Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 2020-2021年泰國青年領導的社會運動及其對君主制下的言論自由之影響
The 2020-2021 Thai Youth-led Movement and Its Influence on Freedom of Expression Regarding the Monarchy作者 陳恩
Silsawang, Sataphat貢獻者 陳健民
Chan, Kin-Man
陳恩
Sataphat Silsawang關鍵詞 泰國青年運動
言論自由
第112條
冒犯君主罪
君主制改革
泰國政治
框架理論
Thai Youth-Led Movement
Freedom of Expression
Section 112
Lèse-Majesté Law
Monarchy Reform
Thai Politics
Framing Theory日期 2025 上傳時間 1-Sep-2025 15:18:57 (UTC+8) 摘要 2020–2021 年的泰國青年運動成為泰國當代政治史上的重要轉折點，大規模抗議活動從最初要求憲法改革和政府問責，逐漸發展為前所未有的君主制改革呼聲，直接挑戰了圍繞《刑法》第112條（冒犯君主罪）所形成的社會禁忌。該運動在社交媒體與去中心化網絡的推動下，放大了替代性敘事，動員了多元社會群體，並重塑了公共話語。本研究運用 Benford 與 Snow 的框架理論，探討行動者如何透過策略性框架挑戰主導的皇室敘事並促進公共參與。採用混合研究方法，本研究結合社交媒體分析、訪談與內容分析，結果顯示，儘管該運動未能實現直接的政治或法律改革，但成功拓展了公共辯論的邊界，削弱了圍繞君主制的長期沉默，並激發了新一代對言論自由的開放態度。最終，研究指出該運動已為泰國社會在權力、異議與民主價值的協商中帶來長遠的變革契機。
The 2020–2021 Thai Youth-led Movement marked a significant turning point in Thailand’s modern political history, as mass protests evolved from demands for constitutional reform to unprecedented calls for monarchy reform, directly challenging the taboo surrounding Section 112 of the Criminal Code. Driven by social media and decentralized networks, the Movement amplified alternative narratives, mobilized diverse social groups, and reshaped public discourse. This study applies Benford and Snow’s framing theory to examine how activists strategically framed their messages to challenge dominant royalist narratives and foster public engagement. Using a mixed-methods approach, combining social media analysis with interviews and content analysis, the research demonstrates that although the movement did not achieve immediate political or legal reforms, it successfully broadened the scope of public debate, eroded traditional silences around the monarchy, and inspired a generational shift toward greater openness in political dialogue. Ultimately, the findings suggest that the Movement has set the stage for long-term transformations in how Thai society negotiates power, dissent, and democratic values.參考文獻 Al Jazeera. (2020, October 26). Thai protesters march on German embassy to seek probe of king. Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/10/26/thai-parliament-opens-to-discuss-pro-democracy-protests Amnesty International Thailand. (2024, August 7). Thailand: Dissolution of MFP an ‘untenable decision’ that stifles human rights. Amnesty International. Baker, C. (2000). Thailand's Assembly of the Poor: Background, drama, reaction. South East Asia Research, 8(1), 5–29. Bangkok Post. (2020, August 2). Majority agree with youth demonstrations: Poll. Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1961375/majority-agree-with-youth-demonstrations-poll Bangkok Post. (2024, February 9). Committee begins amnesty bill study (A. Sattaburuth, Reporter). Bangkok Post. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611 BBC Thai. (2020, August 25). Royalist Marketplace: Digital Economy Ministry files complaint against Pavin Chachavalpongpun under the Computer Crime Act [In Thai]. BBC Thai. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-53832347 BBC. (2020, September 16). The student daring to challenge Thailand's monarchy. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54182002 BBC Thai. (2020, October 18). Mob on October 18: a new phenomenon in flash mobs “scattered stars” and “leaderless” as Thais rise up [In Thai]. BBC Thai. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-54592825 BBC Thai. (2023, December 13). How is the global economic crisis affecting Thailand? BBC Thai. Retrieved July 9, 2024, from https://www.bbc.com/thai/articles/ce5kkp677x5o Boonrueang, S. (2021). Dissolution of political parties: Disqualification of political rights of citizens. Journal of Buddhistic Sociology, 6(4), 124–140. Bunbongkarn, S. (1993, February). Thailand in 1992: In search of a democratic order. Asian Survey, 33(2), 218–223. Copeland, M. (1993). Contested nationalism and the 1932 overthrow of the absolute monarchy in Siam. Freedom House. (2015). Freedom in the World 2015. Freedom House. