• 
• 

Published on September 16, 2007

A group of Bangkok-based and provincial non-governmental organisations (NGOs) held a seminar the other day to voice opposition to new and proposed bills that would curb the freedoms of the mass media and violate the people's right to know.

Of these, the recently enacted Computer Crime Act and the proposed film and video law figured prominently because they're deemed undemocratic.

Proposed by the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Ministry, the cyber-law took effect on July 19, while the film and video legislation, proposed by the Tourism and Sports Ministry, was recently approved by Cabinet and will soon be considered by the National Legislative Assembly.

Three sets of ministerial regulations are being prepared by the ICT ministry to specify the new requirements on the storage of computer-data traffic; the qualifications of cyber-police; and the confiscation of computer hardware and software so as to enforce the law.

Originally, this legislation was intended to protect the public from criminals using electronic media such as the Internet, websites, mobile phones and personal digital assistants.

The original intent of the legislation was also to protect the public's right to privacy, but unfortunately the final act did not contain articles that dealt with the protection of privacy and personal information. Secondly, the law grants state officials excessive power as far as their investigations into alleged wrongdoing are concerned.

For instance, the law requires all Internet-service providers to keep logs of all computer users for a minimum of 90 days without any prior notice - a requirement that could be seen as a violation of the right to privacy.

In addition, officials are empowered to freeze and confiscate all forms of electronic media, which could be seen as a return to the draconian laws of the past that restricted media freedoms.

Such a harsh law could also be abused by future governments in cases of political instability since the law allows the state to restrict the people's right to know as well as their rights to free speech and free expression under the guise of suppressing cyber crime. The scope of the law could include both operators of websites offering pornographic content as well as those offering divergent or opposing political views.

On the proposed film and video legislation, opponents said the government should put this bill on hold because the drafting process failed to take into account the views of the public. Instead of protecting the public's rights and liberties, the bill essentially opens the way for the state to further legitimise its control of the production of films and videos, which are a crucial form of popular mass media, by citing morality and "national security" (very loosely defined) as the basis for control.

Again, freedom of speech and freedom of expression will be curbed if this bill is enacted into law since a dual system (both ratings and censorship) will be adopted to govern public screenings of films and videos. Ironically, if the rating system is going to be used, the outdated censorship system should be scrapped, but it won't be under this bill.

In other words, state officials will continue to have the authority to ban any particular films and videos that they deem inappropriate,

while the rating system, which will provide recommendations to audiences, remains unclear at this stage.

Under this bill, a national film and video commission will be set up, consisting of permanent secretaries of the Culture Ministry and the Sports and Tourism Ministry, and the chiefs of the Religious Department, the Fine Arts Department, and the Public Relations Department, as well as representatives from the Defence Ministry, the Royal Thai Police and other experts.

The commission will have the final say on which local and foreign films and videos can be screened publicly and which locally produced titles can be exported.

Nophakhun Limsamarnphun

 nop1122@yahoo.com