Illusions About Amnesty Could Be Very Costly: Thai Opinion

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

Illusions about amnesty could be very costly

The Nation

Thailand can ill-afford another violent political showdown as floods continue, the economy reels and international confidence evaporates

On Wednesday, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said she was looking forward to using the 19th Asean Summit in Bali as a platform to restore confidence and reaffirm the country's commitment to rebuilding in the wake of the flood crisis. Restoration, reconstruction and rehabilitation seem to be the government's buzzwords of the hour, although the message that she has been trying to send is being drowned out in a resurgent wave of an old political issue - her controversial big brother.

If the flood disaster has weakened investors' confidence in Thailand, the political storm brewing at the moment could turn eroding faith into a real scare.

As Yingluck left for Bali, the long-dormant People's Alliance for Democracy was making some new moves, the opposition camp was considering a censure motion and several civil society groups were up in arms over recent political events.

The alleged plan to bend the legal rules to give Thaksin Shinawatra amnesty for this year's celebration of His Majesty the King's birthday has been dominating newspaper front pages. If the flooding has exposed how political division in the country can make a natural crisis harder to manage, the amnesty issue threatens to worsen the situation dramatically.

Thailand has been debating the pros and cons of Thaksin, and we all know what the outcome of the likely showdown will be. The Yingluck government, in attacking critics of the amnesty plan, has badly missed the point. Whether Thaksin is good or bad is another matter. Thailand simply cannot afford another politically explosive period at the moment. Yes, the government is empowered to enact and enforce a law, but that power is given to maintain national peace and stability. That power should and must not be abused. And that power should never be used to inflame political trouble.

We all know that Thaksin is getting restless. His sister's popularity has taken a big hit during this flood disaster. Thus, for the Pheu Thai government it makes political sense to push for a controversial agenda while she still can. There is also his daughter's wedding in December that Thaksin would love to attend. Last but not least, while the flood crisis made the amnesty move look like poorly timed manoeuvring, Thaksin is very good at turning crises into opportunities. He must have expected the big uproar, but he might have gambled that the ongoing flooding could limit opposition to computer screens, as mass street protests are unlikely to be mobilised given transportation difficulties and other logistical obstacles due to the floods.

Yingluck has managed to sidestep this hot issue by going to Bali. She also wrote on her Facebook page that Asean leaders understood Thailand's flooding crisis, and its economic and political situation. Her message to the public is, predictably, that everything is going to be fine. That was also conveyed to Thailand's neighbours and the international community at a time when anti-amnesty groups are organising a protest and supporters of Thaksin are being mobilised to counter it.

The man who's spearheading the amnesty, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung, has spent the last three days repeating one sentence: "The government isn't breaking any law." That might be true, but the Abhisit government didn't seem to be breaking any law either when the red shirts descended on Bangkok in March last year to set the stage for the worst political violence in modern-day Thailand. The red shirts were protesting against Abhisit Vejjajiva's rise to power, which records show took place through a legitimate parliamentary vote.

If the red shirts could campaign against Abhisit by insisting that the devil was in the detail, anti-amnesty protesters can surely do the same. Again, the point is not about whether some laws have been broken. The point is that proposing the amnesty now is bad for a badly weakened nation trying to find its feet.

"Confidence" is easier spoken about than created. And disasters, we all know, happen when those who matter mistake their illusions as something that gives them confidence.

-- The Nation 2011-11-19

[nong38]

I notice there was no mention of reconciliation this time.

What is important to Thailand is it the country or the individual?

Perhaps the individual might like to make that choice for Thailand.

Edited November 18, 2011 by nong38

[whybother]

I notice there was no mention of reconciliation this time.

What is important to Thailand is it the country or the individual?

Perhaps the individual might like to make that choice for Thailand.

That's asking a bit much isn't it?

[scorecard]

Chalerm says, but it will benefit 26,000 people and he wants the naive Thai public to see this as the most important point.

He really does think that you can fool all of the people all the time.

His 'move' would release all prisoners over 60 etc., including those convicted for drug offences and corruption offenses.

I asked my Thai colleagues whether the Thai media has been giving any further details, example, does it include those convicted for both minor and major drug offenses and same question regarding corruption.

