Gloves Off In Poll Battle: Thailand Election

[webfact]

ANALYSIS

Gloves off in poll battle

By JINTANA PANYAARVUDH,

SOMROUTAI SAPSOMBOON

THE NATION

Democrats slam amnesty plan amid legal move against Yingluck; Pheu Thai hits back, says Army installed Abhisit

The gloves have come off in the election campaign, with the Democrat Party facing attacks over its cosy relationship with the military and the opposition Pheu Thai Party having to fend off increasing scrutiny of Yingluck Shinawatra's background.

The Democrats are using the planned amnesty for fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra as their main weapon. The ruling party urged the public not to be manipulated by Pheu Thai, because its rival had a "four-step ladders" strategy to bring Thaksin back to power.

The four ladders were winning the ballot, forming the next government, issuing an amnesty, and dissolving the House to pave the way for Thaksin to return as prime minister.

Attacks on the amnesty plan coincide with stepped-up efforts to hold Yingluck legally responsible for her alleged "perjury" - lying to a court - during the Thaksin assets seizure campaign.

The 'multi-coloured group' has sought a legal probe on the alleged offence, which could give Yingluck problems in the future.

Kaewsan Atibodhi, a former member of the now-defunct Assets Examination Committee, said yesterday he believed he must block the attempt to issue an amnesty law in favour of Thaksin.

Kaewsan said showing Yingluck's involvement in her brother's share concealment case would show she had a stake in wanting to provide an amnesty for Thaksin.

Kaewsan said he launched the move because electing Yingluck to be prime minister would be the first step in a bid to issue an amnesty law.

"If [she] hadn't proposed an amnesty for Thaksin, nor used the people's voice to ruin the law, I wouldn't have got involved. But now I know this, I have to fight. It's not abuse of women; this is using politics to harm the law," he explained.

Pheu Thai hit back by launching fierce attacks on the Democrats claiming they had an "illegitimate" rise to power in late 2008. They claim Abhisit took office with help from the military. Some columnists in the Thai media attacked Abhisit on the issue, which spurred the premier to clarify what happened on his Facebook page yesterday.

The charge is not good for either the Democrats or the military. The PM said he came to power purely with the support of MPs, not the military, but in the anti-government camp many don't believe him.

"I don't know who might have made a deal with the military but I have never talked to any military officers about the matter myself," he said in his Facebook remarks.

Army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha last week warned an unnamed political party that twice resorted to "mob rule" in 2009 and 2010 to try to gain political power. He also warned that claiming office this way would only lead to an opposite side trying to snatch back power in the same way.

His remark was interpreted as referring to Pheu Thai, leading people to assume he would not allow the party to become the next government.

In response to Prayuth's remark, Yingluck Shinawatra, Pheu Thai's top party-list candidate, said she would seek to meet Prayuth after the July 3 election to talk about the political situation.

On one hand, Yingluck may want to offer an olive branch to the Army. But on the other, her remark could be considered an attempt to tell the world the military would eventually interfere in politics. It could also imply that whoever wants to form the next government would have to consult or be approved by the military.

Many parties are studying the military's role during the current campaign and post-election period. The Army chief has repeatedly said in public that politicians should not try to involve the military in their campaigns, adding that they had no partisan interest in influencing the outcome one way or another.

The Army's main concern involves the monarchy and possible revenge by Thaksin should he or his proxy party return to power. Many red shirts, who support Thaksin, have been accused of disloyalty to the monarchy.

It is widely known that the relationship between military and Thaksin has not been smooth. Some sources say the top brass would let Pheu Thai form the government if they did not intervene in a military reshuffle. But others believe the Army would try all means to stop Pheu Thai from being the next government.

A veteran politician, who asked not to be named, said he did not think the military would be able to influence or intervene in forming the next government this time.

"There is no reason why they (the military) would do that, unless a Pheu Thai government interfered in the military reshuffle," the politician said.

-- The Nation 2011-06-07

[OzMick]

About bloody time! Miss Sweetness and Light (and she's definitely on the light side) was a party to a conspiracy to defraud the thai people of billions of baht, and then lied about her involvement in court. Now she wants the keys to the Treasury, and the power to grant amnesty to both her brother and herself.

Doesn't quite reconcile with her "care for the people" does it?

[ianbaggie]

1) The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.

• Lord Acton, The History of Freedom and Other Essays, Section III: Sir Erskine May's Democracy in Europe p. 76

There are many components absent from the Thai version of democracy. Not the least of these is the respect for individual rights. Think on how this relates to Thailands situation.

2) We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both.

• Louis Brandeis, U.S. Supreme Court Justice ~ quoted by Raymond Lonergan in, Mr. Justice Brandeis, Great American (1941), p. 42

Who provides wealth for Thailand if the rich elite do not? Could the rice farmers and those who sleep in their wooden houses with their Hang Song by their side do it - Or is this election all about whether Thais want the present dictatorship or Thgaksins dictatorship to return? If it is then i believe there is nothing for westerners to debate on this forum.

3) Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

Widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin

Further evidence that there is a line of thought which says that there is more to democracy than mere numbers.

Edited June 7, 2011 by ianbaggie

[OzMick]

Just read that john Edwards (former US presidential candidate) is facing jail time for misuse of campaign funds, directly as a result of journo's investigating love-child rumours. If only the Thai press would actually push home the hard questions...................

