All our personal and business information will no longer be safe from state surveillance if the draft of a new cybersecurity bill becomes law.
If the bill is passed, the cybersecurity agency, with god-like power could monitor our internet activities and penetrate our systems -- without a court order. It could force us to submit information, stop our internet transactions, seize our computers, and issue other measures it deems fit to ward off perceived security threats.
Say "no" and you face a maximum of three years in prison and/or a maximum fine of 300,000 baht.
Sponsored by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, this draconian law now awaits cabinet approval before being forwarded to the National Legislative Assembly. If passed into law, the whole country will be under Big Brother's watchful eyes.
Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha has tried to ease public concerns by saying he would order a review of the bill because he also disagreed with the cybersecurity agency prying into personal information of private citizens. He also asked the public to be patient as the draft law still needs to be reviewed by the National Legislative Assembly.
This is not good enough.
Fixing minor details does not help because the whole legislation is flawed.
This Big Brother law must be stopped.
One critic has slammed this cybersecurity law which was hatched in secrecy as being a blatant attempt to make Thailand a Gestapo state. And rightly so.
Here's why:
For starters, the definition of national security is so broad and so vague that anything deemed upsetting to the government and the status quo can be treated as a threat.
Also, how critical the threat should be to deserve state intervention is also up to cybersecurity authorities' judgement. The room for abuse of power in this scenario is huge, especially when the accused has no right to appeal.
More importantly, military security is also defined as national security. This is why the military -- in its capacity as an arm of the cybersecurity agency -- will be entrusted with the power to freely penetrate our internet systems and force us to follow its order at will.
We can imagine what will happen next.
Violations of citizens' rights and privacy will intensify. So will political suppression.
With the military government's determination to prolong its power, it's clear why there is an urgency to push for this draconian law.
Apart from violating private citizens' privacy and rights, this effort to maintain "peace and order" will entail a great economic cost.
What businesses would want to operate in a country where their trade secrets are freely available at the government's fingertips?
What businesses would want to stay here when they must turn left and right as ordered by the Gestapo agency under constant threat of having their computer and internet systems confiscated at whim.
Not only will international businesses will leave Thailand, any domestic businesses which can afford to flee will definitely do so as well.
This scenario alone suffices to prevent this Big Brother law from harming the national economy.
To allay public and business concerns requires trust in the state authorities' integrity and professionalism. This is not forthcoming. The government has a poor record regarding respect for private citizens' rights and freedom of expression. The status of the all-powerful National Cybersecurity Agency is also in doubt.
As a national regulator, this cybersecurity agency must be first and foremost a governmental body free of business interests. This principle is so basic it needs not be mentioned.
Apart from being able to freely access the computer systems and mobile phones of private citizens and businesses, the National Cybersecurity Agency, also has a questionable status. As an independent body outside the state bureaucracy, it can engage in business ventures and seeks financial support from outside sources. Moreover, it does not need to give its earnings to the state coffers.
In other words, the National Cybersecurity Agency will not only design national cybersecurity strategies for the whole country, it will also issue rules and regulations, enforce them, punish those out of line, and simultaneously compete with other players in the business.
This is bad governance, pure and simple.
With such a blatant conflict of interest, how can we be sure that this powerful organisation will not make rules to undercut other businesses in favour of its own?
When the power to make rules, regulate, punish and compete with other players are in the same hands, the situation is ripe for abuse.
What businesses will want to operate in Thailand when their trade secrets are not safe from the all-powerful regulator, which is also their business competitor?
And mind you, when your business information is leaked at the hands of cybersecurity officials, the law says they are not accountable.
Amid public concerns, the architect of this controversial cybersecurity law, the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA), must clarify why it is pushing a law ridden with conflicts of interest and a lack of transparency. All eyes are on this agency whether it will be the main beneficiary when the National Cybersecurity Agency is set up with its superpower.
The Ministry of Digital Economy and Society must also be accountable if the law it is sponsoring ends up hurting the national economy and society.
Of course, Thailand needs an instrument to protect the country from cyber attacks. Maybe the government should start first with beefing up its cyber personnel, websites, and systems of state agencies across the board.
A few clicks on some government websites shows how backward they are compared with the world. Do we really believe total state surveillance is the answer to state inefficiency?
This draconian cybersecurity law was hatched in secrecy. We now understand why. The cosmetic public hearing took place at the very last stage when the draft was ready to be passed into law, reflecting total lack of transparency and questionable motives.
If the government really cares about the country's cybersecurity -- not its own power -- this law must go back to the drawing board. The law that affects internet users -- almost everyone in the country now -- must be made inclusive and open to participation from all stakeholders right from the start.
Nothing less is acceptable.
Sanitsuda Ekachai is former editorial pages editor, Bangkok Post.
