What exactly does Suthep mean by political reform?

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE
What exactly does Suthep mean by political reform?
Supalak Ganjanaknundee
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The elite and mainstream middle class in Bangkok badly need a real soul-searching model before proposing anything about political reform in Thailand.

No need to look back too far; just examine the 2006 military coup, which many of them strongly supported to rid Thailand of what they called the "Thaksin regime". The term "Thaksin regime" is not quite clear - but it could simply mean rule by the millionaire politician Thaksin Shinawatra as well as later by his clan and associates.

The 2006 military coup got rid of Thaksin and banned two sets of Thaksin's political associates who were executive members of the Thai Rak Thai and People's Power parties. All are now released from such restrictions, but the political problem in Thailand is still far from over.

The military coup-makers and the yellow-shirt middle class, who are now major driving forces for the whistle-blowing protesters in the capital, helped design the 2007 constitution and a number of organic laws and organisations. With the coup and new rules, they believed Thai politics would be clean and Thailand would be stable and strong.

Thai politics is never clean, stable and strong. What we have seen and Thai people have faced since 2006 are instability, protests, riots and bloodshed. People divide even deeper and fight each other all the time.

Contrary to what the elite wanted, the new election rules have been effective instruments in bringing Thaksin's associates into power. The 2007 Constitution is not better than the 1997 charter scrapped by the coup. The 2007 Constitution could also support the Shinawatra clan in power.

Under the rules of the game, the urban middle class's favourite choice, the Democrat Party, would be able to control the helm only for a short period, while the judicial activists helped twist the laws to install it in power. Otherwise, this party, which has not won an election since 1992, would never have had a chance. It is important to note that the party, like Pheu Thai, is never free from allegations of corruption. The party even used military force to handle street protests, which left more than 90 people dead in 2010.

With strong backup from the elite and mainstream middle class in the capital, the Democrats came out to lead street protests by calling again for "political reform" before an election.

It remains unclear what kind of reform they are looking for. Many proposals are not legally valid and some are even undemocratic. The call for a "People's Council" to set new rules and regulations to keep the new election clean is against the 2007 Constitution they themselves sponsored. Unless they amend the charter, the so-called People's Council would be an illegal entity. No need to mention that the way they propose to select members of the council is very undemocratic.

Democracy is premised on agreement about not only the ends, but also the means and values. An undemocratic route will never install democracy.

Suthep Thaugsuban and the Democrats should think carefully about their so-called reform idea. What they are doing these days is not reform, but it exposes the failures of what they did in 2006-2007.


-- The Nation 2013-12-18

[JoeThePoster]

Unravelling the mysteries of the mastermind.

[Robby nz]

Whatever it means it is certainly not acceptable to PT ,Yingluck or Thaksin.

They need to keep things the way they are in order to carry on enriching themselves.

[greg71]

What he means is ,Its my way or the highway .

[meand]

"Thaksin out"

Thaksin is out.

"Yingluck out, Thuksin out"

Why do you want Yingluck out?

"Thuksin out"

What would you like to do if we take Yingluck out?

"Thuksin out"

Yingluck would like to speak with you.

"No. Thaksin out"

[EricBerg]

"An undemocratic route will never install democracy."

correct

[casindonet]

TV must invite Suthep to the forum....he will reveal the meaning of life!!

[selftaopath]

Without RULE OF LAW there is NO democracy; Thai version of democracy would confuse most Democratic Western nations.

[noitom]

Why doesn't the newspaper here in Thailand take the lead on this reform question? Why doesn't the newspaper start publishing informed thoughtful opinion on how Thailand should reform - What steps should be taken in phase 1, phase 1, phase 3 ... and how those reforms should policed and governed. The newspaper should be speaking to informed editorial on ridding Thailand of police and military corruption, transparency, regulation, complinace, and education.

The newspaper should eliminate all this meaningless empty dribble that merely circles the wagons around and around. The newspaper needs to campaign for freedom of the press so that they are free from threat, reprisal, and charges so that they can start doing some meaningful investigative journalism. The press should be calling out known acts of corruption, law breaking with impunity, and calling for the prosecution of those involved. Without a free press and a press driving mindset for reform, Thailand will never change and is doomed to repeat their failures over and over.

[SaamBaht]

This opinion piece should put to rest claims that the Nation is pro-yellow. I find the paper most often in support of the democratic process. With regards that the Thaksin clan will continue to enrich themselves, well yes, but if not them then who? The Democrats? Doesn't matter who is in power, corruption runs down both sides of the isle.

[FangFerang]

A clear-thinking Thai political scientist suggested that amendments to the Constitution require a super majority (2/3) to enact changes (which will prevent future abuses like the boondoggle amnesty bill). He also suggested that key legislation that cross a certain thereshold in cost follow the same requirements, which will make Easter eggs like the rice-pledging scheme a tragi-comedy neither side will be able to repeat, and the annual budget would become a shared process.

