Editors’ Note: this is a companion piece to the Darts & Laurels column that appears in the September/October 2011 issue of CJR, and that will be available at cjr.org on September 22.
Thailand is known as the Land of Smiles. In 2009, I spent a hot December day in the Land of Smiles, in jail. Initially, this seemed mildly amusing and novel—Thai jail, the brown jumpsuits, the rattle of shackles. I assumed I’d be there five minutes.
I passed the rest of the day (not smiling!) in alternating states of resignation, panic, and fury, slouched against the wall with a ration of pork skin on rice, or at peak agitation, with my face pressed between the cell bars for fresh air and a glimpse of my lawyer, Ronnachai, who was supposed to be bailing me out.
I was charged with criminal defamation, a consequence of reporting in the Bangkok Post that a Thai official had been accused of plagiarizing his doctoral dissertation on organic asparagus. He also had allegedly stolen intellectual property and misused his agency’s funds to hire the organic asparagus researchers—mild but embarrassing treachery made relevant given his position as director of the National Innovation Agency (NIA), a Thai state enterprise that manages intellectual property. He had done more elaborate things—absurd but largely documented—to cover it all up, like manipulating immigration documents and work permits and making threats against his accuser, a British agricultural consultant named Wyn Ellis.
The evidence of all this, particularly the plagiarism, was beyond dispute, and the article had been vetted by lawyers and editors at the Post, the English-language newspaper for which I had worked since 2006.
But the official had lost face—the most precious of commodities in Thailand—and he leveraged his connections against me. Along with the Post’s editor-in-chief and Ellis, I was fingerprinted, jailed, and forbidden to leave the country until the Thai courts, which can take years to process cases, resolved the matter. The editor-in-chief, who is Thai, liked to remind me that one of his past defamation cases carried on for thirteen years.
I moved to Thailand in late 2005. It was a bit of a leap, motivated by malaise and desperation brought on by the year I’d spent working as an analyst in a Navy Anti-terrorism office in Washington, D.C (I was an English major, with a misguided dream of becoming a spy). I answered an ad by a travel magazine, now defunct, that operated out of a Chinese shophouse—similar to an American row house, narrow with a shop on the ground floor and residential space above—on Khao San Road in the heart of Bangkok’s backpacker district. The magazine was willing to pay me a stipend (a Bangkok stipend) and so, imagining this as some sort of magical passage into the ranks of journalism, I moved.
I knew irresponsibly little about Thailand, certainly not the language or anyone who lived there. I wasn’t even familiar with Thai food. The magazine was an experience—the three editors chain-smoked and liked to heckle me for being from the country that elected George W. Bush. In some ways, I owe them everything, but I was happy to leave in December when, with some crazy luck, I was hired by the Bangkok Post’s investigative section.
My first stories involved working undercover as an English teacher in a Thai public school and 11 hours interviewing an elderly and respected Thai statesman who also believed he was a Martian.
Eventually, though, I settled in. I became fascinated with Thai politics and wrote about an amazing range of truly sinister things—disappearances of Muslim “insurgents” from military camps, trafficking of Uzbek women into Bangkok’s night clubs, extortion of Burmese migrants—that I always assumed would get me in far more trouble than a story about plagiarism. But that’s the funny thing about Thailand, hierarchy is upheld and deference expected. Confrontation is avoided. It makes an interesting laboratory for investigative reporting. Being young, foreign, and female made navigating these values that much more unpredictable.

There is not a thing in this that surprises me. Thailand might market itself as the Land of Smiles and be welcoming to foreigners but the truth is that foreigners of any race are third-class citizens in Thailand.
The only law in Thailand is that Thais are always right - after all they did invent everything from the wheel on - and foreigners are regarded little more than the husks that blow of the rice at milling time.
As a journalist living in Thailand I am not surprised at the turn of events following Erika writing this story. What is totally unacceptable but also not earth shattering is the actions of the Bangkok Post senior editorial staff.
this is a perfect example of Thainess and it's better to be on a blacklist and have an outstanding arrest warrant than to play a game a foreigner will never win.
That Erika even contemplated returning to Thailand to defend the matter defies belief. Any foreigner contemplating moving to Thailand should forget everything they've ever been taught about law, justice, equality, fair dealing before getting on the plane because Thailand is not one of the countries in the world where those words have any meaning at all.
I'm glad Erika made it out safely.
#1 Posted by John, CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 12:36 AM
A hard lesson learned to find out what the Thais are really like.
Why on Earth you'd want to come back and live amongst them again I don't know but is probably down to the naivety that let you get involved with them so deeply in the first place.
Count yourself lucky, breaking or attempting to break a Thais ricebowl is often fatal.
#2 Posted by Peter Tudders, CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 12:52 AM
Very interesting story.
I wish we could find someone here in the U.S. willing to delve into Obama's academic record, his cocaine use, his cronyism, etc.
It's kind of pitiful that journalists in oppressive foreign environments are willing to stick their necks out to speak truth to power, but the fawning MSM here gives Obama a free pass despite the constitutional protection they enjoy.
#3 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 12:04 PM
Good article and I'm glad you made it out alive. I agree with everything that John has posted above. This country is a joke and just be glad you got out instead of being left to rot in some jail cell because you told the truth about some big haired hi so Thai.
#4 Posted by Farang, CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 01:47 PM
Thaksin Shinawatra is very bad. He insulted Thailand's most revered King, killed thousands of drug dealers, and was a prolific censor. Erika should ask her colleagues how hard it was for the Bangkok Post during his era... and how much nicer things were for the newspaper with the Democrat Party in charge!
If it wasn't for the military overthrowing Thaksin, Thailand would be in an even worse mess: Erika should be thankful for that. Eton and Cambridge-educated Abhisit Vejjajiva and the Democrat Party did everything they could to eradicate his Hitler-like influence from Thailand. Unfortunately, his claws were sunk in too deep, as she sadly experienced.
And now Thaksin's sister won the election... and she campaigned on a promise to bring him back. The light is fading in the Land of Smiles.
#5 Posted by Somchai, CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 03:34 PM
Thank you Erika Fry for exposing Thailand; the whole country is controlled by
Thai mafia which is backed by CIA using your tax money . Doing so you are helping the majority poor Thai to get rid of the mafia.But we need a lot more people like you to help exposing Thailand. Most Thai are living their live in unreal world, they cannot speak out against the powerful criminal killers. Conform or be jailed/killed.
Most people you met are elites in the top 5% of Thailand but control 99% of the country's wealth. I found your story from Bangkok Pundit or New mandala.
Bangkok Post is one of most media that self-censored their works.
Prachathai is a better one to read.
#6 Posted by joe gordon , CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 06:37 PM
Not disimilar from me, but in corporate. 11-years in Land-of-Scams/Smirks and once you are too successful then the sharks circle. The elite cannot have their cosy rent-seeking arrangements removed from them.
I never thought that accepting a job would leave me unable to return to a country that I loved, spoke, wrote and read the language of, but hey, all good things comae to an end.
Conform or be jailed/killed. Yes - probably the most sage advice to give any would-be travellor to Thailand. That is despite the fact that you are conforming to a system and set of rules that is rotten to the core.
#7 Posted by Persued, CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 08:43 PM
I am an American, living in Chiangrai these past nine years, and I have to point out that Bangkok is not Thailand. In fact Thailand intrudes into Bangkok... all the people who actually do the work that enables the corrupt 'elite', described in this young woman's experience, to continue to literally lord it over Thailand are Thais, but the Bangkok 'elite' are a breed apart, and they are the ones who draw the ire of so many, some of whom have commented above, who mistakenly characterize Thais and Thailand on the basis of their experience with the 'elite' and their wannabes.
