Thread: Thailand : PM to Decide on House Dissolution in 4 Months

From Prachatai.....


A Thin Line between Being

A Thin Line between Being “Opportunistic” and “Democratic”, Questions for the “Red Shirts” Party

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 16:34
by prachatai
Pipob Udomittipong


On Wednesday, May 11, 2011, throngs of supporters of the right to speak, including many so-called “Red Shirts”, will again lay siege to the Nag Lerng Police Station in downtown Bangkok. Another reminder of the packed room of the Faculty of Law, Thammasat University in late April, when a press conference was held by the Nitirat Group (นิติราษฎร์ : à¸[at]ำนาจสูงสุดขà¸[at]งประเทศนั้นเป็นภ‚à¸[at]งราษฎรทั้งหลาย) and a lecturer who was facing intimidation and imminent legal actions for his exercise of the right to freedom expression.

Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a history professor from Thammasat University, will report to police in Bangkok to answer accusations that he violated Section 112. He has made sharp criticisms over the misuse of the lèse majesté law (Section 112 of the Penal Code) and called for reform of the monarchy to make it more suitable to a changing democracy. After the arrest of Surachai Danwattananusorn, a core leader of Red Siam, a splinter group of the Red Shirt movement, and Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, a core leader of the 24th June Group which is spearheading the collection of 10,000 signatures for the amendment and repeal of Section 112, now the three persons with the initial S have fallen prey to the law which provides ridiculously high penalties (3-15 years of imprisonment), spells out dubious application and allows anyone to make the complaint.

Such use of the law is obviously an impediment to the right to freedom of expression, a very basic and indispensable right enshrined and made applicable by national and international instruments. The question is, when will the Pheu Thai Party which claims itself as “more democratic” than other political parties in Thailand come out to take a clear stand to uphold the right to freedom of expression, without which any system merely deserves to be called a mockery of democracy? The Party always claims to command the loyalty of the Red Shirts or members of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) who have paid dearly for the fight for democratic rights including the right to speak.

It is fine for the Pheu Thai Party to keep selling its policy gimmicks, the so-called “populist policies” to garner support from “Red” constituents. But to live up to its word as being a more democratic party, the Party has to make its stand clear as to whether it will support the right to differ and how it will address the law and the misuse of the law to serve vested political interests and trample on the democracy they claim to hold dear to their heart.

Previously, the Pheu Thai Party announced a “two-pronged” policy basically to separate the activism of the Red Shirt movement from their political campaign bracing for the forthcoming general elections. Without much scrutiny and with proper sanity, one can conclude that the distancing of the Party from the Red Shirt movement simply stems from their fear and concern over the misuse of the lèse majesté law to persecute dissenting voices. The Party’s stand was simply a response to the latest announcement by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) which threatened to press more charges against those committing breaches of Section 112. And of course, a natural response to the Royal Thai Army which has announced and already pressed charges against those accused of violating the law. Judging from the number having to stand accused in court on lèse majesté charges in the past few years and the sheer number of them affiliated or are known to be siding with the Red Shirts, it was to no one’s surprise that such a laughable and flawed “two-pronged” policy was brought out as a tactic for the Party to disown them and save themselves.

The traditional Thai term Prai connotes the very core identity of the Red Shirts. Such a commonly viewed derogative word has been proudly adopted by the Red Shirts from the core leaders down to those occupying the two main sites in Bangkok for almost three months last year. Equally echoed out loud is the term Ammart, or literally “courtiers” or “aristocrats”, which has been symbolically used by the Red Shirts to identify the powers that be, the “exalted ones”, they are vehemently opposed to.

But in terms of the battle against the Ammart, from Thai Rak Thai to its reincarnation, Pheu Thai, have they shown any distinctive difference to other political parties? The answer is perhaps “no”.

In late April this year, the House of Representatives (217 or 272 MPs) passed in three readings the Public Demonstrations Bill. For pundits, the law will be an important weapon for the government to suppress the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly. It will be a sharp blade that cuts deeply into the core freedoms that people in a democracy deserve. What have the 188 MPs of the Pheu Thai done to oppose this undemocratic bill? They simply pulled out of the Special Committee of the House of Representatives to review the draft of the Bill (which simply means they have no say whatever as far as amendments to the draft are concerned).

Have anyone heard from the Pheu Thai Party, officially or unofficially, if they have any clear and tangible policy to uphold the right to freedom of expression? Has the policy announced by Thaksin during the recent launch of the Pheu Thai’s candidates given any consideration to upholding the right which is so essential to keep checks and balances against the state power?

Clicking on the homepage of the Pheu Thai Party (พรรคเพื่à¸[at]ไทย), one will only find their gimmicks about increasing salaries of university graduate, increasing the minimum wage to 300 baht per day, a guaranteed price of 20,000 baht per ton for jasmine rice, etc.