I was told neither side liked his idea (the idea of sharing power) and that both sides reserve the right to abuse the system when they are in charge. Sadly, I was not surprised.

This is a compromise solution that could stick and give any minority party a say in the process. It came from a respected Thai scholar, and no one could claim foriegn influence. His op-ed piece ran in the BP three days ago, and is now inactive on the site. Sorry, I cannot remember his name.

And Suthep is (again) calling another mass rally Sunday to (again) 'oust the Thaksin regime once and for all.'

I do not believe we will see the groundswelling of numbers this time. I may be wrong, but Suthep now only has 5-8000 on the streets. His radical ideas are scaring people.

He is just being obstructionist now, as well as the other side.

[Zolt]

What exactly does Suthep mean by political reform?

He has no clue, that's the problem. But you might want to look at the people around him for a taste of what is to come. notice that white-beard guy who's at his right hand on almost every photo op? That's Somsak, of the New Politics Party, formerly a PAD leader. Also a former union leader.

"New Politics", for those new to the perpetual political drama that is Thailand, is a system of government proposed by the PAD, the core of which is to have only 30% of the House elected, and the rest appointed like half the senate is today. So indeed after that kind of reform, Suthep can promise all the elections he wants, he and his cronies won't give a damn.

He also proposed the death penalty for corrupt politicians. I wonder if he's willing to make an example of himself. He certainly has been in enough shady deals.

[DocN]

Here is what he means : Mememememememememe!

Here is what it means: much more than we are allowed to discuss!

[Spare]

"An undemocratic route will never install democracy."

correct

Said who?

[HaroldB]

I like the article as written, There are no simple answers but politics is not simple.

I personally Disagree with Suthep and the way he has conducted or orchestrated the downfall of another Thai

Government.

It has achieved nothing but a new Election early, more fighting in the streets and a deepening of the divide

between the Democrats and Shinawatra led factions. "Divided we Rule"

Only by letting governments run full term will you get people voting on how they performed as opposed to fighting to

keep an unjustly removed power returned by a deeply divided people.

Having a smaller party hold sway on power by having a "casting " type of vote isn't the answer as they tend to have too

much power and power itself corrupts.

The best thing is to have two or three powerful parties who can win the elections because of how they perform for Thailand

and the people and letting the system run full term.

Before I get another mouthful of vitriol from the anti Thaksin people, I don't like nor despise the man his human rights record is

both frighting and shocking but for the venomous few that have attacked my previous posts go and look at his Wikipedia bio and

try to judge me in a less offensive way.

Once again these are my personal views!

[Zolt]

A clear-thinking Thai political scientist suggested that amendments to the Constitution require a super majority (2/3) to enact changes (which will prevent future abuses like the boondoggle amnesty bill). He also suggested that key legislation that cross a certain thereshold in cost follow the same requirements, which will make Easter eggs like the rice-pledging scheme a tragi-comedy neither side will be able to repeat, and the annual budget would become a shared process.

I was told neither side liked his idea (the idea of sharing power) and that both sides reserve the right to abuse the system when they are in charge. Sadly, I was not surprised.

As you describe it, that change wouldn't do anything for the rice pledging bill or the amnesty bill, as they aren't amendments to the constitution.

If you were to require a supermajority for all budget policy decisions you would essentially make the country ungovernable as the opposition will always block whatever the government tries to do.

To be honest the current system in the 2007 constitution isn't all that bad. With 50% of senators appointed and the opposition holding at least 1/3 of the rest by proportional vote, any bill that's really harmful ought to be blocked there. Definitely voting rules should be made stricter so that the top party can't sneak a vote through in the middle of the night. Require a quorum of at least 2/3rds of senators, that ought to do it. No more than that otherwise the opposition could filibuster any bill they want by just walking out.

[Alwyn]

Whatever it means it is certainly not acceptable to PT ,Yingluck or Thaksin.

They need to keep things the way they are in order to carry on enriching themselves.

But these laws and reforms were put in place by the "yellow shirt" after deposing Thaksin, I truly don't understand the point of what you're saying. It seems to me that even AFTER the DP altered the constituion to suit themselves and they STILL can't get the people behind them, they will just keep wanting to change the constitution until it's illegal for anyone to vote unles they are voting DP?

[Pops]

Whatever it means it is certainly not acceptable to PT ,Yingluck or Thaksin.

They need to keep things the way they are in order to carry on enriching themselves.

And what do you reckon the old elite wants ?

wakey wakey

[spirit47]

The Nation fears an interview with Suthep. Speaking with people is much more honest, than speaking about people. A newspaper should have more than a monologue...

[tomacht8]

It is a tragedy.