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2015%201 Haberkorn, T. (2021). Under and beyond the law: Monarchy, violence, and history in Thailand. Politics & Society, 49(3), 311–336. Horatanakun, A. (2023). The network origin of Thailand’s youth movement. Democratization, 31(3), 531–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2023.2277293 ILaw. (2023). An analysis of five problems in Section 112: Urging political parties to debate and curb problematic court interpretations. iLaw. Retrieved July 9, 2024, from https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/10441 Jackson, P. A. (2017). A grateful son, a military king: Thai media accounts of the accession of Rama X to the throne. Perspective, 26, 1–7. Kamutphitsamai, A. (1997). The 1932 rebellion: A coup for democracy and the new military ideology. Amarin Printing. Klein, J. R. (1998). The Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, 1997: A blueprint for participatory democracy. The Asia Foundation. Kongkirati, P. (2006). Counter-movements in democratic transition: Thai right-wing movements after the 1973 popular uprising. Asian Review, 19(1), 101–134. Lertchoosakul, K. (2022). The rise and dynamics of the 2020 youth movement in Thailand. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung. Leyland, P. (2010). The struggle for freedom of expression in Thailand: Media moguls, the king, citizen politics and the law. Journal of Media Law, 2(1), 115–137. Maisrikod, S. (1993). Thailand 1992: Repression and return of democracy. In Southeast Asian Affairs (pp. 327–349). ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute. McCargo, D. (2002). Democracy under stress in Thaksin's Thailand. Journal of Democracy, 13(4), 112–126. McCargo, D. (2021). Disruptors’ dilemma? Thailand’s 2020 Gen Z protests. Critical Asian Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2021.1876522 Mead, K. K. (2004). The rise and decline of Thai absolutism. Taylor & Francis. MOB DATA THAILAND. (n.d.). Report on the situation of public assembly in Thailand. https://www.mobdatathailand.org/ OHCHR. (n.d.). Ratification status for Thailand. UN Treaty Body Database. https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Treaty.aspx?CountryID=172&Lang=EN Pintoptaeng, P. (1998). Politics on the street: 99 days of the Assembly of Poor. Krirk University. Prachatai English. (2023, April 24). Thairath election debate 2023: Where the parties stand on Section 112. Prachatai English. https://prachataienglish.com/node/10320 Prizzia, R. (2019). Thailand in transition: The role of oppositional forces. University of Hawaii Press. Reuters. (2020, November 9). Thai protesters march to palace to demand royal reforms. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-thailand-protests-idUKKBN27O0AU/ Reuters. (2023, September 26). Lawyer who called for Thai monarchy reforms sentenced to 4 years for royal insults. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/activist-who-called-thai-monarchy-reforms-sentenced-four-years-royal-insults-2023-09-26/ Section 112: The legacy from the era of absolute monarchy to post–October 6 events. (2021, March 3). iLaw. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/9933 Sinpeng, A. (2021). Hashtag activism: Social media and the #FreeYouth protests in Thailand. Critical Asian Studies, 53(2), 192–205. Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2018). Conservative civil society in Thailand. In The Mobilization of Conservative Civil Society (pp. 28–32). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2021). From repression to revolt: Thailand's 2020 protests and the regional implications. Hamburg: German Institute for Global and Area Studies (GIGA) – Leibniz-Institut für Globale und Regionale Studien. Sombatpoonsiri, J., & Kri-aksorn, T. (2021). Taking back civic space: Nonviolent protests and pushbacks against autocratic restrictions in Thailand. Protest, 1, 80–108. Streckfuss, D. (2014). Freedom and silencing under the neo-absolutist monarchy regime in Thailand, 2006–2011. In P. Chachavalpongpun (Ed.), “Good Coup” Gone Bad: Thailand’s political developments since Thaksin’s downfall (pp. 109–138). ISEAS Publishing. Thabchumpon, N. (2016). Contending political networks: A study of the “Yellow Shirts” and “Red Shirts” in Thailand’s politics. Southeast Asian Studies, 5(1), 99–113. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. (2021). Anon's testimony in the “Harry Potter” case after facing additional Section 112 charge: Reaffirming the wish to see the monarchy exist with dignity. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. https://tlhr2014.com/archives/26414 Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. (2023). Statistics on Article 112 cases with court verdicts [In Thai]. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. https://tlhr2014.com/archives/46268 Ungpakorn, G. J. (2006). The impact of the Thai ‘Sixties’ on the people’s movement today. Inter‐Asia Cultural Studies, 7(4), 570–588. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649370600982925 Winichakul, T. (1995, March). The changing landscape of the past: New histories in Thailand since 197. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 26(1), 99–120. Winichakul, T. (2014). The monarchy and anti-monarchy: Two elephants in the room of Thai politics and the state of denial. In P. Chachavalpongpun (Ed.), “Good Coup” Gone Bad: Thailand’s political developments since Thaksin’s downfall (pp. 79–108). Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Wu, T. (2013). Thailand’s struggle for freedom of expression in cyberspace. e-International Relations. Thai Parliament. (2017). Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2017. https://web.parliament.go.th/assets/portals/61/filenewspar/61_1059_file.pdf 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
