Austrailian Author Jailed for Defaming Thai King

What if you wrote a book that no-one read, but you were jailed for it? Sounds like a nightmare, right? Harry Nicolaides, author of the 2005 novel "Verisimilitude" is living that very nightmare.

Yesterday, Nicolaides was sentenced to three years in jail because he was found guilty of lese majeste; insulting the monarchy. Authorities charged that a paragraph of this novel insulted the king, the crown prince and the royal family. The charges actually carry a six year sentence, but the judge halved the sentence because Nicolaides pleaded guilty. Pleading guilty for a halved sentence is a common practice here in the kingdom.

Nicolaides, who has been in Thailand since 2003, was leaving the country when he was arrested last year. It is not known why the authorities waited so long to after the book's publication to arrest him.

Verisimilitude is anything but a best seller. Only seven copies of the fifty printed were ever sold. While CNN reported Nicolaides conviction, they refrained from reproducing the offending paragraph because to do so would have resulted in the prosecution of their staff in Thailand on the same charges. I will not repeat them either, but they are not hard to find on the Internet.

I am pretty critical of the lese majeste law. I think that it actually hurts Thailand as it inhibits a full and frank discussion of its political future and that it has been used as a tool to attempt to destroy one's political enemies.

Despite my misgivings about the lese majeste law itself, Nicolaides is either incredibly stupid or reckless. Nicolaides' claim that he meant no insult and is surprised by all of this is highly dubious. He didn't write something that would be benign in the U.S. or Australia (his native country) but insulting to Thais because of cultural differences. His writing would be considered offensive, although not criminal, in the Western world.

The other thing that makes his actions so unbelievable is that he lived in Thailand for two years prior to writing the book. Nicolaides was a writer, blogger and university lecturer. I have no doubt that he knew about the lese majeste laws when he penned his novel.

Despite the fact that he had to know the law and that his words would break it, he went ahead with his book. I don't know if he thought that the authorities would not learn of it because it was written in English, or perhaps that his falang skin would cause the police to look the other way. In any case, he was wrong, and a little throw away paragraph in a novel that sold seven copies just might cost him the next three years of his life.

Although his attorney stated that no decision had yet been made, the next logical step is for Nicolaides to appeal for a royal pardon. In the past, foreigners who have run afoul of the lese majeste laws have been successful in obtaining Royal forgiveness. They are then usually expelled after their release.

Web Censorship

The Thai government is currently investigating twenty something web sites for criticizing the monarchy (lese majeste). Included in these web sites was a pro-Thaksin website that has already been shut down. As you may remember, a conviction on lese majeste can result in a prison sentence of up to fifteen years.

A few thoughts about this. First, Thailand can only contain criticism within its border. It can shut down sites hosted here, and block access to those outside its borders. In this age, however, it cannot stop the criticism.

Lese majeste laws bother me for a few reasons. Personally, I don't have any criticism of the King. He is loved by Thai people, and by all accounts he has worked tirelessly to earn that love and respect. King Rama IX has been the one stabilizing figure in Thai government over the last sixty years. Without him, its very possible that Thailand could have fallen to the same fate of some of its neighbors who suffer under a military dictatorship. As flawed and fragile as its democracy may be, Thai citizens were able to vote in elections free from physical coercion (of course they may have been paid for their vote, but that's another matter for another discussion). The King and his family have devoted their lives to help the poor here in Thailand.

The problem that I have with the laws is that they have a chilling effect on speech. If an academic wanted to discuss the merits of different government structures for Thailand, would pointing out possible flaws in the current constitutional monarchy constitute an attack on the King? Would discussing a possible future government that did not include a monarchy constitute lese majeste if it talked about disadvantages to having a monarch?

Right now there is not a lot of opposition to the lese majeste laws because the King is so popular. The King is over eighty years old, and however benevolent and great, he will not live forever. It is quite possible that the next King may not be as universally popular as King Rama IX. In fact, its a near certainty. As the current King is really the glue that keeps this all together, Thais owe it to themselves to frankly and honestly discuss what happens next. Can they do that if any potential criticism of the crown prince (or whoever the successor ends up being) results in prosecution and prison?

Aside from keeping Thais from freely discussing their future government, lese majeste laws can be used as a political weapon. One of the charges against Thaksin was that he disrespected the monarchy. I'm not sure what he allegedly did to do that, or if its even true. But having the charges leveled against you can be damaging to ones reputation and career, not to mention one's personal liberty. And as what constitutes disrespect is not well defined, it is a potent weapon to wield against one's enemies.