The behavior of the people in charge at the Bangkok Post is not in the least surprising to me. I was mildly surprised that the 'elite' corruption present throughout Thai officialdom extends so pervasively to Chulalongkorn University, which is held up as THE serious academic institution in Thailand. But it is so heavily politicized that its corruption is inevitable, I suppose.
The present Puea Thai regime plays the left hand to the anti-democratic Democratic Party's right. At least they are not directly under control of the Royal Thai Army. But the people of Thailand are aroused and struggling to gain control of their country still, at this point, and we Americans might well take a lesson in participatory democracy from them.
#8 Posted by john francis lee, CJR on Sat 3 Sep 2011 at 08:59 PM
Also a journo based in Thailand, I agree 100% with both Johns (No 1 and No 10) above. By and large Thais are wonderful people (I'm married to one of them) but their country has some deep-seated and pervasive problems that no one wants to face, largely fuelled by unjustified (and shamelessly exploited by the ruling class) nationalism that reverts to xenophobia at the slightest challenge.
#9 Posted by Dave S, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 12:19 AM
Thanks, Erika for this powerful and touching personal testament. I've always felt pangs of guilt as well as irony at the way this case affected your life, Thailand is all the poorer without your brave weekly exposés of corruption, the Russian mafia, the sex trade and people trafficking. I want to thank you wholeheartedly for believing in me, when all those respected 'poo-yai', professors, Ministers and even the Prime Minister's Office, continue to look the other way, close ranks, and perpetuate a culture of impunity. I never knew you worked so hard behind the scenes! You would have made a damn good spy.
Your original article is still out there at http://www.f1-net.com/2009/12/25/a-test-of-intellectual-integrity/ though the Post shamelessly pulled it.
When the Ministry of Science and Technology investigated my complaints for a fourth time earlier this year, they ruled there had indeed been "Use of State budget for personal benefit" and "destruction of government documents".
However, the Permanent Secretary, acting as Chair of the NIA Board, simply notified me that the NIA does not see fit to set up a disciplinary committee based upon the Ministry's own rulings. (The folks at NIA can't seem to find anyone brave enough to replace Kosit Panpiemras, Exec Chairman of Bangkok Bank, to fill the NIA Chairman's seat, following Kosit's sudden exit 7 months ago)!
You are also correct in writing that I was as worked up about the lack of scientific merit as I was about plagiarism. As a PhD candidate myself, I am outraged that one of Thailand's élite universities could have ever considered this ‘thesis’ as worthy. I am still waiting after 3 years for Chulalongkorn University to revoke this doctorate degree even though its own investigation upheld my allegation of gross plagiarism "word for word, page for page".
The past 25 years of my life in Thailand have mostly been just wonderful. But for the past 3 years my family and I have been subjected to 9 court and police prosecutions, along with other forms of intimidation. It is only through the constant support, determination and loyalty of my wife that I have maintained my resolve throughout this ordeal. I was also incarcerated with 50 convicts on that same December day, but unlike yourself, at least I had Pattnapong for company (though had I known his views that day, they might have kept me in for longer).
Happily, no case has so far succeeded, and the three that reached a verdict upheld my absolute right to criticize public officials in the course of their duty. But for anyone thinking of reporting corruption by a public official, my advice is: ‘Don’t even think about it!’ Should you be foolish enough to try, your letter will go straight back to the subject of the complaint, who will then wreak his vengeance. Your opponent will file police complaints of criminal defamation, which the Public Prosecutor will pursue on his behalf. Typically, he will also file parallel civil defamation suits, claiming damages. The catch is this: while the State pays the Plaintiff’s costs for police prosecutions, you, as defendant, must hire a lawyer.
I would urge anyone who has read Erika's article to make their views known to the Acting Chairman of NIA at pornchai@most.go.th / all@nia.or.th. Thank you for your support.
By doing so, you can make a difference, and help uphold academic and governance standards in Thailand's universities and civil service. As a result of public debate around this issue, the Commission for Higher Education admitted it had no definition, no process, and no specified punishment for plagiarism. That, at least, has now changed.
#10 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 08:17 AM
Sorry, I was too long-winded, and my msg got truncated. Here's the last part.
... By doing so, you can make a difference, and help uphold academic and governance standards in Thailand's universities and civil service. As a result of public debate around this issue, the Commission for Higher Education admitted it had no definition, no process, and no specified punishment for plagiarism. That, at least, has now changed.
#11 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 08:24 AM
note to self : continue NOT to go / live in a foreign country writing attack journalism articles against the coutry's elite .
what do they teach n those indiana schools anyway ?
#12 Posted by bobbie lee swagger, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 10:50 AM
As a young "farang" (western) woman who has lived in Thailand for over 5 years, it is no surprise that the highly coveted 'saving-face' cultural value would have such a severe (potential) consequence. My question is why in the world did Erika not already know this after living in Thailand 4 years after the story printed?
I know I've got to allow for age, naivete, and just plain Amerocentric ignorance, but seriously, she should have done her homework before being played as a pawn. Didn't she work for the Investigative section, ironically enough?
The fact that the Thais operate in such a way does not excuse the behavior, but "when in Rome..." DON'T do as the Americans would do. Our freedom of speech is not to be exercised without wisdom and careful tread in a culture that clearly doesn't provide liberty for it.
Again, not excusing or justifying the subterfuge of the circumstance, just rebuking the lack of judgment. About 50%+ of the "farang" stay grounded in their own "farang" bubbles and then are genuinely bewildered when their own ethics don't work in Thailand #or elsewhere#.
Future reference - culturally assimilate first.
If she had done just that, she probably would have never written that paper in the first place. Her own culturally fused judgement would have dictated otherwise.
#13 Posted by Michelle, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 11:57 AM
True, but I'm not sure if this guy could count as a member of the 'elite': 'Middle management' springs to mind.... his family had a printing business.
Anyway, we should not characterize this a problem of other countries. Think how journalists exposing embarrassing facts are treated in US, or UK? Remember Wilfred Burchett?
Like any good journalsit, Erika acted courageously in exposing the story. I am in her debt for so doing, and so is Thai society, whether they realize it or not.
#14 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 12:17 PM
Well Erika, as you well know I had a ten year fight (not completely over) having done an investigation for the UK press and already published there which the Bangkok Post - the paper you can trust - asked me to re-write for them. In the middle of the proceedings they settled quietly with the plaintiff and literally disowned me. Further their lawyers were my lawyers and they did not present my witness list for civil proceedings so the judge rules I could not have any witnesses. I won my cases on appeal, funding thankfully by a whip round amongs journalists and editors in the UK. The BP were completely deceiotful Best wishes AD
#15 Posted by Andrew Drummond, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 01:58 PM
I learnt some time ago now, after more than 30 years in the media {outside Thailand} that the last people you "trust" are your employers. Moreover, amongst the list of those one cannot trust, I leant the hard way that the list included colleagues, lawyers, so called "friends" and others. In short, when it hits the fan you learn who your real friends are. Thailand is life "through the looking glass". It is more like Alice in Wonderland that any modern democracy. One only needs to read a chronology of the country’s history since World War 2 to understand that the rule of law is secondary to the rule of the gun. Honesty is an unknown commodity in Thailand and the foreigner is always treated like a trespasser. That said, the food is good which is perhaps the thing going for the country.
#16 Posted by Wayne Taylor, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 10:33 PM
You know what I'm not hearing here from the bulk of you guys?
Kudos to Erika for doing her damned job, that's what...
