Postbag: Suthep loses the plot

Postbag: Suthep loses the plot

While Suthep Thaugsuban's moral compass might be pointing true, I feel he has lost his way in a sea of rhetoric.

What started as an honest protest against a vile and unjust amnesty bill has been lost in a quagmire of half-baked ideas and policy on the hoof.

Everyone should step back, realign and do the right thing for your country and not yourself.

FANTIA


Mob rule must stop

As an expatriate Thai, I am saddened to see what is happening now in my country. It was not too long ago that a democratically elected government was deposed, for the umpteenth time, by a military coup. The present demonstrations, perhaps with the ultimate aim of widespread civil unrest to justify yet another coup, look all too familiar.

I do not belong to any political party and have no allegiance to any. But I blame what is happening now on the opposition led by the Democrats. They seem to be encouraged by the defeat of the recent amnesty bill and are now taking things into their own hands. They don't want to wait until this term of the government ends and try and win power at the next election. Do they realise the damage done to the country's economy and image? Does it make sense to occupy government departments in order to paralyse day-to-day functions which the people and the country depend on?

I am now over 80 years of age and have lived and worked outside Thailand (Vietnam, Japan, the UK, Taiwan, Malaysia and Singapore) for most of my working life. I return to my beloved country every few months to see my family members and to get a first-hand feel of the pulse of Thailand. In my long working life in the various countries I have lived in, I have also seen that only with stable conditions can a country develop. My place of residence for the past 30-plus years, Singapore, has been peaceful and stable since its independence in 1965. Yet in less than 50 years, this tiny island with no natural resources has developed into a prosperous and well-managed country.

How is this achieved? Simple _ a competent and honest government and the rule of law. Not rule of mobs.

EX-THAI BANKER


Be balanced, BBC

There has been much correspondence in your paper in recent days about freedom of the press and how we should welcome contrary opinions. I am in total agreement. However, I do expect news media to offer unbiased and impartial information providing objective, balanced coverage. I regret that this is not the case with the BBC, which in its coverage of the protests in Bangkok is repeating the one-sided, misinformed reporting it provided during the red-shirt occupation of Bangkok in 2010.

One BBC correspondent actually described the present conflict as a clash between the old, traditional Thailand and the new and modern. This is arrant nonsense. No attempt was made to analyse the roots of the conflict, nor was there any mention of the rampant corruption prevalent at all levels of government. Repeated invocations of the democratically elected government with no mention of the vote buying that has enabled first Thaksin Shinawatra and now his sister Yingluck to win election after election is simply a distortion of reality. Elections won by buying votes are no more democratic than the so-called free elections in one-party states.

I would suggest the BBC, which at the same time is so anxious to support the protest movement in Ukraine, should reconsider its pro-government stance in Thailand and offer more balanced and objective coverage.

EDWARD B DUHIGG


This is no class struggle

Western press and television even now do not seem to realise what is happening in Thailand. They were misled in 2010 and continue to fail in grasping the truth of events.

Put concisely, but not oversimplifying in this struggle there are essentially two camps: the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), those people in red shirts supporting the government and others opposing the present corrupt government.

The UDD maintain they are fighting for democracy against dictatorship, but the reverse is true. The latter, a cross-section of society, are fighting to establish true democracy in their country. They realise there is more to democracy than having a vote, as a vote alone gives licence to dictatorship and does not guarantee democratic governance.

The situation is not a class struggle as perceived by the media overseas, but a struggle between bigotry and enlightenment. Democracy, once established, would offer justice and equality of opportunity for all, give meaning to the vote and relegate corruption and coups to history.

J C WILCOX


Here's the way forward

Section 87 of Thailand's 2007 constitution is most intriguing. It places unusual obligations on public bodies to respond to the people, just as has been recently suggested as a solution to Thailand's current political crisis. It mandates a public participation policy. Under this policy, the state shall:

(1) encourage public participation in the determination of public policy and the making of economic and social development plan both in the national and local level;

(2) encourage and support public participation to make decisions on politics and the making of economic and social development plans and the provision of public services;

(3) encourage and support public participation in the examination of the exercise of state power at all levels in the form of a profession or occupation organisation or other forms;

What I take to be very important in these constitutional provisions is placing these responsibilities on the state. Such a requirement brings within its command all offices of public trust and all those who hold positions of public trust, including the monarchy, the national assembly, national and local civil servants, the military and police, the courts, and independent bodies such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission, the Election Commission and the prosecutor.

The second important requirement of this section is that participation by the public is to be simultaneous with decision-making by constituted officials such as the prime minister and the national assembly.

