Taiwan has revoked a television broadcasting license for a cable news channel because the openly pro-China outlet had aired inaccurate reports and ignored warnings to reform, a regulatory body said in an unusual test of the democratic island’s normally free-wheeling media scene.The National Communications Commission’s decision Nov. 18 to revoke the license of Chung Tien Television’s CTi News stands out because Taiwan has some of Asia’s least restricted mass media. CTi News must close on Dec. 11, when its six-year license expires.CTi News broadcasts pro-China material – unpopular with much of the island’s population – as well as criticism of Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party. The party takes a guarded view of relations with Beijing, a political rival of Taiwan going back more than 70 years.$400,000 in finesCommissioners cited serial violations of media-related rules and found that CTi News failed to discipline itself after a review two years ago. The 962 public complaints the commission had received about CTi through last year made up nearly a third of all gripes received, commissioners said in a statement Wednesday.The channel has broken rules 25 times since its license renewal in 2014, received formal warnings twice and paid fines 23 times totaling about $400,000, the statement says. CTi News disrupted public order on five occasions, the commission found. In 2014, the commission renewed CTi’s license on the condition that it would set up mechanisms to improve.“Although some of its programs have received approval through awards, the core programming of daily news and political discussion kept violating the rules,” the statement says.Supporters of revoking the license believe the commission went after CTi News mainly for false reporting.CTi News came under fire last year over the accuracy of a report that farmers had discarded pomelo fruit in a reservoir and the broadcaster was fined the equivalent of $35,000. The channel has been accused too of producing distorting reports that irritate the Taiwan government.’Check, check, check’Chung Tien Television should take “responsibility,” said George Hou, a former mass media instructor at I-Shou University in Taiwan.“Every time I teach, I tell the students that if you’re doing this work it’s because you possess a broadcasting tool that everyone is going to see, so you need to do something, which is check, check, check,” Hou said. “If you haven’t done that, then you’re doing fake news.”Journalism advocacy group Reporters Without Borders said in a statement that it “regrets” the license revocation because it affects the CTi News staff. It asked the commission to disclose all evidence that renewing CTi’s license would have endangered the public.At the same time, the commission’s move doesn’t violate press freedom, Reporters Without Borders added.The media should take a government watchdog role but not just put out content that suits in-house agendas, said Cedric Alviani, the group’s East Asia bureau director.“You do not want [government officials] to abuse power, and you want to hold them accountable, so this is what we call press freedom, not the freedom of media owners to publish whatever content suits their interests,” Alviani said.China claims sovereignty over Taiwan and has threatened use of force, if needed, to unify the two sides. Each has been self-ruled since the Chinese civil war of the 1940s when Mao Zedong’s Communists routed Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalists, who relocated to Taiwan.Most Taiwanese said in government surveys last year they oppose unification with China. Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen also rejects unification.As part of its democracy, Taiwan allows a media scene that has spawned a half-dozen cable news channels along with multiple daily papers and an ever-expanding list of news websites. It cannot legally discipline a media outlet for views expressed on China.Skeptics, particularly people close to today’s opposition Nationalist Party, say commissioners acted under government pressure to kill the 26-year-old network’s license. The Nationalists advocate dialogue with China on Beijing’s precondition that both sides identify as part of the same country.The commission is not impartial, as it should be, said Chao Chien-min, dean of social sciences at Chinese Culture University in Taipei.“Why do we have a way to close it down? Who gives you the power?” Chao asked. “Can the government decide that the content of that news is incorrect?”’It’s an open secret’Chung Tien Television on Nov. 18 called the license revocation “illegal” and cited lack of “due process” as well as “flimsy reasoning.” It announced plans to file for temporary relief of the commission’s ruling and take legal action against the decision.In a separate statement, the broadcaster called the commission’s move “politically motivated.” It acknowledged major network shareholder Tsai Eng-meng’s support for a China-Taiwan dialogue process that would identify both sides as part of China. The shareholder also runs a company that’s in charge of a giant food and beverage firm in China.Sean Lien, vice chairman of the National Policy Foundation, a think tank close to the main opposition party, attributed the decision to politics.”Although the National Communications Commission will never put ‘political censorship’ as their main reason to shut down CTi, it’s an open secret to everyone,” he said.Around Asia, forced closures of media outlets are more common in authoritarian countries such as China and Vietnam. In the Philippines, authorities use legal and extrajudicial means to snuff the media as well as individual reporters.Reporters Without Borders asked that Taiwan’s commission use equal levels of “exigence” when reviewing all future media licenses “no matter the media’s political orientation.” 
…

