Why impose royal defamation law in the first place?
I acknowledge letter-writer Clara Holzer for defending our lese-majeste laws and their application, saying “they exist in many countries … and in most cases the punishment is a lot worse”.
I offer a differing point of view for her consideration: “Thailand’s law of lese-majeste had one very prominent critic: King Bhumibol,” wrote Grossman and Faulder in “King Bhumibol Adulyadej: A Life’s Work”.
“In 2005, after an increase in politically inspired lese-majeste complaints, His Majesty used his annual televised birthday address to convey that charges against those accused of lese-majeste should be dropped, and those held in jail for lese-majeste should be released. ... The use of the lese-majeste law ultimately damages the monarchy. When criticism is prohibited and people are jailed for lese-majeste, ‘the damage is done to the king’.” The birthday address itself is available on YouTube.
If His Majesty King Rama IX is correct, and if we love the monarchy, we would not apply the lese-majeste law at all, since doing so “ultimately damages the monarchy”.
Ms Holzer, most governments and Thais praise the late King’s advice to the skies – and do precisely the opposite. I trust in your integrity, so please explain why you disagree with His Majesty here, that we may learn from you.
Burin Kantabutra