You "professional journalists" are in general nothing but a bunch of cowardly, suck-ass weasels...
Was Erica naive? Sure. So what? That doesn't excuse the third-world, authoritarian bastards who threw her in jail for telling the damned truth.
This "when in Rome" stupidity doesn't fly, dudes.
Erica = good. Thailand's system = bad.
Call the balls and strikes!
Why don't you worthless bastards do the right thing and get behind her?
#17 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 4 Sep 2011 at 11:36 PM
To those who accuse Erika of being naive: Perhaps, but the real outrage of this story is the behavior of the senior editors at the Bangkok Post. It seems clear from her account that Erika believed she had the backing of the newspaper. And why wouldn't she believe that? She was a fully employed investigative reporter on assignment. The story was vetted by several senior editors and the paper's lawyer. Yes, she should have expected heat from Supachai. But it would not be unreasonable to expect the Post to stand up for her. But on the other hand, those of us who have lived in Thailand a bit longer (See Andrew Drummond, above) might have seen this coming. In any case, Pattnapong is gutless scum.
#18 Posted by formerfarang, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 02:38 AM
Erika,
Thank you so very much for all you have done for so many. I have no doubt that you will continue in such fashion. You will be missed here.
#19 Posted by Gerard, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 04:21 AM
Just when I think, " Maybe, just maybe Thailand is actually OK, I read stuff like this and am so so glad I chose to NOT invest in a permanent lifestyle here.
#20 Posted by Christy S , CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 05:44 AM
A real journalist is a rare thing these days but Erika, you can count yourself among them. Thailand won't change overnight – or over the next decade – but you and your efforts may have gone some small way toward showing people that the "gods" can bleed.
Whenever you are tempted to feel regrets, just go up on a rooftop, envision Gerard Butler chucking a spear at a 7-foot ladyboy and yell, "THIS IS SPARTA!"
#21 Posted by Jeff Studebaker, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 10:05 AM
Wow, "padikiller", way to express yourself articulately. Your perspective is clearly one that bolsters the western culture and can't see any other culture outside of your little box.
It should be: Erica = should have known better. Thailand's system = unprincipled. Bangkok Post senior staff = cowards.
If you don't like the "When in Rome" stuff, then don't ever travel abroad and resolve yourself to do and say whatever you want behind the comfort and safety of your computer. Otherwise, traveling and operating abroad with your kind of genius attitude will result in the same kind of rude wake up call like Erica received.
It doesn't excuse the powers-that-be from throwing Erica in jail or her senior staff from failing to stand up for her. It was wrong, tragic, abhorrent, despicable, and every adjective that poo-poos such transgressions, but it's a country that operates that way and people should really know that first. Expect it and don't try to play hard ball or you'll lose; especially as a foreigner with absolutely no rights when push comes to shove. No amount of whining, cursing, or stamping your feet like a 5-year old and belting, "it's not fair!" will change that.
Erika gleaned a hard-learned lesson on many fronts. Wayne Taylor (above) had it right: you don't trust your employers. They may just throw you under the bus to get a good story just to take a swing at people in a passive-aggressive fashion ... in any country. Discernment becomes a critical component and gauging off other people proved to backfire.
Know the parameters within which you should operate or don't be surprised by the consequences - however right or wrong those consequences are perceived.
#22 Posted by Michelle, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 10:40 AM
Michelle, it is good to respect a culture, but corruption is not culture.
In fact, it's not even Thai. The system of cronyism in place today is an import of (guess who!) the British Empire. The Chinese Thai now in power were lowly bureaucrats and paper-pushers until the colonial powers started bribing them for export rights, mining rights, and rights to anything they could put on a ship and haul off to Europe.
With a few notable exceptions (starts with a T and rhymes with "axin'"), all the big money in Thailand can be traced back to corrupt government bureaucrats selling out their country to Western traders. Joe Studwell published a well researched study of this in his book, "Asian Godfathers."
#23 Posted by Jeff Studebaker, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 10:57 AM
lived here eleven years. post is corrupt. Chula is corrupt. lawyers are corrupt. its all corrupt. from very bottom to very top. Don't idealize the land of smiles. it can be a good place to live if you never bump heads with a "big" person or have a traffic accident or incident with a hot head Thai. Life is a gamble living here as a foreigner who is honest. if you are corrupt you are very welcome and fit right in with those in charge. But if you try to be honest and follow the law, you really piss them off because you make them no money.my advice to the lady is to forget about this place. its not a real country, its all fake and for show..You got out, be thankful. The world is a big place; there are many other and better countries to see than this one. forget about Thailand.
#24 Posted by lek, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 01:14 PM
I'm shocked, shocked to find out there is corruption going here!!! (with apologies to Claude Rains)
#25 Posted by Charlie, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 01:44 PM
That about sums up the crummy state of tertiary education in Thailand. If their "top school" allows the following crap to pass for their PhD candidates, one can only wonder what the rest of the system.
PhD in Thailand = High School Diploma in Western Europe/America/Japan
#26 Posted by T F Rhoden, CJR on Mon 5 Sep 2011 at 04:58 PM
Actually I forgot to mention that in my case I was initially convicted and the Bangkok Post (editor,publisher, and features editor) were acquitted!
Now you would have thought that was an impossibility!
#27 Posted by Andrew Drummond, CJR on Tue 6 Sep 2011 at 05:07 AM
Compelling point you bring up about culture, Jeff Studebaker; I wasn’t intentionally arguing that corruption = culture but you started me thinking. By definition, culture is the predominating attitudes and behavior that characterize the functioning of a group or organization (freedictionary.com).
If cronyism was imported from the British Empire, as you say, then at what point does the new ruling elect (the Chinese Thai, as you mentioned) take responsibility for perpetuating the prevailing attitudes and behavior that ripples through the rest of the culture in their daily activities and dealings? Sure, all seed money in Thailand may very well have originated from Western traders, but can Thais then really point the finger at the West as implementing Thais’ current debauchery?
However it started, perhaps corruption may be the side effect of the attitudes and behavior inherent within the mentality of a society. Interesting food for thought.
#28 Posted by Michelle, CJR on Tue 6 Sep 2011 at 07:27 AM
I know well what the author went through.
Everyone involved leaves you holding the bag of manure.
All friends suddenly avoid you.
Everyone starts to lie and deny and twist the truth and no one wants to stand up and fight on your behalf.
All lawyers are useless and none of them , repeat none of them, have any passion at all for your case. They simply want to milk it for all it is worth.
Cooperating with theThai law and the Thai judicial system is highly NOT recommended.
Being Honest and forth right is highly NOT recommended when it comes to legal issues in Thailand.
I also left the country but I left in a big hurry. Less than 24 hours and I was out.
I could have stuck around and tried to fight it. I was oh sooooo reluctant to leave after more than 13 years.
But I did enjoy denying any of the scum bags trying to do me legal harm any victory and any chance of manipulating the circumstances any further. Plus they also lost all the more money.
I stayed away for 10 years and came back because of the statue of limitations for such a case as mine.
But I am well aware that the statue of limitations is somewhat meaningless and the rule of lawlessness is more precedent.
Foriegners here are very vulnerable to a corrupted and unjust system if you happen to get embroiled in any legal disputes with Thai people.
Better to settle out of court if you can and make a meaningless and insincere apology...just like the Thai people do if it is forced upon them.
#29 Posted by Harrison, CJR on Tue 6 Sep 2011 at 02:05 PM
Erika, I think we are all incredibly thankful that you made it back to the U.S. safely. I think we were all very worried about your decision to live and work there, but at the same time admire your courage to take a chance at the unknown. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this as I have not had the opportunity to read any of your previous work, but also to learn the whole story in detail of your ordeal to make it back home. When I heard you were imprisoned I couldn't help but think of the movie, "Return to Paradise" and could only imagine the horrors of what you experienced there. Glad to have you back. This is a great article!
