Prime Minister Advocates Islamic Law For Far South

[pap]

Big mistake if that is what was actually said. Once something like that is mentioned that it should be looked at you have pigeone holed yourself into a position that if you later come out against it you make people angry on one side or the other. Saying nothing and looking at it would have been better. He is now in a lose lose situation.

Something like...the people in the Southern provinces who vote in the elections should decide the laws that apply to them...... would have been better.

Most Islamic laws as written were meant to be applied through your life and not imposed through a government. To bad. Muslims should be accorded equal rights through being able to choose for themselves what they want... they should be at the local provicial level with protections put in to keep the democratic functions of the provinces working. This is easier said than done in an area's where the political process can be bought and is not viewed as representing the people of the area.

[pap]

“No separation: that’s the only condition that we have,” he said. “In the Thai Constitution, we cannot separate our land any more. This is the rule of this land, that we are not going to be divided any more.”

Well, not since we changed the name of the country ...... and.... what constitution? .... it's being re-written isn't it!!!!

Give that parcel of land back to Malaysia, permit the Thais that don't want to be there to relocate a bit further north, fund it with the tax money from some wealthy offspring (no names need to be mentioned)...... and then forget about it.

It will be less trouble in the long run.

Pride, Face, ...... rubbish.... you couldn't drag them into the 20th century, let alone the 21st.

Where do you draw the line next time? Pretty simple way of looking at a complex problem. Does this also mean the Thais should give Pattaya to the Farangs. Baloney.

There has been talk in the past of a panama canal type canal through the penenusula. Certain Thai leaders of great importance have opposed this because it effectively means ceding the regions South of the canal to Malaysia. The southern regions are Thailand and most Muslims and Budhists want to be Thai. The Muslims simply want to be accepted and represented. Not to much to ask. There is a minority that wants it own country still as promised by the British after WWII but most realize that as a seperate country they would not have the resources to survive.

The real problem is not how to placate others. It is how to involve them.

[Rinrada]

All the tourists can enjoy a day at the local squares on a Friday and watch justice being metted out on unfortunate wrongdooers... Used to be fun in Saudi.

For small stuff the usual punnishment is for a wee whipping with a cane by a big lad with "the book"under his arm....some really enjoy that..

Robbers would get their hands "chopped orf"...righ one of course ...the other is for wiping your Ar...

Falling women get...yes STONED and dont mean drunk although the modern way is to chuck them into a pit and simply drop in a load of quick drying concrete...principal is the same....init...

Murderers of course... get their head lopped off...keeps them quiet.....

being Thailand whoremongers would have to be left to your immagination...wonder if...

[pap]

All the tourists can enjoy a day at the local squares on a Friday and watch justice being metted out on unfortunate wrongdooers... Used to be fun in Saudi.

For small stuff the usual punnishment is for a wee whipping with a cane by a big lad with "the book"under his arm....some really enjoy that..

Robbers would get their hands "chopped orf"...righ one of course ...the other is for wiping your Ar...

Falling women get...yes STONED and dont mean drunk although the modern way is to chuck them into a pit and simply drop in a load of quick drying concrete...principal is the same....init...

Murderers of course... get their head lopped off...keeps them quiet.....

being Thailand whoremongers would have to be left to your immagination...wonder if...

All reason why you don't want it at a governmental level.

[Douggie Style]

What’s the alternative?

Whatever they have been trying to date clearly hasn't worked and in fact is only escalating the situation, brute force is the wrong tool for this type of problem, you need to address the actual grass root issues that are creating the tension. As stated before research how the British won the Malayan insurgency for an alternative to years of ongoing violence.

Logic dictates there is a reason people resort to force, they are flesh and blood and mostly have the same thought processes as any other human.

It is often to politicians and other interest groups advantage, to demonise marginal groups as a tool to divert attention from more pressing problems.

IMHO it is actually a clever move, takes heat out of the insurgency and attempts to draw them into a discussion.