Thailand does not seem to be able to organize unity and justice.

The division of the country appears deeper than ever before.

To find compromises, searching for a better fairer solution, appears alien.

The political system has many faults.

And, unfortunately, the so-called "elected" representatives of the people, take advantage shamelessly only for themselfs.

The necessary changes, reforms and the honorable work of politicians will this country never experience,
as long convicted criminals, corrupt people and only of themselves thinking people sit in Parliament and key positions.

Every Thai I've talked to, all like to be rid of these greedy cancer.
But they do not know how to do it.

As the greatest hope remains the Constitution Court

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/688398-bt2-trillion-loan-bill-halted-pending-court-ruling/

Hopefully the court judges with a variety of parliamentary requirements to be met in the future, no matter who is in power.

Like for all future budgeting processes they make it compulsory for all future governments, that

- the use of money for project proposals are accurately represented in detail and coherent on the last baht.

- the use of money for project proposals is described in detail for all people publicly documented and visible

- Public monthly or quarterly reports on Finance and project progresses.

- Public invitation for project proposals and at least three competitive compare offers.

- Project completion reports including all expenses with receipts.

- a strong supervisory committee composed of members is formed by all parties,

to control the entire investment process without disabilities and time delay restrictions.

The results of the process and progress checks are presented to the parliament.

The members of the supervisory body should rotate so that corruption is impossible or more difficult.

When public funds are used, then the public has the right to see what the representatives of the people plan to do with the money and how it was used.

It must be prevented that a country can be completely plundered by a few unethical people just because they are currently in power.

[aechzen]

free mind and free speak !

[DK2223]

I agree. Like I say in past forum, Suthep has no idea how it want it to reform and how he want the whole thing to stop. There is ways for political reform in the country, is just not he wants due to this will bring no benefits to him (etc: Transparency, anti-corruption, education and many others). When they have the chance in the government, they did not make any changes so people go back to other parties and this is the main down fall of the opposition. For me what I can see here is that Suthep doesn't want reform at all he want is to maintain power for himself and the people financing him. He started the rally with a good reason to push against for the amnesty bill, and after he saw the people support for him, he take the advantage to overthrow the currently government (the ways used has now gone to far) by selling promise and idea that the people wanted to hear. But the problem now back fire on him, after he start selling, he do not have an idea how to make the promise happen or end the things without losing the people trust, so he started with the people council and all other promise but himself know that this can't happen. A real politician doesn't ask to change this and that in the law, but how to used it to make them in power (by the end Laws is set by human and it will have it flaw). For me no matter how Suthep change the law, as long as it cannot bring power to him, he will no stop and all coming back to square one. As for Thaksin, I don't really agree with him, but at least now he is a little clever on how to play this game.

[Spare]

I agree. Like I say in past forum, Suthep has no idea how it want it to reform and how he want the whole thing to stop. There is ways for political reform in the country, is just not he wants due to this will bring no benefits to him (etc: Transparency, anti-corruption, education and many others). When they have the chance in the government, they did not make any changes so people go back to other parties and this is the main down fall of the opposition. For me what I can see here is that Suthep doesn't want reform at all he want is to maintain power for himself and the people financing him. He started the rally with a good reason to push against for the amnesty bill, and after he saw the people support for him, he take the advantage to overthrow the currently government (the ways used has now gone to far) by selling promise and idea that the people wanted to hear. But the problem now back fire on him, after he start selling, he do not have an idea how to make the promise happen or end the things without losing the people trust, so he started with the people council and all other promise but himself know that this can't happen. A real politician doesn't ask to change this and that in the law, but how to used it to make them in power (by the end Laws is set by human and it will have it flaw). For me no matter how Suthep change the law, as long as it cannot bring power to him, he will no stop and all coming back to square one. As for Thaksin, I don't really agree with him, but at least now he is a little clever on how to play this game.

You have under estimated the force.

The dark force.

[kingstonkid]

If you want reform it is quite easy start doing political education in the north areas around PT. Do not do it as a party thing. Just start going over different things that both parties are doing wrong and how they can be changed for the good

The first thing that should be done is get rid of the appointed MP's either you win a seat or you do not there is no extra seating. This will make the government smaller and remove all the favoritism and nepotism.

It will also allow for a better discussion as the people elected will be responsible to the people and to to the leadership be it AV or Thaksin.

Imagine if an MP was chosen by the people and was responsible for gong back to the people to explain why he screwed up the rice deal, or why they kept getting flooded.

[newermonkey]

A real democracy would have the entire population over the age of 18 voting on every single issue, this can be done over the internet.

There would be no need for political parties, only state administrators.

Thailand would be perfect for this new and real democracy.

BUT...

Problem is... there would be no room for the rich corrupt politicians to become richer.

So its not going to happen, any time, ever.

