• 
• 

Chalerm said ASTV had encouraged people to break the traffic law and not pay taxes. Chalerm said he received orders from the prime minister but his move was not the best way to solve the problem. Thai Rath said the People's Alliance for Democracy was rallying in Bangkok but the government asked governors in the provinces, far from the demonstrations, to solve their problems.

Chalerm, according to Thai Rath, said that if any governor refused to comply with the order to suspend the broadcasts, he would take action against them for negligence. But he failed to mention who would take action against the cable TV operator which broadcasts ASTV in Bangkok.

Thai Rath said, "We don't know what the government expects to achieve from this." Earlier, PM Samak Sundaravej announced a crackdown on the PAD's rally but back-tracked the following day.

Thai Rath asked whether an order to suspend the broadcast of a TV programme would violate the Constitution. Article 46 of the Constitution says that if members of a political organisation try to obstruct or intervene in news reporting or the expression of opinion in public, "it is deemed the person intentionally abuses the power and the order shall not come into effect".

Thai Rath said that issues relating to the expression of opinions - in writing, publishing and advertising - have been unresolved for more than ten years. Recently, a certain minister was accused of violating this provision by lobbying community radio operators to do a favour for the government. This issue should be resolved systematically, the paper said.

Matichon's editorial piece also carried the same topic. It warned in the title that, "Be careful of the trouble that the order may cause." It said some governors had responded already to the verbal order of Chalerm. For instance, the governor in Khon Kaen province was trying to block the ASTV signal, prompting the members of ASTV cable to protest in front of the governor's residence.

Matichon said the provincial governors should be careful in how they respond to the order. What they do may violate the law, even though Chalerm claims he received the order from the prime minister. If the order to block the cable TV station is against the law, then the governors would take full responsibility for their acts, and politicians would again be able to get away with the responsibility because they made the order verbally.

There were previous complaints relating to ASTV, but the Administrative Court ruled that ATSV had the right to transmit its programmes. In the same way as CNN, ASTV uses satellite - not the frequency system - to transmit its programmes. Censorship can be carried out only during periods of emergency or war. The government could instead take action against any speaker at the PAD rallies, if it thinks those people have violated the law, instead of trying to block ASTV's transmission.

Matichon said it was undeniable that the current situation reflects the public's desire for accurate information. TV alone does not provide sufficient information. Thus, audiences look for alternative media outlets. Governors may be able to stay in office for a while after any blockage of cable TV transmission but no one could guarantee that any attempt to close the eyes and ears of the people would not lead to massive protests later on.

 The current political crisis was a result of many factors such as the attempt to amend the Constitution, the government's mismanagement of the economy, the abuse of power and attempts to bribe the courts. Ministers and the coalition parties should solve the political problems on their own. It was wrong to use civil servants as the means to take action against political opponents because no law could support this tactic. It would not only fail to solve the problems but also put civil servants in trouble. The provincial governors should think hard whether it's worth following any such order, Matichon said.