As to actually implementing Sharia law, firstly there are many variations, a lot of what applies simply reflects the cultural standards on where it is based, to my knowledge it is not a universal code (correct me if wrong).

I point out here, both Thailand and the US are notorious for their application of capital punishment, something that is difficult to reconcile with the posters implied claims Sharia law is anymore uncivilized and brutal.

Finally, it should be seen for what is, an offer to include Sharia law not to supplant the existing law, in practise it is likely to have a very limited application. For example as a jurisdictional element would it apply to those who are Muslims or those geographically in the province? There are many such ways to dilute the effect.

As stated above I think it is a good move and worth considering further in the absence of any other workable solutions from the Donald Rumsfeld camp of political relations.

Edited November 8, 2006 by Douggie Style

[pap]

I can't speak to Thailand but the US rarely actually carries out Death penalties if you compare the number of convicted to the number it is carried out on. The number it is carried out on have to have met a very high standard and only applies to the most Heinous of crimes. The US has many problems but you don't just wake up one day on death row for being unfaithful to a husband for example.

People have to choose what is acceptable to them. Even most Muslims are not thrilled with the most extreme versions of Shariya law...especially when the tables turn and it is being applied to them. I would expect the Muslim practices in the South would be more in line with the rest of Thai culture in that region which for the most part is very accepting of others ways of doing things. The strictest of Shariya law has many more opponents than backers. As long as Muslims stay main stream and have access to education the stricter versions and literal interpretation have little appeal.

[ding]

Odd.

I was always reading that it was safer there than other muslim regions because it was ONLY A SEPERATIST MOVEMENT, not an Islamist theocracy dynamic.

So, now the thing that was supposed to be uniquely calming -is off the table (seperatism). BUT! Islamist theocracy is supposed to be the fix for the current unrest.

It's always confusing when you deal with theocracy oriented societies I guess.

THE KEY; no poverty there and education + jobs. A funded jobs program would be cheaper than unrest.

Edited November 9, 2006 by ding

[younghusband]

I can't speak to Thailand but the US rarely actually carries out Death penalties if you compare the number of convicted to the number it is carried out on. The number it is carried out on have to have met a very high standard and only applies to the most Heinous of crimes. The US has many problems but you don't just wake up one day on death row for being unfaithful to a husband for example.

People have to choose what is acceptable to them. Even most Muslims are not thrilled with the most extreme versions of Shariya law...especially when the tables turn and it is being applied to them. I would expect the Muslim practices in the South would be more in line with the rest of Thai culture in that region which for the most part is very accepting of others ways of doing things. The strictest of Shariya law has many more opponents than backers. As long as Muslims stay main stream and have access to education the stricter versions and literal interpretation have little appeal.

Just on the question of death penalties you are wrong to suggest the number carried out in the US is small.The question of number carried out compared to conviction scarcely seems relevant.While recognising the situation varies from state to state, the truth is that the USA is almost up there with China as still holding onto this barbaric practice which seems ineffective as a deterrent.

Thailand on the other hand while retaining the death deterrent option is in fact remarkably restrained in actual usage.It does happen in extreme cases but most Thais don't like it, and HM the King pardons when he can.Generally I would say Thailand is far more civilised than the US in this respect.

[cmsally]

IMO the introduction of Sharia law is not compatible with individual human rights. What happens to the moderate muslims who do not want to live their lives according to what some see as a code of extremism.

I know this has happened from friends of mine that used to live in the northern part of Malaysia (east side). That part became much more radical about 15 yrs ago. As a well travelled and cosmopolitan family they ended up moving to Europe from the village/town in which they were born. They simply couldn't put up with the local "watchdog system". They would be watched if they had non muslim visitors , reported if both males and females congregated in their house and at one stage even had somebody going through their garbage for beer bottles!

OK this might be an extreme case or they might have been exagerrating. But they also thought it might have been initiated by people with opposing business interests, which just goes to show how this kind of thing can be manipulated.

