Lese Majeste - Thailand
หมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ การกล่าวหาสะเทือนขวัญ? - A horrifying allegation
"Lèse majesté is an obstacle to reasoned free-thinking among Thais. It is high time it was abolished."
from: http://thaifilmjournal.blogspot.com/2008/05/threats-against-no-stand-activist-and.html
But Wise Kwai, operator of the website, also later stated, "And, because I'm scared, I have deleted comments on prior posts about this issue and will not be publishing any more. I'm sorry to those folks who made well-thought, measured comments that were not critical in any way of the Monarchy. But it appears that discussion about this issue cannot take place - not without risk of a lawsuit, prison and/or deportation." Horrifying!! Tolerant Thailand...
lesemajestethailand.com has been registered. Webpages not yet built.

Thailand's Privy Council - By Paul Handley

"I want them to criticize."
"Actually I must also be criticised."
His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej, on His Majesty's 2005 annual birthday speech to the nation.
King's 4 December 2005 speech, with English subtitles.
A reader asks, why are Thai police seemingly so intent on not complying with the advice?

Just how difficult it is to reconcile basic political differences in Thailand is
illustrated at an anti-government political protest in Bangkok that began on
25 May 2008 and which still continues to this date (8 July). Activists are
pressing for removal of corrupt officials, transparency and accountability. As
is often the case, they present images of their beloved king (background) to
reaffirm loyalty and respect to the country's revered monarch. They struggle
against remnants of the powerful Thaksin political infrastructure, a struggle.
they maintain is just but which the majority of Thai citizens often express a
widely different range of opinions of. Use of the monarchy as a banner and a
harpoon to destroy political, social and personal foes has been a long and
harmful Thai social tradition. Many calls have been made for the repeal of this
hurtful, shameful and sociopolitically damaging law.

The following is a translation posted on Nation Multimedia, clearly indicating that Thailand's revered king, His Majesty Bhumibol Adulyadej, wishes that people will not be afraid to criticize him and will criticize him when such criticism is warranted.
Therefore, Thailand's current application of the lese majeste law Article 112 of the Criminal Code (as of 6/22/2008) is not only antiquated but against the desires of the country's beloved monarch. Such aplpication has also demonstrated repeatedly that is is non-constitutonal and conflicts with various national and international human rights and civil rights safeguards Thailand is a signatory to.

His Majesty The King's Birthday Speech (Thailand) Nation Multimedia ^ | December 5, 2005 |

His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej Posted on 12/04/2005 6:24:40 PM PST by killjoy

His Majesty the King gave a speech after Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra led his Cabinet and their wives to offer their well wishes to His Majesty on the occasion of his 78th birthday at Chitralada Palace yesterday. A translation of a key portion of the King’s speech, in which he says that he is open to criticism, follows:

"I thank the prime minister for wishing me well on the occasion of my birthday [today]. I thank you for making people here and outside happy that you spoke well. I have no idea whether there may be some people who disagree with my compliments that the PM speaks well. Saying this, I create trouble for myself because if I compliment the PM some other people may not compliment me for complimenting the PM. They may question why I compliment the PM. But we have the PM for complimenting. If you have the PM, and you do not compliment, the PM may not be satisfied. If the PM is not satisfied, how can the work be managed? I have to compliment the PM on speaking well, because he complimented me. It is normal that every one likes compliments and does not like to be criticised. I have criticised people consistently and people are not satisfied. Even though I do not criticise [may not have actually criticized] people, sometimes they have said in the newspaper that the King criticised this person or that person.
Actually, I do not criticise much. I may criticise but I do not openly say that I criticise. People who are in the open are normally seen more and are criticised more because of more public exposure. Suppose you have done a lot of goodness, it is all right, but if you have done some bad things, and people criticise you, you feel emotion, and sometimes you feel delighted and sometimes you feel upset. If people feel that they are criticised and show that they are upset for being criticised, there will be damage and there will be turmoil in society. I have spoken enough; if I speak more, there may be difficulties.