#30 Posted by Rebecca, CJR on Wed 7 Sep 2011 at 11:14 AM
Excellent article and truly harrowing experience. It says so much about the way Thai society works, the Thai judicial system and the Bangkok Post. It also confirms my impressions of "fat cattish" Pichai. I was a big fan of your reports in Spectrum and was wondering why they had disappeared.
#31 Posted by Arnaud Dubus, CJR on Fri 9 Sep 2011 at 03:55 AM
This is an outstanding piece and really highlights issues that are hindering Thailand's development. Whilst the country remains a co-operating strategic partner to the US I doubt these matters will ever receive the attention they truly deserve.
I lived in Thailand for almost ten years and so I can completely identify with the authors experience. There is something that is very attractive about day to day life in Thailand and the friendliness of the people. Unfortunately, there also exists a culture of concealed but soul-destroying bullying and oppression that blights the lives of the many.
I almost fell out of my chair laughing when Erika mentioned their 'elaborately indirect ways'. There is little that can prepare you for a confrontation with a Thai due to the way in which is it address. The matter will be raised in such a convoluted and indirect manner it can leave you stunned and powerless to respond. It is something exceptional to behold when confronted in this way as only a true victim can fully understand.
You can't live life without occasionally encountering conflicts with people and in Thailand that is when you get an education on who is boss and how the place really ticks.
I think you made the correct decision to leave and you can be proud as a young journalist to join the ranks of those who have fled thailand because of political oppression. I am disheartened when I think of all the Thais who have no choice but to suffer in this system; but I do think change is coming to the country and perhaps sooner than we think.
#32 Posted by Mother Eagle, CJR on Fri 9 Sep 2011 at 04:22 PM
In our profession, we all know that there is always more than one side to a story. Erika Fry’s article “Escape from Thailand” accuses the Bangkok Post of failing to defend her in a defamation case filed against her, its editor and the company. This is simply untrue. Her story is one-sided.
This response is not a defence of the Thai legal system or its processes. There is no doubt that dire improvements are long-overdue. The abuse and use of connections and influence is prevalent in many sectors of Thai society.
Although there are portions of her article which are correct, there are other crucial portions which are inaccurate and untrue. Sadly, some paragraphs amount to nothing more than innuendo, speculation and baseless accusations.
Indeed, Ms Fry was assigned to cover a plagerism story and as a result of its publication the Bangkok Post was sued for criminal defamation along with the editor. The story was approved for publication by relevant editors. And yes, one senior editor expressed reservations and said the newspaper was at risk of a lawsuit. The fact that Ms Fry was unaware of this is irrelevant. The fact is that the story was approved for publication. There is no dispute here.
Spending time in jail, even temporarily for a day and especially in a foreign country, can be an unsettling and traumatic experience. Although I have never been behind bars in a foreign country, I have been in a Thai jail temporarily under similar circumstances as Ms Fry did. Other editors and reporters have gone through this unpleasant experience. I can understand how she felt.
Usually when a defamation case goes to trial in a Thai court and the defendants decide to fight the case, the courts will require bail be posted. Once the court decides this, the lawyer must file a formal request for bail and approval can take time. It can take a couple of hours over lunch or longer. It all depends on the court officials and their processes.
While the defendants wait for bail approval, they are required to spend time behind bars. Many newspapers in Thailand, like the Bangkok Post, regularly make requests for its editor or reporter waiting for bail approval to sit in a waiting room rather than behind bars. But it is up to the each court’s discretion whether to agree to this request or not. Sometimes courts in Bangkok would agree to such requests, but this is not always guaranteed. This is especially the case in courtrooms upcountry like Nakhon Pathom where this particular defamation case was being tried.
Ms Fry says she lacked confidence in the Bangkok Post’s lawyer, Ronnachai Netrumporn for a number of reasons, one being his inability to provide details of a blacklist. All I can say is that often officials say that such blacklists exist but are not readily accessible despite efforts to obtain them. Is this sufficient reason for lack of confidence?
Ms Fry also said she lacked confidence in the lawyer because he spoke little English and even went on to write “a lawyer I knew told me Ronnachai hadn’t won a single case for the Post”. This is simply untrue and amounts to nothing more than shoddy journalism.
Khun Ronnachai has served three editors and members of Post’s management in defamation cases for over 15 years. Of course there are cases which the Bangkok Post has lost. But this amounts to three cases. Khun Ronnachai has successfully defended about 40 cases against the Bangkok Post and Post Today, its Thai-language sister publication. Khun Ronnachai’s lack of proficiency in English has not prevented him from successfully defending cases filed against the Bangkok Post.
Khun Ronnachai, or any Thai lawyer for that matter, has no control over the legal process or its pace. He has no control over the court’s decision which initially denied Ms Fry’s requests to leave the country. But in the end, Khun Ronnachai did his duty and managed to convince the court to allow her to leave the c
#33 Posted by Pichai Chuensuksawadi, CJR on Tue 13 Sep 2011 at 11:58 AM
Khun Ronnachai has served three editors and members of Post’s management in defamation cases for over 15 years. Of course there are cases which the Bangkok Post has lost. But this amounts to three cases. Khun Ronnachai has successfully defended about 40 cases against the Bangkok Post and Post Today, its Thai-language sister publication. Khun Ronnachai’s lack of proficiency in English has not prevented him from successfully defending cases filed against the Bangkok Post.
Khun Ronnachai, or any Thai lawyer for that matter, has no control over the legal process or its pace. He has no control over the court’s decision which initially denied Ms Fry’s requests to leave the country. But in the end, Khun Ronnachai did his duty and managed to convince the court to allow her to leave the country to cover a story in which the Bangkok Post acted as guarantor.
Ms Fry accuses the Bangkok Post of abandoning her. This is not true.
Normally, court cases in Thailand are a time-consuming and can last for years. Defamation cases against the Press and media are given a low priority by the courts. In most cases, even if the defendants are found guilty, they are given a suspended sentence.
Therefore, when defamation cases are filed against the Press, the court usually prefers that the plaintiff and defendant compromise and many cases are settled out of court. Compromises and face-saving tactics are normal in such cases.
In this case, the plaintiff, Supachai Lorlowhakarn, came to the Bangkok Post for consultations after he filed the defamation suit. Ms Fry was present during this initial consultation along with other senior editors.
The plaintiff offered a compromise saying that his primary target was Mr Wyn Ellis - Ms Fry’s primary source who was also sued by the plaintiff. In fact, the plaintiff and Mr Ellis were former partners in business who became embroiled in several suits and counter suits after they had a falling out.
The plaintiff said the Bangkok Post editor Pattnapong Chantranontwong and Ms Fry were not his prime targets. The plaintiff offered to drop the case against the editor and Ms Fry (after Ms Fry testified in court that her interview with Mr Ellis was correct) and if the Bangkok Post took the story off its on-line archive.
The editor consulted Khun Ronnachai who advised that the request to withdraw the article from the online archive had nothing to do with the case against the Bangkok Post. The online withdrawal request was a face-saving move since the Bangkok Post had made it clear that it would not retract its story and fight the case in court.
A reporter being called by the defendant to testify as a witness against a plaintiff in defamation cases is normal. The defendant merely wants the reporter to reaffirm that the interview given by the plaintiff (Mr Ellis) is correct. It is not a confession of guilt or error. It is a reaffirmation that the interview was accurate and correct.