Scary, when mixed with local politics! Quite frankly I can't see those of other faiths surviving under this system.

[younghusband]

To be frank I think there is no question of Sharia Law being applied in the South.It's a step too far without elaborating further.I think General Surayud was trying to be accomodating hence the subject being raised, but it won't go further.

[Plus]

Women being stoned, hands chopped off, Friday Night executions in public places....

Do they do that in Malaysia? Cos that's what Thai version will look like, most probably.

They practice Shariya and most people don't even notice it.

Thais can also learn from their experience so that cases like moderate muslims moving out don't happen very often.

[phibunmike]

Women being stoned, hands chopped off, Friday Night executions in public places....

Do they do that in Malaysia? Cos that's what Thai version will look like, most probably.

They practice Shariya and most people don't even notice it.

Thais can also learn from their experience so that cases like moderate muslims moving out don't happen very often.

However, Malaysia has problems which have for many years been avoided and not yet resolved. For example, nightclubs raided by religious police, music stopped, lights on, and all inappropriately dressed muslim females arrested; or more recently, a non-muslim couple separated, the man converted to Islam, then converted their kids. The wife appealed in civil court against the conversion and for custody, but since he was now Muslim they referred it to the Sharia court. She, as a non-muslim, is not entitled to appear in the Sharia court.....

And what about Kelantan's separate queues in the supermarket for men and women ????

Most of Malaysia, most of the time, has a reasonable balance - but there are a number of long-standing problems which need to be resolved before their model could be wisely applied elsewhere....

[Plus]

nightclubs raided by religious police, music stopped, lights on,

Sounds like Thailand to me.

[Douggie Style]

Kudo's to the General for some fresh Thai style thinking.

If he can get something working it could be a model of reconciliation applicable to other Muslim/Western conflicts, of which there are a few.

To highlight the PM’s key points (as reported in the OP):

Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont...said Tuesday

1. that Islamic law should be given a bigger role there

2. the only condition ...was that there should be no discussion of separation

3. Islamic law, should be allowed in the area, where 80 percent of the people are ethnic Malay and Muslim.

4. Last week Mr. Surayud went south to make a public apology & His apology was followed by the dropping of charges against 92 Muslims

This is not to predict these measures alone will bring a resolution-it takes two to Tango, but it's a reasonable opening hand.

PS: Stated in Zoidberg’s accent: Yay, an interesting thread finally!.

[younghusband]

Kudo's to the General for some fresh Thai style thinking.

If he can get something working it could be a model of reconciliation applicable to other Muslim/Western conflicts, of which there are a few.

To highlight the PM’s key points (as reported in the OP):

Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont...said Tuesday

1. that Islamic law should be given a bigger role there

2. the only condition ...was that there should be no discussion of separation

3. Islamic law, should be allowed in the area, where 80 percent of the people are ethnic Malay and Muslim.

4. Last week Mr. Surayud went south to make a public apology & His apology was followed by the dropping of charges against 92 Muslims

This is not to predict these measures alone will bring a resolution-it takes two to Tango, but it's a reasonable opening hand.

PS: Stated in Zoidberg’s accent: Yay, an interesting thread finally!.

It's a good start but on point 4 nothing will progress until the resposible Thai army officers are brought to justice and punished if found guilty of the Tak Bai massacre.It's simply not enough to drop charges, even as an opening hand.

I am as can be seen sympathetic to the plight of Thai Muslims in the South, but the introduction of Sharia Law would be plain stupid, and invite a descent into grater horrors.Don't ask me why:ask the Indonesians who as the world's most populous Muslim nation will have no truck with it.

[BkkPundit]

It's a good start but on point 4 nothing will progress until the resposible Thai army officers are brought to justice and punished if found guilty of the Tak Bai massacre.It's simply not enough to drop charges, even as an opening hand.