your ad here

Pro-democracy activists demanded public oversight of Thai King Maha Vajiralongkorn’s vast wealth during a protest Wednesday outside the headquarters of a major bank in which he is the largest shareholder. The demonstration amounted to a show of defiance after police summoned a dozen protest leaders over alleged royal defamation. Several months since they started near-daily anti-government rallies, the pro-democracy movement called Ratsadorn, or “The People,” shows no sign of losing steam, despite the mounting risk of clashes with ultra-royalists and a wave of charges under a draconian lese majeste law — which provides for up to 15 years in jail per charge. Thai King Maha Vajiralongkorn, left, and Queen Suthida meet supporters after attending a ceremony to mark an anniversary of the death of King Vajiravudh in Bangkok, Thailand, Nov. 25, 2020.Police summoned at least 12 protest leaders overnight from across the country to hear charges of lese majeste — known by its criminal code number 112. They are the first such cases to be brought in several years as authorities move to quash the rampant anti-monarchy graffiti, banners and speeches that now accompany every protest. Several thousand demonstrators massed around the headquarters of Siam Commercial bank, one of Thailand’s largest lenders. The king is named as holding a 23.5% stake worth an estimated $2.3 billion based on Wednesday’s share price. The demonstrators swarmed across gardens outside the bank as evening fell, holding signs saying, “We the people reclaim our property from the king.” Many wore rubber ducks in their hair or glued to hard hats — the latest symbol of meme-making young activists who fended off police water cannon and tear gas earlier in the month with giant inflatable yellow ducks. Protesters flash the three-finger protest gesture during a rally in Bangkok, Thailand, Nov. 25, 2020.”We should be able to look at the king’s finances as they come from taxpayers’ money,” said one 24-year-old protester who identified himself only as “Jim.” “At least rubber ducks protect the people, unlike the soldiers,” he said. Army targeted by protesters The protest movement also wants to permanently remove the military from politics in a country that has had 13 coups in less than 100 years. The starting point, they say, must be the resignation of ex-army chief turned Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-O-Cha and his government, along with a rewriting of a constitution which has gifted the army a backdoor into power through a fully appointed senate. But it is the role of the Thai monarchy which now motivates them, with protesters calling for the king’s wealth and power to be constrained within the constitution — as established by a peaceful 1932 revolution — and for the palace to remain firmly beyond politics. Vajiralongkorn is perhaps the world’s richest monarch, enjoying an annual palace budget of around $1 billion. He holds controlling stakes in banks and construction companies in his own name as well as untold billions of dollars in prime Bangkok real estate under the Crown Property Bureau (CBP). Protesters turn on mobile phones with lights during a rally outside the headquarters of the Siam Commercial Bank, a publicly-held company in which the Thai king is the biggest shareholder, in Bangkok, Thailand, Nov. 25, 2020.The value of the CBP, which was established to manage palace wealth for the good of the kingdom, is estimated at anywhere between $30-60 billion. But it does not publish its accounts and experts say it effectively morphed into a private piggy bank after it was moved in 2018 directly under Vajiralongkorn’s control from the finance ministry.  Initially, protesters had vowed to mass around the CBP offices in the historic heart of Bangkok. But in a sign of the sensitivity of any attack on the king’s wealth, all roads to the bureau were blocked before dawn on Wednesday by shipping containers stacked on top of each other and fronted by curls of razor wire. Behind them stood thousands of police and military conscripts. “The objective is not only to stop the protesters today but also to send a message to them to refrain from protesting in the future or face the consequences of violent arrest and other harsh action using the rationale of Criminal Code Section 112,” said Paul Chambers, a lecturer and special adviser on international affairs at Naresuan University. Gap widening Thailand is a kingdom divided. The split runs between young and old, rich and poor — it is one of the Asia’s least equal societies — and between voices for reform and arch-royalist conservatives who support the army-shaped status quo. As the Thai protesters — known locally as “the mob” — settled in for an evening outside the king’s favorite bank, the monarch himself rubbed shoulders with royalists in a downtown park. Many royalists see the palace as untouchable and the monarch beyond reproach by virtue of his position at the head of Thai society. Supporters of the Thai monarchy hold images King Maha Vajiralongkorn and Queen Suthida at a ceremony to mark an anniversary of the death of King Vajiravudh in Bangkok, Thailand, Nov. 25, 2020.”These kids are deluded if they think the crown assets belong to the country,” said Warong Dechgitvigrom, leader of ultra-royalist Thai Pakdee (Loyal Thai) group. “They belong solely to the king.” Critics accuse the king of living an opulent lifestyle, much of it overseas in Germany with a large retinue, creating an image that has played particularly badly at home with the coronavirus-hit economy expected to contract at least 6% this year. But arch-royalists say the king is merely asserting control over possessions that were the sole property of the palace before the 1932 revolution ended absolute rule. “I think King Vajiralongkorn recognizes his assets must return to where they belong,” said Nopadol Prompasit, who receives complaints of alleged lese majeste violations and files cases to the police. “He has every right to move money or spend it however he deems fit.” With the gap widening between the pro-democracy protesters and royalists, experts fear an escalation of the violence which marred a parliamentary debate on the constitution on November 17. Scores were wounded in the fighting, including six by gunshots, marking a dangerous escalation in a country awash with guns. Prime Minister Prayuth, on the backfoot as never before in the six years since he seized power as army chief in a 2014 coup, has so far refused to resign and on Wednesday batted away reports he may consider martial law to control the protests. “In a democracy … I can’t make everyone agree with me,” he told reporters. 
 
…

your ad here

The U.S. Navy says one of its warships conducted a freedom of navigation operation Tuesday in the Sea of Japan, making a rare challenge to a controversial maritime claim by Russia.Russia’s defense ministry said that in response to the operation, one of its military ships “stopped” the USS John S. McCain destroyer by threatening it with a warning that it would be rammed out of the disputed waters in the vicinity of Peter the Great Bay.“The Russian Federation’s statement about this mission is false. USS John S. McCain was not ‘expelled’ from any nation’s territory,” the Navy said Tuesday, adding that the operation was “in accordance with international law” in international waters. The area has been in dispute since 1984, when the Soviet Union declared it part of its waters. Russia has maintained that claim.“The operation reflects our commitment to uphold freedom of navigation and lawful uses of the sea as a principle, and the United States will never bow in intimidation or be coerced into accepting illegitimate maritime claims, such as those made by the Russian Federation,” the Navy added in its statement.FILE – The guided-missile destroyer USS John S. McCain sails in formation during exercise Foal Eagle 2013 in waters west of the Korean peninsula in this March 21, 2013 handout photo courtesy of the U.S. Navy.The last U.S. military challenge to Russia’s maritime claims near Peter the Great Bay was in December 2018, according to the Navy. Prior to that, the last U.S. freedom of navigation operation in the area took place in 1987.The U.S. frequently conducts freedom of navigation operations in the western Pacific region to dispute excessive maritime claims by several countries, especially China, and to promote free passage through international waters.
…