Many newspapers and reporters are sued as plaintiffs so that defendants can use their testimony against other plaintiffs in the case. Ms Fry did not agree with this and demanded that the case against her be dropped immediately before agreeing to testify in court.
Her position was conveyed to the plaintiff but he stood firm on his position. Despite repeated requests that the plaintiff withdraw the suit against Ms Fry, the plaintiff remained adamant. The editor tried to resolve this deadlock a number of times but was unsuccessful.
In order to move the compromise forward, the editor decided to agree to the plaintiff’s face-saving request. The plaintiff withdrew the case against the editor but still had the case pending against Ms Fry whom he wanted to testify as a witness. The Bangkok Post did not issue a retraction and continued to fight the case in court and would have fought the case through to the Supreme Court if necessary.
When Ms Fry decided to leave the country
#34 Posted by Pichai Chuensuksawadi, CJR on Tue 13 Sep 2011 at 12:02 PM
Despite repeated requests that the plaintiff withdraw the suit against Ms Fry, the plaintiff remained adamant. The editor tried to resolve this deadlock a number of times but was unsuccessful.
In order to move the compromise forward, the editor decided to agree to the plaintiff’s face-saving request. The plaintiff withdrew the case against the editor but still had the case pending against Ms Fry whom he wanted to testify as a witness. The Bangkok Post did not issue a retraction and continued to fight the case in court and would have fought the case through to the Supreme Court if necessary.
When Ms Fry decided to leave the country, her section editor coordinated the request directly with Khun Ronnachai who assumed the editor had given his approval. The section editor did not inform the editor of this request.
Once she had arrived in Singapore, Ms Fry informed the Bangkok Post that she would not be returning and had had signed power of attorney to another lawyer. Only at that point did the Bangkok Post had over responsibility of handling her case to her lawyer before the court at its next hearing.
Her lawyer probably did not inform her that once she had left the country, the case against her would be put on hold. Thai courts will not proceed and deliberate on cases unless the defendant is physically present before the court. The case proceeded nonetheless and in the end, Khun Supachai’s (the plaintiff) case was dismissed. Unfortunately, the record still stands that she skipped bail.
In her article Ms Fry suggests that the decision to agree to a face-saving request had something to do with politics; that the Post’s Chief Operating Officer is the cousin of the former Prime Minister (Abhisit Vejjajiva) or that money had changed hands. It’s a pity she included such unsubstantiated speculation and innuendo so as to embellish her story. What she wrote is simply not true.
Embellishing her story also seems to explain another paragraph in her story: “I was left particularly vulnerable, since my legal status depended on my work permit, which the Post controlled. Had I been fired, theoretically I could have been sent to the Immigration Detention Center, a sad, worse-than-prison sort of place where they hold destitute foreigners and asylum seekers, sometimes for years”. In all my years at the helm of the Bangkok Post, and under the leadership of my successors, no foreign staff has been treated this way.
I disagree with how she portrayed of our conversation about this case. We spent more than an hour discussing this case and I certainly was not condescending, nor did I chuckle or treat her concerns lightly. Yes, I disagreed with her suggestion that she change lawyers. In my view we have a good lawyer and hiring another lawyer unfamiliar with defamation cases would simply jeopardize the case.
By her own admission, Ms Fry consulted 10 lawyers and some judges, businessmen and so-called phuyai (or senior persons) for help. It appears her efforts came to naught. Consulting so many lawyers, especially if they are unfamiliar with defamation cases, only contributes to further confusion. And in the end, as was mentioned earlier, the case was dismissed by the court.
#35 Posted by Pichai Chuensuksawadi, CJR on Tue 13 Sep 2011 at 12:04 PM
Khun Pichai,
This is of course, my story. I have told it, as I experienced it, without embellishment or fabrication. You may not have reached the same decisions, but you have the luxury of considering them from a very different position. What may seem inaccurate to you, I’m afraid was a very troubling and stressful reality for me. It surprises me that you characterize me as ‘demanding’ during this ordeal. If anything, I was not demanding enough—this case had major implications on my life, career, and ability to see my family.
Much of what we disagree on can be explained by my loss of trust in the Post. I trusted the Post completely until Pattnapong struck his deal without consulting or notifying me. In addition, he lied to me about it. One would be completely irresponsible to continue to have faith in people and an employer that had behaved this way, particularly in a matter as serious and consequential as a legal case.
This instinct was reinforced by the lawyers, NGOs, and officials I met with, who would invariably remind me of this case— http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg39858.html— in which the Post did fire reporters, who wrote a true, but controversial story. I also knew of Andrew Drummond’s case (see comment #15). This was important context for my decision-making throughout.
For the sake of my colleagues, I am glad to hear Ronnachai is competent. I gave my reasons for having doubts about it—the unusual jailing (Pattnapong told me this had never happened to him before), the rejected appeals for my travel (I knew of a foreign journalist charged with defamation that was allowed to travel freely), but most of all the fact that he spread allegations about me without bothering to first ask me about them. The blacklist was not the source of my doubts, but a point I made to demonstrate that there was no certain, easy way out for me.
It is true that before that deal was struck, I was present for a meeting with Supachai. But that meeting resulted in nothing other than Supachai saying he needed to discuss things with his lawyer. Pattnapong assured me that he would keep me informed when he heard back and I would be consulted about any sort of negotiated settlement. Several weeks later, I discovered otherwise. There were other discouraging details of this ordeal that because of space issues were also not in the article, such as Pattnapong’s continued resistance to renegotiation. (On one occasion he told me he could not call Supachai because he didn’t have his phone number.)
I was told and you emphasize the removal of the article from the website would not have adversely affected my case and should not be read as the Post not standing by the story. Yet, I am not sure how the removal of the article could be perceived by an outsider—or a court—in any other way than a retraction. It seems highly plausible that this could have been argued in court. It also made it harder for me to believe the Post was standing by my story, when in fact they made an effort to make every trace of it disappear.
And though, it may seem an embellishment to you, winding up in the detention center, given the way I had been treated, seemed well within the realm of possibility to both me and those I consulted with. During my last year at the Post, events related to my case unfolded in line with my worst imagination. It would have been foolish of me to assume that pattern would change.
#36 Posted by Erika, CJR on Wed 14 Sep 2011 at 05:49 PM
would have been foolish of me to assume that pattern would change.
#37 Posted by Erika, CJR on Wed 14 Sep 2011 at 09:55 PM
It is not for me to comment upon Kh Pichai's defence of Bangkok Post's handling of Erika's case, but for the record I would like to clarify some inaccuracies in Kh Pichai's characterization of my relationship with Supachai, and offer some background to the story.
I am an independent consultant in the field of agricultural development. My clients have included UN agencies, bilateral donors, multinationals, the Asian Development Bank and the Thai government. In 2005 Supachai asked me to organize his organization's first international conference - a conference on innovation. I did this on a part-time basis, and worked with Supachai as a consultant for just over 2 years.
We were never "business partners" as Kh Pichai claims, and never had any personal falling-out aside from my insistence that he recognize me as the true author of the reports I had written in my capacity as Team Leader for a technical assistance project implemented by the UN International Trade Centre, relating to Thailand's organic agriculture policy. Thailand’s National Innovation Agency (NIA), headed by Supachai, hosted the project office but was not part of the technical assistance team which conducted the work. Supachai claimed authorship and published the outputs of this project as his own personal work, which triggered the dispute.
Though the suggestion that this was somehow a "personal dispute" may at face value seem innocent enough, it is important because many government officials and apologists have tried to portray this as a "personal dispute" in order to justify wriggling out of their statutory duty to investigate e.g. whether Supachai's actions caused damage to the State.