Shame isn't it

[HUAHIN62]

I agree. Like I say in past forum, Suthep has no idea how it want it to reform and how he want the whole thing to stop. There is ways for political reform in the country, is just not he wants due to this will bring no benefits to him (etc: Transparency, anti-corruption, education and many others). When they have the chance in the government, they did not make any changes so people go back to other parties and this is the main down fall of the opposition. For me what I can see here is that Suthep doesn't want reform at all he want is to maintain power for himself and the people financing him. He started the rally with a good reason to push against for the amnesty bill, and after he saw the people support for him, he take the advantage to overthrow the currently government (the ways used has now gone to far) by selling promise and idea that the people wanted to hear. But the problem now back fire on him, after he start selling, he do not have an idea how to make the promise happen or end the things without losing the people trust, so he started with the people council and all other promise but himself know that this can't happen. A real politician doesn't ask to change this and that in the law, but how to used it to make them in power (by the end Laws is set by human and it will have it flaw). For me no matter how Suthep change the law, as long as it cannot bring power to him, he will no stop and all coming back to square one. As for Thaksin, I don't really agree with him, but at least now he is a little clever on how to play this game.

Suthep is the jester bringing the message to the people. He was instructed and have done as asked. Even if this folly brings his type of political system into power he will never be the ruler, but he would be even richer than now.

[HUAHIN62]

I agree. Like I say in past forum, Suthep has no idea how it want it to reform and how he want the whole thing to stop. There is ways for political reform in the country, is just not he wants due to this will bring no benefits to him (etc: Transparency, anti-corruption, education and many others). When they have the chance in the government, they did not make any changes so people go back to other parties and this is the main down fall of the opposition. For me what I can see here is that Suthep doesn't want reform at all he want is to maintain power for himself and the people financing him. He started the rally with a good reason to push against for the amnesty bill, and after he saw the people support for him, he take the advantage to overthrow the currently government (the ways used has now gone to far) by selling promise and idea that the people wanted to hear. But the problem now back fire on him, after he start selling, he do not have an idea how to make the promise happen or end the things without losing the people trust, so he started with the people council and all other promise but himself know that this can't happen. A real politician doesn't ask to change this and that in the law, but how to used it to make them in power (by the end Laws is set by human and it will have it flaw). For me no matter how Suthep change the law, as long as it cannot bring power to him, he will no stop and all coming back to square one. As for Thaksin, I don't really agree with him, but at least now he is a little clever on how to play this game.

You have under estimated the force.

The dark force.

You mean the family of 200 that said before the real protest started "we only need 20% of the people to support us". This was in an article in The Nation, that have since disappeared from their website. After this statement suddenly the protest became alive. As seen from the quote they are not interested in democracy but the support of 20% of Thai's to force their way to power. Thailand need reform but within a democratic system.

[marcusd]

"An undemocratic route will never install democracy."

correct

NOT QUITE TRUE. We can see evidence of DEMOCRACY coming to power from autocratic rule in General Franco's Spain and now there is a democracy and a Monarchy and a robust healthy debate for the future of the country

[marcusd]

Why doesn't the newspaper here in Thailand take the lead on this reform question? Why doesn't the newspaper start publishing informed thoughtful opinion on how Thailand should reform - What steps should be taken in phase 1, phase 1, phase 3 ... and how those reforms should policed and governed. The newspaper should be speaking to informed editorial on ridding Thailand of police and military corruption, transparency, regulation, complinace, and education.

The newspaper should eliminate all this meaningless empty dribble that merely circles the wagons around and around. The newspaper needs to campaign for freedom of the press so that they are free from threat, reprisal, and charges so that they can start doing some meaningful investigative journalism. The press should be calling out known acts of corruption, law breaking with impunity, and calling for the prosecution of those involved. Without a free press and a press driving mindset for reform, Thailand will never change and is doomed to repeat their failures over and over.

Because they are a THAI Newspaper and do not think. It is always easier to POINT OUT THE OBVIOUS and suggest nothing as suggestions means you need to have a brain to think.

Sadly lacking here in Thailand. Too many people say we need to think and ask this and that and this and that is wrong, but where are the LEADERS with suggestions? Hiding away looking at how they can fleece and steal from more Thai people and foreigners without DOING ANYTHING constructive. thats where they are..

[fab4]

This opinion piece should put to rest claims that the Nation is pro-yellow. I find the paper most often in support of the democratic process. With regards that the Thaksin clan will continue to enrich themselves, well yes, but if not them then who? The Democrats? Doesn't matter who is in power, corruption runs down both sides of the isle.

The odd opinion piece in the Nation that is pro or leaning towards the PTP does not suddenly absolve it of the extreme bias it usually exhibits. There is a long way to go before this opinion piece and a few articles by Pravit transforms this rag into something worthy of the journalistic trade.