Thaksin and Suthep straddle the thin line between bold and dumb

By Tulsathit Taptim 
The Nation

 

 

We have seen two acts of political insanity over the past few days. The question is which one of them – Suthep Thaugsuban publicly announcing he was going back on his words, or Thaksin Shinawatra reminding everyone that he remains the de facto supreme leader of the Pheu Thai Party – is the smarter of the two.
 

Both moves are extremely risky, meaning either or both could backfire very easily. The fact that Suthep has attracted a torrent of abuse whereas Pheu Thai seems unaffected, does not necessarily mean the former move is dumber.

 

For starters, Suthep has got the hard part over with, having faced the thunderous boos and chants of “Liar! Liar!”. It can’t get much worse. The party he is supposed to lead is a new one, hence it has no stake whatsoever in terms of parliamentary seats. It is starting with zero, so any number of seats – be it 10 or 50 – is a bonus.

 

Thaksin, on the other hand, has reportedly conducted at least one meeting with Pheu Thai politicians and has seen his picture plastered on newspaper front pages and website homepages, all without much of a fuss.

 

While Suthep has endured an uproar of contempt, Thaksin has enjoyed a relative calm. But it could be the calm before the storm, since he may have unwittingly put Pheu Thai in political and even legal jeopardy.

 

Unlike Suthep’s party, Pheu Thai has everything to lose. It controlled a large number of parliamentary seats before the 2014 coup. The party could have repeated that feat without Thaksin’s name even being mentioned.

 

In other words, while Suthep made his move out of necessity, since the new party needed his name to market itself, Thaksin was taking unnecessary risks.

 

Thaksin’s name can be a blessing or it can be a curse. That was evident during the last Bangkok gubernatorial election a few years ago. An incumbent Democrat governor had a low rating and a Pheu Thai candidate was all poised to oust him in that poll. Until two days before the election, that is, when the Democrat Party smartly used Thaksin’s name to scare Bangkok voters and push them to re-elect the much-maligned incumbent in a landslide.

 

Some may argue that since opponents can “demonise” Thaksin any time, as his control of Pheu Thai is no secret, whatever he does as far as the party is concerned should be irrelevant. This argument, however, fails to take into account one big, new factor.

 

In the past, Thaksin could name a party leader, call a press conference in Dubai saying he had Pheu Thai wrapped around his finger, and nobody could do anything legally about it. Not any more. The new Constitution is clear in its ban on “outsiders” having control over a political party. A violation could lead to dissolution of a party.

 

The constitutional rule was of course written with Thaksin in mind. But debate on a “conspiracy” against him, or on the nobility or baseness of the man is getting nowhere, so it’s better to focus this analysis on legal points only. Legally speaking, it’s extremely unwise for  both Pheu Thai and Thaksin to boast of connections that can be interpreted as him being in control.

 

This new constitutional rule must have been the reason why Suthep had to make his role clear regarding the new party. Being a member of this new party takes away the legal risks, as he can influence it in any way he wants. Promoting his connection with the party is the risk he has to take, and it is worth taking.

 

Legally safe

 

When Suthep led massive street protests against the Yingluck government a few years ago, he solemnly announced that he would never accept any political position that would later come his way as a result of the campaign. That was generally taken as a pledge to disavow politics – although, to be fair, he did not exactly say so.

 

Another political storm will batter Suthep if he decides to take up a party or Cabinet position. But, so far, the new party is legally safe regarding its connections with him. Pheu Thai is on much shakier ground when it comes to its relations with Thaksin.

 

While the new party needs to tout Suthep’s name openly, Pheu Thai can sell its “pro-election” campaign and “ghost” connections with Thaksin without even having to whisper his name to voters. Politically speaking, while some of Suthep’s followers during the pre-coup mass protests might be turned off by his “broken promise”, they are never going to vote for Pheu Thai. Similarly, even if Thaksin disappeared from the face of the earth, Pheu Thai supporters would never switch camp.

 

This leaves us with the legal aspect. In Thai politics, after all, the line where “bold” becomes “dumb” almost always has to do with legality.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30347611

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-06-13

What an idiotic article.

 

First, Suthep is a lying cockroach who should be in jail, but isn't solely because he is connected. That is it, that is all.

 

Second, if the Junta/Prayut decides to try to ban the PTP, it does not matter in the slightest what Thaksin does or does not do; the idea that an attempt to ban the PTP would be done "legally" and "fairly" and "independently" and "legitimately" is laughable and ridiculous.