your ad here

Indonesian lawmakers have renewed discussions about banning alcohol in the country, amid a rise in fatalities due to the consumption of illegally made liquor. But critics of a proposed bill say a broad prohibition could worsen the use of sometimes dangerous bootleg liquor.  The Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR) included the controversial Alcohol Prohibition Bill among a list of prioritized legislative initiatives for next year, the so-called 2021 Prioritized National Legislation Program (Prolegnas).  The bill was first introduced in 2015 but was put on hold amid wide criticism.  Eighteen lawmakers from three parties, including Islam-based United Development Party (PPP), the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) and the nationalist Gerindra Party, pushed for the bill to again be considered. Illiza Saaduddin Djamal, one of the lawmakers from PPP who spearhead the Alcohol Prohibition Bill, says the bill aims to protect the public from the negative effects of alcohol. “We want to raise awareness on the danger of alcohol for health. This bill is also aimed at creating orderliness in the society and prevent incidents caused by drunk people who roam the street harassing people,” she told VOA. A more narrow focus But some critics say the proposed bill may be too broad.  Pingkan Audrine, a researcher from the Center for Indonesian Policy Studies (CIPS), a Jakarta-based policy research organization, says most alcohol related deaths are caused by illegal, homemade liquor. According to the data compiled by CIPS, from 2014 to 2018, 546 people died after consuming bootleg liquor. Audrine says the highest number was in 2018, with more than one hundred deaths. In more recent cases this year, three people died in Malang, East Java, in May, and two people also fell victim to bootleg alcohol in Depok, West Java, in October.The researcher says most of consumers of illegal liquor are from lower economic backgrounds because of the price and accessibility of bootleg alcohol.In this Monday, April 9, 2018, photo, family move the body of a victim who died from drinking poisonous bootleg liquor at a hospital in Cicalengka, West Java, Indonesia.In Indonesia, alcoholic beverages are only sold in very few stores and the price is considered high due to the alcohol tax. “Our analysis shows that people turn to bootleg liquor because they do not have access to legal ones because it’s expensive or hard to obtain, but they still want to get the effect of alcoholic drinks,” she said.  “If the government is serious about preventing negative effect of alcohol in the community, they should have addressed this problem. But in the draft bill they generalize all alcoholic beverages,” said Audrine. She added the government could have used the high number of fatalities from illegal liquor consumption in 2018 as a case study. Over Criminalization of Alcohol Consumption  Meanwhile, Maidina Rahmawati, a researcher from the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR), an organization that focuses on criminal law, believes the Alcohol Prohibition Bill, if it is passed as the law, could lead to over-criminalization. Based on the draft released by the House last week, every person who consumes alcohol can be subjected to a maximum of two years in prison or a fine of $3,500.  “We do not agree with the prohibitionist approach of the bill. In the draft it is also stated the law will forbid every form of possession, production and consumption. The DPR says there are problems related to alcohol, such as health problem or drunk driving. It’s the same in other countries, but an approach like this will never solve the problem,” Rahmawati explained. If anything, she believes such law will only cause the black market, where people sell illegal liquor and alcohol, to thrive. Rahmawati adds by simply prohibiting alcohol, the state basically relinquishes all control of alcohol production and distribution to the black market. “Then it will be more difficult to monitor the distribution of bootleg alcohol and more people will fall victim,” she said.  Rahmawati also says it can potentially put more burden on the Indonesian prison system. “We need to look at our strict drug law, because of it the prison is overcrowded. Now the government is trying to find a solution to ease the burden on the prison, but with a prohibition on alcohol the problem will only get worse,” she told VOA. According to the Directorate General of Correctional at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, 48 percent of the inmates were convicted of drug-related activities. 
 An Agenda to Protect the Public PPP lawmaker Illiza Saaduddin Djamal says the Alcohol Prohibition Bill will be able to cut down on the distribution of dangerous homemade liquor, though there is no mention of bootleg or illegal alcohol in the draft released by the House. Djamal says the draft legislation includes some exceptions, such as consumption of alcohol for traditional ritual or religious procession. Moreover, tourist areas and certain entertainment venues are also exempted in the draft bill. Indonesia already imposes high tax on alcoholic drinks, the government set a 150% import duty for products with less than 80% alcohol content. The sale of alcohol is also limited to selected stores and big supermarkets. In 2015 the country banned small convenience stores from selling alcohol, except for Bali province. 
…

your ad here

China is scheduled to launch an unmanned spacecraft to the moon Monday to land, gather soil and rock samples, and return them to Earth.  
 
If successful, it will be the first mission by any nation to retrieve samples from the lunar surface since the 1970s, and the third nation, after the United States and Russia, to retrieve such samples.
 
The Chang’e 5 probe, named after the ancient Chinese goddess of the moon, will seek to collect material that can help scientists understand more about the moon’s origins and formation.  
 
 U.S. space agency NASA, says the mission’s goal is to land in a previously unvisited area of the moon known as Oceanus Procellarum and operate for one lunar day, which lasts 14 earth days, and return a 2-kilogram sample of lunar soil, possibly from as deep as 2 meters.  
 
The sample will travel to Earth in the return capsule and land in the Siziwang Banner grassland of the autonomous region of Inner Mongolia in China.
 
During a brief government-organized visit to the launch center, reporters were taken to a place where they could see, in the distance, the Long March 5 rocket that carries the Chang’e 5 probe. The launch is expected to take place between 4 a.m. and 5 a.m. (2000-2100 GMT) on November 24.
 
The Reuters news service reports China made its first lunar landing in 2013. In January 2019, the Chang’e 4 probe touched down on the far side of the moon, the first by any space probe. Within the next decade, China plans to establish a robotic base station to conduct unmanned exploration in the south polar region.
 
…

your ad here

A panel of human rights experts working with the United Nations says former Renault-Nissan boss Carlos Ghosn was wrongly detained in Japan and has urged “compensation” and “other reparations” for him from the Japanese government.         In an opinion published Monday, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found that Ghosn’s detention in Japan in late 2018 and early 2019 was “arbitrary” and called on Japan’s government to “take the necessary steps to remedy the situation of Mr. Ghosn without delay.”         The four-member group, which is made up of independent experts, asked Japan to ensure a “full and independent investigation” of Ghosn’s detention, and called for the government “to take appropriate measures against those responsible for the violation of his rights.”         “The Working Group considers that, taking into account all the circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to accord Mr. Ghosn an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law,” its 17-page opinion said.          Ghosn, a 66-year-old with French, Lebanese and Brazilian citizenship, led Japanese automaker Nissan for two decades, rescuing it from near-bankruptcy. He was arrested in November 2018 on charges of breach of trust, in misusing company assets for personal gain, and violating securities laws in not fully disclosing his compensation. He denies wrongdoing.         In December, he fled Japan to Lebanon while out on bail awaiting trial, meaning his case will not go on in Japan. Interpol has issued a wanted notice but his extradition from Lebanon is unlikely.         Ghosn has accused Nissan and Japanese officials of conspiring to bring him down to block a fuller integration of Nissan with its French alliance partner Renault SA of France.     
…