Today I intend not to implicate anyone or criticise anyone because criticism will cause people to be upset. But as I can see before me here, there are people that said - you know who said it - there are people who said that I am not good, the King is not good and did wrong, but they have to show[they are bound under convention and applicatino of the law to say] that the King is not wrong, cannot be wrong, which is true under the Constitutional Monarchy, that the King can do no wrong. They said that the King can do no wrong, as the privy councillors like to say in English.
But when you say the King can do no wrong, it is wrong.
We should not say that. When you read the Constitution of the United Kingdom, there are textbooks that always claim, and people who study English and study English law always claim, about how the King can do no wrong. Lawyers here nodded that yes, because that the King can do no wrong is very much an insult to the King, because why can the King do no wrong, why can not the King do wrong, because this shows that they regard that the King is not human.
But the King can do wrong.
But the most important thing, I am the King, and they said the King “does no wrong” and I agree with them.
Whatever you do, you must have consciousness which means that you must realise what you are doing and what you are thinking and do not do wrong and you will not be wrong, cannot be wrong. This is to say that I am not wrong, in no way can [I] be wrong. Suppose if I speak wrongly, because I am not aware, that is another case, but do wrong without realising, and realising that it is wrong. It is not good to do wrong with full awareness but sometimes you do not realise, you must apologise. If you speak without awareness, lack of awareness is not careful, afterwards you will regret. Before I was the King, I regretted many times but after I became the King, the Thai King, which foreigners call the King, I understand that I hardly do wrong because I am careful.
f I were not careful, I would have died. Must be careful, if not then I would die.
This is natural for politics or for being in the public eye. The public eye can kill. If we are not careful, we die. That is why I said the King can do no wrong because it must be “do no wrong’’ because to do wrong is to die. It is the same for everyone. It is not that the King is competent but everyone is also able. They have positions, high positions, receive decorations. People said this person is in a very high place, has high rank. The King has a high rank, but people who are here also hold high ranks, if you are not careful, you also die. Do not think that this or that person will die if they are not careful. Every one, from the first row to the last row and even outside. Everyone that is not careful faces dangers.
What I say may sound a bit strange. Some may think that I curse. Actually I do not curse, I sympathise. Because if you are not careful, Thailand will die. I ask for one thing only.
Today be careful, careful, careful, careful to think, to say, to do. If you believe it is right, do it. In referring to what they said in the newspaper, in radio and television that they will not criticise what the King does and says, do not criticise, actually I want them to criticise because whatever I do, I want to know that people agree or disagree. If they do not say, it can seen as good. But actually in the news, in the interviews that said do not criticise the King, they must say do not criticise the King because it is not appropriate. In the Constitution, there is a part that said [the King] shall not be violated. But if you say the King does right, speaks right, it is not violation. If you speak English, it is “approve”. The King approves. But there has never been anyone telling me “approve” because the King speaks well and speaks correctly.
Actually I must also be criticised.
I am not afraid if the criticism concerns what I do wrong, because then I know. Because if you say the King cannot be criticised, it means that the King is not human. I am also afraid, if you say you cannot criticise. It means the King is not good, how do you know? If you say do not criticise the King because the King is very good. Sometimes it is all in the brain. ‘The King speaks strangely’. If I shall be open, criticise me that sometimes I may be wrong so that I know that I am wrong. If they say that it is wrong to criticise the King, I would like to know where it is things are going wrong. If I do not know, I am in trouble. So if criticism is a violation, and the King can be violated. If they violate wrongly, the people bomb them [who criticise the King].
I just want to know how they criticise. If they criticise correctly, I have no problem.
It is not good to give false criticism. But if you rule out all criticism as a violation, the damage is done to the King or the King is not a good person.
If Thai people, firstly do not dare, and secondly do not care for the King, then they do not want to violate that law.
But foreigners often violate the King, and then they laugh at the King of Thailand. ‘Your King, Thailand’s King cannot be violated’. Ultimately if I cannot be violated, I am not a good man. I am bad.
So on some occasions, please violate those rules, so we know who is good and not good. I have spoken too much.
But the people who sit in front of me do not have to be afraid, because you have not committed any wrong.
Those who believe they commit wrong, nod. Nod to show that they have committed wrong.
Actually they do not take responsibility. Previously people have committed wrong.
Some of those who nod do not try to correct things. The wrong here is in not correcting, evading responsibility. In Thailand people who do not follow the track, quit. Quit and are found not guilty, even though they may have committed grave wrongs. If they are bureaucrats, they are transferred to the ministry, into Bangkok, then that is the end of the story. Hardly ever do they go to jail.
What I am referring to is becoming a serious issue.
They are transferred to Bangkok and sent to jail. There are stories about going to jail. However, after going to jail, if they violate the King, the King is troubled, troubled in many ways.
First, foreign countries see Thailand as a country where people cannot criticise the King, otherwise [they] go to jail. The King is in trouble [for this].
I have to say that after going to jail, I have to pardon them for seriously insulting me.
Foreigners say ‘In Thailand you go to jail if the King is insulted.’ Actually, shall go to jail, but because foreigners said so, do not send [them] to jail. No one dares to send people who insult the King to jail because the King will be troubled because they will accuse that the King is not a good person, [or] at least is sensitive. Whoever insults a little, send them to jail.
Actually, the King has never told [anyone] to send them to jail.
[Under] previous kings, even rebels were not sent to jail, were not punished. King Rama the VI did not punish rebels. During [the time of] King Rama IX, who were the rebels? Actually, there had never been. I also followed the same way: Do not send them to jail, but release [them]. If they are in jail, release them. If they are not in jail, I will not sue because I am in trouble. A person who is insulted is in troubled.
People who violate the King, and are punished are not in trouble but the King is in trouble.
This is strange.
Lawyers like to launch suits and send them to jail. Lawyers teach the PM, telling him to sue, to punish. This is how they teach the PM. Who said to punish?
Do not punish them. Punishment is not good.
Finally it is not that the PM is in trouble, the King is in trouble - or want to see the King in trouble, I do not know. They commit wrong, they insult the King in order that the King is in trouble. And truly, I am in trouble. Because whoever insults me, do we like it? But if the PM punishes them, it is bad. All lawyers want those who insult the King punished. Eventually we follow them. Some people insult the PM. Is the PM in trouble? He should not be. If people insult the PM, the King is not in trouble because it is the PM’s affairs. If people insult the King, the PM is in trouble because he has to handle the case. This is how things get complicated.
The lawyers teach the PM like that. They teach him that whoever insults the King, we have to insult them.
This is not good.
My speech is going quite wrong, more personal. I will not tell what you should do. Lawyers should know what is right and wrong. Do not speak every day. Actually they do not speak every day but they record in tapes, DVDs and distribute to people. People listen and watch, they are fed up with it, for making excuses on behalf of the PM.
Today I am here to make an excuse on behalf of the PM because the PM is not wrong. The PM can do everything. No need to go on air on the TV, on air in the TV every day. Someone told me that people are fed up. But if you have a duty to go on air in the TV, then go. There are some people in trouble in the programme - they have to speak out. People who spoke out then were hit with stray bullets. However, it is ok to make excuse one time, but it has been 10 times for going on air. People are getting fed up. They want to see soap dramas. Enough, wasting electricity. It is not wasting electricity of TV watchers but electricity of broadcasters. Waste oil. This makes me think that I must stop speaking. I am wasting a lot of electricity. They might say ‘Quit speaking. Do not speak too much’. But I shall continue speaking because this is a programme that is recorded on a tape and not [live] on air and not wasting electricity for television.

Note: This site contains clippings, references, case files, contacts, blog, video, official resources and websites, opinion, scholarship, etc., relating to the subject of lese majeste in geneal terms and as it is treated in Thailand. The intent of providing this information is dual - for personal reference, and as research for those who wish more information on this important topic. Many Thai and foreign scholars and other authorities, as well as membes of the media, have been involved over the past in just and unjust application of the concept of lese majeste, generally, however, abusing it in a political, social, personal or other context to "harpoon" perceived foes or others who merely happen to think differently.

Comments, references, links, analyses, and/or all other information and/or data that appear on these pages are intended to provide a democracy-based resource for lawful and ethical discussion of Thailand's institution of the monarchy and/or its family members, its role, and critics and supporters. It is to be noted that during His Majesty's birthday speech on 5 December 2005, as well as other numerous occasions, His Majesty has clearly indicated that he wishes to be perceived as human, not supernatural, and that he indeed wishes to be criticized where such criticism is warranted. Thus, based on His Majesty's own comments and publicly-stated wishes in this regard, our first defense against any lese majeste accusations arising from posting of information on this website related to the topic is to first demand that anyone entertaining such charges to consider His Majeste's own intentions and words, and then to proceed as needed based on applicable laws and the constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand wherein they may apply, and/or laws of other sovereign countries where they may apply. In short, don't act in a vindictive manner or attempt to carry out hypocritical actions against anyone or any resources on this website if you respect His Majesty and what he said and intended. When you behave as a hypocrite and act holier-than-thou in denunciation of legitimate constitutional safeguards exercised by right-minded Thais and foreigners, you are likely committing lese majeste yourself.

Final Note: This webpage has developed from personal experiences wherebythe webmaster was formerly being fraudulently charged with lese majeste by a Thai national in the northeast city of Nakhonratchasima, Thailand. From February 2005 through to mid 2007, this webmaster and his Thai wife were villified and publicly accused of lese majeste. In particular, I was formally alleged to have committed lese majeste via a report filed with the local police. Despite dozens of attempts to forestall public racial and other clear and indisputable hate speech directed at us, and despite multiple attempts to have authorities provide us with information as to what we were supposed to have said/done that was considered lese majeste, authorities, including the police, refused to provide such information. This is what those seeking justice from unwarranted lese majeste charges in Thailand face: inaction, lack of protection, villification and shameful misenforcement of this strict and what many feel unjust portion of the Thai Criminal Code.

More material will be added as time allows.

Latest Lese Majeste Cases in Thailand

Chotisak Onsung.
He challenges a broken system.

These are the latest reported police orders for how investigation committees are set up to pursue lese majeste cases.

20 August 2008: Thai Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Mr. Veera Musikapong for lese majeste in a case connected with Veera's alleged lese majeste in part conducted during a televised program.

15 August 2008: Thai Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Mrs. Boonyern Prasertying for allegedly committing lese majeste at Sanam Luang, said to refer to the heir to the throne.

Web-board user accused of lèse majesté for allegedly posting comments about Phufa shops

Prachatai 06 August 2008 News
A web-board user has been accused of lèse majesté by another user in a popular Thai internet forum, www.pantip.com, after they had a petty argument about the latter’s published works that are on sale at Princess Sirindhorn’s Phufa shops. On Aug 4, Phisek Sanitthangkun, a Chiang Mai resident, flew from his city to report to police at the Crime Suppression Division in Bangkok. He denied the allegation.