 

Prayut and the Junta might try to ban the PTP, but they would do so because they fear that it might return to power.

 

In my view, if Prayut and the Junta ban the PTP, it would throw the election into meaningless confusion and make Thailand and her government an international laughing stock. And, I don't believe Thailand and/or the PTBs would tolerate the global loss of face.

 

It would be the equivalent of tattooing "third-world loser" on the forehead of every Thai on the planet.

 

2 hours ago, webfact said:

This leaves us with the legal aspect. In Thai politics, after all, the line where “bold” becomes “dumb” almost always has to do with legality.

the article is aimed at thinking people; the everyman thai voter cannot ,and thus will not, think along the lines pointed out here; they want food in their mouths

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Legally speaking, it’s extremely unwise for  both Pheu Thai and Thaksin to boast of connections that can be interpreted as him being in control

Maybe he doesn't see it that way. Having Phue Thai party dissolved may be the straw that breaks the camels back in terms of public uproar. An election with incredibly low turn out based on zero options for a large portion of the voter base could be widely perceived as blatantly illegitimate.

4 minutes ago, coulson said:

An election with incredibly low turn out based on zero options for a large portion of the voter base could be widely perceived as blatantly illegitimate.

 

Not by the clowns running the show... If they win with 51% of a 20% turnout, they will claim it as a free and fair election...

I have no idea if 20% turnout would actually be a legal election but it matter not one iota to the boys in green traditional Thai dress !!

6 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

Not by the clowns running the show... If they win with 51% of a 20% turnout, they will claim it as a free and fair election...

I have no idea if 20% turnout would actually be a legal election but it matter not one iota to the boys in green traditional Thai dress !!

Agreed. But I'm referring to the international perception. Thaksin has a goal to show the world how he is the victim, having a military installed regime elected by a shambles of a vote just helps his case. He lives in the UK, Dubai, has a passport from a choice of Countries, visits Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Europe and the US frequently. He has an audience. His end game is to prove this lot are legitimate and return home with carte blanche. Having the most popular political party thrown out of the race at home doesn't hurt his agenda. He's just playing chess.

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The question is which one of them – Suthep Thaugsuban or Thaksin Shinawatra – is the smarter of the two.

The question is who is the more ignorant....these fleecing politicians & Junta or the Thai people themselves?

 

I am sorry to say because I love the Thai people but for crying out loud ! Get up do something!

Take your country back & learn from the miserable past. The miserable fleecing the miserable coups

 

Kick them to the curb & take your country back! If not then continue down the road of touch your toes & spell RUN

1 hour ago, YetAnother said:

the article is aimed at thinking people; the everyman thai voter cannot ,and thus will not, think along the lines pointed out here; they want food in their mouths

I don't agree.Thinking people would treat the article with the contempt it deserves.In addition your comment about Thai voters wanting "food in their mouths" is patronising and dishonest.Thai voters like voters in every country want a better life for their families, their communities and their country.They are perfectly able to choose leaders, if given a chance, who would meet their objectives.

9 minutes ago, meechai said:

The question is who is the more ignorant....these fleecing politicians & Junta or the Thai people themselves?

 

I am sorry to say because I love the Thai people but for crying out loud ! Get up do something!

Take your country back & learn from the miserable past. The miserable fleecing the miserable coups

 

Kick them to the curb & take your country back! If not then continue down the road of touch your toes & spell RUN

Sadly for the Thais the past is the present and is their reality.  Change is not on the horizon only more of the same. I really wish it were different and would be glad to be proven wrong. 

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The party could have repeated that feat without Thaksin’s name even being mentioned.

It would be best of Thaksin showed some restraint, but he can't help himself.  The good of the people rests on he keeping his mouth shut.  Not comment on Sutep.  He is barely worth mentioning.

47 minutes ago, yellowboat said:

It would be best of Thaksin showed some restraint, but he can't help himself.  The good of the people rests on he keeping his mouth shut.  Not comment on Sutep.  He is barely worth mentioning.

Yet both men represent the views of millions of Thais (Thaksin obviously many more than Suthep but principle is same) so I don't see how they can simply be told to keep silent.At some point there has to be a change in Thai politics so it isn't just a zero sum game in which the aim is to crush the other side.In other words there needs to be negotiation and compromise.There will be a need to pay special attention to real checks and balances not the unsatisfactory situation we have now where one side is preferred.