As a result of my requests that the National Innovation Agency (NIA) rectify its violation of the UN’s copyright over the project’s final report, and that Chulalongkorn University investigate its possible wrongful use in Supachai’s academic work, my family and I have suffered 3 years of legal and other harassment. These include (1) 9 lawsuits and police complaints (one of which was a completely trumped-up charge filed by NIA itself); (2) an anonymous letter to my employer containing my passport number and full details of my employment history; and (3) defamatory faxes and emails signed by Supachai and circulated on NIA letterhead to my employer, university presidents, and also indiscriminately by NIA staff to God-knows whom. Even my neighbor received a copy. I too shared a day in the cells with Pattanapong and 50 other prisoners, and was banned from leaving Thailand.
My home has been raided by the Immigration Department, my tax affairs investigated, and I was put under surveillance. Most recently, on 18 March my wife and I left home to drive to a court hearing to cross-examine Supachai’s two witnesses, but we never made it. A few minutes into our journey, a motorcyclist smashed a 10kg chunk of concrete into the rear windshield of our car (http://www.scribd.com/doc/65091615/Bangkok-18-March-2011-0815). Supachai’s witnesses didn’t turn up to court. Of course, I have no direct evidence that Supachai was in any way involved in ordering this attack, but it left us wondering what may come next.
Kh Pichai also says I ‘counter-sued’. This is not the case. Although countersuits are a customary automatic response in defamation cases, I chose not to follow this litigious path, naiively believing that the official investigations would reveal the truth. I have so far filed only a single case against Supachai, alleging criminal forgery. The court accepted the suit had grounds; Supachai was indicted, and his trial is now under way. (cont'd)....
#38 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Thu 15 Sep 2011 at 02:05 PM
In May, the Thai media reported that an investigation by the Ministry of Science and Technology’s (MOST) had found Supachai guilty of a number of violations. However, although the Permanent Secretary (Pornchai Rujiprapha, email pornchai.rujiprapha@most.go.th) is quoted as acknowledging the plagiarism, he has inexplicably refused to take the promised disciplinary action. However, until he cleans up NIA, overseas organizations considering any dealings with NIA, or indeed, MOST, would be well advised to keep a watchful eye on their intellectual property.
Likewise, the university investigation reported on 7 April 2010 that the thesis contained 4,019 lines, 122 tables and 53 figures plagiarized from other four documents (as I alleged). Supachai beats von Guttenberg hands-down, but over a year later, we still await revocation of this fraudulent PhD degree.
Erika Fry’s article mentions that Kh Pattnapong had claimed I was “not telling the truth”. If this is the case, I would like to challenge him to have the courage to clarify his position publicly on this blog, so that I may address any concerns he may have.
Finally, I would like to thank Kh Pichai and the Bangkok Post for publishing Erika’s original article, which was widely commended as an excellent piece of journalism and helped blow the lid on this systematic deception. It is sad that as a result of the legal actions against her, Thailand has lost an excellent and courageous investigative journalist. With the clouds now gathering once again over media freedom in Thailand, I hope you will continue to play your part in standing wholeheartedly by your journalists in their attempts to expose corruption through your columns.
#39 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Thu 15 Sep 2011 at 02:13 PM
PS: I have so far filed only a single case against Supachai, alleging criminal forgery. The court accepted the suit had grounds; Supachai was indicted, and his trial is now under way.
#40 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Thu 15 Sep 2011 at 02:18 PM
What disturbs me most about Pichai's reply is that the Bangkok Post were dealing with the plaintiff, not giving Ms Fry a full account of what was happening, and apparently willing to screw Wyn Ellis because he was the plaintiff's real target.
Of course the plaintiffs in my case approached the BP as well and said the newspaper and its editor were not the targets and they wanted to do me.
Pichai and co like this alternative and while I won my cases on appeal
However as a journalist I hold a record. I was convicted, while the Editor,(Pichai) publisher, Features editor were found entirely innocent a seemingly impossible judgment. Did they print the libel or not?
The plaintiff in my case had already been exposed in newspapers in the UK where had they taken a libel action they could have secured ten times the damages had they been successful.
Ms Fry may have entered into area (ie re Ronnachai) where she should not have commented but I can confirm I did not have a coherent conversation with my Bangkok Post lawyer.
#41 Posted by Andrew Drummond, CJR on Thu 15 Sep 2011 at 11:39 PM
I should add that while the BP did not in the end screw Mr.Ellis, as he won, by removing their story they did in fact prevent anyone who had not actually read the paper on the day in question from knowing the truth.
It is true that in any country newspapers do deals on libel. They weigh up the costs of courts cases and act accordingly.
But investigative journalism by foreign journalists at the Bangkok Post will continue to be limited to such stories as finding child porn videos in the Suykhumvit Road, (where the targets are just street vendors) unless the newspaper backs its journalists.
I am freelance. Have been for 25 years since quitting Murdoch. (although for ten years, up until the recent redhsit business, I was 'The Times' (London) corr here. Had not the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand raised the matter in the first place I doubt the BP would have given me a lawyer at all.....which of course was a case for regret and I decided to get my own. Luckily a whip round editors and journalists in the UK raised almost US$10,000 - they knew exactly what game the BP was playing.
Erica was right to leave. The Bangkok Post's assurances would not have been convincing. When one is told one lie, why wait for the next?
#42 Posted by Andrew Drummond, CJR on Fri 16 Sep 2011 at 12:05 AM
Khun Pattnapong- I suppose it was a bit optimistic to suppose you might actually take up my challenge and articulate your concerns over my integrity (as reported by Erika Fry). I guess your silence speaks louder than words.
To sum up Andrew Drummond's interpretation, having endorserd Erika's original story, when faced with a lawsuit, Bangkok Post could have shown solidarity. Instead, it did a secret deal with Supachai to get you off the hook, and in acting unilaterally, showed no concern over the legal implications for myself, or for its own staff member.
Happily, and no thanks to BKP, the court returned a not guilty verdict (which however, is still subject to appeal). Had I been convicted by the Provincial Court of the offence with which Erika and I were charged ('criminal conspiracy to defame by advertising'), I would have faced several years' imprisonment.
At least I have shown I am not afraid to speak out against the pretenders and charlatans among us, rather than whisper furtively from behind closed doors. I now await the verdict of the Appeal Court on Thursday, and of another court next week, on two more defamation charges. So who knows- I guess I could yet be writing from behind bars...
#43 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Tue 20 Sep 2011 at 04:53 AM
A sorry pickle you all got yourselves in but hardly unknown in Thailand where abuse of court process is commonplace.
I particularly liked the complaint pulling the "sickness" ploy to postpone the case in the court. I used to deal with such matters and this was a constant botheration, the long winded and dishonest procrastination of the lawyers. No surprise that most cases do not reach a conclusion in the court.
At least Erika got out of Thailand, I suggest she chalk it up to experience and take note that the Land of Smiles is really the Land of Insincere Smiles, they are smiling only because they cannot work out what to do with you.
#44 Posted by Jules, CJR on Wed 21 Sep 2011 at 05:41 AM
I have known Erika since she was my daughter's room mate at Dartmouth. Having read some of her writing over the years I have a suspicion this story may not be over. There may yet be an interesting sequel or two. It would not surprise me to see her become a hugely successful writer and use some of her Thai experience as one of the building blocks upon which this success is built.
If I were a Thai Generalissimo I would issue her a full pardon--and sincere apology-- ASAP. I would not want someone with her ability to communicate as my enemy.
