Its DMC television station, which was ordered closed recently, was a powerful medium for the temple to publicise its activities and teachings, reaching millions of followers through its satellite network. Since the closure of the station, the temple has turned to social media. Phra Sanitwong’s Facebook profile is the most active, with posts about Dhammakaya’s teachings and activities.

The monk operates multiple accounts, including one under his real name, Phra Sanitwong Charoenrattawong, as a spokesperson for the temple.

In addition to the monks, the temple’s lay followers are also using social media in a battle of information. The page “We love Dhammakaya” is among many pages posting about the temple and the stand-off with the authorities, notably the ongoing operation conducted by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI).

The newest page, under the name “Pitak Luang Por Duay Chewit” (protect the abbot with our lives), was launched recently in Thai, Chinese and English.

The temple, which has as many as 100 branches around the world, includes many non-Thai followers.

As the temple raid to arrest Phra Dhammachayo, the former abbot of the temple, was launched this past week, Facebook Live broadcasts by Dhammakaya monks and followers was used intensively to depict events on the ground.

The temple’s spokespeople have used social media to provide information about the temple, but also to assail authorities. Justice Minister Suwaphan Tanyuvardhana and his wife’s telephone numbers were shared widely on the temple’s social media networks, alongside threats against him and his family.

In addition to real information about the stand-off, false information and so-called fake news have also appeared on social networks, apparently intending to confuse perceptions of the situation.

It took the DSI days to realise that it had been left behind in the battle of information. Initially, junta supporters had used social media to defend the DSI and justify the operation against the Buddhist temple, while the DSI later took to Facebook to explain its operation and plans, as well as to identify misinformation in the public sphere. The department also uses Facebook Live to broadcast its operations and negotiations with monks and stream news conferences. But while the DSI uses English in its social media communications, its communications machine is far inferior to that of the temple.

The DSI spokespeople are also using Line to communicate with journalists to spread their messages.

Both sides have released “discourses” and “counter-discourses” attacking each other on social media. The temple has said the state is damaging Buddhism and bullying monks, while the government has said Phra Dhammachayo has no reason to run away unless he did something wrong.

ABOUT 200 members of the sea-gypsy community in the Rawai area of Phuket’s Muang district yesterday morning blocked the demolition of two homes in Soi Mukdee, while 100 policemen, Navy officers and administrative officials were stationed at the scene to prevent clashes.

The homes were to be demolished after the Supreme Court ruled on December 30, 2015 that homeowners Maren Bangchak and Anan Bangchak, who leased the plots and were formally notified to move out in 2011, were to be evicted from the properties.

Since Maren and Anan were not present to receive the demolition notices, official Theerasak Eiad-chuthong told the landowners, brothers Suthep and Thawee Mukdee, that the demolition could not be carried out due to fears of clashes with protesters.

However, the landlords and their authorised representative Satheun Mukdee insisted on going ahead with the demolitions because they had already brought workers and tools to perform the task. But when they faced the protesters, Satheun capitulated, saying that the demolition could not proceed and that he would have to file a police complaint.

Protesters, many of whom carried a portrait of late His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej, began crying and singing the Royal Anthem after the capitulation.

Last month, the Phuket Court rejected a separate land-encroachment case against four sea gypsies in Rawai based on evidence, including a photograph of the late King during his visit to the community in 1959.

Kwanjai Bangchak, 27, who lived with 10 others in one of the two houses marked for demolition, said tearfully that she had been living in the house that her father built many years ago and would not know where to go if evicted.

Another resident Juree Krasaechonthan, 52, said the landlords had let them live on the land, but had changed their minds later and were now trying to evict them.

Landlord Suthep, 71, said the four-rai (0.6-hectare) plot, which was later divided into six plots, had been inherited by him and his younger brother Thawee. They leased the land to sea-gypsy people on a year-to-year basis, but when they wanted the land back in 2009 and asked them to leave, they had refused. The refusal led to a lawsuit, in which the court issued a verdict saying the houses could be demolished in October.