The answer - chalerm's bill covers all, in other words those people convicted of very major drug offenses and very major corruption activity would be released.

Strange that chalerm was a couple of weeks ago sprouting his usual fire and brimstone about his (and yinglucks, but hey whose in charge here?) new war on drugs.

Seems to be a big inconsistency / big clash. Go get em with vengeance, convict them, then release them, making a complete farce of Thai law and order.

But given his scaly history, would that worry chalerm?

NO, the man has no morals, no values, and no conscience whatever.

Edited November 19, 2011 by scorecard

[sparebox2]

Chalerm says, but it will benefit 26,000 people and he wants the naive Thai public to see this as the most important point.

He really does think that you can fool all of the people all the time.

His 'move' would release all prisoners over 60 etc., including those convicted for drug offences and corruption offenses.

I asked my Thai colleagues whether the Thai media has been giving any further details, example, does it include those convicted for both minor and major drug offenses and same question regarding corruption.

The answer - chalerm's bill covers all, in other words those people convicted of very major drug offenses and very major corruption activity would be released.

Strange that chalerm was a couple of weeks ago sprouting his usual fire and brimstone about his (and yinglucks, but hey whose in charge here?) new war on drugs.

Seems to be a big inconsistency / big clash. Go get em with vengeance, convict them, then release them, making a complete farce of Thai law and order.

But given his scaly history, would that worry chalerm?

NO, the man has no morals, no values, and no conscience whatever.

This year, 26,000 poor criminal will not be set free just because of 1 fugitives.

This is Thaland. This is Thaksin.

[JohnAllan]

This being the 19th Asean summit that she wasn't attending because of the flooding crisis?

[inquisitive]

I have been looking to find one particular bit of information regarding this proposed amnesty, but can't seem to find it. Perhaps someone here can help. I understand that 26,000 convicts will be included by the proposed definitions, and so Chalerm can claim that his proposal is not for benefit of Thaksin alone. But I'd like to know how many would be covered if the definition only allowed those that had served at least part of their sentences? Would it be 25,999? That would mean that one particular provision WOULD be helping just one man. Or are there thousands of convicts that are covered by this provision, and it's just coincidence that Our Man in Dubai benefits? How would things change if the eligible age was changed to one year older? How many that are covered by the present plan would lose their eligibility? What would happen if it was required that the convict must have demonstrated remorse or some other indication that they won't just turn around and commit the same crime again? Was the particular age chosen to benefit Thaksin?

I don't think anyone is against the idea of an amnesty. It's clear that there should not be a even one provision of the proposal that appears to single out one person while pretending to be something else. If the object if the exercise is just to clear OMiD, then why not just put his name on the thing and avoid looking like a manipulative and dishonest government with no respect for the intelligence of the people it leads?

So does anyone know the answer? Or has the government concealed this information?

[lannarebirth]

This being the 19th Asean summit that she wasn't attending because of the flooding crisis?

No she's attending the ASEAN summit, because there aren't any nations there that aren't m/l the same as Thailand. It was the APEC summit she was too busy for, as those countries are a bit more discerning.

[rubl]

I have been looking to find one particular bit of information regarding this proposed amnesty, but can't seem to find it. Perhaps someone here can help.

... middle removed ...

So does anyone know the answer? Or has the government concealed this information?

I think this statement from Dept. PM Chalerm made on the 17th, is still valid

"The government will not release details of the draft decree for amnesty before it is endorsed by the palace, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said yesterday, adding that it needed to be kept confidential to avoid public debate."

Edited November 19, 2011 by rubl

[exeter]

Looks like a reciepe for disaster to me, when the floods go down the fun (you know what I mean) will start. The reconciliation is word not understood, like corruption. So long as the reds are in charge its all ok, fit in or F__ off. and we dont win they we will cause utmost chaos to Thailand ( not bothered outside view of Thailand because never been there) so long as we reds can impose our will on the populous the world is how it should be.

PS please dont think we reds are selfish we just want more and certainly more than the next man or woman and if it comes down to a choice between country and me, its me because I am real and I need the money

[hellodolly]

Like the heading of the article says illusions about amnesty can be very costly.