國際研究英語碩士學位學程(IMPIS)
111862020資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111862020 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 陳健民 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chan, Kin-Man en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 陳恩 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Sataphat Silsawang en_US dc.creator (作者) 陳恩 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Silsawang, Sataphat en_US dc.date (日期) 2025 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2025 15:18:57 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2025 15:18:57 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2025 15:18:57 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0111862020 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/159139 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國際研究英語碩士學位學程(IMPIS) zh_TW dc.description (描述) 111862020 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 2020–2021 年的泰國青年運動成為泰國當代政治史上的重要轉折點，大規模抗議活動從最初要求憲法改革和政府問責，逐漸發展為前所未有的君主制改革呼聲，直接挑戰了圍繞《刑法》第112條（冒犯君主罪）所形成的社會禁忌。該運動在社交媒體與去中心化網絡的推動下，放大了替代性敘事，動員了多元社會群體，並重塑了公共話語。本研究運用 Benford 與 Snow 的框架理論，探討行動者如何透過策略性框架挑戰主導的皇室敘事並促進公共參與。採用混合研究方法，本研究結合社交媒體分析、訪談與內容分析，結果顯示，儘管該運動未能實現直接的政治或法律改革，但成功拓展了公共辯論的邊界，削弱了圍繞君主制的長期沉默，並激發了新一代對言論自由的開放態度。最終，研究指出該運動已為泰國社會在權力、異議與民主價值的協商中帶來長遠的變革契機。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) The 2020–2021 Thai Youth-led Movement marked a significant turning point in Thailand’s modern political history, as mass protests evolved from demands for constitutional reform to unprecedented calls for monarchy reform, directly challenging the taboo surrounding Section 112 of the Criminal Code. Driven by social media and decentralized networks, the Movement amplified alternative narratives, mobilized diverse social groups, and reshaped public discourse. This study applies Benford and Snow’s framing theory to examine how activists strategically framed their messages to challenge dominant royalist narratives and foster public engagement. Using a mixed-methods approach, combining social media analysis with interviews and content analysis, the research demonstrates that although the movement did not achieve immediate political or legal reforms, it successfully broadened the scope of public debate, eroded traditional silences around the monarchy, and inspired a generational shift toward greater openness in political dialogue. Ultimately, the findings suggest that the Movement has set the stage for long-term transformations in how Thai society negotiates power, dissent, and democratic values. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgment 2 Chapter 1: Introduction 7 1.1 Research Background 7 1.2 Research Question 8 1.3 Literature Review 10 1.4 Theoretical Framework 20 1.5 Research Method 21 Chapter 2: Freedom of Expression Regarding the Monarchy Before the Movement 25 2.1 Freedom of Expression During the Absolute Monarchy: The Tension Between Modernization and Suppression of Dissent 25 2.2 Freedom of Expression After the Siamese Revolution in 1932 32 2.3 Freedom of Expression After the Military Dictatorship Until the Events of October 6, 1976 34 2.4 Freedom of Expression During Contemporary Politics 38 2.5 Current Legal Framework Regarding the Freedom of Expression 41 2.6 Summary of the Chapter 44 Chapter 3: The 2020–2021 Movement, Its Strategy, Agenda, and the Demand Regarding Freedom of Expression 46 3.1 Context Before and After the Movement Until the Emergence of the Demand 46 3.2 Demands and Protests Regarding Freedom of Expression 50 3.3 Social Media as a Catalyst for Mobilization 56 3.4 Summary of the Chapter 59 Chapter 4: Reconfiguring Public Discourse on Freedom of Expression Regarding the Monarchy Post-Movement 64 4.1 Analysing Public Awareness: Insights from Activists and CSOs 65 4.2 Digital Public Discourse: Before vs. After the Movement 71 4.3 Analysing Political Discourse: Institutional Echoes and Resistance 75 4.4 Summary of the Chapter 80 Chapter 5: Conclusion 82 5.1 Revisiting the Research Questions 