#45 Posted by Peter Nistad, CJR on Fri 23 Sep 2011 at 12:37 PM
You may be hanged for what you did if this happen in Singapore
#46 Posted by Top, CJR on Mon 26 Sep 2011 at 01:29 PM
Thank you Erika for sharing your story. It is so encouraging to know that there is someone like you, who cares and seemingly still assuring that you have been challenged! not discouraged.
Plagiarism is, in my opinion, a relative new concept for the Thais. Plagiarism in Thailand is not well defined and the laws govern it is unclear and ineffective. it is widely practiced and manifested in various forms and ways, especially when government agencies, admins. and public educators, who have to produce reports or obtain certain academic degree to satisfy their promotional requirement. When such norms and values of dignity and self-respect are often misplaced or altogether disregarded. The root cause is dishonesty and lack of discipline. Too coward to admit of wrong-doing actions or plainly assuming a culture of 'Phu-yai ' or 'Grownups do no wrong do no wrong' or Daddy knows best', which we all realize that it ultimately breeds a culture of compromising and non-confrontational. A high price to pay indeed...a return of feudal society.
I agree with your assertion, Erika, that loosing face is, indeed, the most precious of commodities in Thailand!! and not to be violated!! I can't go without mention, it is one of the major constraints to Thailand development and transformation towards modern and democratic society.
All that said, I'm rather outraged by the fact that such elite university, Chulalongkorn Uni. has not been taking any action to either revoke or withhold Supachai's doctorate degree. This lesson can be used as an educational and hopefully one day be developed into a case study! of plagiarism for generations to come.
#47 Posted by Tsiu, CJR on Tue 27 Sep 2011 at 03:47 AM
Somchai might have mistaken. I believe this event occurred during Abhisit administration. Ms. Fry met the former PM when he was in NY delivering the talk at Columbia, but I don't know for sure. Abhisit went to Oxford not Cambridge. Journalism in Thailand is in sad situation, including the two English newspapers fair no better, perhaps worse in many situations. The way they treated Ms Fry was shameful. Prachatai is the most reliable source of information. Other internet sites such as Bangkok Pundit and New Mandala are good source of information -- far better than most Thai newspapers. Democracy is difficult to flourish when free speech is limited. I am hopeful that this barrier will be broken bit by bit by electronic access like the internet, even tight censoring by Thai Government will not be completely effective.
#48 Posted by Vic, CJR on Tue 27 Sep 2011 at 11:08 PM
Well, I'm glad Erika is safely back home in USA, but I was reminded of my own vulnerability just this morning as I drove with my wife to yet another court date. Less than a mile from home, a motorcyclist trailing my car launched a concrete block into my rear windscreen, and sped off.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/66652296/Attack-on-Wyn-Ellis-Car-en-Route-to-Court-28-Sept-2011
This is the second identical ambush on my car this year. The first was on 18 March in identical circumstances, close to today's attack. On that day too, I was on my way to attend a court hearing to cross-examine my opponent's witnesses. It's a strange coincidence, and I have no idea who could have committed such an evil act, as I'm sure my opponent would never stoop so low. CCTV footage to be posted on YouTube tomorrow.
Tsui- I agree entirely with your sentiments. Chulalongkorn has had 18 months to act on the damning findings of its own investigation. Every day it delays acting increases the very real threat to our safety. It is, moreover, an insult to all academics that Chula apparently seems so reluctant to weed out such blatant fraud and does not follow the example showed, for example by Bayreuth University, which earlier this year revoked the PhD degree of the German Defence Minister, Baron zu Guttenberg.
So, Chula, your move?
#49 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Wed 28 Sep 2011 at 09:31 AM
I am glad you back to US safely. Thailand is Thailand nothing will be able to change the country. But one good thing about Thailand is Thai people. Just remember the good thing forget the bad part moving forward to the new life. You are one of the lucky to get into The Ivy League institution so therefore nothing to regret the past. Thailand might be the good experience for you even in US we have a freedom of expression we still have to be careful what we write and what we speak out.
Wish you the best for everything
Kon Thai NY (Thais in New York)
#50 Posted by Nina Sureerat, CJR on Wed 28 Sep 2011 at 08:00 PM
Erika Fry's article appears in Thai on the webiste of the Thai Association for Human Rights:
http://thai-ahr.org/2011/09/27/%E2%80%9C%E0%B8%AB%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B5%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%AB%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B5%E0%B8%A0%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B0%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%A8/
#51 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Sat 1 Oct 2011 at 11:48 AM
Wyn...I don't think I have your updated email so I didn't congratulate you directly on the challenge you undertook (I hope the reprisals now disappear...)
One thing that should be pointed out in response to some of the comments above is that this is not as much of a Thai vs. farang thing as it sounds. There are plenty of Thais who are abused by the system they live under, who seek change, some who bear the burden and say nothing, a smaller number who speak out and get swatted down.
I am not saying any of this to excuse the situation against Erika, only to point out that there are plenty who are appalled by this situation and would like to see certain people get their comeuppance. Indeed, I received the Thai version of the article from colleagues at the Ministry of Science and Technology, who are watching the case closely.
The country is undergoing change, hopefully for the better, certainly too slowly to make many people, Thai and farang, satisfied. In fact, this is true for the whole region: Malaysia is flirting with adjusting its national security laws (or is that just a political ploy?). Singapore, Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos, China have not even taken on these issues. The region is not a place where free speech can be openly practiced. Hopefully that will change, but many in power (whether they currently sit in the government, or in the opposition) benefit from the way things are and will do whatever they can to keep things that way.
The only surprising aspect of this case for me is, as Wyn pointed out above, the person in question is not really a "phu yai", to be able to muster the clout necessary to sustain this. I can only imagine that "the system" (at Chula, for example, or the NIA) refuses to acknowledge its fault, and that inertia, as much as one person’s influence, is at fault.
From what I am hearing, however, I can't imagine that the system won't at least be forced to bend this time. In the last few days, Chulalongkorn has been ordered by a government commission to publicly reveal the results of their internal investigation, which should lead to increased and open scrutiny of the whole affair.
There are many who hope so.
#52 Posted by Ed, CJR on Mon 3 Oct 2011 at 08:39 AM
Ed, thank you for this encouragement, at this admittedly dark moment.
Perhaps I am incurably naiive, but I still retain some hope that the public will soon be able to read the report (submitted to the University President on 7 April 2010) which the university refused to disclose to me, and only did so eventually by court order.
When the contents of this very detailed and authoritative report are finally disclosed, as must inevitably happen sooner or later, real academics will ask (a) why Chula refused to voluntarily disclose it to myself as the damaged party, and (b) why it still hasn't acted to uphold its own standards and protect the university's academic standing? I urge Chula to prove its seriousness about eliminating plagiarism, and that it will not be swayed by influence or the ex-student's current position at NIA.
As Erika pointed out in her article, NIA looks after intellectual property, so check out these two reports (the original of which was a main source of text in the thesis):
Original: UN copyright (Aug 2006, Ellis et al): (http://www.intracen.org/Strengthening-the-Export-Capacity-of-Thailands-Organic-Agriculture/
"New" NIA version: (Feb 2008, Lorlowhakarn et al): http://www.nia.or.th/organic/download/Strengthening_new.pdf
Spot the differences.... when I complained to the Permanent Secretary, pointing out the UN's ownership of copyright over the report it had paid for, NIA just went ahead and registered its own claim., after the fact....
So be warned.