8 minutes ago, jayboy said:

Yet both men represent the views of millions of Thais (Thaksin obviously many more than Suthep but principle is same) so I don't see how they can simply be told to keep silent.At some point there has to be a change in Thai politics so it isn't just a zero sum game in which the aim is to crush the other side.In other words there needs to be negotiation and compromise.There will be a need to pay special attention to real checks and balances not the unsatisfactory situation we have now where one side is preferred.

You are not making nonsense.  What you are saying is completely true, but military authority over the country dictates without check or balance.  Poking the junta may just extend the ridiculous status quo.  It is fine to scrutinize the junta for all their boneheaded, childish antics, but Thaksin shouldn't call himself a leader of the party as it brings unneeded ire. 

2 hours ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

Not by the clowns running the show... If they win with 51% of a 20% turnout, they will claim it as a free and fair election...

I have no idea if 20% turnout would actually be a legal election but it matter not one iota to the boys in green traditional Thai dress !!

Absolutely right. They make up the rules as they go along. Thailand is a lawless land - and never more so than under this junta. 'Law' is whatever they say it is.

 

I just don't see the junta relinquishing power without the dirtiest (perhaps even deadliest) of tricks. 'Legality' is an entirely irrelevant concept at the present time and with the present bunch 'leading' the country. That is why I am convinced that the only way the Thai people can take back their freedom is en masse and outside of the bogus 'laws' (obstacles) that the junta have thrown in their path.

 

Will the Thais rise to the challenge? 

 

I doubt it - at least, NOT IN SUFFICIENT NUMBERS.

Suthep and Thaksin not same.

Suthep not care about law. Thaksin leave country.

Thai legal is joke!

2 hours ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

Not by the clowns running the show... If they win with 51% of a 20% turnout, they will claim it as a free and fair election...

I have no idea if 20% turnout would actually be a legal election but it matter not one iota to the boys in green traditional Thai dress !!

I still wonder why people here still talk about an "election" as whatever the plans are, it is far away from the real meaning of the word.

Yet both men represent the views of millions of Thais (Thaksin obviously many more than Suthep but principle is same) so I don't see how they can simply be told to keep silent.At some point there has to be a change in Thai politics so it isn't just a zero sum game in which the aim is to crush the other side.In other words there needs to be negotiation and compromise.There will be a need to pay special attention to real checks and balances not the unsatisfactory situation we have now where one side is preferred.

While i for once agree with you the transition wont be easy. They are used to crushing the opposition and not listening to them when they are in power. There is little compromise ever. The situation you describe is how it should work but it will take a long time before we are there.

Sharing power and compromise does not seem to be a thai junta or politicians trait.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Suthep and Thaksin not same.
Suthep not care about law. Thaksin leave country.
Thai legal is joke!

They are both jokes and a problem for the progression of Thai politics.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

5 hours ago, webfact said:

In the past, Thaksin could name a party leader, call a press conference in Dubai saying he had Pheu Thai wrapped around his finger, and nobody could do anything legally about it. Not any more. The new Constitution is clear in its ban on “outsiders” having control over a political party. A violation could lead to dissolution of a party.

Come on, drop the silliness in this article. Weak attempt to try justified the new constitution to try again to dissolve Thaksin's parties. Most will know that the establishment with the military have been targeting Thaksin and have tried in the past to get rid of his parties and influence.

 

Haven't the establishment and the military know that they have to win the hearts and minds of Thaksin's supporters and dissolving his parties 2 times have not affected his popularity.

 

TRT was dissolved for election fraud and 111 of their top executives was banned for 5 years. The same election fraud was leveled on the Dem Party but was dismissed and gave the Dem a better chance in the election but it didn't.

 

TRT members formed the PPP and the junta issued order to suppress the activities of the new party. A popular Dem Party MP who defected to the PPP was assassinated. PPP still win with in a landslide election. Again it  was dissolved for election fraud and executives banned. The junta may have think they have rid most executives but non executives of PPP rallied and formed PTP. PTP again win a landslide election.     