your ad here

Early this year Thai pro-democracy activist Wanchalearm Satsaksit told his sister he felt as if he were being followed by three men who looked like Thai police officers. Wanchalearm had arrived in Cambodia in 2014, fleeing a warrant for failure to report to a military camp for dissidents after a coup. He is now missing.Sister of Missing Thai Activist Headed to CambodiaShe hopes to force an investigation“They are in the circles where these threats are common,” his sister, Sitanun Satsaksit, told VOA Khmer.  She added that her brother didn’t seem very worried at the time, which she recalled as being “before COVID.”  On May 13, Thai police visited their mother’s home in Ubon Ratchathani, a city in northeastern Thailand. They asked about Wanchalearm’s whereabouts. The Thai activist immediately took to Facebook to mock the police officers for “performing their duties.”  
“This might have been the last straw,” Sitanun said during a video call November 16 with VOA. She added that she believes the satirical post pushed Thai authorities to act.   Her brother made his last Facebook post June 3, taunting Thai Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha in Isan, the language of northeastern Thailand. His delivery seems friendly, but his words are profane.  CCTV footage from June 4 shows a black SUV speeding away from Wanchalearm’s home in Phnom Penh’s Chroy Changvar district. Eyewitnesses who identified Wanchalearm told VOA Khmer that three men had forced him into the vehicle before it took off.    The Thai activist has not been seen since.  Sitanun arrived in Phnom Penh in early November to attend a December 8 hearing at the Phnom Penh Municipal Court into Wanchalearm’s alleged disappearance. She plans to present evidence and push for a fuller investigation into the incident.  
“I want to find the truth about my brother,” she told VOA, “I don’t really know what to expect.”  She said she knows only that as she spoke to Wanchalearm the day he disappeared, she heard men speaking in a language that was not Thai in the background. “He said, ‘I can’t breathe, I can’t breathe,’” she said. Worried that something was obstructing his windpipe, she told him to smack his chest to try to clear it if he couldn’t breathe. “The next thing you know, he went off the line.” Linking generations  Wanchalearm is the ninth self-exiled pro-democracy critic of Thailand’s government and monarchy to disappear since Prayuth came to power in a military coup in 2014. The bodies of Kraidej Luelert and Chatchan Buphawan, who had fled to Laos, were found in the Mekong River in December 2018. None of the cases has been solved. Activists gather for a rally with a photo of Thai dissident Wanchalearm Satsaksit in front of Cambodian Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand, June 8, 2020.After the alleged abduction, Cambodia initiated an investigation at the request of Thai authorities. Within days, Cambodian authorities questioned whether Wanchalearm had ever lived at the Mekong Garden condominium in the Chroy Changvar district. By June 10, Cambodian police were questioning his presence in Cambodia at the time of his disappearance. Cambodian national police spokesman Lt. Gen. Chhay Kim Khoeun said that according to official records Wanchalearm was not living in Cambodia at the time of his abduction. He told Radio Free Asia “According to our investigation, Wanchalearm left Cambodia in 2017 [and did not return].”   In a submission to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, the Cambodian government said Wanchalearm’s visa had expired on December 31, 2017, and his last recorded entry into the country was on October 19, 2015. The government’s letter continued to maintain that authorities had yet to ascertain “if there was a real abduction case and if it had really happened in Cambodia.” Sitanun said that since her brother left Thailand, she had spoken to him constantly about his life and work in Phnom Penh.   “The entire family knows. He posted about it on Facebook,” Sitanun said of his residence in Cambodia. Two charges Sitanun’s court summons lists two charges that are being investigated by Sin Sovannroth, unlawful arrest, detention and confinement, and unauthorized possession of weapons. The charged are “unidentified individuals” and the investigative judge will decide after hearing testimony if the case should go to trial. 
 
Eyewitness accounts reported by VOA Khmer in June suggest that the three men involved in the alleged abduction were carrying concealed weapons. 
 
On Wednesday, Nov. 18, Y Rin, a Phnom Penh Municipal Court spokesperson, directed VOA to query deputy prosecutor Kuch Kimlong. VOA Khmer contacted him that day, and Kuch Kimlong asked that queries be sent via Telegram, an encrypted messaging app. He has not responded to requests for comments sent as requested. 
 
Khieu Sopheak, secretary of state at Cambodia’s Interior Ministry, said Nov. 18 that he could not comment on court proceedings and that ministry officials would aid the court in its investigation. 
 
He said the police investigation had found no leads to suggest Wanchalearm was abducted outside his residence and that there was “no trace” of the pro-democracy activist. 
 
“Anything that has been raised on Facebook or wherever else [about this case], there is no truth to it,” said Khieu Sopheak. 
 
Sam Chamroeun, Sitanun’s Cambodian lawyer, said only that the prosecutor had taken note of the complaint and charged unidentified individuals with Wanchalearm’s disappearance. 
 
“Now, it is in the hands of an investigative judge – it means the prosecutor has already pressed charges,” he said.   James Buchanan, a lecturer at Mahidol University near Bangkok, said in an email that it was unlikely the Cambodian government would conduct a serious investigation into Wanchalearm’s disappearance because it might reveal the Thai government’s involvement.  “If the Cambodian government actually seriously investigated this case and came to the conclusion that it was the Thai state that was responsible, that would of course provoke an angry reaction,” Buchanan said.   Thaksin was once supported by Hun Sen, who authorized the deposed Thai politician to travel to Cambodia and mobilize his Red Shirts supporters from there.   Buchanan said he believed Cambodia was “harboring many Thai dissidents, including Wanchalearm” which could pose challenges to Cambodia’s relations with the Thai government.  He added that it was revealing that the Cambodian courts had filed charges against unidentified individuals in the case.  
 
