BURNING ISSUE
Govt must consider putting in place 'just laws' to rule
SUPALAK GANJANAKHUNDEE
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- INSTEAD of wasting time and energy providing explanations and begging for understanding from the international community over Article 44, General Prayut Chan-o-cha's government would be better off adjusting its political security management and law enforcement policies.

The junta has been blaming the international community, plus foreign governments and the media for misunderstanding the need for the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) to enforce the interim charter's Article 44 after martial law had to be lifted.

Martial law was put in place two days before the military seized power from Yingluck Shinawatra's government on May 22 last year.

The imposition of martial law itself is not strange in Thai politics, but it's very rare for an open society like Thailand to be under this law for nearly a year.

The international community, and many in the tourism sector, had been calling and pushing the government to lift martial law for two reasons.

Firstly, it violates the basic rights of Thai citizens by prohibiting them from expressing themselves, especially at a time when the government is trying to reform the country. It would be difficult for Thailand to move toward democracy when people's basic rights are restricted.

Secondly, martial law has had a negative impact on the economy as travellers stopped coming to Thailand because insurers refused to cover people visiting a land under martial law. Once martial law is in place, it means there is a greater risk of instability and chaos, which scares investors and travellers away.

Though the junta's decision to lift martial law won the thumbs up, the thumbs turned down again when it was replaced with Article 44 because the new measure is essentially no different from the previous one. It's like martial law under a new name. In fact, in some aspects it is even worse, as Article 44 gives too much power to a single man - the junta chief.

Hence, the international community led by the United Nations and the United States did not pull any punches when it called on the junta to not exercise such extraordinary power.

As far as the government is concerned, military personnel - down to the rank of second lieutenant - will be appointed as "peace and order maintenance officers" with sweeping powers, including the power to search, arrest and detain without any judicial oversight.

In addition, they will have the power to "conduct any other action" as ordered by the NCPO.

Article 44 authorises Prayut to issue any legislative, executive or judicial order. Such orders, and any action based on them, would automatically be considered legal, constitutional and conclusive. This basically violates human rights under international and existing national laws. The peace and order maintenance officers are blessed with immunity from criminal, civil and disciplinary liabilities for any action they might take while acting under these extraordinary powers.

Obviously, the premier did not quite understand the international community's concerns when he instructed his deputy and legal expert Wissanu Krea-ngam, along with officials from the Foreign Ministry, to provide an explanation to Bangkok-based diplomats and foreign correspondents. He was hoping this explanation would help stop the criticism.

Wissanu is able to talk until the cows come home, but the man who designed Article 44 still failed to convince the public as to why this law has to go against the basic "rule of law".

The "rule of law" principle does not translate to just having any old laws in place to rule, but "just laws" that have a transparent checks-and-balance system to rule. Giving all the power to one man is autocracy, not the rule of law. Even Wissanu, as a legal expert, has failed to convince other countries as to why Prayut needs sole power to prohibit people's assembly, freedom of expression and to censor media.

For as long as people's basic rights are violated, no matter what kind of law is in place, the government will never be able to stop international criticism.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Govt-must-consider-putting-in-place-just-laws-to-r-30257644.html


-- The Nation 2015-04-08

Post showing Disrespect to Thai people Removed.

Post in a polite, respectful manner please.

Thank you.

Quote : (...) Prayut needs sole power to prohibit people's assembly, freedom of expression and to censor media (...) For as long as people's basic rights are violated, no matter what kind of law is in place, the government will never be able to stop international criticism.

OK, so ... this journalist says that the government prohibits people's assembly, freedom of expression and censors media. But wait a second, in a country where media are censored, would this journalist be able to publish such a statement ?

It's what keeps nagging at me. Human Rights Groups and the like keep trying to draw a picture of Thailand that would be somewhat like Chile just after Pinochet seized power in 1973. Here and there, one reads that in Thailand at the moment, political oponents are 'thrown in jail', freedom of expression is seriously muzzled and the right to assemble is cancelled sine die...

Is that so ? We can't be watching the same movie, then... In the movie that I see (and live in, incidentally) daily, people live quite normally, media (including this Forum) get away with pretty loud criticism and yes, huge demonstrations that block the entire capital for weeks are now a thing of the past, which, excuse me, I find a rather good thing.

But the guy sitting in the armchair next to me, who happens to be a journalist for The Nation or AFP, goes back home and writes a totally unrealistic account of what we are actually seeing. It's like we're seeing something in Thailand in 2015 and he's writing about Chile in 1973. Are journalists that lazy or do they just enjoy distorting reality to a point where it's unrecognizable (but good for sell) ?

Quote : (...) Prayut needs sole power to prohibit people's assembly, freedom of expression and to censor media (...) For as long as people's basic rights are violated, no matter what kind of law is in place, the government will never be able to stop international criticism.

OK, so ... this journalist says that the government prohibits people's assembly, freedom of expression and censors media. But wait a second, in a country where media are censored, would this journalist be able to publish such a statement ?

It's what keeps nagging at me. Human Rights Groups and the like keep trying to draw a picture of Thailand that would be somewhat like Chile just after Pinochet seized power in 1973. Here and there, one reads that in Thailand at the moment, political oponents are 'thrown in jail', freedom of expression is seriously muzzled and the right to assemble is cancelled sine die...

Is that so ? We can't be watching the same movie, then... In the movie that I see (and live in, incidentally) daily, people live quite normally, media (including this Forum) get away with pretty loud criticism and yes, huge demonstrations that block the entire capital for weeks are now a thing of the past, which, excuse me, I find a rather good thing.

But the guy sitting in the armchair next to me, who happens to be a journalist for The Nation or AFP, goes back home and writes a totally unrealistic account of what we are actually seeing. It's like we're seeing something in Thailand in 2015 and he's writing about Chile in 1973. Are journalists that lazy or do they just enjoy distorting reality to a point where it's unrecognizable (but good for sell) ?

You aren't up on more news events that I care to list here, from over the last year, to be able to make that statment. Yes, there's a very real threat for journalists in that way. And more than 500 websites have been blocked at this point. Many journalists have been detained, and many reports of intimidation with real consequences. Hundreds of individuals have disappeared since last May, and people are being sentenced to prison for things like facebook comments and the like. You not noticing or caring about that, is your own business. But it obliterates any rationality in your statement.

Edited April 8, 201511 yr by No Apologist

General Prayut has accomplished a political imposibility.

He makes communism look democratic.

'Obviously, the premier did not quite understand the international community's concerns when he instructed his deputy and legal expert Wissanu Krea-ngam, along with officials from the Foreign Ministry, to provide an explanation to Bangkok-based diplomats and foreign correspondents. He was hoping this explanation would help stop the criticism.'

So what was the argument they used to try and persuade the international community that all is OK?

'For as long as people's basic rights are violated, no matter what kind of law is in place, the government will never be able to stop international criticism.'

Even from within, criticism should not be stopped. It helps with checks and balances.

Thailand doesn't have a government, it has a ruling junta. Justice cannot spring from injustice.

" The junta has blamed the international community plus foreign governments and the media for misunderstandings. .. "

Isn't this the essence of Thainess, blame everybody else !

Well, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Stand back and watch the fallout