Commentary | Karin Zackari, Academics as Critics: New Trends in Thailand
A new trend can be observed in Thailand where the academic-as-critic has become an actor included in socio-political analysis. While attacks on scholars and students have increased over the last decade, recent data from the Varieties of Democracy Institute (V-dem.) also indicates that there is a rise in dissent among academics (fig. 1). It remains to be seen whether this trend will last, but it opens for new research the role of academics, students, and higher educational institutions in authoritarian states.
I first address Thailand in a global comparison of de facto academic freedom. Secondly, two cases will exemplify the particularities of attacks on academic freedom in Thailand where universities work together with law-enforcement against academic staff and students. As monitoring by the Scholars at Risk network (SAR) shows, the kind of attacks academics face in Thailand are predominantly of a legal nature, targeting individuals more than institutions. The attacks include wrongful imprisonment and detention or wrongful prosecution, but they are also retaliatory and executed by the higher educational institutions, including discharge or dismissal and expulsion from study.
The Academics-as-critics (red line) and Academic Freedom Index (blue) for Thailand 1950-2022, including confidence rating. The Academics-as-critics indicator answers the question to what extent scholars and university students publicly criticize government policies, regardless of how free they are to do so.
The Academic Freedom Index (AFI) by V-dem., is based on data collected from a little more than 2000 country experts worldwide who scored academic freedom based on five key indicators: the freedom to research and teach; the freedom of academic exchange and dissemination; institutional autonomy; campus integrity; and freedom of academic and cultural expression.
Comparing the AFI of 2022 with 2011, major declines are seen in Brazil, Turkey, and Thailand, each dropping more than 0.4 points. Thailand is found in the bottom tier, group E on an A-E scale, while in 2011 it was in the mid-tier, group C. Academic freedom in Thailand was at its highest point in late 1990s and early 2000s, during a new wave of democratization as well as human rights institutionalization. It then fell sharply, coinciding with the military coup in 2006. The threat to academic freedom lessened in a brief period of increased political mobilization and trials of democratic elections around 2012-2013 (fig. 2). Another military coup in May 2014 led to harsher restrictions on civil rights and freedoms, and Thailand is now considered a closed autocracy.
The Academic Freedom Index (top dark blue line) with Variations of democracy indices, including confidence rating.
Typical for the junta and later military-dominated government (post 2019 elections) is the use of the law and the judiciary to suppress academic freedom and public participation. The use of “strategic lawsuits against public participation” (SLAPP) are intended to intimidate, censor and silence. In Thailand these cases are typically defamation lawsuits and the selective enforcement of the lèse-majesté (criminal code 112).
Academic freedom in general is dependent on the respect and protection of rights and freedoms in society at large. It is a set of freedoms and rights as well as a set of principles that need to be in place to protect said freedoms and rights. While academic freedom is protected in international conventions, declarations, and policy documents, higher education institutions must be grounded in certain core values which support the quality of research, teaching, and learning for academic freedom to be meaningfully realized. These core values include among others institutional autonomy, accountability, equitable access, and social responsibility.
“Higher education institutions must be grounded in certain core values which support the quality of research, teaching, and learning.”
Academic freedom is not universal, as freedoms and rights belong to an institution or to an individual status as a scholar or student. That said, the rights and freedoms of the academic – teacher or student – are considered to not be limited to actions within the higher education institution. While there is an ongoing debate about the extent of academic freedom in the public sphere – so-called extramural expression – there are strong arguments for the institutional obligation to protect and refrain from retribution against academics exercising their rights and freedoms as citizens in the public sphere. The line between online and on campus has become blurred, and that affects Thai academics’ online behavior. The military presence felt in educational spaces after 2014 has since moved online: Researchers & students are not just in that role while at campus but also in social spaces online.
Two cases are used here to exemplify the abuse of SLAPP in Thailand and how higher education institutions in Thailand participate in violations of academic freedom.
Case 1: Art-students at Chiang Mai University
There have been several incidents involving both faculty and students where the universities participate in policing academic and artistic activities and expression on campus. Chulalongkorn University officials retaliated against eight student-activists for engaging in a peaceful protest during a student ceremony, by deducting the students’ “behavior points”—a punishment that effectively stripped them of their positions on the university’s Student Council. Mahidol University in 2017 announced an administrative investigation and possible disciplinary actions against faculty members of the university’s Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies (IHRP) in response to a statement issued the previous day condemning the degree of power held by the military junta and alleging it to have engaged in sweeping, unjustified arrests.
Since the military coup in 2014, and especially since the beginning of a new student led movement in August 2020 calling for the reform of the monarchy and the lèse-majesté law, there has been several incidents at Chiang Mai University (CMU) where academic staff and students, in various groupings, mobilize to protest law, and to dissent using legal mechanisms.
