As Covid-19 pandemic restrictions ease and society gradually learns to live with the disease, Thailand is at a point where it must decide whether to usher in a sense of normalcy or continue enforcing regulations -- some of which are aimed at what the government sees as a different kind of malady.
Over the past year, the government has been preparing for the country's reopening to the world. Officials are now even considering axing the mandatory RT-PCR tests for foreign arrivals to attract tourists, a move being hailed by many in the private sector.
But some things remain unchanged. The government is still using an emergency decree to control not only Covid but also how the news media reports on it.
The reliance on such an anachronism -- a special law that allows officials to bypass the normal judicial process -- has become a trademark of Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha's leadership.
Since the 2014 coup, the junta-appointed government led by Gen Prayut has issued hundreds of regulations under emergency decrees to control situations it deems critical to national security, such as crowd control during pro-democracy rallies and the arrests of suspected insurgents in the South, or speeding up national development policy in special economic zones.
And despite its becoming civilian-elected since 2019, the Prayut government continues to use an emergency decree as way to control Covid-related news.
In July last year, the government issued two media-related regulations by emergency decree. First, Announcement 27, in which, under Restriction 11, anyone found guilty of disseminating information "that may cause people to panic" is liable to two years in prison and/or a fine of 40,000 baht.
Later in the month, Announcement 29 empowered authorities to order internet service providers to block access to anyone who propagates information that may "frighten the public". However, a few days later the government had to nullify the announcement after a civil court ruled the order unjustified.
Yet Restriction 11 of Announcement 27 remains in effect. This is despite the Thailand Journalist Association (TJA) last year asking the government to drop the restriction.
Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam was quoted telling the TJA at the time that media outlets had no reason to worry as long as they weren't distorting information or reporting inaccuracies.
On Thursday, however, the National Human Rights Council (NHRC) asked the government to rescind the restriction.
The NHRC said Restriction 11 in Announcement 27, "breaches human rights and must be revoked" because it places curbs on free speech.
The NHRC had been asked by media outlets and the TJA to decide whether the regulation violates the constitutional freedom of expression.
Wasan Paileeklee, an NHRC commissioner, called some of Restriction No 11's provisions "vague" and "overly broad", noting that it can be used to interpret opinions -- regardless of how factual they are -- as dangerous to public security.
Simply put, Announcement 27 has given broad powers to the authorities to interpret "fake news" as they see fit.
The media in Thailand plays a crucial role in the government's recovery plans because it disseminates many of the wishes that officials want to convey. Every day, reporters flock to Government House, ministry headquarters and other institutions to grab quotes and soundbites from officials before packaging the information into digestible pieces for their audience.
Mistakes in reporting can be made, but journalists must strive to improve by verifying their stories and boosting credibility. Reporters should always aim for accuracy and fairness in their pieces to garner the trust of the public.
Meanwhile, the government should listen to the NHRC and revoke Restriction No 11. We should not protect an unprofessional media, but the kingdom already has plenty of laws such as a libel law and Computer Crime Act to deal with fake news and disinformation.
The overuse of emergency powers seems unreasonable to the public, and the courts seem to agree. In August last year, a civil court decided to drop Announcement 29, which gave the government power to cut online news, after on-line media outlets complained.
If it truly thinks these decrees are beneficial to the public, it should do a better job of justifying them.
Regardless, one thing is clear: cancelling Restriction No 11, as urged by the NHRC, would make it difficult for authorities to control media but it would show the world that officials are confident in the abilities of the nation's institutions, including the free press.