It’s time for the Red Shirts, if they are the real supporters of the Pheu Thai Party, to hold the Party accountable and take them to task. And it is time for the Party to refrain from excusing itself by claiming that “we’ve got to win the elections first!” As an eligible voter, I won’t buy it and I shall not vote for any political party that present no concrete stand and solutions to untangle the misuse of this repressive law.

From Twitter today....

TAN_Network TAN News Network


INN: His Majesty the King has endorsed the House dissolution, effective tomorrow; general election on July 3

30 minutes ago

^ So, finally - it's now done.

To paraphrase a famous soccer-related quote*: "They think it's all started...... It has now".


* They think it's all over - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by SteveCM

To paraphrase a famous soccer-related quote*: "They think it's all started...... It has now".

I think to paraphase might to say "let the game begin"

I understand Yingluck has been officially announced as the PM candidate for the PT Party, on radio.

Nothing on the State Media yet, but that is being prepared with all the derogatory things they can think of to add while they are at it. May as well tinge the original announcement as much as possible right from the outset.

so we have a new "proxy" PM candidate,

I wonder how long she will last if PT wins,

Originally Posted by Butterfly

so we have a new "proxy" PM candidate,

I wonder how long she will last if PT wins,

Thailand has a proxy PM for Prem now so what is the difference?

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Originally Posted by Butterfly

so we have a new "proxy" PM candidate,

I wonder how long she will last if PT wins,

Thailand has a proxy PM for Prem now so what is the difference?

Correct you are Droversdog

Come to think of it, Mr. Thaksin was the last non-proxy PM

^ & ^^
Well said, both.

Toxin was his own prem, hence it had to be removed

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Toxin was his own prem, hence it had to be removed

Aside from the misspelling of the former Prime Minister's name, this is probably the very first time I agree with you on anything.

Originally Posted by SteveCM

Originally Posted by Octagon

Hard to analyse of course, because it relies on rumours and is generally illegal. There's this idea that Prem is the invisible hand and an immensely powerful behind the scenes controlling figure. Well, whilst he played his part in the 2006 coup, from what I've heard Prem has had very little power since then. I think Thaksin and the red leaders know this, but he's one of the few figures that can be legally named so they choose to target him. I don't know - just speculating here. It's just amazing when you speak to red shirts and they talk about how much power Prem has. I was talking to a semi-palace insider type and as far as he's concerned the idea that Prem is anywhere near being able to call the shots these days is a sad joke given his decline.

I'd appreciate your expanding on your thought that Prem has very little power - or let's call it significant influence - if you can. Do you have further support (beyond the view of the semi-palace insider) for the idea that Prem has very little? Thailand is nothing if not a very hierarchical society and Prem is seen as being very close to the apex of that hierarchy - and by extension seen as placed to express views that (IMO) are likely to be taken as reflecting those of - let's say - others. He continues to receive very high profile visits from top level government, bureaucracy and military figures on almost every conceivable occasion. Are these really just kind-hearted, charitably-minded courtesy calls on a respected old gentleman? If so, what of the frequent visits to address army units, the new cavalry division and so on?

I have other thoughts about the possibility of some accusations being made against Prem in a kind of proxy approach, but I think you'll understand that I can't expand on those here.

Sorry it took me so long to reply. I shouldn't have put it the way I did. Prem still does hold quite considerable sway, of course. What I should have said is power is more dispersed amongst the amaat than perhaps some would suggest. And as far as I know Prem isn't one of those who're doing too much anti-democratic maneuvering at present (I believe he may actually even support elections). Certain key figures like Thanpuyinig Jarungjit, ML Piyapat Bhirombhakdi and Piya Malakul are amongst those who don't want an election to go ahead and are against the idea of democracy in general. This group were rumoured to be pressuring Prayuth to stage a coup, and possibly contributing to the funding for the ongoing PAD protest this year.

^
Thanks. Good to have at least a little light shone into these shadows.

^ but, it's pretty much the same group isn't it.

Nice big pink 50 million baht motors at those polo meetings...

Difficult to comment - haven't been to a polo meet for some time..... and never in this country. Seems likely, though.....

^ you've never been to the Queen's Cup polo meet? Oh dear...

http://www.thai-polo-club.com/news_d...p?detail_id=46

Yep, everything that's wrong with this country is right there (sponsored by Mercedes Benz; oh, the irony!).

You'd expect TH to be strolling around somewhere in those pics...

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Yep, everything that's wrong with this country is right there

I'd go with "an awful lot" (pun intended) rather than "everything".....

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

...
You'd expect TH to be strolling around somewhere in those pics...

Nope, polo is not my thing, can't stand the horses. This is much more my style.



TH