“This could be a compromise that allows them to save face in front of Wanchalerm’s family and the international community, but without any serious diplomatic repercussions from the Thais.”  Sitanun remains unequivocal about the Thai government’s involvement in her brother’s disappearance. The government has denied involvement repeatedly.  “Everyone knows who did this. The Thai state was involved, I said this publicly several times,” she told VOA, giving no specifics or proof.  She said police officers have been following her in Thailand and they told her that they had been instructed to keep track of her. VOA has called Thai police and the Thai embassy in Phnom Penh for comment but has not obtained responses.  “I have not been threatened but I have been followed virtually everywhere I go by the police officers.”  This report originated in VOA Khmer. Rattaphol Onsanit, chief of VOA Thai, contributed from Washington.  
…

your ad here

She has been threatened more times than she can remember, harassed by legal cases and targeted by online trolls, but Pornpen Khongkachonkiet says she won’t stop championing human rights, especially while the law does not protect Thais from falling victim to “enforced disappearances” by shadowy powers.She is not alone in her concerns.Nine Thai dissidents An activist holds up a picture of missing Thai dissident Wanchalearm Satsaksit during a rally in front of the Cambodian Embassy in Bangkok on June 8, 2020.The only occasion to rattle her, she said, was a criminal defamation complaint, later dropped, by the military over a 2016 report on the alleged torture of ethnic Muslim-Malays in Thailand’s Deep South, on the Malaysian border. Defamation of a person or institution carries up to two years’ jail sentence in Thailand.“I was scared because if I was indicted who was going to help these guys? I had dragged these innocent people into a calamity,” she said.The case was later dismissed amid international pressure.In Cambodia, Pornpen is once more treading into dangerous territory.Wanchalearm’s family believes the Thai government knows what happened to the activist, who ridiculed the Thai government of Prayuth Chan-ocha on his Facebook page from Cambodia.Pornpen is accompanying his sister and her lawyers to Cambodia with evidence she hopes will spur an investigation into the fate of her brother.His disappearance has become a banner for a Thai protest movement desperate to sever the link between power and impunity.“An ‘enforced disappearance’ is not something anyone can do. It takes a high level of organization by those who have power, because it often involves abduction, torture, killing, destroying evidence and getting rid of the bodies,” she told VOA before leaving.The lack of a body leaves the trail cold, she said, presuming authorities are even looking in the first place.“Thai authorities treat enforced disappearance cases like a lost wallet or a lost bike. There is no investigation whatsoever,” she said.“It’s my job, my duty to discover the truth. Once I find the facts out, I have to help,” she said.Rebel at heartShe says she has had a rebellious spirit since childhood; she recalls asking her mother, at 6 years old, why she was being asked to prostrate herself in front of a royal family member, as is customary In Thailand.She credits growing up with marginalized communities, ethnic Karens at school in Ratchaburi, with giving her an early education on “the structural problems in our country.”Her main ambition is to see the law changed and the country codify protections taken for granted in many other nations.Thailand signed the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance in 2012, but it has yet to ratify it, insisting it must first pass a domestic law before joining the convention. Several years on, the law is still not on the books.Critics blame political obstruction by elements of the army-aligned government, unnerved by the prospect of a law that could see a slew of cases against people in power.After all, the military-linked government of Prayuth Chan-ocha — and the junta he led after seizing power in a 2014 coup — has hustled laws through a parliament stacked with its allies, including a hand-picked senate, appointed under a constitution the army wrote.“There’s a cybercrime law, a law banning political assembly but not the one that aims to protect lives and liberty of people to be free from torture and enforce disappearances,” Pornpen said.After six years of faltering rule, Prayuth is now in a corner. A youth-led protest movement is refusing to leave Bangkok’s streets until he resigns and a new fairer constitution with rights at its core is written.The youth “speak the language that I once had to learn in my law school,” she said, “But they learn in a day from internet. Change is already in the air.”  
…

your ad here

Thailand’s “Bad Students” pro-democracy group took over a downtown Bangkok intersection Saturday night, deriding the country’s royalist government as “dinosaurs” as a kingdom bitterly divided by age, politics and attitudes toward the monarchy lurches deeper into crisis.    
 
Inflatable meteors proclaiming the end of the “dinosaur age” bounced across the rally of thousands as protesters in oversized T-Rex suits danced to anti-government rap songs, organized by a group of high school pupils tired of an education system that elevates rote learning and obedience to Thailand’s strict hierarchy over critical thinking.
 
“The dinosaurs are these government officials who have decision-making power over our lives,” Pimchanok Nongnual, 19, told VOA.  
 
“They are stuck in tradition. They’re conservative, old-fashioned and refuse to change. Their time is up, they must go and open the way to other people who are more competent,” Nongnual said.
 
Thailand, a kingdom with 13 coups in less than a century, has hit another dead end, six years after the last coup, which its leaders said was meant to end political divisions for good and restore economic growth.
 
In the last few days alone, though, rival groups of protesters have clashed on the streets and police summoned for questioning pro-democracy protesters as young as 15, while there are no signs of compromise by the royalist establishment, which instead is threatening tougher use of the law, especially against any criticism of the monarchy.
 
The pro-democracy movement wants the former army chief turned elected premier Prayuth Chan-ocha and his government to step down, a new constitution to replace the current one written by the military, and crucial reform of the once unassailable monarchy.Pro-democracy protesters flash the three-finger salute during a ‘Bad Student’ rally in Bangkok, Thailand, Nov. 21, 2020.Escape route
 
After months of peaceful protests, which lean heavily on satire and ridicule of the elderly hectoring generals and arch-royalists who stack the parliament, the pro-democracy movement is becoming increasingly frustrated with the intransigence of the government.
 
Clashes with royalist “yellow shirts” last week saw the first wounds by gunshots—in a country flooded with weapons and a history of deadly street politics—while police have used water cannon and tears gas against protesters shielding themselves with giant inflatable rubber ducks.
 