27 July 2008
Da Torpedo Gets Intercepted

An outspoken pro-government lady, nicknamed Da Torpdeo, spoke at Sanam Luang recently and was initially ignored by Thai police. But when Sondhi Limthongkkul persisted on his own PAD stage in citing the woman for lese majeste, police finally swooped down on her, and then two days later, down on Sondhi himself for repeating lese majeste. Thai authorities draw no difference between reporting lese majeste vs. repeating it - which is ignorant and inexcuseable.

14 June 2008
Lese Majeste Thailand Online

At the moment, Thailand's most recent lese majeste allegations seem to be those made by a British citizen through a sympathetic Thai policeman. Once again a serious criminal proceeding has been initiated against a victim by 'the system' which refuses to address an urgent need for reform to guarantee justice for all.
Background:
Jonathan Head, BBC's [see BBC Statement] ]South East Asia Correspondent [bio], was accused of lese majeste [Wiki] on 30 May 2008 by Thai police Lt. Colonel Watanasak Mungkijkarndee, assigned to the Crime Suppression Division in Bangkok. The police officer did not act totally on his own. He was encouraged, according to media reports, by a British expatriate. Yes, a foreigner has apparently goaded a Thai into pressing lese majeste charges.
According to a 9 June 2008 Bangkok Post report, the British subject, Mr. Akbar Khan, had also been behind the lese majeste filing against Mr. Jakrabhop Phenkhair, a close associate of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra who was allegedly working closely with the former premier to criticize directly and indirectly former Prime Minister and Privy Council President General (ret.) Prem Tinsulalonda whom they had indicated was behind "extra-constitutional" powers to interfere with Thaksin's democratically elected government.
According to the Bangkok Post article, Mr. Khan said that his reasons for goading the police colonel to take steps against both Jakrabhop [and later Jonathan Head] was "Mr. Jakrapop is a Thai national. He should not have made such a remark, which I find really disgusting." Also, "I have been living in Thailand for 20 years. I have never heard any Thai speak like Mr. Jakrapop before. Worse, he spoke in front of foreign reporters who are ready to write and spread it out to the world."
Precisely the point, Mr. Khan.
Freedom of speech, the constitutional (even in Thaland) right to free speech and freedom of the press. The other important point that this gung-ho (does he have a work permit, by the way?) British expatriate totally chose to ignore is HIS MAJESTY'S OWN CLEARLY EXPRESSED WISH that people engage in criticism of him and/or his actions if such criticism is warranted.
His Majesty clearly stated that he was not a supernatural being and that like all other humans, he deserved to be criticized when it was warranted - so that he could, like other common men and women, improve himself.
Despite this express and succinctly-stated wish by His Majesty on his 5 December 2005 birthday, this British citizen and a Thai policeman he has shared a close association with (Thai police have virtual carte blanche to prosecute lese majeste cases but totally lack meaningful detailed and just guildelines on how to constitutionally do so.) neglected the tone and content of His Majesty's speech and some would say recklessly filed serious allegations against both Mr. Jakrapop and Mr. Head. On this basis, by their demonstrated standards, the two themselves can be deemed to have committed lese majeste by going against the king's expressed wishes of allowing and even encouraging justified criticism of him.
Issues and Analysis
Obviously the first issue is defense against the allegation to pre-empt an official charge of lese majeste and subsequent procecution process. This is all within the purview of police and legal teams concerned and it is not the intent of this website to enter into any sort of advice or other legal commentary but rather to provide editorial comment and logical analysis only. Those who disagree with what is said on these pages are always invited to contact us so as to engage in a constructive dialogue.

Be that as it may, at the stage where police are summoning principals involved to discuss allegations and compare evidence to either corrobate the allegations or refute them, calm heads must prevail on the one hand, and 'Plan B' hints need to be communicated on the other. In Thailand, the lese majeste allegation and charge has, for years now, gotten out of hand and is being used far more by opponents of legitimate speech - political, social, business - than it is used for legitimate informed concern by those filing allegations. For their part, the police have a strong track record of being in hte pocket of politicians on the one hand, and convenience on the other when it comes to choosing sides - justice and law (Thai or international) take second priority at best.
In this environment, Mr. Head's case will progress in whatever way it does. The overall issue of the ability of Thailand's police organizations to willy-nilly prosecute one person or group after another based on spurious charges of lese majeste is itself a sad record of non-respect for the Thai monarchy. If there is a legitimate, just, moral and ethical respect present, then the very implications that such spurious charges have - no matter who makes them - will be evident and certainly part of the factor in dealing with allegations when they first come in. In most cases, in fact, the police should give the upset party a Valium and send him or her home. Yet, instead of properly assessing both the allegation and its source (Is the person making the accusation a stable member of society or a nut? - it makes no difference here in Thailand!).
Sondhi Limthongkul and Thaksin Shinawatra have perhaps unknowingly done a service to the nation by making very public the abuse and consequences of Thailand's lese majeste laws and the behavior of those who use them to undermine their foes and aggrandize themselves.
In this case, Mr. Ahbar Khan may or may not have the best wishes of Thailand at heart. It is evident that he is not a constitutionalist and is perhaps ignorant of the laws of the kingdom, and certainly evident that he has ignored His Majesty's entreaty to permit criticism and not perceive of the king as a supernatural being or divine being of any kind. Mr. Khan needs to read Voltair, as well as to consult with his own elected officials in the UK who, it is recently reported, are now seriously petitioning one another for a possible replacement of the United Kingdom's monarchy. Surely he has an interest in that matter? And surely, he must review his actions, past, present and future, to reason whether he is doing the right thing or not. According to His Majesty's own words, if its criticism that Mr. Khan does not like, he is singing off the wrong sheet.

Pol. Lt. Col. Wattanasak Mungkijjakarndee Tel. 081- 855 9744	Akbar Khan 118/515 Nonsi Road Yannawa Bangkok, Bangkok 10120 Thailand Tel: Email: ak@aakz.com http://www.phyakrut.com/content/view/2/2/	Jonathan Head, BBC

Links

Contacts
You are encouraged to call to find out the latest and to express your concerns and offer comments.

Akbar Khan http://www.linkedin.com/pub/5/68a/604
Royal Thai Police (Wikipedia)
Crime Suppression Division - Thai (CSD) Central telephone numbers in Bangkok: 0-2513-3844-5 0-2939-3700-19 ต่อ 1894-1896
CSD offices to inquire as to status of cases (Your are encouraged to call to make your point.)
กลุ่มงานสอบสวน (ติดตามผลคดี สำนวนคดี) 0-2513-9286 0-2513-3846. The numbers are from this link which you may wish to open as there are Skype links and you can make a minimum cost call. The last two Skype numbers should coincide with these mentioned unless the page has been updated/altered.
According to a well-placed source in mid-June 2008, the lese majeste charge in Thailand is now investigated under internal Royal Police of Thailand commissioner's order no. 330/2550 dated 4 June 2007. This internal police docuoment is supposed to detail procedures in 'handling' lese majeste cases.
For those who wish to "go upstairs" to file a complaint, inquiry or express concern, etc., regarding lese majeste allegations or charges you are concerned about, you may wish to contact your nearest Thai Embassy or Consulate, but writing newspapers and elected officials, and calling them, also helps. In addition to calling, it is uggested that you also fax and even send a letter (response requested) because Thai government agencies haave a serious problem with retaining 'damning' evidence, especially as it concerns friends and relatives of officials. Also, followup on a regular basis. Another unfortunate Thai trait is' letting the embers die.'