I am as can be seen sympathetic to the plight of Thai Muslims in the South, but the introduction of Sharia Law would be plain stupid, and invite a descent into grater horrors.Don't ask me why:ask the Indonesians who as the world's most populous Muslim nation will have no truck with it.

You do realise that Islamic Law has been used since the 1940s in the 4 southern border provinces in divorce/inheritance matters. It is hardly something new. Islamic Law is allowed to be use because of an Act passed by the Thai Parliament. Some mention of it here.

[chechoie]

To be frank I think there is no question of Sharia Law being applied in the South.It's a step too far without elaborating further.I think General Surayud was trying to be accomodating hence the subject being raised, but it won't go further.

I agree, Thai's are famous for telling you "what you want to hear"

doesn't mean they are going to do what they say they will.

It's a good start but on point 4 nothing will progress until the resposible Thai army officers are brought to justice and punished if found guilty of the Tak Bai massacre.It's simply not enough to drop charges, even as an opening hand.

I am as can be seen sympathetic to the plight of Thai Muslims in the South, but the introduction of Sharia Law would be plain stupid, and invite a descent into grater horrors.Don't ask me why:ask the Indonesians who as the world's most populous Muslim nation will have no truck with it.

You do realise that Islamic Law has been used since the 1940s in the 4 southern border provinces in divorce/inheritance matters. It is hardly something new. Islamic Law is allowed to be use because of an Act passed by the Thai Parliament. Some mention of it here.

So why would the PM say " Islamic law should be allowed where

80% of the people are ethnic Malay and muslim" -- because it's not

being allowed even though the constitution or law say's it should be?

Or maybe he is not aware that it is allowed.

IMO it would be a mistake, give them a inch and they take a mile.

But then again, what's the alternative, I don't know.

[pap]

I can't speak to Thailand but the US rarely actually carries out Death penalties if you compare the number of convicted to the number it is carried out on. The number it is carried out on have to have met a very high standard and only applies to the most Heinous of crimes. The US has many problems but you don't just wake up one day on death row for being unfaithful to a husband for example.

People have to choose what is acceptable to them. Even most Muslims are not thrilled with the most extreme versions of Shariya law...especially when the tables turn and it is being applied to them. I would expect the Muslim practices in the South would be more in line with the rest of Thai culture in that region which for the most part is very accepting of others ways of doing things. The strictest of Shariya law has many more opponents than backers. As long as Muslims stay main stream and have access to education the stricter versions and literal interpretation have little appeal.

Just on the question of death penalties you are wrong to suggest the number carried out in the US is small.The question of number carried out compared to conviction scarcely seems relevant.While recognising the situation varies from state to state, the truth is that the USA is almost up there with China as still holding onto this barbaric practice which seems ineffective as a deterrent.

Thailand on the other hand while retaining the death deterrent option is in fact remarkably restrained in actual usage.It does happen in extreme cases but most Thais don't like it, and HM the King pardons when he can.Generally I would say Thailand is far more civilised than the US in this respect.

I won't argue that Thailand is more civilized in many respects but removing proportions from the equation is a fairly silly step. The the number IS small for the number of convictions actually carried out....especially if you exclude Texas but even including it is a small percentage. I won't get into wether one life or a thousand is to many because that is an entirely different ethical debate which is the more important debate. FACT is the percentage IS small. Unless of course your in that percentage.

[Laulen]

The troubled South has some of the finest places to visit in Thailand. The present efforts at restoring some law and order there will only have an effect once all the of people there take collective responsibility for the violence and bloodshed, no longer support any idea of 'separatism'.

However, it takes only a few well-armed fanatics to spread fear and suspicion amongst the population. There should be little to worry people about Sharia law being introduced, judging my experiences in Malaysia.

One thing both Buddhist and Muslim should do is to pray for peace, respect, and tolerance of other communities. These troubles are not likely to vanish just because of a change of government, I fear.