The rubber duck has become the latest symbol of a relentlessly meme-making protest movement and was worn Saturday in hair pins and key chains.
 
Protesters plan a rally on Wednesday to the Crown Property Bureau, the office in charge of much of the multibillion-dollar fortune of King Maha Vajiralongkorn, the world’s richest monarch.
 
On Friday ex-army chief Prayuth, the subject of much of the protesters’ scorn, issued a warning that “all laws” will be enforced—potentially including Thailand’s strict lèse-majesté law, which allows for imprisonment for up to 15 years for defamation of or insulting members of the royal family.
 
“It’s not right … I can’t tolerate this,” he told reporters, accusing the pro-democracy group of “creating chaos and violating the monarchy institution.”
 
The protest movement has smashed through taboos, however, by openly criticizing the monarchy for lavishly spending Thai tax revenues while signing off on the army’s role in politics.
 
There was little fear on the streets on Saturday.Pro-democracy protesters flash the three-finger salute during a ‘Bad Student’ rally in Bangkok, Thailand, Nov. 21, 2020.Ruined future
 
“What is there to be scared of?” asked high school student Amy, 15, giving one name only. “The government has ruined our future already.”
 
Vajiralongkorn has been under pressure as never before since ascending the throne in 2016. He has returned from his preferred home in Germany to conduct an unprecedented public relations campaign showing a softer side to a monarchy that protesters say is out of touch and uncaring, going on near-daily walkabouts among royalist supporters.
 
The pro-democracy camp, though, accuses him of a one-sided approach to his subjects.
 
They have called from him to remain bound by the constitution, to open palace books for scrutiny and scrap the lèse-majesté” law, while decoupling from an establishment led by army generals and business clans who the protesters say have turned Thailand into a winner-takes-all society.
 
With neither the protesters nor the government appearing ready to give ground, some experts fear a descent into violence sooner or later. Scores have died on Bangkok’s streets in political violence over the last 15 years.
 
“It does seem that events are leading toward confrontation,” said Matt Wheeler, International Crisis Group senior Southeast Asia analyst.  
 
The government may be under pressure from its core royalist constituency “to act decisively to put an end to criticism of the monarchy, which is growing bolder,” he said.
 
“But it is hard to see what measures they could employ that could both quash this burgeoning criticism and also avoid a backlash.”
 
Others see a December 2 constitutional court date for Prayuth—over a minor infringement of staying in an army residence after he retired from the military—as a potential face-saving escape route for the establishment to remove an unpopular premier through legal means rather than in response to the protesters on the streets.
 
“This could be seen as a gesture of compromise so to speak,” Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang, constitutional law scholar at Chulalongkorn University, said.  
 
“But would it quell the movement on the streets? That’s another story,” he said.
 
Protesters have called for a seven-day rally from Wednesday until December 2.
 
…

your ad here

The U.S. Treasury Department says the economic sanctions imposed under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act on a Chinese development company operating in Cambodia and its Cambodian liaison are an “effective and appropriate tool” for improving human rights and democracy.In September, the Treasury Department imposed sanctions on a Chinese state-owned company, Union Development Group (UDG), that operates in Cambodia. The U.S. cited UDG for seizing land and displacing families to make way for a $3.8 billion luxury gambling and lifestyle project in unspoiled Koh Kong province.UDG operates under a parent company, Tianjin Union Development Group. UDG says the Cambodian project is part of Beijing’s global Belt and Road infrastructure initiative.A Chinese state-owned entityIn the past, the U.S. raised concerns that the site could be used by Chinese naval forces. Cambodian authorities denied this, pointing to the nation’s constitutional prohibition on allowing foreign troops on its territory.The U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated UDG as a Chinese state-owned entity and alleged that UDG operated as a Cambodian entity under the aegis of Royal Cambodian Armed Forces Gen. Kun Kim, a close ally of Cambodia’s Prime Minister Hun Sen. The general allegedly used the military’s right to seize land for its needs to move local people off the land UDG wanted for its resort project.The U.S. sanctioned Kun Kim and his family network on Dec. 9, 2019, for corruption and bribery.The U.S. sanctioning of UDG and Kun Kim is pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13818, which builds upon and implements the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act to target serious human rights abusers, their corrupt practices and supporters. The act allows “the executive branch to impose visa bans and targeted sanctions on individuals anywhere in the world responsible for committing human rights violations or acts of significant corruption,” according to Human Rights Watch.These sanctions, which include freezing funds held in U.S. banks, function as a deterrent “forcing foreign officials at all levels who would use unlawful violence or corruption to consider repercussions from the U.S. government,” according to Human Rights Watch.The Treasury Department official said accomplices of sanctioned parties could also face consequences.“Foreign persons who provide certain material assistance or support to the designated entity may be subject to future sanctions by Treasury,” the Treasury spokesperson said.“We cannot comment on the specific impact that our sanctions have had on UDG, nor potential ongoing investigations,” the spokesperson added.’Specific malign actors’However, during an email exchange in late October, the spokesperson said that “Treasury uses its Global Magnitsky sanctions authority in a targeted fashion to counter the activities of specific malign actors associated with corruption and serious human rights abuse. Targets are carefully investigated, evaluated, and selected based on evidence of their involvement in such activities, as well as our assessment that economic sanctions would be an effective and appropriate tool against them.”In some cases, the success of a sanction hinges on the “voluntary compliance” of non-U.S. banks.“The scope of Treasury’s Global Magnitsky sanctions prohibitions is limited to the United States or U.S. persons, but it is possible that other governments may choose to take similar action,” according to the Treasury spokesperson.Scott Johnston, an associate attorney for human rights accountability at Human Rights First in Washington said, “It’s not uncommon to see voluntary compliance where other foreign companies in banking also choose to comply” with the U.S. Magnitsky sanctions.“For their own reasons, internal reasons, [foreign banks] look at these sanctions and they do their own internal calculus and decide it’s better for them to be able to maintain positive relationships with the U.S. financial sector than it is to maintain relationships with these actors,” he said.Once sanctions are in place, a new process begins, Johnston said.“They [the Treasury] continue to monitor the activities of the sanctioned persons,” he said. “It’s not uncommon to see them do supplemental follow-up sanctions where they will add additional designations” based on additional information unearthed since issuing the original sanction or changes in how the sanctioned person is doing business.For example, Serbian arms dealer Slobodan Tesic, who was sanctioned in December 2017, faced expanded sanctions in December 2019. After the U.S. agency found companies and people that had helped Tesic evade the initial sanctions, new sanctions were issued to target the enablers.’It’ll be stopped’Olivia Enos, a senior policy analyst in the Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation told VOA Khmer last month that it is not necessary for the sanctioned person to have assets or family members in the U.S. If the sanctioned person uses a dollar-denominated credit card, it doesn’t matter if transactions take place in Cambodia or China, the card will be frozen, she said.“It’ll be stopped, and it’ll link back to like the bank accounts, too,” Enos said.She said the sanctions imposed by the U.S. under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act on UDG and Kun Kim “were very good decisions made by the U.S. government even if some of them were kind of too little and a little bit late. But I think that many of these designations are important.”Enos continued to say, “I think that the individuals who were chosen were chosen for very specific reasons because in part of their proximity to Hun Sen, but also because of their support of or practices that just distort the flourishing of democracy in Cambodia.”Enos told VOA Khmer she encourages rights groups to keep monitoring the sanctioned persons and report to the U.S. if there are any changes in their business or other activities.”I think that human rights advocates and ordinary Cambodian citizens should continue to press for accountability for a government that has taken, you know, what was once at least a semi-democratic system and entirely done away with it,” Enos said. “So I think that there should be no greater pushes for internal accountability, but also that there should be encouragement of future additional sanctions that continue to zero in on Hun Sen and his party.”
…