Watpa Salawan - Thai and English language combined documents related to various filings and appeals against mafia-type goings-on at Watpa Salawan, Korat, Thailand. This link contains Thai language recordings of Papatchanan Chingin, photo below, inciting the public and spreading hate speech. Police and other Thai government officials were basically apathetic and dismissive when appealed to for assistance.

Papatchanan Chingin, right, Watpa Salawan abbot Luang Pho Pherm, left. Both worked hard at trying to make lese majeste charges stick in 2005. They failed. But not without pain and hate speech. Despite requirements inThai Criminal Procedure Code Sections
137, locla police have to date refused to provide to accused all statements obtained during case investigation.

Lese Majeste Cases
Perceptions vs. Realities - Wrongful Police Involvement

Sensitivities over real vs. perceived lese majeste varies from case to case, country to
country. See Wikipedia's Wizard of Id reference. In Thailand, censors to date* have not
bothered with the Wizard of ID cartoon although it shows the ruler of a despotic country
in a negative light. In the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the same cartoon is constantly edited
to remove the word "king" and replace it with "boss." (* 7/29/2008)

The Role of the Thai Monarchy

The Thai monarchy has had, has, and will continue to have various roles, some of which have changed from outside pressures or by the mnarchy itself at one time or another. In terms of political influence and/or actual political power, the Thai monarchy has waxed and waned in these terms as conditions and circumstances changed or called for changes. That Thai government agencies, especially the Royal Thai Police, have frequently prosecuted and persecuted those who dared broach the subject of the role of the Thai monarchy is a matter of regrettable record, and hopefully some day in the not too distant future this practice will be stopped by the Thai courts through citizen activism.

Academic Resources

Books and other academic resources on Thailand's Lese Majeste Laws and culture

Streckfuss, David Eirich. 1998 . “The poetics of subversion: Civil liberty and lese-majeste in the modern Thai state.” Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Wisconsin-Madison. 669 pp.
David Streckfuss Books: http://www.allbookstores.com/author/David_Streckfuss.html

Books
King's Elder Brother - some background from: http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~karnchan/thai_isa.txt
Present Thai Government and Politics King Prachathipok (King Rama VII), King Rama VI's successor and brother, was not as forceful or strong-willed as his older brother. Policy during his regime was almost entirely determined by the group of the princes advising the monarch. It has been said that he wanted to give his country a constitution, but his advisors prevented him from doing so. Several factors, however, now indicated that a greater change might be coming. Among them were a decrease in the psychological strength of the monarchy, the development of confidence and professional skill among the military officers, financial difficulties and the resentment by the military of the king's private army.5 On June 24, 1932, a revolutionary group delivered an ultimatum to the king. Calling themselves the People's Party, the group, composed of military and civil officers, demanded that the king accept a constitution or be replaced by another prince. The leader of this group was Dr. Pridi Phanomyong, a young lawyer who had studied law in Paris. Though only thirty years old at the time, Pridi was regarded as the brains behind the coup. Colonel Phahon Phol Payuhasena led the conservative element of the party consisting of Army and Navy officers. The king yielded to this group, and the day of the absolute monarchy were over. Thailand was to seek its future in constitutional government presided over by a nominal monarch. In 1933, Colonel Phahon led his conservatives in a coup against the Royalists and was elected Prime Minister. In 1938, Phibun, Colonel Phahon's protege, became Prime Minister. During World War II, the Phibun government made an alliance with Japan. But Pridi, working with the United States Office of Strategic Services (OSS), led the Free Thai Movement. This group supplied and trained some 30,000 men who were prepared to invade Japan whenever the United States gave the word.6 As a result of Phibun's unpopular alliance with Japan, Pridi was able to speed the downfall of the Phibun government and to install Nai Khaung Apaiwong as Prime Minister. In 1947, King Ananda Thamahidon (Rama VIII) died mysteriously (he had succeeded to the throne in 1935 when King Rama VII abdicated) while Pridi was the Prime Minister. In the tension that followed, Phibun again became Prime Minister. In February of 1949, Pridi's attempt at a coup d'etat was crushed by the Army. The last such coup took place in 1958 when Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat took power and announced the drafting of a new constitution more suitable for the Thai people.7 After Field Marshal Sarit's death in December 1963, the leadership of the ruling group passed to his Deputy Prime Minister, Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn. He reiterated Field Marshal Sarit's assurances that elections to parliament would take place. In February 1969, the Constituent Assembly approved Thailand's present constitution, and it was promulgated by the King on June 20, 1968. A general election was held on February 10, 1968. It resulted in a victory for the forces of Field Marshal Thanom, who continued in office as Prime Minister. In 1973, when Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn resigned under the pressure of massive student demonstrations, Professor Sanya Thammasak, Thammasat University Rector was appointed as Interim Prime Minister. Thailand returned to a civilian government and in January 1975 had national general elections. M. L. Kukrit Pramoj, of the right wing of the Social Action Party (SAP) was elected Prime Minster. Later on, his brother M. L. Seni Pramoj replaced him but was ousted in 1976 by Admiral Sa-Ngad Chaloryu with the National Administrative Reform Council. The junta appointed Thanin Kraivichien, a Supreme Court justice, as new Premier and also appointed a 340 member National Assembly, 110 of them military officers. After three years of civilian government ended with a military coup on October 6, 1976 Thailand reverted to military rule. The military in 1977, ousted Thanin as "weak", replacing him with an army General, Kriangsak Chamanan. The later resigned from the Premiership in 1980. The National Assembly elected General Prem Tinsulanon Prime Minister. There were a few coups during his premiership. One occurred on April 3, 1981. It was a military coup against the Prem government, but it failed. A general election on April 18, 1983, resulted in a new coalition government being formed, with Prem continuing as Prime Minister. Another coup attempt on September 9, 1985, was crushed by loyal troops after 10 hours of fighting in Bangkok. Politically speaking, it should be noted that Thailand has been mainly ruled by the military since the 1932 coup, even though steady efforts for constitutional rule have been made. The basic ruling structure, however, remains remarkably stable under three major groups, the Army Generals, top bureaucrats (technocrats) and entrepreneurs (business-financial leaders). They are mutually supportive of each other and continue to dominate Thai politics. Since an abortive coup in September 9, 1985, General Prem, who has been in office since 1980, dissolved the Thai House of Representatives on April 29, 1988, apparently to avoid a non-confidence vote. He faced a national election on July 24, 1988.8 A national general election on July 24, 1988, won General Chatichai Choonhavan, a retired army major general and a wealthy businessman, head of Thai Nation Party the office of Prime Minister.9 His political party won most of the votes to have the Prime Minister directly elected rather than nominated. Under the current Thai constitution, however, after general elections, the major parties select a prime ministerial candidate, who does not have to be a member of Parliament. General Prem Tinsulnanonda, the former Prime Minister with the longest tenure in Thai political history turned down offers to return to his post for another term.

