You can read the Bangkok Post : Focus on Thailand and Neighbors

ISOC and Thailand's Internal Security Act
Danger lurking?

By Jon Fernquest

[Introduction|Article]
[Reading Questions|Answers]

Many are worried that Thailand is on the verge of a return to military dominance in the governance of the country.

Recently, several impassioned articles have argued against the proposed "Internal Security Act" the law that will empower the military and ISOC after the December elections and return to democracy.

We'll look at two of these articles today.

The first article is a translation of an important article from the Thai press. Each week the Bangkok Post's In Print section features important articles written in the Thai language media and translated into English by Bangkok Post journalist Kamol Hengkietisak.

This week's In Print featured an editorial against the Internal Security Act from the Thai language daily Matichon written by Dr. Weng Tochirakarn.

The second article is senator Jon Ungphakorn's discussion of the proposed law in his weekly Straight to the Point column for the Bangkok Post. Extracts from his critical assessment are included below.

Thirdly, Chang Noi's analysis of the original bill also provides essential background information. Read the original bill and the revision to make the bill more palatable.

on the verge of - about to happen, will happen shortly
impassioned - with great emotion
ISOC - Internal Security Operations Command

Jon Ungphakorn's analysis of the ISOC bill

Two weeks ago Jon Ungphakorn discussed the ISOC bill in his weekly "Straight to the Point" column that appears in the Bangkok Post every Wednesday (See Bangkok Post, Opinion and Analysis, 24-10-2007). He pointed out that Thailand already has two very powerful security laws in place. First, there is the martial law that continues to exist months after the coup in many provinces around the country:

"First we have Martial Law, dating back to 1914. At present, 27 of Thailand's 76 provinces are subject to martial law, which gives the military many special powers over the civilian population, such as powers to search homes, detain suspects for up to seven days, ban public gatherings, impose curfews, censor publications and restrict travel. Civilians charged with crimes relating to national security face trial by military court, with no rights of appeal."
"Once we return to some form of democratic rule, however, it is unlikely that martial law will still remain in force on this scale."

Then then there is the security law that Thaksin passed to deal with the southern insurgency:

"In 2005, amid strong opposition from many quarters, including the Lawyers' Association, the Thaksin Shinawatra government introduced the emergency decree on "Public Administration in Emergency Situations" which became permanent after it received parliamentary approval."
"This law which is currently being applied to the three southern border provinces most affected by chronic violence, allows the government to declare a state of emergency in designated areas, thereby giving the prime minister and officials under his/her command wide-ranging special powers to restore order."

"These include powers to detain suspects, ban public gatherings, censor media, intercept communications, impose curfews, restrict travel, ban individuals from entering or leaving designated areas and order individuals to report to officials for interrogation or for mandatory re-education."

"In fact, under this law the prime minister has the power to order officials to carry out any "necessary" action, even the killing of suspects, and officials who carry out such orders in good faith are given immunity from prosecution."

With powerful security laws aleady in place, he raises the next logical question: why is another security law needed now?

"The only logical explanation is that certain sections of the military, particularly those directly involved in last year's coup, want to have control of special powers, similar to those allowed under the martial law and Public Administration in Emergency Situations Act, in order to prevent attempts by pro-Thaksin political groups to regain political power, even by legitimate democratic means.
Under the present draft, while the prime minister will be the nominal director of the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc), the real power will likely reside with the Army chief who will serve as deputy director of Isoc, and have hands-on command of the organisation.

