Government House yesterday, another group of demonstrators who gathered outside decided to do so.
However, the group was unable to march past Makkawan Rangsan bridge on Ratchadamnoen Nok Avenue since police officers had been deployed to secure the road.
About 3.30pm, national police chief Pol Gen Chakthip Chaijinda and his deputy Pol Gen Srivara arrived at the scene. Accusing the protesters of breaking the law, they ordered officers to apprehend the protest leaders one by one while the demonstrators tried to fight back to no avail.
Chulalongkorn University political scientist Chaiyan Chaiyaporn said yesterday the public assembly law specifies a minimum distance a public gathering must keep away from government agencies, including Government House, which is also normal practice in foreign countries.
He said it is normal that the government protected Government House as it is the symbolic venue of power though all groups of protesters must be treated the same.
Titipol Phakdeewanich, dean of Ubon Ratchathani University’s Faculty of Political Sciences, said the government was quite careful and tried to prevent violence which could have led to a negative image of the regime and affected its legitimacy.
The UN Human Rights Office for SouthEast Asia,yesterday called for the immediate release of the activists. “We have consistently urged the Royal Thai Government, as a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to fully respect the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly,” said the office.
Media activists and academics yesterday voiced concerns over new armbands distributed to reporters covering political gatherings, saying they violate the media’s freedom of expression.
Prachyachai Daththuyawatra, the spokesman of the Thai Journalists Association (TJA), said yesterday that along with the armbands, preventing the media from compiling news of protests was also viewed as a media rights abuse.
He said the armbands were a similar colour to those worn by police which could stir mistrust among protesters who may perceive them to represent some kind of affiliation between state and media.
The official procedure requires police to contact the TJA beforehand so the association can issue emblems or armbands to reporters who will be stationed at the venues.
However, officers had not worked with the TJA regarding yesterday’s gathering of demonstrators, known as “People who want an election”, at Thammasat University at Democracy Monument, which made local media feel uneasy, Mr Prachyachai said.
“Media outlets can issue armbands by themselves without relying on police,” he added.
The move came after deputy national police chief Srivara Ransibrahmanakul on Monday said members of the media who do not wear armbands issued by the Metropolitan Police Bureau while at an anti-regime rally site will face legal action.
“If this measure is strictly enforced, the media might not agree to follow it because it is impracticable. The measure needs to be more flexible,” Mr Prachyachai said.
“At the gathering [yesterday], even though there were not enough armbands for the media, reporters could still access the area by showing their media identification card to demonstrators. This means the police armbands are useless.”
Although police are able to issue regulations in compliance with the Public Gatherings Act, they must not contradict the constitution in which the media’s responsibilities are protected under Section 35.
Mr Prachyachai said the media also reported news content in accordance with the association’s own code of ethics which preclude it from stirring up conflict and antagonism among the public.
He insisted the media was capable of self-regulation, adding that measures and legal action were pursued against media outlets which caused trouble.
Speaking on the issue, Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) adviser Jade Donavanik said it was permissible for authorities to devise regulations, but the freedom of expression of both demonstrators and the media must be still preserved under those measures.
“If the media find measures issued by the police bar their operation, it can petition the Administrative Court to abolish the regulation,” he added.
In terms of orderliness during the gathering, CDC chairman Meechai Ruchupan said the latest measure was unlikely to contradict the charter.
However, he admitted that barring reporters from entering the venues or pursuing legal action against them was an overreaction, adding that the media can oppose the measures.