 

The editor is better off trying to be factual and analyse the failures to rid Thaksin influence and that coups were counter effective and neither are new laws written to specifically target Thaksin and his parties. 

both should be barred from thai politics, neither should be able to have any voice in any party. Thaksin runs the ptp and as such it needs to change to remove him and any of his influence, the man is a wanted felon and has several more charges waiting for him, everyone knows he is corrupt same as suthep, both need to be locked up but their supporters/apologists will continue to use bullsh*t and innuendo to put them in good light. A criminal should not be allowed any voice in any party especially when they are not even living in the country, the influence of either of these two is bad for thai politics, both need to pull their heads in and remove themselves although thaksin is probably in the worse position as he could cause the ptp to become none existent if he has anything to do with them.

Edited June 13, 20188 yr by seajae

27 minutes ago, seajae said:

both should be barred from thai politics, neither should be able to have any voice in any party. Thaksin runs the ptp and as such it needs to change to remove him and any of his influence, the man is a wanted felon and has several more charges waiting for him, everyone knows he is corrupt same as suthep, both need to be locked up but their supporters/apologists will continue to use bullsh*t and innuendo to put them in good light. A criminal should not be allowed any voice in any party especially when they are not even living in the country, the influence of either of these two is bad for thai politics, both need to pull their heads in and remove themselves although thaksin is probably in the worse position as he could cause the ptp to become none existent if he has anything to do with them.

Is coup leader not criminal?

Why you not say Prayut?

 

42 minutes ago, robblok said:

While i for once agree with you the transition wont be easy. They are used to crushing the opposition and not listening to them when they are in power. There is little compromise ever. The situation you describe is how it should work but it will take a long time before we are there.

Sharing power and compromise does not seem to be a thai junta or politicians trait.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 

Agreed.The road will not be easy nor a safe arrival certain.Among other things there will need to be unanimity on the complete subordination of the military to democratically elected civilian direction, and punishment for military officers who transgress.Even political statements by serving military officers will be potentially grounds for dismissal.For more serious treasonable offenses such as attempting coups the punishments must be very severe.There will be no question of self awarded pardons.

 

"Dream on" would be a quite reasonable reaction to the above.But remember the subordination of the military to their proper place has been done in other countries -Japan, South Korea and Indonesia for example.

36 minutes ago, seajae said:

both should be barred from thai politics, neither should be able to have any voice in any party. Thaksin runs the ptp and as such it needs to change to remove him and any of his influence, the man is a wanted felon and has several more charges waiting for him, everyone knows he is corrupt same as suthep, both need to be locked up but their supporters/apologists will continue to use bullsh*t and innuendo to put them in good light. A criminal should not be allowed any voice in any party especially when they are not even living in the country, the influence of either of these two is bad for thai politics, both need to pull their heads in and remove themselves although thaksin is probably in the worse position as he could cause the ptp to become none existent if he has anything to do with them.

You don't seem to grasp the problem.Both could be banned from politics or "permanently removed" but that doesn't change the powerful sources they represent.The solution is the same - negotiation and dialogue under a truly democratic system.The underlying issues exploited by both Thaksin and Suthep need to be addressed.Otherwise the country will continue in an evermore current disastrous mode , even perhaps after Thaksin and Suthep are no more.

 

The genie is out of the bottle and can't be squeezed back in again.

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Thaksin, on the other hand, has reportedly conducted at least one meeting with Pheu Thai politicians

"Thaksin, on the other hand, has reportedly conducted at least one meeting with Pheu Thai politicians" - and American politicians and businesses. 

The first meeting will be waved off as inconsequential by the junta who believes they have the political scene tied-up and secured.
The second meeting should give the junta pause to think although I doubt they have the sophistication to understand the (colorful) ramifications.

Edited June 13, 20188 yr by connda

2 hours ago, seajae said:

A criminal should not be allowed any voice in any party especially when they are not even living in the country, the influence of either of these two is bad for thai politics

Is not Thaksin still a Thai citizen and thus, guaranteed freedom of speech under the constitution?

As far as influence is concerned, that is the choice of the listener and not the speaker.

Yet, currently the Thai people are bombarded almost daily by politician PM Prayut who uses the power of his office an absolute power of the junta to blatantly attempt to cajole people not only though speech but through positive (subsidies, grants, promotions) and negative (laws restricting speech, warrantless search, seizure and detention) reinforcements.

Prayut is no less an outsider than Thaksin (if one accepts such as concept). But I doubt Prayut will allow a constitutional challenge to such inclusion.

9 hours ago, webfact said:

The new Constitution is clear in its ban on “outsiders” having control over a political party. A violation could lead to dissolution of a party.

I've seen this statement several times but cannot find it in the 2017 Constitution as translated by the Council of State.