Vocabulary from above:

detain - keep locked up, in jail
suspects - people the police believe might have broken the law
ban public gatherings - people are not allowed to meet in public places for protests
impose curfews - laws requiring people to be in their houses after a certain hour at night
censor media - restricting what newspapers and tv news can say
intercept communications - monitor private phone conversations and email to gather information
chronic - lasting for a long period of time
state of emergency -
designated areas - specified areas
interrogation - when the police ask people questions in their investigation of a crime
mandatory - required
re-education - political education
immunity - protection
immunity from prosecution - cannot be tried for a crime
legitimate - acceptable
hands-on - involved in day to day operations

Reading Questions

Here are some questions to guide your reading (See answers at end):

1. What laws of western countries does the Internal Secutiry Act seem to be modeled upon?

2. What are the differences between the internal security threats that the US and Britain face and those faced by Thailand? (Compare and express your opinion)

3. Under what conditions can citizen's fundamental rights be trespassed under western security laws?

4. How are politicians held accountable to the public for enforcing the western security laws?

5. Is this the first time a government in Thailand has tried to pass such a security law?

6. What prevented the passage of such a security law in the past?

7. Has the power of ISOC grown or diminished in recent times? How and why?

8. How did the military and ISOC's role change after the 2006 coup?

9. How will the Internal Security Act change the distribution of power in Thailand, according to Dr. Weng?

10. What does Dr. Weng recommend as the most appropriate way to deal with this bill?

Bangkok Post Article November 17, 2007

IN Print

Internal Security Act for a military state?

The Internal Security Bill passed its first reading in the National Legislative Assembly on November 8 by an overwhelming 101 to 20 vote, noted Dr Weng Tochirakarn, a Matichon writer.

The Internal Security Bill seems to emulate the US' Homeland Security Act and Britain's Internal Security Law, he noted. However, the two countries face different threats than those faced by Thailand. The 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center was the catalyst for the act in the US, while the United Kingdom faced subway bombings. The attacks left hundreds of dead and injured. Even right now, both countries are threatened by potential acts of international terrorism practically everyday.

But Thailand has not faced international terrorist attacks nor does it face threats of them. The unrest in the three deep South provinces, the political demonstrations, and divisions in the country are home grown and do not pose grave security threats.

first reading - laws being considered by Thai parliament are read and voted on three times before coming law
by an overwhelming - complete victory, almost everyone voted for it
emulate - use as a model
Homeland Security Act (HSA) - the post-9/11 law to deal with terrorism in US (See Wikipedia)
Internal Security Law (Britain) - the post-9/11 law to deal with terrorism in Great Britain
a catalyst - initiator of change, a chemical that starts a chemical reaction
unrest - public protests (and other expressions of political discontent)
home grown - made at home, originating in the country, not coming from outside
pose a threat - are a threat
grave - very serious
security threats - ways that a place or person lacks safety, is unprotected

Lack of accountability under the new act

Dr Weng noted that in the two Western countries, the security law is enforced only after there is first a terrorist attack or an emergency situation. Only then can citizens' fundamental rights be trespassed upon. Yet, these security law enforcers come from a civilian government, elected by the people directly - and not by any general or group of military brass.

This means that the people can monitor the politicians who enforce the security law. If they think the law is reasonably enforced, the incumbents will not be punished in the next election and will be allowed to return to power. This is not the case with the Thai version of the Internal Security Act. The law's enforcers can abuse power and the people cannot punish them through the ballot box. There have been several attempts by previous governments including the Chuan, Chavalit and Thaksin regimes to submit a similar law to parliament, but each time, the parliament directly elected by the people has not seen the merit of passing a law that must come at the expense of the people's fundamental rights. They have rejected the proposal every time.

trespassed - violated, abused (unwarranted infringement)
military brass - high ranking military officers
monitor - watch and evaluate activity
enforce a law - making sure that people who break the law are punished
incumbents - people who currently hold elected office seeking re-election
x comes at the expense of y - y is the cost of benefit x

Recent resurgence of ISOC

Meanwhile, the successive civilian governments have weakened the political role of the military and the Internal Security Operation Command (Isoc). Isoc was nearly dissolved during Thaksin's administration and it could be deemed that Thailand was no longer dominated by the military.

Immediately after the military staged the coup last year, the coup leader used his power to change the Isoc chief from a prime minister, to an army chief instead. Not only were the Isoc's power and personnel expanded tremendously. all 20 ministries were put under Isoc's command.

The military budget was raised from 115 billion baht in the 2007 budget year to 153 billion baht in 2008. Most of the increases are hidden in secret budgets or channelled through Isoc. In short, Isoc again became powerful in Thailand, allowing the military state to again dominate Thai society in just about every conceivable way.