82 5.2 Competing Theories and Limitations of the Study 89 5.3 The Future of Freedom of Expression and Public Discourse 92 5.4 Final Reflection and Concluding Remarks 95 Bibliography 97 Appendix 102 zh_TW dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111862020 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 泰國青年運動 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 言論自由 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 第112條 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 冒犯君主罪 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 君主制改革 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 泰國政治 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 框架理論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Thai Youth-Led Movement en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Freedom of Expression en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Section 112 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Lèse-Majesté Law en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Monarchy Reform en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Thai Politics en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Framing Theory en_US dc.title (題名) 2020-2021年泰國青年領導的社會運動及其對君主制下的言論自由之影響 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The 2020-2021 Thai Youth-led Movement and Its Influence on Freedom of Expression Regarding the Monarchy en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Al Jazeera. (2020, October 26). Thai protesters march on German embassy to seek probe of king. Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/10/26/thai-parliament-opens-to-discuss-pro-democracy-protests Amnesty International Thailand. (2024, August 7). Thailand: Dissolution of MFP an ‘untenable decision’ that stifles human rights. Amnesty International. Baker, C. (2000). Thailand's Assembly of the Poor: Background, drama, reaction. South East Asia Research, 8(1), 5–29. Bangkok Post. (2020, August 2). Majority agree with youth demonstrations: Poll. Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1961375/majority-agree-with-youth-demonstrations-poll Bangkok Post. (2024, February 9). Committee begins amnesty bill study (A. Sattaburuth, Reporter). Bangkok Post. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611 BBC Thai. (2020, August 25). Royalist Marketplace: Digital Economy Ministry files complaint against Pavin Chachavalpongpun under the Computer Crime Act [In Thai]. BBC Thai. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-53832347 BBC. (2020, September 16). The student daring to challenge Thailand's monarchy. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54182002 BBC Thai. (2020, October 18). Mob on October 18: a new phenomenon in flash mobs “scattered stars” and “leaderless” as Thais rise up [In Thai]. BBC Thai. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-54592825 BBC Thai. (2023, December 13). How is the global economic crisis affecting Thailand? BBC Thai. Retrieved July 9, 2024, from https://www.bbc.com/thai/articles/ce5kkp677x5o Boonrueang, S. (2021). Dissolution of political parties: Disqualification of political rights of citizens. Journal of Buddhistic Sociology, 6(4), 124–140. Bunbongkarn, S. (1993, February). Thailand in 1992: In search of a democratic order. Asian Survey, 33(2), 218–223. Copeland, M. (1993). Contested nationalism and the 1932 overthrow of the absolute monarchy in Siam. Freedom House. (2015). Freedom in the World 2015. Freedom House. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2015%201 Haberkorn, T. (2021). Under and beyond the law: Monarchy, violence, and history in Thailand. Politics & Society, 49(3), 311–336. Horatanakun, A. (2023). The network origin of Thailand’s youth movement. Democratization, 31(3), 531–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2023.2277293 ILaw. (2023). An analysis of five problems in Section 112: Urging political parties to debate and curb problematic court interpretations. iLaw. Retrieved July 9, 2024, from https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/10441 Jackson, P. A. (2017). A grateful son, a military king: Thai media accounts of the accession of Rama X to the throne. Perspective, 26, 1–7. Kamutphitsamai, A. (1997). The 1932 rebellion: A coup for democracy and the new military ideology. Amarin Printing. Klein, J. R. (1998). The Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, 1997: A blueprint for participatory democracy. The Asia Foundation. Kongkirati, P. (2006). Counter-movements in democratic transition: Thai right-wing movements after the 1973 popular uprising. Asian Review, 19(1), 101–134. Lertchoosakul, K. (2022). The rise and dynamics of the 2020 youth movement in Thailand. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung. Leyland, P. (2010). The struggle for freedom of expression in Thailand: Media moguls, the king, citizen politics and the law. Journal of Media Law, 2(1), 115–137. Maisrikod, S. (1993). Thailand 1992: Repression and return of democracy. In Southeast Asian Affairs (pp. 327–349). ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute. McCargo, D. (2002). Democracy under stress in Thaksin's Thailand. Journal of Democracy, 13(4), 112–126. McCargo, D. (2021). Disruptors’ dilemma? Thailand’s 2020 Gen Z protests. Critical Asian Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2021.1876522 Mead, K. K. (2004). The rise and decline of Thai absolutism. Taylor & Francis. MOB DATA THAILAND. (n.d.). Report on the situation of public assembly in Thailand. https://www.mobdatathailand.org/ OHCHR. (n.d.). Ratification status for Thailand. UN Treaty Body Database. https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Treaty.aspx?CountryID=172&Lang=EN Pintoptaeng, P. (1998). Politics on the street: 99 days of the Assembly of Poor. Krirk University. Prachatai English. (2023, April 24). Thairath election debate 2023: Where the parties stand on Section 112. Prachatai English. https://prachataienglish.com/node/10320 Prizzia, R. (2019). Thailand in transition: The role of oppositional forces. University of Hawaii Press. Reuters. (2020, November 9). Thai protesters march to palace to demand royal reforms. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-thailand-protests-idUKKBN27O0AU/ Reuters. (2023, September 26). Lawyer who called for Thai monarchy reforms sentenced to 4 years for royal insults. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/activist-who-called-thai-monarchy-reforms-sentenced-four-years-royal-insults-2023-09-26/ Section 112: The legacy from the era of absolute monarchy to post–October 6 events. (2021, March 3). iLaw. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/9933 Sinpeng, A. (2021). Hashtag activism: Social media and the #FreeYouth protests in Thailand. Critical Asian Studies, 53(2), 192–205. Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2018). Conservative civil society in Thailand. In The Mobilization of Conservative Civil Society (pp. 28–32). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2021). From repression to revolt: Thailand's 2020 protests and the regional implications. Hamburg: German Institute for Global and Area Studies (GIGA) – Leibniz-Institut für Globale und Regionale Studien. Sombatpoonsiri, J., & Kri-aksorn, T. (2021). Taking back civic space: Nonviolent protests and pushbacks against autocratic restrictions in Thailand. Protest, 1, 80–108. Streckfuss, D. (2014). Freedom and silencing under the neo-absolutist monarchy regime in Thailand, 2006–2011. In P. Chachavalpongpun (Ed.), “Good Coup” Gone Bad: Thailand’s political developments since Thaksin’s downfall (pp. 109–138). ISEAS Publishing. Thabchumpon, N. (2016). Contending political networks: A study of the “Yellow Shirts” and “Red Shirts” in Thailand’s politics. Southeast Asian Studies, 5(1), 99–113. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. (2021). Anon's testimony in the “Harry Potter” case after facing additional Section 112 charge: Reaffirming the wish to see the monarchy exist with dignity. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. https://tlhr2014.com/archives/26414 Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. (2023). Statistics on Article 112 cases with court verdicts [In Thai]. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights. https://tlhr2014.com/archives/46268 Ungpakorn, G. J. (2006). The impact of the Thai ‘Sixties’ on the people’s movement today. Inter‐Asia Cultural Studies, 7(4), 570–588. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649370600982925 Winichakul, T. (1995, March). The changing landscape of the past: New histories in Thailand since 197. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 26(1), 99–120. Winichakul, T. (2014). The monarchy and anti-monarchy: Two elephants in the room of Thai politics and the state of denial. In P. Chachavalpongpun (Ed.), “Good Coup” Gone Bad: Thailand’s political developments since Thaksin’s downfall (pp. 79–108). Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Wu, T. (2013). Thailand’s struggle for freedom of expression in cyberspace. e-International Relations. Thai Parliament. (2017). Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2017. https://web.parliament.go.th/assets/portals/61/filenewspar/61_1059_file.pdf zh_TW