The 2016-2017 report, which was released on Wednesday, said the junta continued to punish and ban peaceful political dissent, prosecuted politicians and activists who were critical, and tortured and treated prisoners poorly.

The ministry said the report did not fully reflect positive developments in Thailand and added that the government was committed to the implementation of the “road map” towards achieving sustained democracy, social harmony and lasting stability.

It said Thailand supported and valued freedom of expression and respected human rights in accordance with international practices, which was evident in the fact that the press can freely criticise the government.

Concerning the lese majeste law, the ministry said it was part of Thailand’s Criminal Code, which gives protection to the rights and reputation of the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent and the Regent in a similar way libel law does for ordinary citizens to maintain national peace and stability.

“It is not aimed at curbing people’s rights to freedom of expression and is not driven by any political agenda,” the ministry said.

Human right defenders in Thailand were entitled to fair trials without discrimination, the ministry said.

The government welcomed concerns raised by all relevant sectors including civil society, the ministry said, adding that it believed that constructive engagement on the basis of comprehensive and balanced information would lead to the effective promotion and protection of human rights in the country.

The ministry said the Supreme Administrative Court did not say that the office was derelict in its duty, but pointed to a breach of contract by the private wind farm developer.

A wind farm in the northeastern province of Chaiyaphum was located on ALRO land.

Following a complaint, the court pointed out that the wind-farm operation did not directly benefit farmers nearby, which is one of the prime conditions for use of ALRO land, Sompong Inthong, secretary-general of the ALRO has said.

This resulted in the annulment of the company’s lease and has prompted investigations into 17 other wind farms located on ALRO land in Chaiyaphum and Nakhon Ratchasima.

Agriculture Minister Chatchai Salikulya said he ordered the investigations and he expected a report by early April.

The ALRO has already sent two teams to inspect two wind farms in Chaiyaphum and two others in Nakhon Ratchasima.

Investigators will check the wind-farm locations and their direct benefits to nearby farmers and operations. Contracts and requests for permits from ALRO will also be inspected.

Chatchai said that according to the initial probe into the ALRO’s resolution issued in 2010, the office had set the rent at Bt35,000 per rai per year, similar to the rental rates of state land set by other agencies, including the Treasury Department.

All 18 wind farms had leased around 620 rai (99 hectares) of ALRO land in the two provinces.

The office did not say whether it would launch a probe into whether the committee itself breached the ALRO’s land distribution conditions under ALRO law.

Chatchai said that although the Auditor-General’s Office had requested the ALRO submit a report by early April, the office was just doing its duty to ensure the optimal use of state property.

His move halted more than two years of protest against the 870-megawatt project.

However, Premier Prayut Chan-o-cha wants a one-year deadline for the EHIA – though the Cabinet has not yet given the green light. Should the impact assessment restart from the beginning, the start of operations at the plant are expected to be delayed until 2023-2024.

The bid to build the plant has already been won, but the contract cannot be signed until the EHIA process is completed.

The current EHIA has already been conducted and is only awaiting endorsement by the National Environment Board.

The PM promised that the project would be scrapped if it could not pass the EHIA, but the chief opposition group remains sceptical.

“We do not believe the verbal promise,” said the Save Andaman from Coal Network. “We will wait for the official statement, because we are concerned that there may be unacceptable terms within the official written order.”

Significant public doubt over the project remains, despite assurances from Prayut and other authorities.

Governments have been campaigning for years to convince citizens of the need for a large power plant to meet growing demand for electricity in the southern provinces.

But widespread scepticism remains over why the plant should be coal-fired and why it should be located in Krabi. Wouldn’t a focus on renewable energy be less damaging to the environment and the tourist industry, a vital source of national revenue?

Critics also claim the Krabi plant would benefit other areas while polluting the environment for locals. Among their concerns is that shipping in the coal by sea risks serious damage to marine life.