The most glaring example of this was the coup leaders' move to force the Thai people to accept the B.E. 2550 Constitution in the national referendum. This was possible due to the commands from the Council for National Security. However, the CNS' power is temporary and will soon expire with the arrival of a new civilian government next year.

successive - several each following the previous, one after another
civilian - non-military, not soldiers
dissolved - when an organisation is officially ended and broken up
deemed that - could be judged that
channelled through - sent through
glaring example - a very obvious example
referendum - when a government asks the people to vote on policy
expire - end

Resurgence of a military state

To make sure that the "military state" continues to coexist with Thai society, the coup leaders are pushing the NLA to pass the Internal Security Bill. To do so would mean the military state would become a permanent fixture of Thai society.

No matter how many general elections are held or how many constitutions are promulgated in the future, as long as this act exists, the power will rest with the military oligarchy, asserts Dr Weng.

coexist with - exist at the same time
become a permanent ficture of - become a permanent part of (not just temporary)
promulgate a constitution - when a constitution is made official
an oligarchy -

Counting from November 8, when the NLA passed the first reading to the Dec 23 general election date, there are only 45 days. Why didn't the NLA shelve the Internal Security Act and let the coming parliament elected by the people decide the fate of a bill which aims to create a military state and greatly trample upon the people's fundamental rights?

Why did the NLA overwhelmingly pass the bill in the first reading and why is there a likely chance that it will again pass the final reading before the general election as well? The only explanation is that the coup leaders want to create a military state permanently in Thai society and that the appointed NLA is a slave institution serving the military dictatorship, concluded Dr Weng.

shelve - remove from consideration (and possibility of becoming a law)
decide the fate of - decide the future of
trample upon - treat without respect (walk upon)
overwhelmingly - complete victory, almost everyone voted for it
pass the bill - vote to make the bill a law

Answer Key:

1. What laws of western countries does the Internal Secutiry Act seem to be modeled upon?

a. The Homeland Security Act (US)
b. Internal Security Law (Britain)

2. What are the differences between the internal security threats that the US and Britain face and those faced by Thailand? (Compare and express your opinion)

a. The US and Britain face terrorist attacks that leave hundreds dead and injured.
b. Thailand faces unrest restricted to three provinces in the deep south.
c. Thailand faces political demonstrations and divisions after the coup.
d. The security threats that the US and Britain face are severe.
e. The security threats that Thailand faces are not severe.

3. Under what conditions can citizen's fundamental rights be trespassed under western security laws?

When there is a terrorist attack or an emergency situation.

4. How are politicians held accountable to the public for enforcing the western security laws?

Security law enforcers are part of the civilian (non-military) government, so elections can be used to express disatisfaction with the way security laws have been enforced. Enforcers can effectively be punished with the ballot box.

5. Is this the first time a government in Thailand has tried to pass such a security law?

No, there have been several attempts by previous governments (Chuan, Chavalit and Thaksin).

6. What prevented the passage of such a security law in the past?

A parliament elected by the people has always rejected such a law.

("...each time, the parliament directly elected by the people has not seen the merit of passing a law that must come at the expense of the people's fundamental rights. They have rejected the proposal every time.")

7. Has the power of ISOC grown or diminished in recent times? How and why?

Diminished, because successive elected civilian governments expressing the wishes of the people have weakened the political role of the military. ISOC was almost completely eliminated during Thaksin's administration.

8. How did the military and ISOC's role change after the 2006 coup?

Both became more important:
a. The ISOC chief changed from the Prime Minister to the army chief.
b. ISOC's power was expanded.
c. ISOC's personnel was expanded.
d. All 20 ministries were put under ISOC's command.
e. The military budget was increased from 115 to 153 billion.
f. The military budget is hidden in secret budgets or channeled through ISOC.

9. How will the Internal Security Act change the distribution of power in Thailand, according to Dr. Weng?

a. Elections and constitutions will be irrelevant.
b. Real power will reside in the military oligarchy.