#53 Posted by Wyn Ellis, CJR on Mon 3 Oct 2011 at 12:53 PM
Speaking truth to power is a dangerous thing to do in any country. I myself have the career scars from both the USA and Thailand, to show for my efforts, proving that this is not a culturally specific problem. For anyone to point a finger at Thailand and say that the intellectual corruption here does not exist in their home countries, displays an ethnic superiority complex that frankly makes me puke.
However, what I can say, is that there is something about Thailand, maybe the mai pen rai, maybe the sunny skies, that makes people of all races while resident here, practice the copy and paste exercise more proactively than anywhere else on earth. There just seems to be no pride of authorship. Anything to make a buck, anything to get that trophy, that degree. A degree for what? To copy?
I can say that I myself have been copied by Thais and foreigners alike. Yes. And it hurts even more when those foreigners come from countries that reward creativity and innovation. It hurts when those foreigners get paid to be consultants to Thais who are fighting the copy paste mentality by eroneously hiring those fake consultants to give them something unique.
Thus it is painful to see a truly professional consultant like Wyn Ellis be pulled through the ringer for protecting his intellectual property. The only question I have is WHY is it that a person has to go through all of this to get justice? I do not have the comparable time, patience, or focus to fight tooth and nail for the IP that I have lost to countless degreed, well paid, mental thieves that have preyed upon my ideas.
It often happens that a battle of ideals will be personalized by those who have no other weapon at their disposal. The only way to fight truth is with lies, the only way to resist the march of innovation is to strangle the soldiers with paperwork, character assassination, and solitary confinement.
To Andrew, Erika, Wyn, and other courageous Spartans, I say: hold the course. The rest of us wearied minions need to see a victory or two so that we can get up and walk in the light of day.
Pamela Hongsakul
http://hongsakul.com
#54 Posted by Pamela Hongsakul, CJR on Mon 3 Oct 2011 at 09:54 PM
See the latest coverage on this subject in Times HIgher Education (http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=419680&c=1) and http://www.andrew-drummond.com/view-story.php?sid=537
Chulalongkorn University has become a laughing stock within the global academic community.
#55 Posted by Sam, CJR on Fri 20 Apr 2012 at 09:58 PM
I see from Matichon 22/6/2012 that Chulalongkorn University has revoked the National Innovation Agency's director's PhD for plagiarism.
#56 Posted by Steve, CJR on Fri 22 Jun 2012 at 03:48 AM
Over a long period of time I helped supervise 16 Thai MSc/PhD theses. Nearly all of these had examples (large and small) of plagiarism (not plagerism Khun Pichai). The best was a student who presented me with an introduction chapter that was over 150 pages. A small part of it was written in typical Thai-English. The rest was perfect. Completely lifted from a text-book on the subject. I pointed this out and said this could not be used. The response: But I put so much work into this. My response: Typing out a standard text-book is not work. It goes.
As I got the drafts I had to discuss the whole concept of plagiarism with these students. All seemed to genuinely have absolutely no idea of what this meant. This clearly demonstrates that Thai University teachers are not introducing their students to the iniquities of plagiarism. I gently chastised these students and hopefully, as they continue their careers, they will remember what plagiarism is all about - a theft from the mind of others. However, there is absolutely no excuse for Mister Supachai (and by extension the NIA and Chulalongkorn University) as he has no doubt been in contact with many international organisations, is involved with intellectual property rights and should damned well know the internationally accepted rules of the game.
#57 Posted by Nigel H-J, CJR on Sun 24 Jun 2012 at 02:02 AM
Supachai is a shame of the country. He should be fired. Please don't generalize the rest of the Thai people. We are ashamed of what happened to Wyn and Erika.
#58 Posted by Thai, CJR on Tue 26 Jun 2012 at 07:16 PM
It would be a reasonable assumption on the part of any honest journalist that the Queen of Thai Innovation had committed a crime and should be exposed. The chances that he had powerful forces behind him and was a skillful street scrapper would have seemed slim. Wrong.
One suspects this is merely the tip of the iceberg and there is much more there that needs uncovering. How, for example did a small to middling bureaucrat responsible for NSTDA's publications become the Director of a state agency, particularly for a post that would require a minimum PhD? Why was NIA established as a separate agency and who pushed to have it established? Who are the invisible hands responsible for financing all these court actions and the intimidation of witnesses? Who are the members of the surrounding power circle and how far will their support reach before they themselves risk exposure?
Worthy of a novel. Organic Asparagus perhaps a nice title.
#59 Posted by Periphery, CJR on Mon 13 Aug 2012 at 04:05 AM
I find this article very shocking , but of no surprise .
I have lived in Thailand eight years , married to a beautiful charming professional lady , some years younger than me , with two grown up married children . I guess I have been here long enough to see things how they really are . Thailand is NOT the land of smiles , try and crack a joke in Bangkok and you will see . Isaan is the land of smiles , where most people don't know anything about anything . " Ignorance is Bliss , where tis Folly to be Wise ".
I am well aware that behind the smiles is also cunning .
Thailands problem of honesty starts in the home . Mother does what is necessary to further her childrens ends ; bribery and cheating are part of the way of life , nobody sees anything wrong in it . Drive through any rural village , as often as not the most extravagant houses belong to school teachers or policemen , my wife points out . Maybe a Chulalonghorn University you cannot buy your doctorate , but at other universities you can .
I keep a low profile and be good friends with everyone ; with three brothers-in-law who are police officers , I hope they would take care of me if the need arose . I know of many cases where a foreigner has been at a grave disadvantage where the law is concerned . Even thai vs. thai , the actual law doesn't figure .
Erica was very wise to leave the country ; she was right in thinking that she couldn't count on the word or support of anyone . Thai people are only interested in themselves , have no concern for anybody else . My wife says ,
" Thai people do what they like "; whether it is having a party that makes a terrible noise , or having a bonfire that fills neighbours houses with acrid smoke .
#60 Posted by David , CJR on Tue 14 Aug 2012 at 02:18 AM
To be honest, Erika Fry faced no real risk and would have emerged unscathed and a hero anyway events played out. ***There are many in rural Thailand, however, who never get this attention*** and die lonely deaths hanging from the end of a rope in a prison cell or with a gunman's bullet to the brain. I have known them and their "friends" for the most part pretended they did not exist, perhaps out of fear of the police. After their deaths, their names are spelt wrong in the Thai language media underneath perhaps a photo of their corpse on the morgue slab and the facts are garbled beyond comprehension and will not be corrected unless they have powerful friends (this is a composite of many cases but citations are available upon request). In one case, after they died in police custody, some police officers stopped by their home and robbed it of their home appliances. No local media exists to accurately report, expose and provide a reliable primary source of such events for public scrutiny and explicitly mentioning the events with names would most likely result in a defamation suit. In conclusion, Erika Fry should get off her grandstand and help these unseen victims, if she ***really wants to be a hero***. [N.B. The Bangkok Post is a model employer where employees are true stakeholders in the business and the newspaper takes an active stance against police injustice in its editorials and coverage.]
#61 Posted by jonfernquest, CJR on Tue 14 Aug 2012 at 03:21 AM
"To be honest, Erika Fry faced no real risk"
After how long in jail?
What are you smoking, Jon?
#62 Posted by Stuart, CJR on Sun 19 Aug 2012 at 11:24 AM
Wow! Go girl.
Very easy and a must read.
I found your words excellent journalism and the fact that it is your personal experience is really impressive.
It was your tempo that really carried the story.....well done!
#63 Posted by clayton wilder, CJR on Sat 22 Sep 2012 at 05:43 PM
I see Andrew Drummond's link to the Times article seems to have been blocked. 'Nuff said.
#64 Posted by findlay, CJR on Fri 30 Nov 2012 at 11:42 PM