In March 2021, during a student protest on the CMU campus, an art installation piece referencing the Thai flag was exhibited. Participants in the protest were invited to write messages on the red and white flag stripes of the art piece addressing the government and Thailand’s lèse-majesté law. The middle blue stripe, which represents the monarchy, was replaced with a mannequin doll under plastic wrap.
The Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts attempted to remove the art installation from campus without informing the student artists. According to Prachatai, the Dean and his colleagues claimed that the artwork was being removed to clean the campus and stated that some of the items could possibly violate the law. Thai police subsequently summoned art student Yotsunthorn Ruttapradit and philosophy student Withaya Khlangnin on May 5, 2021, to answer to charges that the art installation violated Section 112 of the Criminal Code, Thailand’s lèse-majesté law, and the 1979 Flag Act. Breaching any of these laws can lead to imprisonment, while each count of lèse-majesté can result in punishment ranging from three to fifteen years imprisonment.
Again, in October 2021 the art students at CMU were targeted when the dean filed a trespassing charge against two art lecturers and a student for occupying the university art center. The trespassing occurred after the university administration had effectively prohibited students from showing degree projects with political and social themes by locking them out of the center and cutting the water and electricity supply to the buildings.
The removal of artwork prompted protests from students and lecturers, as well as legal actions. First, students filed charges of theft and destruction of property against the dean and faculty for projects damaged or missing after the incident in March. After the lock-out and trespassing incident in October, students petitioned the Chiang Mai University Council to have university principal Dr Niwet Nantajit and Faculty of Fine Arts dean Asawinee Wanjing removed from office for violating their academic freedom. Additionally, the students filed for a temporary injunction at the Chiang Mai Administrative Court. In November 2021, the court ruled in favor of the students, ordering the University administrators to not delay or otherwise administratively block the students from showcasing their projects as the exhibition is a requirement for the fulfilment of the degree.
Case 2: The defamation lawsuit against political scientist Nattapol Chaiching.
Political scientist Nattapol Chaiching completed his doctoral studies with distinction at the prestigious Chulalongkorn University in 2009, with a thesis entitled, “Thai Politics in Phibun’s Government under the US world order (1948-1957).”
One reference in the thesis was to a Bangkok Post article published on December 18, 1950, suggesting that the appointed regent, the Prince of Chai Nat (Prince Rangsit), had been expanding his political role by frequently attending cabinet meetings led by prime minister Field Marshal Plaek Phibulsonggram. In 2018 – 9 years later – a political philosophy professor at Chulalongkorn university found that this was an incorrect reference and demanded revision as well as punishment, arguing that the false statement and misreading had been intentional and done to harm the monarchy.
An investigation at the faculty of political science, however, found that it was an unintentional misreading, and that the reference could be removed without altering the main argument of the chapter or the thesis. To confirm that he had indeed made a mistake, Dr. Nattapoll requested to revise the thesis – a request that was denied as the thesis had already been approved and published. In 2019, the university prohibited public access to the thesis – which was in practice a censorship of the whole thesis.
A revised version of the thesis without the controversial mistaken reference was turned into a bestselling book in 2020 by the left-wing publishing company Same Sky Books. Then, in February 2021, responding to a call from royalist alumni, the university set up a committee to investigate the “academic integrity” of Dr. Nattapoll’s thesis and degree. In March, the granddaughter of Prince Rangsit, M.R. Priyanandana Rangsit, filed a civil lawsuit against Dr. Nattapol, the publisher, as well as his former thesis advisor, Dr. Kullada Kesboonchu-Mead, accusing them all of defamation. A verdict was expected at the end of 2021, but the case has not yet been settled.
This example is relevant as it shows how a case that could have been settled within the university through mechanisms that apparently were in place to safe-guard academic honesty and integrity was instead brought into the public and subjected to censorship and legal repression.
Concluding remarks
The autocratization of Thailand since the military coup in 2014 also includes a decline in academic freedom. Academic freedom is typically attacked in the public, with laws not designed to target scholarly and artistic work. Rather, civil defamation lawsuits and lèse-majesté cases represent deep political conflict in Thailand. Recently, we can also identify a politicization of academic practice, where the decrease in freedom has been followed by an increase in activism among faculty and students. What remains to see is what levels and kinds of dissent from academia that we can expect following the general election in May 2023.
Karin Zackari, PhD. is a senior lecturer in Human rights and a researcher in history at Lund University. She is the author of the dissertation (2020) “Framing the Subjects: Human Rights and Photography in Contemporary Thai History”.
To cite this essay, please use the suggested entry below:
Karin Zackari, “Academics as Critics: New Trends in Thailand,” criticalasianstudies.org, Commentary Board, May 7, 2023; https://doi.org/10.52698/PUZD7174.