Section 87 can be put immediately into effect as a solution to the current problem of finding a constitutional and legal way to resolve the conflict between the government and a large protest movement voicing the concerns of many people who are examining the exercise of state power and economic and social development plans for the country.

People's delegates can be appointed to advise Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and her cabinet. To prepare for new elections, the prime minister can immediately dissolve the House and convert her government into an interim administration. To ensure the interim administration will not abuse its power or illegitimately manipulate new elections in its favour, people's delegates would be empowered to veto if necessary any act of the prime minister and the cabinet.

For example, two senior statesmen with the stature and dignity of former prime minister Anand Panyarachun could be authorised to advise and monitor decisions of Prime Minister Yingluck until a newly elected government is inaugurated. They would have the right to consider and veto all decisions coming from the Prime Minister's Office. They would be authorised to sit in on all meetings where the prime minister is present and be informed of her official phone calls and communications.

Senior leaders of the Thai Chamber of Commerce could be selected to similarly monitor the decisions of the minister of commerce and the rice scheme; senior bankers or a former finance minister to supervise the minister of finance. And so on for each ministry.

The authorisation of these people's delegates can be simply and immediately arranged by contract, making reference to Section 87. The prime minister and each of her ministers would enter into contracts containing their personal commitment to refer matters to, listen to, and follow any veto by, the named advisers.

People's delegates would be chosen by a small convention of the organisations leading the protest. Each delegate would be selected by an 80% majority of those credentialled to participate in the convention.

STEPHEN B YOUNG
Former Assistant Dean, Harvard Law School and former Dean and Professor of Law, Hamline University School of Law


Where's the democracy?

I am stunned that Guy Baker (PostBag, Dec 5) would call those demonstrations in Bangkok ''Democracy at work''. A minority of the people calling for the overthrow of a democratically elected government is not democracy in any sense of the word.

He also seems unaware that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have condemned the fact that people in Thailand can be thrown in jail without bail simply for being accused of lese majeste.

ERIC BAHRT


It's referendum time!

Putting aside the argument that neither side in Thailand's current political conflict are interested in much more than their own benefit, it seems to me that the discussion has been reduced to whether Thailand is ready or not for ''democracy''. The options put forward appear to be whether to continue with ''democracy'' or to suspend it.

This misses a vital point. When people talk about democracy with regard to Thailand, and many other countries, they are actually talking about ''representative democracy''.

In a representative democracy such as Thailand, politicians are elected every four years or so, and then essentially can do whatever they like for those four years, even things that directly contravene the policies on which they were elected, or things that are clearly wrong.

In reality, in a representative democracy, you are not actually electing accountable representatives, you are instead electing autonomous temporary leaders and simply gambling on whether or not they are the person you thought they were, and whether or not they will keep their promises. More often than not, one or both of these proves not to be the case. In Thailand, and in many other countries, representative democracy consistently fails the people.

There is another form of democracy that no one talks about, or that is casually dismissed as unworkable. That is ''direct democracy''. Clearly, every citizen voting in a referendum on every matter is unworkable, so some combination or direct and representative democracy is, in my humble opinion, the answer.

Briefly, representatives are elected as normal and the day to day running of the country is also as normal, but any legislation can be challenged and sent to full referendum should a certain percentage of the voters oppose it _ through petition or whatever. Politicians themselves can also be subject to censure at any time, again if a certain percentage of the population demands it and a full referendum then confirms it. Changes to the constitution, and various other extremely important legislative actions should always require a referendum.

The system of direct democracy, or some representative-direct democracy hybrid, is not going to be perfect, but it must be better than the inherent potential for abuse of a fully representative democratic system, and certainly better than a return to the dark ages of autocracy.

STEVE TODD


Double standards

Call it double standards, hypocrisy, dereliction of duty or whatever you like. Capo chief Surapong Tovichakchaikul on Thursday said he has asked the police to issue arrest warrants for anyone who conspires with PDRC leader Suthep Thaugsuban, saying he is a rebel with an arrest warrant out for him for for insurrection. He ruled out talks between Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Mr Suthep. Anyone talking to Mr Suthep would be found guilty of talking to a rebel. He has to strictly uphold the law.

Since no court has handed down a ruling on whether Mr Suthep is guilty, compare this to the case of former PM Thaksin Shinawatra, who has been found guilty by a court and is now on the run. If Mr Surapong really wants to uphold the law strictly, he must order the police to arrest most Pheu Thai MPs and Ms Yingluck for talking to Thaksin. Mr Surapong himself should face an arrest warrant for trying to issue a red passport for a criminal in exile.

ARAM BOY


CONTACT: BANGKOK POST BUILDING
136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110
Fax: +02 6164000 email:
postbag@bangkokpost.co.th

All letter writers must provide full name and address.

All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (10)