Panel Disccusion, including Paul Handley author of "The King Never Smiles."
Bangkok Pundit Comments - Analysis and Review of lese majeste in Thailand

Constitutional Monarchy and all Thai constitutions - Thai language summary

Succession
(See Sections 20-21)

Law of Succession กฏมณเฑียรบาลว่าด้วยการสืบราชสันตติวงศ์ พ.ศ. 2467 (From 1924- Present)
Thai language discussion of succession
English lnaguage Thai Government Primary source detailing succession (Thai oparliamentary Source) to wit:

Section 12. A Privy Councillor shall not be a member of the Constitutional Tribunal, senator, member of the House of Representatives, government official holding a permanent position or receiving a salary, official of a State enterprise, or member or official of a political party, and must not manifest loyalty to any political party.
Section 13. Before taking office a Privy Councillor must make a solemn declaration before the King in the following words: "I, (name of the declarer), do solemnly declare that I will be loyal to the King and will faithfully perform my duties in the interests of the country and of the people. I will also uphold and observe the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in every respect."
Section 14. A Privy Councillor vacates his office upon death, resignation or removal by a Royal Command.
Section 15. The appointmentand the removal of officials of the Royal Household and of the Royal Chief Aide-de-Camp shall depend entirely upon the King's pleasure.
Section 16. Whenever the King is absent from the Kingdom or unable to performHisfunctions for whatever reason, He will appoint a person Regent, and the President of the National Assembly shall countersign the Royal Command.
Section 17. In the case where the King does not appoint a Regent under section 16, or in the case where the King is unable to appoint a Regent owing to His not being sui juris or to any other reason what ever, the Privy Council shall submit the name of a suitable person to hold the office of Regent to the National Assembly for approval. Upon approval by the National Assembly, the President of the National Assembly shall make an announcement, in the name of the King, of the appointment of such person as Regent. During the expiration of the term of the House of Representatives or theHouse of Representatives is dissolved, the Senate shall act as the National Assembly to give the approval under paragraph one.
Section 18. In the absence of the Regent under section 16 or section 17, the President of the Privy Council shall be Regent pro tempore. In the case where the Regent appointed under section 16 or section 17 isunable to perform his duties, the President of the Privy Council shall temporarily act as Regent. While being Regent under paragraph one or acting as Regent under paragraph two, the President of the Privy Council shall not perform his duties as President of the Privy Council. In such case, the Privy Council shall select a Privy Councillor to act temporarily as President of the Privy Council.
Section 19. Before taking office, the Regent appointed under section 16 or section 17 shall make a solemn declaration before the National Assembly in the following words: "I, (name of the declarer), do solemnly declare that I will be loyal to His Majesty King (name of the King) and will faithfully perform my duties in the interests of the country and of the people. I will also uphold and observe the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in every respect."

Section 20. Subject to section 21, the succession to the Throne shall be in accordance with the Palace Law on Succession B.E. 2467. The amendment of the Palace Law on Succession B.E. 2467 shall be the Royal prerogative. Upon the initiation of the King, the Privy Council shall draft the Palace Law amending the existing Palace Law and shall present it to the King for His consideration. If He approve the draft Palace Law and sign His signature thereon, the President of the Privy Council shall instruct it to the Presidentof the National Assembly so that he shall then inform it to the National Assembly. The President of the National Assembly shall countersign the Royal Command and it shall come into force as Law after its publication in the Government Gazette.
Section 21. In the case where the Throne becomes vacant and the King has appointed His Heir under the Palace Law on Succession B.E. 2467, the Council of Ministers shall inform the President of the National Assembly such information. The President of the National Assembly then shall convoke the National Assembly for information. And the President of the National Assembly shall invite such Heir to ascend the Throne and proclaim him King. In the case where the Throne becomes vacant and the King has not appointed His Heir under paragraph one, the Privy Council shall, under section 20, submit the name of the successor to the Throne to the Council of Ministers. And the Council of Ministers shall submit the name of the successor to the National Assembly for approval. In this case, name of a Princess may be submitted. Upon the approval of the National Assembly, the President of the National Assembly shall invite such successor to ascend the Throne and proclaim him King. During the expiration of the term of the House of Representatives or the House of Representatives is dissolved, the Senate shall act as the National Assembly to be informed under paragraph one or to give an approval under paragraph two.

Section 22. Pending the proclamation of the name of the Heir or the successor to the Throne under section 21, the President of the Privy Council shall be Regent pro tempore. In the case where the Throne becomes vacant while the Regent has been appointed under section 16 or section 17 or while the President of the Privy Council is acting as Regent under section 18 paragraph one, such Regent, as the case may be, shall continue to be the Regent until the proclamation of the name of the Heir or the successor to the Throne. In the case where the Regent who has been appointed and continues to be Regent under paragraph one is unable to perform his duties, the President of the Privy Council shall act temporarily as Regent. In the case where the President of the Privy Council is the Regent under paragraph one or acts temporarily as Regent under paragraph two, the provision of section 18 paragraph three shall apply.
Section 23. In the case where the Privy Council must perform its duty under section 17 or section 21 paragraph two, or the President of the Privy Council must perform his duty under section 18 paragraph one or paragraph two or section 22 paragraph two, and the President of the Privy Council is absent or is unable to perform his duties, the remaining Privy Councillors shall select a Privy Councillor to act as President of the Privy Council or perform the duty under section 18 paragraph one or paragraph two or section 22 paragraph three as the case may be.

Succession law per 2007 Thai constitution

Section 22. Subject to section 23, the succession to the Throne shall be in accordance with the Palace Law on Succession, B.E. 2467. The Amendment of the Palace Law on Succession, B.E. 2467 shall be the prerogative of the King. At the initiative of the King, the Privy Council shall draft the Palace Law Amendment and shall present it to the King for His consideration. When the King has already approved the draft Palace Law amendment and put His signature thereto, the President of the Privy Council shall notify the President of the National Assembly for informing the National Assembly. The President of the National Assembly shall countersign the Royal Command. The Palace Law Amendment shall come into force upon its publication in the Government Gazette. During the expiration of the term of the House of Representatives or the dissolution thereof, the Senate shall act as the National Assembly in acknowledging the matter under paragraph two.
Section 23. In the case where the Throne becomes vacant and the King has already appointed His Heir to the Throne under the Palace Law on Succession, B.E. 2467, the Council of Ministers shall notify the President of the National Assembly. The President of the National Assembly shall then convoke the National Assembly for the acknowledgement thereof and shall invite such Heir to ascend the Throne and proclaim such Heir King. In the case where the Throne becomes vacant and the King has not appointed His Heir under paragraph one, the Privy Council shall submit the name of the Successor to the Throne under section 22 to the Council of Ministers for further submission to the National Assembly for approval. For this purpose, the name of a Princess may be submitted. Upon the approval of the National Assembly, the President of the National Assembly shall invite such Successor to ascend the Throne and proclaim such Successor King. During the expiration of the term of the House of Representatives or the dissolution thereof, the Senate shall act as the National Assembly in acknowledging the matter under paragraph one or in giving an approval under paragraph two.
Section 24. Pending the proclamation of the name of the Heir or the Successor to the Throne under section 23, the President of the Privy Council shall be Regent pro tempore. In the case where the Throne becomes vacant while the Regent has been appointed under section 18 or section 19 or while the President of the Privy Council is acting as the Regent under section 20 paragraph one, such Regent, as the case may be, shall continue to be the Regent until the proclamation of the name of the Heir or the Successor to ascend the Throne as King. In the case where the Regent who has been appointed and continues to be the Regent under paragraph one is unable to perform his duties, the President of the Privy Council shall act as Regent pro tempore. In the case where the President of the Privy Council is the Regent under paragraph one or acts as Regent pro tempore under paragraph two, the provisions of section 20 paragraph three shall apply.
Section 25. In the case where the Privy Council has to perform its duties under section 19 or section 23 paragraph two, or the President of the Privy Council has to perform his duties under section 20 paragraph one or paragraph two or section 24 paragraph two, and there is, during that period, no President of the Privy Council or the President of the Privy Council is unable to perform his duties, the remaining Privy Councilors shall elect one among themselves to act as President of the Privy Council or to perform the duties under section 20 paragraph one or paragraph two or section 24 paragraph three, as the case may be.