[Cpt_M0ney_Sh0t]

The troubled South has some of the finest places to visit in Thailand. The present efforts at restoring some law and order there will only have an effect once all the of people there take collective responsibility for the violence and bloodshed, no longer support any idea of 'separatism'.

However, it takes only a few well-armed fanatics to spread fear and suspicion amongst the population. There should be little to worry people about Sharia law being introduced, judging my experiences in Malaysia.

One thing both Buddhist and Muslim should do is to pray for peace, respect, and tolerance of other communities. These troubles are not likely to vanish just because of a change of government, I fear.

Right on, If it's what the majority of the people want and it keeps them peaceful, and the provinces unified, then so be it. I'm actually quite surprised, that if it was a Islamic Sultanate on it's own back in the early 1900's, that Sharia law was not a part of the annexation agreement way back then. That would be like if the US could be annexed by some force and they did not allow for any form of Democracy for her citizens.

[Scott]

introducing islamic law would be like opening pandora's box.

if it is to be considered, i believe it should not be the mandate of the current government (who did not come from election)

they came in citing specific reasons, corruption by thaksin admin, division in country (pro and anti thaksin mob, les majeste by thaksin. then they should concentrate on proving /bringing out those issues. and not try to implement new policies that will have long term effect. leave that to the next government who will come from electoral process.

Mig16 is absolutely write in the above quote. This gov't needs to hold the line. They could end up doing more harm than good. I have nothing against them implementing anything that will work, but

making promises that may conflict with a new constitution and future laws may cause a lot of problems.

[Plus]

From a practical point of view they should introduce measures that will work. Whether they come from elected or appointed government is secondary.

Thaksin government was elected, did it do them any good?

It's assumed that democracy would bring out the best government. Not always, and certainly not in Thailand.

It could be said that democracy represents the collective will of the nation, then, logically, if 40 mil vote that further oppression is the way to deal with the South, so be it. It should not be allowed to happen.

[younghusband]

From a practical point of view they should introduce measures that will work. Whether they come from elected or appointed government is secondary.

Thaksin government was elected, did it do them any good?

It's assumed that democracy would bring out the best government. Not always, and certainly not in Thailand.

It could be said that democracy represents the collective will of the nation, then, logically, if 40 mil vote that further oppression is the way to deal with the South, so be it. It should not be allowed to happen.

An excellent point in the last paragraph, which touches on one of the troubling aspects of democracy.In another context the majority in say the UK would almost certainly wish to see the death penalty restored there.The great Anglo-Irish philosopher Edmund Burke worried a great deal about unbridled democracy and the often wrongheaded passions of the mob.He felt strongly that in a democracy the elected representatives should vote with their conscience not the wishes of his constituents.It's a real dilemma.Obviously once every five years the people get the chance to change their representatives but that's not enough to satisfy the upholders of pure democracy.

It seems to me that in Thailand as elsewhere what's needed is not a guided democracy as such but a system of checks and balances.

[Scott]

The basic point with the insurgency in the South is that this, like other insurgencies, have a life of their own. If you look at different places in the world, almost no one has had any formula for ending them. They tend to last about a decade and then sort of fade away. Gov'ts can do things to exacerbate them and if politicians aren't careful they can end up in a full-blown civil war, but no matter how much you give (unless you give in completely), it's not enough.

Some points to consider is that these movements are usually dominated by 15-30 year old males. The higher the number of young males, the greater the chance of the insurgency continuing. When the demographics of the area change (i.e., the overall age increases), these movements tend to die out.

If you look at countries with a high percentage of young men in that age range, you usually see social problems (crime rates etc); this has nothing to do with being Muslim, other than that Muslim countries like a number of Christian religions, don't believe in birth control and thus have high birth rates. The other option is to actually have a war, which removes a large number of the males from population.

Of course, education, jobs and many other things affect how serious the problems become. But basically young men like to "raise he*l."

