THE NATIONAL Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) committee on media reform will Monday consider removing the proposed licensing requirement for media professionals from its draft media regulation bill due to strong industry opposition and concerns that such a requirement could lead to more problems, chairman ACM Kanit Suwannet said.

However, the proposed 15-person national media council will still include two representatives from the government to ensure smooth cooperation between the public and private sector on media affairs, he said, adding that the two slots would be phased out in six years after two fixed terms of three years each are completed.

The Thai Journalists Association (TJA) plans to submit a formal letter to the NRSA vice president Alongkorn Ponlaboot Monday asking for the proposed reform draft to be withdrawn.

The licensing requirement and government representation on the national media council have become hot issues for the government as it faces strong criticism for attempting to control the media sector

According to Kanit, the government would not be able to interfere in media affairs or curb media freedom because the media sector would have up to seven representatives on the 15-member council, while the NRSA committee had agreed to consider removing the controversial licensing requirement as a compromise with opponents of the bill.

In addition, he said, government representatives on the media council were necessary to ensure that both public and private sectors work together to reform the media sector, but the national media council would in the end have only 13 members after two government slots are removed after six years.

At this stage, the permanent secretaries of the PM’s Office and Ministry of Culture are tipped to be the government’s representatives on the national media council.

However, Chaovarong Limpatama-panee, president of the National Press Council of Thailand (NPCT), said earlier he would not join a committee tasked with preparing the establishment of the new national media council as suggested by the NRSA.

NPCT spokesman Pratchaya-chai Datuyawat said the government would still be able to interfere in media affairs due to the proposed structure of the new national media council, even though the licensing requirement might be suspended at this stage. He said other professional bodies such as Medical Council or the Lawyers’ Council had no government representatives on their board.

Yesterday, reporters covering Parliament also urged the NRSA to withdraw the draft media regulation bill, saying in a statement: “It is unacceptable to let the state take part in favouring or penalising mass media and social media practitioners as stipulated in the draft bill.”

Journalists and members of the public have raised concerns that such a mechanism would give authorities undue control over the media, which should be independent given their role in scrutinising various authorities.

“Any law related to the media should be designed to protect rights and freedom of the media practitioners to create a mechanism for freedom of the press on the basis of public interest,” they said in the statement.

Media bodies have also threatened to protest on World Press Freedom Day this Wednesday and have vowed to fight it at every stage of the legislation.

Since last week, many media professionals have framed their social networking profile photos with a picture of pigeons breaking free from a chain, with the motto: “Stop licensing the media. Stop controlling the people.”

They also took to change.org calling for the NRSA to halt deliberations. More than 400 people have signed the online petition.

The bill would set a punishment for media practising without a licence at three years imprisonment and a fine of up to Bt60,000.

Veteran journalist Suthichai Yoon wrote in his column “Black Coffee” in Krungthep Turakij, The Nation’s sister newspaper, that reporting under such conditions would make it impossible for the media to be straightforward or question abuses of power.

Politicians would definitely be able to interfere through the professional council directly or indirectly, he wrote.

In addition, Suthichai pointed out the licence reflected the line of thought of authoritarianism that aims to control freedom of expression.

“Press freedom is people’s freedom. If one wants to chain the media, then he wants to cage the people’s thoughts,” the journalist wrote.

Pramed Lekpetch, TJA president, said the media had no problem with having a professional council. However, such a mechanism should rely on self-regulation with no state interference.

“This is not media reform. It is media control and opens they way for the state to interfere with us,” Pramed said.

What the media had to do was warn the people of the dangers that the bill would make scrutiny impossible amid a plague of corruption, Pramed said. And the media must send the message to the powers-that-be that reforms, not a control mechanism, were necessary.

Thepchai Yong, president of the Thai Broadcast Journalists Association, said the bill would have a chilling effect on press freedom as the media would be vulnerable to political interference. He said the proposed media ethics council, staffed partly with top bureaucrats and given vast powers, could be easily abused. “If the military junta allows this bill to become law, it will essentially hand the politicians coming to power in the future a legal tool to control the media,” he said.

Thepchai appealed to the NRSA to seriously ponder the consequences. “It would deal a big blow not only to press freedom but also to Thai people’s freedom of expression,” he said.