your ad here

In recent years, a growing number of college professors in China have been dismissed, fired, even arrested and sentenced to prison terms after being turned in to authorities by classroom informants for “inappropriate speech.”Analysts say the worrying trend of what they call “malicious reporting” in China’s universities is becoming increasingly rampant. They say the practice not only further limits the space for freedom of thought and expression in Chinese universities, but also is jeopardizing the quality of academic research and discussions.Earlier this month, renowned Chinese historian and Cold War expert Shen Zhihua was delivering a live-streamed speech at an academic seminar on the rise and fall of the Soviet Union, but an hour into the lecture, the feed was suddenly cut off. It remains unclear what Shen may have said that was offensive and the host of the seminar, Capitol Normal University in Beijing, has yet to put the video back online.In a statement, the university blamed a malicious tip-off from students or individuals who tattle on teachers when they make statements or share views that are perceived as challenging the Communist Party’s official narratives or its leader, Xi Jinping.The university called the complaint a clear violation of academic discussion and freedom of speech. It also noted that the lecture was the seventh in a “Four Histories” series at the History College of the Capital Normal University. The university said that far from being a subversive speech, the talk was an attempt by the school to carry out the spirit of President Xi Jinping’s speech on the study of the “Four Histories.”The “Four Histories” refer to the history of the party, the history of the People’s Republic of China, the history of reform and opening up, and the history of the development of socialism.When asked by VOA about the incident, Shen just laughed and said he doesn’t pay much attention to criticism online.”Chinese netizens…they will report you when they hear anything that they are not happy about,” he said.This photo taken on June 26, 2019, shows an adult student taking notes on Xi Jinping taught in a class at the Party School of the Chinese Communist Party’s Central Committee for foreign journalists in Beijing.Violating the constitutionProfessor Yang Shaozheng, who was fired after being spied on and after his students reported him for remarks criticizing the CCP in 2018, told VOA that the party deprives people of their freedom of speech even though it is guaranteed in the country’s constitution.”On the surface, it’s these malicious reporters who are annoying and disgusting, but if they didn’t have the environment, they wouldn’t be able to get away with it even if they wanted to make a malicious report,” he said.He also said that the country’s broader political environment does little to discourage the reporting of false accusations.“Malicious reporting is now prevalent, mainly because they (authorities) do not comply with the laws that protect freedom of expression in our country, so university professors and citizens’ constitutional right to freedom of expression is violated,” he said.Students attend a class on the first day of the new semester in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province on Sept. 1, 2020.Student informantsYou Shengdong, another victim of this practice, says the reason malicious tip-offs are prevalent is that many universities in China deploy student informers as watchdogs against their teachers to eliminate dissent and turn universities into party strongholds in a throwback to the Mao Zedong era. He told VOA that everyone is feeling the danger and the chilling effect in Chinese universities.Many universities have openly recruited informers to supervise teachers. These monitors are required to report teachers who spread superstitions, Western values and criticism of the party’s principles, and to ensure that things that belong to “seven things to not talk about” proposed by Xi Jinping in 2013 are not mentioned in the classrooms, including universal values and historical mistakes that the Chinese Communist Party has made.In addition to making Xi Jinping Thought a mandatory course in universities, a requirement that began at 37 institutions of higher learning this fall, schools have been openly hiring informants in recent years.In its regulations for student informants, Xiantao Vocational College in Hubei Province states clearly that student informants should report teachers that have any behaviors that jeopardize national interests. The school said teachers should also be reported if their speech or behavior contradicts Party policies or violate the party’s discipline.”In recent years, the political and academic climate of Chinese universities has deteriorated, ” You said. “Because of the cameras in the classrooms as well as the informers, I have been reported along with other teachers. This situation is getting worse. If teachers cannot teach and research freely in their own fields, how can we educate students?”New cultural revolutionYou says the result is the promotion of “ideological brainwashing.””If there is no freedom of speech in a country, especially in a university, how can the truth be spread? How can knowledge be imparted? How can the students be taught?” he said. “Any country — if it is a society for the people — then there should be many voices, not only one voice.”And in a paranoid atmosphere where many are focusing on what cannot be discussed, Yang said the climate can often raise common academic discussions to a political level.”In academic discussions, no academic idea should be raised higher than it is, to the political level. This is what a normal academic environment needs,” he said. “What is prevailing now is people don’t care about logic or facts. They always talk about political stuff and doctrines.”He said that this kind of far-left thinking reminds him of China’s Cultural Revolution in the 1960’s and 1970s, a period that cost Chinese society dearly. During the chaotic Cultural Revolution, millions died, intellectuals were targeted, and schools and places of higher learning were closed. Yang said it seems that the authorities have not learned any lessons from the past.Teachers punished for ‘inappropriate speech’Deng Xiangchao, former vice-dean of the School of Art at Shandong University of Architecture, was ordered to retire in January 2017 for reposting articles that criticized Mao Zedong.Shi Jiepeng, former associate professor at Peking University, was dismissed in July 2017 after being accused of “spreading false statements on the Internet” and “crossing ideological red lines.”Tan Song, associate professor at Chongqing Normal University, was dismissed by the school and detained by the police in September 2017 for investigating China’s land reforms, the Anti-Japanese War, Wenchuan earthquake, and talking in class about the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown in Beijing.Xu Chuanqing, associate professor at Beijing University of Architecture, was reported in September 2017 for allegedly criticizing students for not taking classes seriously and saying Japanese students work hard and Japan would become a “superior nation.” He was given administrative sanctions in 2018.Zhai Juhong, associate professor at Hubei Zhongnan University of Economics, Political Science and Law, was accused of criticizing Xi Jinping’s constitutional amendments and China’s people’s congress system in a political class, and was expelled from the party, disciplined and removed from her post in May 2018.Wang Gang, associate professor at School of Clinical Medicine at Hebei University of Engineering, was dismissed in July 2018 after creating a WeChat group for Chinese people who are looking to speak up about rights that are violated and arguing that China would not embark on a path of democratic constitutionalism in a series of articles.Cheng Ran, Xiangtan University lecturer, was demoted in March 2019 after he was accused of making a series of statements in the classroom “with a large number of false images and reports from foreign media” and “vilifying the image of the party and state leaders.”Tang Yun, associate professor at Chongqing Normal University, was disqualified and demoted in March 2019 after being reported by students for making statements that damaged the country’s reputation.Xu Zhangrun, professor at Tsinghua University’s law school, was suspended in March 2019 for criticizing Xi Jinping for amending the constitution and calling for rehabilitating the June Fourth Movement. Xu was later dismissed and arrested for prostitution.Lu Jia, associate professor at Tsinghua University’s School of Marxism, was accused by students of being “anti-party and anti-constitution” in April 2019 and is under investigation.Zi Su, former teacher at the Yunnan Provincial Party School, who advocated for the Chinese Communist Party practice of intra-party democracy and called for Xi’s resignation, was arrested in April 2017 on suspicion of inciting subversion of state power and sentenced to four years in prison in April 2019.Huang Qi, retired female professor at Guizhou Minzu University, was administratively detained for 15 days on September 24, 2019 for making comments on Twitter and WeChat about Hong Kong’s Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement and the Tiananmen Square crackdown.Liu Yufu, teacher at Chengdu University of Technology’s law school, was administratively punished in October 2019 for comments he made in class and online several years ago.Cao Jisheng, lecturer in the School of Marxism at Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, was administratively sanctioned by the police and marked by the school in late October 2019 for making “inappropriate remarks” in a WeChat group.Adrianna Zhang contributed to this report.
 