Some blog speculaton

Thai Government Agencies Involved

Legal References and Citations
- Includes internal police procedures -

From: http://www.article19.org/pdfs/analysis/thailand.def.1.04.pdf
This website location contains inforamtion regarding Thailand's defamation laws and possible solutions to reform and/or repeal. Article 19 refers to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

From: http://www.sobsuan.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1879&highlight=
คำสั่ง สำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ
ที่ 330/2550
เรื่อง กำหนดแนวทางปฏิบัติในการดำเนินคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ และ Subject: คณะกรรมการพิจารณาคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ

ตามคำสั่งสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติที่ 28/2548 ลงวันที่ 17 มกราคม 2548 เรื่องเปลี่ยนแปลงคำสั่งแต่งตั้งคณะกรรมการพิจารณาคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ ซึ่งกำหนดแนวทางปฏิบัติของพนักงานสอบสวนและหน่วยงานทุกหน่วยงานไว้เพื่อให้ถือปฏิบัติในกรณีพบการกระทำความผิดในลักษณะที่เป็นการหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ นั้น สำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ พิจารณาแล้วเห็นว่า การพิจารณาดำเนินการเกี่ยวกับคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพเป็นเรื่องสำคัญ จำเป็นต้องพิจารณาด้วยความละเอียด รอบคอบ เพื่อมิให้เป็นการระคายเคืองเบื้องพระยุคลบาท จึงสมควรปรับปรุงแนวทางปฏิบัติเกี่ยวกับการดำเนินคดีและคณะกรรการพิจารณาดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ อาศัยอำนาจตามพระราชบัญญัติตำรวจแห่งชาติ พ.ศ.2547 มาตรา 11(4) จึงให้ยกเลิกคำสั่งสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติที่ 28/2548 ลงวันที่ 17 มกราคม 2548 และกำหนดแนวทางการปฏิบัติขึ้นใหม่ ดังนี้ 1.ให้กองบัญชาการตำรวจนครบาล ตำรวจภูธรภาค 1-9 กองบัญชาการตำรวจสอบสวนกลาง และกองบัญชาการตำรวจสันติบาล มีคณะกรรมการพิจารณาคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ ของกองบัญชาการ/ตำรวจภูธรภาค ประกอบด้วย
1.1 ผู้บัญชาการ เป็นประธานกรรมการ 1.2 รองผู้บัญชาการทุกคน เป็นกรรมการ 1.3 ผู้บังคับการท้องที่ที่เกิดเหตุ/รับผิดชอบ เป็นกรรมการ 1.4 ผู้กำกับการท้องที่ที่เกิดเหตุ/รับผิดชอบ เป็นกรรมการ 1.5 ผู้บังคับการอำนวยการ เป็นกรรมการ/ เลขานุการ ทั้งนี้ให้ประธานคณะกรรมการดังกล่าวมีอำนาจแต่งตั้งข้าราชการตำรวจในสังกัดเป็นคณะกรรมการเพิ่มเติมได้ตามที่เห็นสมควร 2.เมื่อปรากฎว่าหน่วยงานในสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติได้รับทราบไม่ว่าโดยทางใดว่ามีการกระทำที่เข้าข่ายว่าอาจเป็นการกระทำผิด ตามประมวลกฎหมายอาญา มาตรา 112 ให้ดำเนินการดังนี้
2.1 เมื่อมีผู้กล่าวโทษให้ดำเนินคดีกับผู้กระทำความผิด ให้พนักงานสอบสวนดำเนินการสอบสวนไปตามอำนาจหน้าที่ให้เป็นไปตามกฎหมายและระเบียบที่เกี่ยวข้อง แล้วรายงานข้อเท็จจริงโดยละเอียดพร้อมพยานหลักฐานเสนอกองบัญชาการ นำเข้าพิจารณาในคณะกรรมการในเรื่อง 2.1.1 การตั้งข้อหา 2.1.2 การร้องขอให้ศาลออกหมายจับ 2.1.3 การทำความเห็นทางคดีเสนอผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ เพื่อพิจารณาสั่งคดี ในขณะที่อยู่ระหว่างการรอผลการพิจารณาของคณะกรรมการฯ ให้พนักงานสอบสวนทำการสอบสวนหาพยานหลักฐานและดำเนินการทั้งหลายเพื่อให้ทราบข้อเท็จจริงหรือพิสูจน์ความผิดต่อไปโดยมิชักช้าโดยมิต้องรอความเห็นจากคณะกรรมการ เมื่อพนักงานสอบสวนเห็นว่ามีพยานหลักฐานสำคัญทางคดีเพิ่มเติมที่เป็นประโยชน์ต่อการพิจารณาของคณะกรรมการ ให้พนักงานสอบสวนรีบนำเสนอต่อคณะกรรมการโดยเร็ว สำหรับในส่วน สำนักงานตำรวจสันติบาล ให้รายงานเสนอ ผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ เพื่อพิจารณาสั่งการให้หน่วยงานที่มีอำนาจหน้าที่ทำการสอบสวนเป็นผู้ดำเนินการตามวรรคหนึ่งและวรรคสอง 2.2 เมื่อปรากฎพฤติการณ์จากข่าวทางสื่อมวลชนหรือเป็นกรณีที่ไม่เป็นการกล่าวโทษ ให้หน่วยงานที่รับผิดชอบรายงานข้อเท็จจริงโดยละเอียดเสนอกองบัญชาการ นำเข้าพิจารณาในคณะกรรมการเพื่อพิจารณาว่าเป็นการกระทำที่เข้าข่ายเป็นความผิดตามประมวลกฎหมายอาญา มาตรา 112 หรือไม่ หากคณะกรรมการฯพิจารณาแล้วเห็นว่าเป็นการกระทำที่เข้าข่ายเป็นความผิด ให้ดำเนินการตามข้อ 2.1 และหากพิจารณาแล้วเห็นว่าการกระทำดังกล่าวไม่เข้าข่ายเป็นความผิด ให้รายงานผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ ทราบโดยเร็ว 2.3 เมื่อมีการจับกุมบุคคลใดดำเนินคดีดังกล่าว เพราะเหตุกระทำความผิดซึ่งหน้า หรือมีเหตุจำเป็นอย่างอื่นให้จับได้โดยไม่มีหมายตามที่กฎหมายบัญญัติ ภายหลังการจับกุมให้พนักงานสอบสวนรีบรายงานข้อเท็จจริงโดยละเอียด พร้อมเอกสารหลักฐานที่เกี่ยวข้องพร้อมความเห็นเบื้องต้นเสนอกองบัญชาการ นำเข้าพิจารณาในคณะกรรมการดำเนินการตามข้อ 2.1
3,เมื่อพนักงานสอบสวนทำการสอบสวนเสร็จสิ้น และกองบัญชาการ/ตำรวจภูธรภาค ได้เสนอสำนวนการสอบสวนพร้อมความเห็นทางคดีมายังสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ ให้ผู้บังคับการ กองคดีอาญา ประมวลเรื่องนำเข้าพิจารณาในคณะกรรมการพิจารณาคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพของสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ ซึ่งประกอบด้วย 3.1 รองผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ เป็นประธานกรรมการ (งานสืบสวนสอบสวนและกฎหมาย) 3.2 ผู้ช่วยผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ เป็นกรรมการ (งานสืบสวนสอบสวนและกฎหมาย) ทุกคน 3.3 ผู้บัญชาการ สำนักงานกฎหมายและสอบสวน เป็นกรรมการ 3.4 ผู้บัญชาการ กองบัญชาการตำรวจสันติบาล เป็นกรรมการ 3.5 ผู้บัญชาการกองบัญชาการตำรวจสอบสวนกลาง เป็นกรรมการ 3.6 ผู้บัญชาการ ท้องที่เกิดเหตุ เป็นกรรมการ 3.7 ผู้บังคับการ กองนิติการ เป็นกรรมการ 3.8 ผู้บังคับการกองคดีอาญา เป็นกรรมการ/เลขานุการ 3.9 รองผู้บังคับการ กองคดีอาญา ทุกคน เป็นผู้ช่วยเลขานุการ เพื่อพิจารณามีความเห็นเสนอผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติมีความเห็นทางคดี หรือสั่งการอย่างใดอย่างหนึ่งเกี่ยวกับคดี 4,การรายงานเหตุเบื้องต้น ให้พนักงานสอบสวนสรุปข้อเท็จจริงโดยให้ปรากฏชื่อผู้กล่าวหา ชื่อผู้ต้องหา ความผิดที่กล่าวหา วันเดือนปีที่เกิดเหตุ สถานที่เกิดเหตุ และพฤติการณ์แห่งคดีโดยละเอียด เสนอต่อผู้บังคับบัญชาตามลำดับชั้นจนถึงผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ (ผ่าน กองคดีอาญา ) ภายใน 3วัน นับแต่เมื่อรับคำกล่าวโทษ 5.กำหนดชั้นความลับในการเสนอเรื่องเป็น “ลับมาก” ทุกกรณี ทั้งนี้ตั้งแต่บัดนี้เป็นต้นไป
สั่ง ณ วันที่ 4 มิถุนายน 2550
พลตำรวจเอก เสรีพิศุทธ์ เตมียาเวส
( เสรีพิศุทธ์ เตมียาเวส ) รักษาราชการแทน ผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ

Police Order no. 28/2548
คำสั่ง สตช.ที่ตร.ยึดเป็นหลักในการจับ “สนธิ” โดย วัน พุธ ที่ 23 พฤศจิกายน พ.ศ. 2548 12:08 น.
คำสั่ง สำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ ที่ 28/2548 เรื่อง เปลี่ยนแปลงคำสั่งแต่งตั้งคณะกรรมการพิจารณาคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ ตามคำสั่งสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ ที่ 705/2547 ลงวันที่ 26 ตุลาคม 2547 เรื่องแต่งตั้งคณะกรรมการพิจารณาคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ ซึ่งกำหนดแนวทางปฏิบัติของพนักงานสอบสวน และหน่วยงานทุกหน่วยงานไว้ เพื่อให้ถือปฏิบัติในกรณีพบการกระทำความผิดในลักษณะที่เป็นการหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ นั้น เนื่องจากที่ผ่านมาพบข้ออุปสรรคเกี่ยวกับการจัดการประชุม ซึ่งทำให้การพิจารณาของคณะกรรมการเกิดความล่าช้า สำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ พิจารณาแล้วเพื่อให้การดำเนินการเป็นไปด้วยความรวดเร็ว เหมาะสม และมีประสิทธิภาพ ดังนั้น หากปรากฏว่ามีผู้มากล่าวโทษ หรือปรากฏข่าวสารทางสื่อมวลชนกล่าวหาว่ามีการกระทำผิดต่อองค์พระมหากษัตริย์ พระราชินี รัชทายาท หรือผู้สำเร็จราชการแทนพระองค์ ในลักษณะที่เป็นการหมิ่นประมาท ดูหมิ่น หรือแสดงความอาฆาตมาดร้าย ตามประมวลกฎหมายอาญา มาตรา 112 ซึ่งตามพฤติการณ์บางกรณีอาจไม่เข้าข่ายความผิด แต่เป็นการกระทำที่ไม่เป็นการเทิดทูนต่อองค์พระมหากษัตริย์ พระราชินี รัชทายาท หรือผู้สำเร็จราชการแทนพระองค์ หรืออาจมีบุคคลที่ไม่หวังดีนำสถาบันพระมหากษัตริย์กล่าวอ้างในทางที่ไม่เหมาะสม หรือไม่สมควร และเพื่อไม่ให้
และเพื่อไม่ให้เป็นการระคายเคืองเบื้องพระยุคลบาท และเพื่อให้การดำเนินการดังกล่าวเป็นไปด้วยความรอบคอบ จึงกำหนดแนวทางปฏิบัติของพนักงานสอบสวน และหน่วยงานที่เกี่ยวข้อง ดังนี้ 1.ให้กองบัญชาการตำรวจนครบาล และกองบัญชาการตำรวจสอบสวนกลาง กองบัญชาการตำรวจภูธรภาค 1-ภาค 9 และสำนักงานตำรวจสันติบาล มีคณะกรรมการพิจารณาคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ ซึ่งประกอบด้วย 1.1 ผู้บัญชาการ เป็นประธานกรรมการ 1.2 รองผู้บัญชาการทุกท่าน เป็นกรรมการ 1.3 ผู้บังคับการท้องที่ที่เกิดเหตุ/รับผิดชอบ เป็นกรรมการ 1.4 ผู้กำกับการท้องที่ที่เกิดเหตุ/รับผิดชอบ เป็นกรรมการ 1.5 ผู้บังคับการอำนวยการ เป็นกรรมการ/เลขานุการ สำหรับในกองบัญชาการตำรวจสอบสวนกลาง ให้ผู้บังคับการกองปราบปราม เป็นกรรมกาารแทนตามข้อ 1.3 และผู้กำกับการกองปราบปราม ที่รับผิดชอบคดีนั้นๆ เป็นกรรมการแทนตามข้อ 1.4 และในส่วนสำนักงานตำรวจสันติบาล ให้ผู้บังคับการตำรวจสันติบาล 1, 2 เป็นกรรมการแทนตามข้อ 1.3 และผู้กำกับการตำรวจสันติบาล (กลุ่มงานดำเนินกรรมวิธีข่าวกรอง) เป็นกรรมการแทนตามข้อ 1.4 2.เมื่อปรากฏว่าหน่วยงานในสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติ ได้รับทราบไม่ว่าโดยทางใดว่ามีการกระทำที่เข้าข่ายว่าอาจเป็นการกระทำผิดตามประมวลกฎหมายอาญา มาตรา 112 ให้ดำเนินการ ดังนี้
2.1 เมื่อมีผู้กล่าวโทษให้ดำเนินคดีกับผู้กระทำความผิด ให้พนักงานสอบสวนรับคำกล่าวโทษไว้ตามระเบียบการตำรวจเกี่ยวกับคดีและคำสั่งที่เกี่ยวข้องในเรื่องการรับคำร้องทุกข์กล่าวโทษ และดำเนินการสอบสวนให้เป็นไปตามประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความอาญา และระเบียบการตำรวจเกี่ยวกับคดีกำหนดไว้ แล้วรายงานข้อเท็จจริงโดยละเอียดพร้อมพยานหลักฐานเสนอกองบัญชาการนำเข้าพิจารณาโดยคณะกรรมการในเรื่อง 2.1.1 การตั้งข้อหา 2.1.2 การร้องขอให้ศาลออกหมายจับ 2.1.3 การทำความเห็นทางคดีเสนอ ผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ เพื่อพิจรณาสั่งคดี ในขณะที่อยู่ระหว่างการรอผลการพิจารณาของคณะกรรมการฯ ให้พนักงานสอบสวนทำการสอบสวนหาพยานหลักฐานและดำเนินการทั้งหลาย เพื่อให้ทราบข้อเท็จจริงหรือพิสูจน์ความผิดต่อไป โดยมิชักช้า โดยมิต้องรอความเห็นจากคณะกรรมการ เมื่อพนักงานสอบสวนเห็นว่ามีพยานหลักฐานสำคัญทางคดีเพิ่มเติมที่เป็นประโยชน์ต่อการพิจารณาของคณะกรรมการ ให้พนักงานสอบสวนรีบนำเสนอต่อคณะกรรมการโดยเร็ว สำหรับในส่วน สำนักงานตำรวจสันติบาล ให้รายงานเสนอผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ เพื่อพิจารณาสั่งการให้หน่วยงานที่มีหน้าที่ทำการสอบสวนเป็นผู้รับผิดชอบคดีและมีหน้าที่นำเข้าเสนอคณะกรรมการเพื่อพิจารณาต่อไป
2.2 เมื่อปรากฏพฤติการณ์จากข่าวทางสื่อมวลชน หรือเป็นกรณีที่ไม่เป็นการกล่าวโทษ ให้หน่วยงานที่รับผิดชอบรายงานข้อเท็จจริงโดยละเอียดเสนอกองบัญชาการ นำเข้าพิจารณาในคณะกรรมการเพื่อพิจารณาว่าเป็นการกระทำที่เข้าข่ายเป็นความผิดตามประมวลกฎหมายอาญา มาตรา 112 หรือไม่ หากคณะกรรมการฯ พิจารณาแล้วเห็นว่าเป็นการกระทำที่เข้าข่ายเป็นความผิด ให้ดำเนินการตามข้อ 2.1 และหากพิจารณาแล้วเห็นว่าการกระทำดังกล่าวไม่เข้าข่ายเป็นความผิด ให้รายงานผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ ทราบโดยเร็ว 2.3 เมื่อมีการจับกุมบุคคลใดดำเนินคดีดังกล่าว เพราะเหตุกระทำความผิดซึ่งหน้าหรือมีเหตุจำเป็นอย่างอื่นให้จับโดยไม่มีหมายตามที่กฎหมายบัญญัติ ภายหลังการจับกุมให้พนักงานสอบสวน รีบรายงานข้อเท็จจริงโดยละเอียด พร้อมเอกสารหลักฐานที่เกี่ยวข้อง พร้อมความเห็นเบื้องต้น เสนอกองบัญชาการ นำเข้าพิจารณาในคณะกรรมการดำเนินการตามข้อ 2.1 3.กำหนดชั้นคงามลับในการเสนอเรื่อง “ลับมาก” ทุกกรณี ให้ยกเลิกคำสั่งสำนักงานตำรวจแห่งชาติที่ 705/2547
ลงวันที่ 26 ตุลาคม 2547 และให้ปฏิบัติตามคำสั่งนี้แทน ทั้งนี้ตั้งแต่บัดนี้เป็นต้นไป
สั่ง ณ วันที่ 17 มกราคม 2548
พลตำรวจเอก (ลายเซ็น) (โกวิท วัฒนะ)
ผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ

Section 190 of the 2007 Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand specifies, " The King has the prerogative to conclude a peace treaty, armistice, and other treaties with other countries or international organizations..................."

Ananda Bio (Thai language)

From the Thailand Criminal Code This material has been scanned, copyedited and corrected for meaning and accuracy by referring to the original Thai language text and native English resource material, including Thai-English dictionaries.

BOOK II
SPECIFIC OFFENCES
TITLE I
OFFENCES RELATING TO THE SECURITY OF THE KINGDOM
CHAPTER I
OFFENCES AGAINST THE KING, THE QUEEN, THE HEIR-APPARENT AND THE REGENT

Section 107. Whosoever commits regicide shall be punished by execution. Whosoever attempts to commit the aforesaid act shall be punished in the same manner. Whosoever in any way prepares for committing regicide or knowing that there is a person who will commit regicide and has in any way acted to assist in keeping this secret, shall be punished by life-imprisonment.
Section 108. Whosoever commits an act of violence against the King or his liberty shall be punished with death or imprisonment for life. Whosoever attempts to commit such an offence shall be liable to the same punishment.
If such act is likely to endanger his life, the offender shall be punished by execution. Whosoever makes preparations for committing of any act of violence against the King or his liberty, or acts in any way to assist keeping secret any intention to commit such offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of sixteen to twenty years.
Section 109. Whosoever causes death to the Queen, the heir-apparent or the Regent shall be punished by execution. Whoever attempts to commit such offence shall be liable to the same punishment. Whoever makes preparations for causing death to the Queen, the heir-apparent or the Regent, or acts in any way to assist keeping secret any intention to commit such offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of twelve to twenty years.
Section 110. Whosoever commits an act of violence against me Queen or Her liberty, the heir-apparent or His liberty, or the Regent or his/her liberty, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or sentenced to imprisonment from sixteen to twenty years. Whosoever attempts to commit such offence shall be liable to the same punishment. If such act is likely to endanger the life of the Queen, the heir-apparent or the Regent, the offender shall be punished with execution or sentenced to life imprisonment. Whosoever makes preparations for committing an act of violence against the Queen or her liberty, the heir-apparent or his liberty, or the Regent or his / her liberty, or acts in any way to assist keeping secret any intention to commit such offence, shall be punished with imprisonment from twelve to twenty years.
Section 111. Whosoever is a supporter in committing offences under Section 107 to Section 110 shall be punished in the same manner as the principal in such offence.
Section 112. Whosoever defames, insults or threatens the King, Queen, the heir-apparent or the Regent shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years.

Definitions, Thai and English words that pertain to the subject area.

Copyeditor’s notes: Because this material may be read by non-native speakers of English, I have provided some material for clarification of vocabulary and choice of words used in the translation from Thai to English. 1. Regicide – the killing of a king. 2. Regent – one who governs a kingdom in the absence or disability of a sovereign 3. Heir-apparent – one whose succession [example, from crown prince to king] appears certain under existing circumstances. 4. Use of the word ‘liberty’ in this translation:
In an original Thai-English translation in another source, the word ‘liberty’ was also used. Another alternative would be ‘freedom.’ Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language defines three close-meaning words thusly: Independence – freedom from the control, influence, support, aid, or the like, of others. Freedom* – the right to enjoy all of the privileges or special rights [of the sovereign, etc.] Liberty – freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.

Conventions recognized in regard to references to the Thai monarchy and/or its symbols, family members, etc.