Looking through the Organic Act on Political Activities and in particularly at Section 94 wherein the Constitutional Court may issue an order dissolving a political party, I find no specific language that neither defines an "outsider" per se nor covers a ban on "outsiders" having control over a political party.

To vote, be a candidate, a party member or party leader one must first be a Thai citizen. Thaksin is a Thai citizen. He is by definition not a foreigner in the context of this Act. He is not an "outsider."

One can be disqualified from such positions and electoral activities if a convicted criminal. Thus, Thaksin by definition is disqualified from political party leadership, membership, candidacy, etc. He cannot therefore be accused of "leading" the party." He has stated on occasion that he is not a party member nor the party's leaders. It is hyperbole to say otherwise but without any legal foundation.

I must conclude, pending direct legal references to "a ban on outsiders having control over a political party," citation of such ban is a propaganda statement intended to intimidate contact with a political party, ie., PTP.

Unfortunately, the NCPO with its absolute power and control over all government agencies, the Constitutional Court is susceptible to making interpretations that are not consistent with the literal language of the constitution.

http://thailaws.com/law/t_laws/tlaw0498.pdf

Edited June 13, 20188 yr by Srikcir
correct spacing

7 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

It would be the equivalent of tattooing "third-world loser" on the forehead of every Thai on the planet.

would that be in the Thai script?

18 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

I've seen this statement several times but cannot find it in the 2017 Constitution as translated by the Council of State.

Looking through the Organic Act on Political Activities and in particularly at Section 94 wherein the Constitutional Court may issue an order dissolving a political party, I find no specific language that neither defines an "outsider" per se nor covers a ban on "outsiders" having control over a political party.

To vote, be a candidate, a party member or party leader one must first be a Thai citizen. Thaksin is a Thai citizen. He is by definition not a foreigner in the context of this Act. He is not an "outsider."

One can be disqualified from such positions and electoral activities if a convicted criminal. Thus, Thaksin by definition is disqualified from political party leadership, membership, candidacy, etc. He cannot therefore be accused of "leading" the party." He has stated on occasion that he is not a party member nor the party's leaders. It is hyperbole to say otherwise but without any legal foundation.

I must conclude, pending direct legal references to "a ban on outsiders having control over a political party," citation of such ban is a propaganda statement intended to intimidate contact with a political party, ie., PTP.

Unfortunately, the NCPO with its absolute power and control over all government agencies, the Constitutional Court is susceptible to making interpretations that are not consistent with the literal language of the constitution.

http://thailaws.com/law/t_laws/tlaw0498.pdf

I think you have attached the previous Political Party Act. If you recalled, Prayut use 44 to amend the act last year. Section 28 and 29 have that clauses that you looking for. Sorry I can’t find the details. Maybe later when I have time. If the law is broken, it will be referred to the constitution court for a conviction. Think that’s how it works.

4 hours ago, Anak Nakal said:

Is coup leader not criminal?

Why you not say Prayut?

 

because the article isnt about him, its just about  thaksin and suthep

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Is not Thaksin still a Thai citizen and thus, guaranteed freedom of speech under the constitution?

As far as influence is concerned, that is the choice of the listener and not the speaker.

Yet, currently the Thai people are bombarded almost daily by politician PM Prayut who uses the power of his office an absolute power of the junta to blatantly attempt to cajole people not only though speech but through positive (subsidies, grants, promotions) and negative (laws restricting speech, warrantless search, seizure and detention) reinforcements.

Prayut is no less an outsider than Thaksin (if one accepts such as concept). But I doubt Prayut will allow a constitutional challenge to such inclusion.

he gave that right  up when he did a runner and had his passports removed, thaksin is a wanted criminal with more criminal charges pending, how in the hell do you see that as an ok person to run a political party when he is hiding out to avoid jail time. Just goes to show how pathetic some of his supporters are when you come up with this crap. Again this article is on thaksin & suthep not the junta, doesnt need an apologist for thaksin to try to change the subject because they know their hero is  a corrupt scumbag. You really need to get some morals if you think thaksin is ok to lead any political party, like suthep, they both need to be removed to stop much of the crap in this country with the reds and yellows

Edited June 13, 20188 yr by seajae

4 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

I think you have attached the previous Political Party Act

Yes it was 2007. Will look again.

The issue I have are statements made to a ban prescribed by the constitution, not by organic laws or by NCPO directives or amendments to the constitution that was passed in the 2017 referendum.