…

your ad here

Vietnam has threatened to shut down Facebook in the country if it does not bow to government pressure to censor more local political content on its platform, a senior official at the U.S. social media giant told Reuters.Facebook complied with a government request in April to significantly increase its censorship of “anti-state” posts for local users, but Vietnam asked the company again in August to step up its restrictions of critical posts, the official said.”We made an agreement in April. Facebook has upheld our end of the agreement, and we expected the government of Vietnam to do the same,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity citing the sensitivity of the subject.”They have come back to us and sought to get us to increase the volume of content that we’re restricting in Vietnam. We’ve told them no. That request came with some threats about what might happen if we didn’t.”The official said the threats included shutting down Facebook altogether in Vietnam, a major market for the social media company where it earns revenue of nearly $1 billion, according to two sources familiar with the numbers.Facebook has faced mounting pressure from governments over its content policies, including threats of new regulations and fines. But it has avoided a ban in all but the few places where it has never been allowed to operate, such as China.In Vietnam, despite sweeping economic reform and increasing openness to social change, the ruling Communist Party retains tight control of media and tolerates little opposition. The country ranks fifth from bottom in a global ranking of press freedom compiled by Reporters Without Borders.Vietnam’s foreign ministry said in response to questions from Reuters that Facebook should abide by local laws and cease “spreading information that violates traditional Vietnamese customs and infringes upon state interests.”A spokeswoman for Facebook said it had faced additional pressure from Vietnam to censor more content in recent months.In its biannual transparency report released on Friday, Facebook said it had restricted access to 834 items in Vietnam in the first six months of this year, following requests from the government of Vietnam to remove anti-state content.‘Clear responsibility’Facebook, which serves about 60 million users in Vietnam as the main platform for both e-commerce and expressions of political dissent is under constant government scrutiny.Reuters exclusively reported in April that Facebook’s local servers in Vietnam were taken offline early this year until it complied with the government’s demands.Facebook has long faced criticism from rights group for being too compliant with government censorship requests.”However, we will do everything we can to ensure that our services remain available so people can continue to express themselves,” the spokesperson said.Vietnam has tried to launch home-grown social media networks to compete with Facebook, but none has reached any meaningful level of popularity. The Facebook official said the company had not seen an exodus of Vietnamese users to the local platforms.The official said Facebook had been subject to a “14-month-long negative media campaign” in state-controlled Vietnamese press before arriving at the current impasse.Asked about Vietnam’s threat to shut down Facebook, rights group Amnesty International said the fact it had not yet been banned after defying the Vietnamese government’s threats showed that the company could do more to resist Hanoi’s demands.”Facebook has a clear responsibility to respect human rights wherever they operate in the world and Vietnam is no exception,” Ming Yu Hah, Amnesty’s deputy regional director for campaigns, said. “Facebook are prioritizing profits in Vietnam, and failing to respect human rights.”  
…

your ad here