All Rise

Thailand is one of only a handful of countries where lese majeste is still prosecuted. Lese majeste is the French expression meaning injury to the Majesty. It is essentially offenses against the king and royalty. Thailand’s lese majeste is codified in article 112 of its 2007 constitution which makes it a criminal offense punishable by three to fifteen years in prison for insulting, defaming or threatening the King, Queen, Heir to the Throne or royal regent.

Thai police have charged twenty-seven year old Chotisak Onsoong with lese majeste for an offense occurring in September of 2007. What insult, offense or threat did Mr. Chotisak give against the throne? He refused to stand at the playing of the King’s anthem at the start of a movie.

At the start of every movie here in Thailand, there is a musical and pictorial tribute to the King, at which time all patrons are expected to stand and pay their respects. When Mr. Chotisak refused to rise, one of his fellow patrons became incensed and demanded the movie theater owner take some action. Unsatisfied at the movie theater’s lack of action, this patriotic fellow called the police and demanded that Mr. Chotisak be prosecuted for lese majeste. Six months later, the police did just that.

It’s not certain if the case will be successful. Does failing to rise during the tribute really offer offense to the royal family? Mr. Chotisak has stated that he did not intend to give any offense, but rather thought that everyone had the right to decide for themselves whether to rise or not. Part of the case may hinge on a sixty-five year old degree requiring one to stand during the Royal anthem at public events.

The case is interesting for a few reasons. First, lese majeste is a pretty foreign concept to Americans. The ability to criticize our leadership is a cornerstone of American free speech and democracy (okay, we are really a republic, but let’s not split hairs for the moment). Can you imagine if it were against the law to offer insult to a U.S. President? Rush Limbaugh would be serving consecutive life sentences for his words during the Clinton administration, and Air America would have their own wing in some federal prison for their “thoughtful” critiques of the Bush administration.

As I have mentioned before, Thais love their king. It’s a kind of reverence which I honestly don’t understand. They are very upset by any perceived slight against the king.

To me, this case is a lot like the flag burning cases in the U.S. A lot of people, particularly those who have served in the military get very upset by someone burning the flag. Let me first state that I don’t support burning the flag (except for the proper disposition of the flag) and I think that those who do it are generally jack asses who are starved for attention and largely bereft of reason. They perhaps do not appreciate the irony that the flag they are burning is a symbol of what gives them the right to do the burning in the first place.

I do, however, support the flag burners’ right to burn a flag. The Supreme Court has found it protected speech, and I concur. To prevent someone from burning a flag as political speech would be a restriction of the rights that the flag symbolizes. It’s not necessarily a popular stand, but it seems pretty obvious to me. And before you start filling out my applications for the ACLU and the American Communist Party for me, just remember that Justice Scalia joined the Supreme Court’s decision protecting flag burning. Justice Scalia may be accused of many things, but one of them is not making up rights not in the constitution. I don’t think you’ll find a stricter constructionist than Justice Scalia. Of course, I have no problem with charging the jack asses for burning it in public if burning is against the law there.

Part of the reason for the case may be that it was Mr. Chotisak. He was a former student activist and was involved in an anti-coup group. Although I don’t know a lot about him, I’m speculating that his activism is the type that probably rubs a lot of people the wrong way. My guess is that there are probably people in power who are not sad to see him in trouble. At first I thought that perhaps he was instigating the case for publicity or to challenge the law. The Bangkok Post article makes it sound, however, like the other patron is the one who pushed the issue.

One issue with lese majeste is that it is pretty vague and can encompass a lot of behavior. It can make an excellent tool for discrediting one’s political enemies, as a charge of lese majeste could severely diminish one in the public’s eye. One of the charges against Thaksin by the 2006 coup makers was lese majeste. The King himself said in 2005 that he didn’t take lese majeste very seriously, but apparently some of his more ardent supporters have a different opinion.

When I go to the movies here I stand when they play the King’s anthem. I’m guessing that if, as a falang, you didn’t stand, that you would not face lese majeste charged. The Thais around you might politely indicate to you to stand, or more likely just think you are a stupid falang. In any case, if it takes six months to prosecute, you may well already be gone. I don’t think the U.S. would extradite you for that.