Others argue that the coal-fired plant is set to be built on the site of an old power plant fuelled by diesel and oil, also brought in by sea. New technology and “clean” coal would at least mean lower emissions than its predecessor.

Cost is a key factor in the government’s calculations, with electricity generated by coal-fired plants much cheaper than that harvested from renewable sources such as solar cells and wind turbines.

Yet Thai environmentalists are wary of the claims being made for “clean” coal, with many convinced the government is exaggerating its benefits in an effort to overcome public opposition.

That tension is typical of the debate on the Krabi plant so far. At every turn, the government has failed to gain public trust in the project, suspected of being economical with the truth and unaccountable to genuine concerns.

To overcome this impasse in what is a critical national issue, authorities must improve their communication by honestly demonstrating the pros and cons of the Krabi project so that the people can make an informed decision on how to meet their energy needs.

He said the department’s chief Thanya Netithammakul urged reformers to amend the old Act and related regulations, so the department can draw on income generated from entrance fees to support the cause.

Currently, there are no legal channels allowing it to draw on its earnings for this purpose, he said.

The department is considering this issue because four of its rangers in Mae Yom National Park were recently indicted over a clash with villagers during a logging-suppression operation in 2011, which resulted in two villagers getting killed and some others injured.

The rangers were released on bail after their bosses placed their positions as guarantee. They were indicted later and had to fight the case in court.

If a state official is indicted, his or her agency is not allowed to provide legal aid as per the Finance Ministry’s regulations, Chalermchai said.

This is the reason why the department has not been able to provide legal support to the indicted rangers, he added.

The four have had to hire lawyers on their own, and that has cost them at least Bt200,000, so far. Also they may have to end up paying up to a million baht in compensation.

A ranger is paid Bt7,000 to Bt9,000 or less per month, and since they are not fully employed they have no access to social security.

As a result, the department and some of its regional offices have been distributing internal memos seeking contributions from officials nationwide.

Chalermchai said this way the department and park officials can help one another as best as they can, he said.

Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha often blasts his spokesperson team for failing to maintain the distribution of information to his standard.

At his weekly press briefing last Tuesday, Prayut even lashed out at the team for “failing” to clearly explain the ongoing controversy of the Krabi coal-fired power plant.

Shortly after the blast, the team set up three chat rooms via Line.

PM Prayut is known as keen Line user, as he always communicates to his subordinates, reporters, and peers on the application.

Thailand was the world’s third largest market for Line users in 2016.

According to an informed source, it is Prayut’s desire to not only integrate information management among bureaucrat sectors, which are often seen as inactively responsive, but seize space from mass media.

Starting at 9.30am each day, the first room called “Issue Discussion Chat” will monitor media currents and decide which topics should be elaborated or countered, and by whom. Government Spokesman Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd, also acting director-general of the Government Public Relations Department, has both of his working groups in this room.

Then at 10.30am, conclusions will be forwarded to another room, “Issue Assignment Chat”, which involves the heads and spokespeople from various governmental agencies. In the group, they will hear selected topics, the topics’ sources, the agencies responsible for handling them, and expected deadlines delivered by the spokesperson team. They must also decide who will proceed with the orders.

Once the explanation jobs are done, the last room, “Issue Report Chat”, will be where agencies report their actions via a form bearing the names of the responsible officers and agencies, as well as an explanation of the respective issues, dates of action, and channels where explanations are made. Additional evidence must be sent via email two days after actions are taken.

The three rooms will be staffed by 316 people. These people are required to set up profile pictures only. “I don’t know” is a taboo response to an issue.

Whether agencies can perform in an expected timeline, whether they can get to the point when explaining issues, and how many channels the explanations are reported in will all be the evaluation criteria for each head officer, who may be shifted to another responsibility for failing to reach satisfactory outcomes.

It is now or never for civil servants in the communication game.