Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai this week defended his new policy and the recently issued regulation to screen foreign media representatives for journalist-visa applications, saying that the move would prevent negative reporting about Thailand.

The authorities are upset over reports from foreign media about political developments in Thailand, and particularly about the role of the monarchy, he said.

Commenting on the new rule, the BBC’s Southeast Asia Correspondent, Jonathan Head, said foreign journalists who applied for a visa to work in Thailand would be asked about their political attitude – and notably, their thoughts about the Thai monarchy.

These “inappropriate” questions and “tougher” practices have been applied as part of validating applicants’ qualification for a media visa (M visa), he said.

Moreover, some journalists who were working in the country for decades have been rejected when seeking to renew their M visa, and have been asked to apply instead for a business visa (B visa), Head said, adding that the grace period was too short for them to apply for an alternative visa.

According to the guidelines issued on February 18 and which will be effective from March 21, those journalists whose M visas are due to expire before the effective date, are given a four-month grace period, while there is a three-month grace period for those whose M visas expire from March 21 onwards.

It is impossible for rejected journalists to apply for an alternative visa within the specific grace period the authorities have laid down, he stressed.

Even though representatives of foreign journalists in Thailand had a dialogue with the authorities and asked them to extend the grace period, the request was rejected, according to Head.

“We will try to get information [on foreign journalists affected] as far as we are able to do so, in order to see how things go with the new guidelines,” the BBC correspondent said.

It is very strange that the government issued these guidelines, he said, adding that they are unclear and confusing as they do not clarify what criteria are used to consider whether a journalist is qualified or eligible for an M visa.

If the government intended to reduce the number of journalists who do not contribute to society in their work, the criteria should not focus on the content of the work, he said.

They are being deemed as fake journalists because they do not write anything on critical issues, and especially on politics, he said.

Don said the new regulation had been issued to “regulate” working journalists in Thailand and get rid of “unreal” journalists.

The government has no intention of limiting freedom of the press, he said, adding that Thailand is the freest media society in the region.

Only 10 per cent of 500 foreign media representatives would be affected by the regulation, since they cannot identify their organisations, the minister said.

“If they can identify their media organisations properly, we will extend their journalist visas,” he stressed.

Head argued, however, that many media organisations used freelancers for their coverage, rather than having their own correspondents in Thailand.

Nirmal Ghosh, president of the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand, also voiced concern over the restrictions in the revised guidelines.

“It affects foreign media personnel in terms of their professional and personal life, even though the government confirmed that the guidelines did not attempt to curb media freedom,” Ghosh said.

“Lawrence Osborne, a British photographer, is an obvious case with regard to the revised guidelines. He had been working here for years, but his application was rejected,” the club’s president told The Nation.