They would try to have us believe that if the one clause that will for sure save Thaksin and possibly up to 50 others and future criminals as long as they are politicians does not pass 27,000 people won't get pardons.

Maybe they have dealers over 60 who are locked up and they want them back in business.

[magpie3]

In purely practical terms, it occured to me that the feeding of the 26,000 convicts

(those who had ACTUALLY served their time in some sweaty hole and not luxuriating with their ill gotten gains all around the world)

would be some serious issue too. I suspect many would be destitute and a burden to the family or support network they would return to - therefore likely to have little option for work at the moment - other than to re-offend perhaps

Releasing them piecemeal would seem less likely to inflict a tsunami of potential re-offenders on the nation.

I suspect the real reason is the cost of incarceration, or perhaps the need to redecorate their rooms for the next batch.

Or perhaps some noble benefactor is looking for an army for an urgent mission?

An efficient way to recruit don't you think? And positive discrimination for pensioners - and ....

Sorry - just testing the relief valve - it's been a while.

[hyperdimension]

Pardons should be done on a case-by-case basis that involve writing a detailed signed letter of confession and remorse. There should also be interviews and psychiatric examinations which the convict must pass to ensure that the chance of re-offending is low. For those who pass, there should also be assistance in finding employment so that they don't go back to crime for income.

Edited November 19, 2011 by hyperdimension

[ballpoint]

26,000 criminals out on the streets. We haven't seen that since the last red shirt rally.

[udonguy]

I have observed that it is a tradition here to release (i'm sure many unsavory) characters on HM birthday and I dont doubt Khun Thaksin will be back at some stage as the electorate had a landslide victory and THEY decided - we should remember that.

[yoshiwara]

I have observed that it is a tradition here to release (i'm sure many unsavory) characters on HM birthday and I dont doubt Khun Thaksin will be back at some stage as the electorate had a landslide victory and THEY decided - we should remember that.

They voted to abolish the law on money laundering? Did Thaksin's chauffeur get elected?

[hyperdimension]

I have observed that it is a tradition here to release (i'm sure many unsavory) characters on HM birthday

Traditionally pardons are meant to be a portrayal of leniency for convicts who have been remorseful. Has it changed to become something else?

I wonder how many more of Thaksin's and Pheu Thai Party members' friends and relatives they have been able to lump in to the list of 26K convicts to be potentially set free.

I dont doubt Khun Thaksin will be back at some stage as the electorate had a landslide victory and THEY decided - we should remember that.

Not all of those who voted for Pheu Thai necessarily voted because they want Thaksin back. Many would have voted for the too-good-to-refuse populist policies like minimum 300 THB daily wage and free tablet PCs, as they are what would affect their own lives the most.

[SICHONSTEVE]

Chalerm says, but it will benefit 26,000 people and he wants the naive Thai public to see this as the most important point.

He really does think that you can fool all of the people all the time.

His 'move' would release all prisoners over 60 etc., including those convicted for drug offences and corruption offenses.

I asked my Thai colleagues whether the Thai media has been giving any further details, example, does it include those convicted for both minor and major drug offenses and same question regarding corruption.

The answer - chalerm's bill covers all, in other words those people convicted of very major drug offenses and very major corruption activity would be released.

Strange that chalerm was a couple of weeks ago sprouting his usual fire and brimstone about his (and yinglucks, but hey whose in charge here?) new war on drugs.

Seems to be a big inconsistency / big clash. Go get em with vengeance, convict them, then release them, making a complete farce of Thai law and order.

But given his scaly history, would that worry chalerm?

NO, the man has no morals, no values, and no conscience whatever.

"The answer - chalerm's bill covers all, in other words those people convicted of very major drug offenses and very major corruption activity would be released"

Oh C'mon, stop worrying about trivialities will you???? Why does this matter eh!!!

Only one thing, and one thing matters and that is to answer Thaksin's call and "get him to the church on time".

Think about it - would you like to be the person that say's to Thaksin "I am so sorry Sir but you can't have a few bevvy's at your daughters wedding" - and why??? because those nasty heartless people want to deny you your rights!!!!

Thaksin's barbaric treatment is way out of order as surely he deserves better than this on his SPECIAL DAY after all he has only ever had 1 thing at interest in his huge heart and that is the welfare of the Thai people!!!!