[ColPyat]

It seems to me that in Thailand as elsewhere what's needed is not a guided democracy as such but a system of checks and balances.

What is important that there is a strong regard towards the upkeep of human rights, and an independent system of checks and balances to enforce this. No democracy is worth much when mob rule, or a strong army whose leaders are above public scrutinity are permitted to dominate the system.

Under no government in Thailand, elected or not, much regard for human rights has existed, and especially not under Thaksin (but not only under Thaksin). Culprits of the many violations usually get off free, or are punished with a slight slap on the back.

If the culprits of Tak Bai or the drug war killings are not brought to justice soon, then i do not hold much hope for substantial changes. Apologies are not enough. Following through the Somchai case due to international pressure is not enough either.

How can a sense for human rights develop in the population when Army recruits are not taught about them, when police recruits have hardly any legal training? When the guilty are not punished?

[Douggie Style]

From a practical point of view they should introduce measures that will work. Whether they come from elected or appointed government is secondary.

Thaksin government was elected, did it do them any good?

It's assumed that democracy would bring out the best government. Not always, and certainly not in Thailand.

It could be said that democracy represents the collective will of the nation, then, logically, if 40 mil vote that further oppression is the way to deal with the South, so be it. It should not be allowed to happen.

An excellent point in the last paragraph, which touches on one of the troubling aspects of democracy.In another context the majority in say the UK would almost certainly wish to see the death penalty restored there.The great Anglo-Irish philosopher Edmund Burke worried a great deal about unbridled democracy and the often wrongheaded passions of the mob.He felt strongly that in a democracy the elected representatives should vote with their conscience not the wishes of his constituents.It's a real dilemma.Obviously once every five years the people get the chance to change their representatives but that's not enough to satisfy the upholders of pure democracy.

It seems to me that in Thailand as elsewhere what's needed is not a guided democracy as such but a system of checks and balances.

Two excellent points, democracy is often promoted as a one size fits all panacea.

In this case, the PM is only being pragmatic, attempting to incorporate elements of both Muslim and Thai law (classed as democratic for discussion purposes) in order to promote harmony.

This seems to cause fear amongst some posters, why is that?

Is it because of the negative associations to Sharia law or Muslims generally?

If the law was to be called the DEMOCRATIC pragmatic amalgamation of Thai and local customary law to reduce violence, would there be the same response?

The test should be what the legal system delivers on the ground. As an example, basic measuring systems may include respect for human rights, tolerance, ability to do business and so on.

Pragmatism not ideology.

There are parts of Sharia law, (as reported through the media filter), which make me very uncomfortable; however opening a discussion with the insurgents provides an opportunity to trade off/ dilute these sections.

In this regard, applying Thai pragmatism here is far superior to an ideologically driven approach (typically Western) which may be fettered by fixed ideas of right and wrong and produce a system unwanted by those it governs.

[MiG16]

How can a sense for human rights develop in the population when Army recruits are not taught about them, when police recruits have hardly any legal training? When the guilty are not punished?

i second that. with much much emphasis. and dont forget to include the media. they need to move on from this commercialisation of headlines that draw attention, and spicing up stories without giving regard to consequences

[dog412]

the problem of "sharia law" for thailand, is that it neither contains democratic principles nor pragmatism. it's basis is theological, with the accompanying intolerance inherent to religions.

[Douggie Style]

the problem of "sharia law" for thailand, is that it neither contains democratic principles nor pragmatism. it's basis is theological, with the accompanying intolerance inherent to religions.

From OP

'... said Tuesday that Islamic law should be given a bigger role..(in the far south)]'

[JemJem]

*Religion should have NO place in the legal system of a modern, humanist society.

*There are just too many things wrong/unfair/inhumane about the Sharia system.

*I believe that it is only a tiny minority of Muslims who would want Sharia over there.

*A sovereign, federal country having different sets of laws for different parts of the country is simply WRONG.

Cheers,

Jem