[anterian]

One reason why Thaksin never faced a public trial when the opportunity existed was that he was party to far too many secrets of the powerful in Thailand. There has always been the fear that his seizure and return to Thailand would reveal too many skeletons in the cupboards. I think there is a "gentleman's agreement" to let things rest as they are. This amnesty idea seems to be breaking that agreement so the fight is getting dirty.

[Thai at Heart]

One reason why Thaksin never faced a public trial when the opportunity existed was that he was party to far too many secrets of the powerful in Thailand. There has always been the fear that his seizure and return to Thailand would reveal too many skeletons in the cupboards. I think there is a "gentleman's agreement" to let things rest as they are. This amnesty idea seems to be breaking that agreement so the fight is getting dirty.

The tacit agreement is that no one takes a little too much of the pie for themselves, or upsets the apple cart a little to much in going about his business. This is the rule that Thaksin broke,

Edited June 7, 2011 by Thai at Heart

[pastitche]

I would tend to agree with your quotations and I assume that your conclusion is that Thailand is to be ruled by a self-perpetuating plutocracy, whichever party gains power.

1) The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.

• Lord Acton, The History of Freedom and Other Essays, Section III: Sir Erskine May's Democracy in Europe p. 76

There are many components absent from the Thai version of democracy. Not the least of these is the respect for individual rights. Think on how this relates to Thailands situation.

2) We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both.

• Louis Brandeis, U.S. Supreme Court Justice ~ quoted by Raymond Lonergan in, Mr. Justice Brandeis, Great American (1941), p. 42

Who provides wealth for Thailand if the rich elite do not? Could the rice farmers and those who sleep in their wooden houses with their Hang Song by their side do it - Or is this election all about whether Thais want the present dictatorship or Thgaksins dictatorship to return? If it is then i believe there is nothing for westerners to debate on this forum.

3) Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

Widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin

Further evidence that there is a line of thought which says that there is more to democracy than mere numbers.

[JAG]

"I don't know who might have made a deal with the military but I have never talked to any military officers about the matter myself,"

I dare say Abhisit didn't do any talking. All he had to do was listen, I expect that the generals were on permanent send!

[jdinasia]

One reason why Thaksin never faced a public trial when the opportunity existed was that he was party to far too many secrets of the powerful in Thailand. There has always been the fear that his seizure and return to Thailand would reveal too many skeletons in the cupboards. I think there is a "gentleman's agreement" to let things rest as they are. This amnesty idea seems to be breaking that agreement so the fight is getting dirty.

The tacit agreement is that no one takes a little too much of the pie for themselves, or upsets the apple cart a little to much in going about his business. This is the rule that Thaksin broke,

Thaksin was brought to public trial. He appeared in court and answered charges, he said he trusted the court, his lawyers sent a pastry box to a court (filled with cash) which was rejected, Thaksin fled the country prior to the trial's conclusion. Thaksin still faces many charges that cannot move forward until he appears in court to answer the charges.

Thaksin fleeing the jurisdiction did not stop the criminal proceedings against him. since under Thai law the only time he was required to be in court was to answer charges. Thaksin was represented by lawyers of his choosing and was found guilty and sentenced to two years in jail.

The rest of the post you are replying to is speculation. If it were as simple as "he knows too much" then there would be other alternatives to dealing with the problem that would simply enforce his silence and his non-involvement in Thai politics.

That the Dems can make political hay with the fact that an Amnesty for her brother would also include an amnesty for Yingluck may or may not go over well. We only have about 3 weeks until we find out.

[rubl]

Thaksin was brought to public trial. He appeared in court and answered charges, he said he trusted the court, his lawyers sent a pastry box to a court (filled with cash) which was rejected, Thaksin fled the country prior to the trial's conclusion. Thaksin still faces many charges that cannot move forward until he appears in court to answer the charges.

...

A small technicality. K. Thaksin did not flee the country. K. Thaksin had permission to go see the Olympic Games in Beijing and did not return. He jumped bail forfeiting the few million baht deposit. After jumping bail you may call him a fugitive, a criminal on the run from justice.

Edited June 8, 2011 by rubl

[jdinasia]

Thaksin was brought to public trial. He appeared in court and answered charges, he said he trusted the court, his lawyers sent a pastry box to a court (filled with cash) which was rejected, Thaksin fled the country prior to the trial's conclusion. Thaksin still faces many charges that cannot move forward until he appears in court to answer the charges.

...

A small technicality. K. Thaksin did not flee the country. K. Thaksin had permission to go see the Olympic Games in Beijing and did not return. He jumped bail forfeiting the few million baht deposit. After jumping bail you may call him a fugitive, a criminal on the run from justice.

That one is surely a semantics issue --- if his intent was not to return then he fled the country (imho), I still wonder what exactly was on the plane with him ...

[Ricardo]

That one is surely a semantics issue --- if his intent was not to return then he fled the country (imho), I still wonder what exactly was on the plane with him ...

You mean that, mistrusting the normal in-flight catering, he may have packed a 'lunch-box' more to his own liking ?

[jdinasia]

That one is surely a semantics issue --- if his intent was not to return then he fled the country (imho), I still wonder what exactly was on the plane with him ...

You mean that, mistrusting the normal in-flight catering, he may have packed a 'lunch-box' more to his own liking ?

or 17+ steamer trunks full of snacks .. (or whatever the ridiculous number was)