A View of the Thai Political Scene, Crime and Democracy


With the understanding, nothing can resolve the current political problems in Thailand unless the causes of the problems, especially the prime causes are identified and dealt with.

According to Kepner and Tregos, any successful approach to resolving any problems must be carried out rationally.  The problems can be identified as the deviation from what should be or what should not be.  When what is deviated from the rationality of what should be or what should not be exisdted, then the problems can only re resolved when the causes of such deviations are accurately identified and the causes of the deviations are corrected.  If any one here on the blog is an expert in th KT’s approach to the problem solving system, please do check on my understanding here. (Note:  Kepner and Tregos are the experts in the US Government’s think Tank, Rand Corporation before they left to establish the KT an Associate Consultancy, specializing in problem solving)

With the above understanding, nothing can resolve the current political problems in Thailand unless the causes of the problems, especially the prime causes are identified and dealt with. 

So, PAD has been pointing out at the crimes committed by Thaksin Shinnawatra and members of the current and past governments during and before Thaksin’s tenure as Thai prime minister, some of which has alrady been trialed and decided by the court.  PAD has been pointing out the current and past Thai government’s misconducts of official duties in various cases including the pushed to amend laws to de-criminalize its leader behind the scene, now ousted former PM, Thaksin Shinnawatra.

The pro Thaksin’s side has been claiming the legitimacy of the current government due to its majority in the most recently elected house.  In a way the pro Thaksin fraction has been insinuating claims that being elected with the majority of the house, it is entitled to do whatever it wants to do, including, laundering criminal charges and election law violation of its own former and present leaders and party executives.

Thus, the attempt to put the criminal offenders under the justice of the law is in confrontation of the claims of democratic majority to legislate laws and propose constitutional amendments.

So, we have a stand-off here where the theoretical aspects are concerned.

During the past 6 months since the most recent uproar of the PAD and the counter acts by the pro Thaksin group (by any name they might called), The first open seminar on Democracy by PAD  at the Thammasart University was met by criminal attacks with sling shots, stone throws and threat with bodily harms or even murdr by pro Thaksin’s side.  In short, while PAD resorted to democratic freedom of speech approach to address the difference of opinions, the pro Thaksin seek to interrupt, discourage the opposition with threats of attacks, quite clearly a criminal act.

As PAD’s well organized demonstrations to protest and expose the misconducts of the nominee government of Thaksin, strictly under the provision of the democratic constitution, the pro Thaksin side including those in the police uniform and in the position of police commanders carried out several attacks against the unarmed PAd, causingPAD to establish its own guards.

If we check the records from multiple sources for verifiable evidences, cases of PAD’s repetitive uses of democratic means to protest the wrong doing of the goverment were always met by criminal action from proThaksin’s side, be it through the hooligans or through the police.

ProThaksin side has been using various legal and illegal means to destroy the public broadcasting systems being used by PAD, that is ASTV which has been broadcasting the activities along with the exposures of information of Thaksin and his side’s criminal acts.  They have even violently attacked PAD organized activities to tell people about such information. 

The question is, if proThaksin’s side insist so much about democracy, why then should it feel their justification to prevent the freedom of speech and the freedom to the accesses of information?  Otherwise, why should they try to interfere with PAD’s  information spreading to the uninformed public while the proThaksin side which claimed the democratic legitimacy has been deploying criminals and employing deadly attacks on PAD.

According to KT’s problem solving principle, we may be able to identified the following deviations from what should be and what should not be:

1) A democratic system should be a system that guarantees the people’s rights including their freedom of speech and their right to check on the accountability and integrity of those democratically elected representative and the executives of the cabinet including the prime minister.

The situation that has developed since Thaksin’s ousting has been attempts to seal off the means to a check on the past and present politician’s integrity.  This is the deviation from the principle of a democratic system. Thus, this is the problem.

2) Any political systems, democratic or not should assure the society of the enforcement of laws so no law violators would go unpunished.  In this case, the proThaksin’s side’s attempt to make whatever changes needed to laundry the already committed crimes by Thaksin and members of his government and nominee government would be a deviation from the principle of the law enforcement, be in democratic or otherwise.

Thus, unless these two prime causes of the problems identified as the deviation from what should be are addressed, no other ways can resolve the current problems in Thailand.

By Piset

Thai Talk


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s