Reconciliation too slow, with little achieved: poll

[rooster59]

Reconciliation too slow, with little achieved: poll

By THE SUNDAY NATION

 

 

MOST PEOPLE surveyed in the past week believe that the junta’s attempts at reconciliation have proceeded too slowly with no tangible outcomes yet to be seen, according to results of a poll released yesterday.

 

Of 1,019 people surveyed nationwide by Suan Dusit Poll, almost 74 per cent said they thought that the post-coup government’s ongoing efforts have yet to bear fruit and that political figures remain in conflict. 

 

Only 26 per cent of survey respondents thought that the government-established reconciliation committee was following the junta’s so-called roadmap. 

 

The poll, titled “People’s attitude on reconciliation building”, was conducted from July 24 to 28 with a nationwide sample of the population asked their opinions on the government’s progress in reconciling political factions.

 

Since January, the military has positioned itself as a non-partisan middleman, asking political blocs for opinions on drafting an “agreement of truth”. The agreement is expected to be published soon amid rising political temperatures involving some Pheu Thai Party figures. While political blocs are expected to nod to the agreement, it is not known yet to what extent they will be bound by it. The poll said 71 per cent of surveyed people expected the reconciliation effort to unify the country, while 60 per cent admitted it was hard work but should be continued. 

 

Fifty-eight per cent of the respondents said they thought that the junta government should allow every side to participate in the procedure. Asked what agreements should be prioritised, almost 72 per cent emphasised moral principles, followed by around 70 per cent who stressed the rule of law. 

 

Almost 69 per cent of those surveyed, meanwhile, wanted all sides to build an atmosphere of unity. Asked how reconciliation could be accomplished, more than 78 per cent thought that all sides should be more open-minded toward each other. 

 

About 67 per cent said that legal measures should be applied fairly to all sides, and about 64 per cent said that everyone had to put an emphasis on public benefits.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30322212

 

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-07-30

[steven100]

no one believes these polls.

[kotsak]

 

[yellowboat]

Coup leaders are not the people who will patch things up, as they caused the divide.  It will take several years after the coup before differences are forgotten or set aside.  This is why coups are bad and representative governments need to be protected, not knocked over.  Don't scratch the itch.  Apply ointment. 

[smedly]

This pursuit of reconciliation is a myth - it was a word introduced by Thaksin which actually meant his Amnesty.

 

What the Thai people want are reforms that allow laws and a justice system to apply equally to all, they want corruption eradicated - a better education system and a general improvement in equality and rights, many were of the belief that Prayut could deliver but he seems to have go lost somewhere along the way. Transfer of someone to an inactive post is not the answer, these people need to be dealt with severely for wrong doing - big or small ................ dealt with

 

As for the court and justice system - people being arrested for murder or other serious crimes then out on bail ? Defamation laws that protect wrong doers, people should feel free to report suspected wrongs to the authorities without the threat of being criminally charged themselves and that includes complaints against police, the police are answerable to the public not themselves, time for a civilian board to oversee their activities and hold them to account.

 

 

[LomSak27]

Reconciliation here is and always has been, ‘winner take all’. The military and the Yellows need to think about the long term consequences of disenfranchising the majority of the population. Although that seems to be the last thing anyone does here.

[smutcakes]

24 minutes ago, smedly said:

This pursuit of reconciliation is a myth - it was a word introduced by Thaksin which actually meant his Amnesty.

 

What the Thai people want are reforms that allow laws and a justice system to apply equally to all, they want corruption eradicated - a better education system and a general improvement in equality and rights, many were of the belief that Prayut could deliver but he seems to have go lost somewhere along the way. Transfer of someone to an inactive post is not the answer, these people need to be dealt with severely for wrong doing - big or small ................ dealt with

 

As for the court and justice system - people being arrested for murder or other serious crimes then out on bail ? Defamation laws that protect wrong doers, people should feel free to report suspected wrongs to the authorities without the threat of being criminally charged themselves and that includes complaints against police, the police are answerable to the public not themselves, time for a civilian board to oversee their activities and hold them to account.

 

 

Why on Gods green earth would army generals want to reform justice laws so they are applied equally to all? Or for that matter have a better educated population. 

[seajae]

true reconciliation would mean removing the reds and yellows, making the countries laws absolute and enforcing them, not bailing convicted criminals and locking them. Only when everyone is treated the same way, the groups that push all the separation/ violence and all people breaking the law are charged will we see the crap stop. Its hard to have reconciliation when every one is treated differently depending on their name/wealth/position plus all the corruption allowed to flourish, trouble is no one single entity in Thailand is willing to take the first steps to do so, money is far to important to them all, screw being honest and doing whats right for the country.

[trainman34014]

Forget it...it ain't gonna happen in your lifetime !

[Russbert]

3 hours ago, smedly said:

This pursuit of reconciliation is a myth - it was a word introduced by Thaksin which actually meant his Amnesty.

 

What the Thai people want are reforms that allow laws and a justice system to apply equally to all, they want corruption eradicated - a better education system and a general improvement in equality and rights, many were of the belief that Prayut could deliver but he seems to have go lost somewhere along the way. Transfer of someone to an inactive post is not the answer, these people need to be dealt with severely for wrong doing - big or small ................ dealt with

 

As for the court and justice system - people being arrested for murder or other serious crimes then out on bail ? Defamation laws that protect wrong doers, people should feel free to report suspected wrongs to the authorities without the threat of being criminally charged themselves and that includes complaints against police, the police are answerable to the public not themselves, time for a civilian board to oversee their activities and hold them to account.

 

 

The reason Thailand has none of the above is the repeated use of coups to stifle any progress towards change in the right direction. How easy would it be for Gen Prayuth to use Section 44 to make an example of the Red Bull kid - yet he remains completely silent. No further proof is required as to the military position on all you mention above. The upside with politicians is even if they don't support something they will have no hestitation bashing their opponents to win votes - this is how democracy forces progress and that in turn is why the military are doing all they can to tarnish politicians and deny democracy.

[smedly]

48 minutes ago, Russbert said:

The reason Thailand has none of the above is the repeated use of coups to stifle any progress towards change in the right direction. How easy would it be for Gen Prayuth to use Section 44 to make an example of the Red Bull kid - yet he remains completely silent. No further proof is required as to the military position on all you mention above. The upside with politicians is even if they don't support something they will have no hestitation bashing their opponents to win votes - this is how democracy forces progress and that in turn is why the military are doing all they can to tarnish politicians and deny democracy.

that is your opinion I do not agree, while elected politicians continue to enrich themselves they have little to no interest in changing anything, why would they change the constitution or laws or the justice system in order to put themselves in jail, nope sorry - the only way is to make sure the constitution laws and justice system are fully in place before they take office - and also making sure they cannot reverse or change  any of it without public consent - only then will Thailand be ready for an elected fully working democracy

[smedly]

1 hour ago, seajae said:

true reconciliation would mean removing the reds and yellows, making the countries laws absolute and enforcing them, not bailing convicted criminals and locking them. Only when everyone is treated the same way, the groups that push all the separation/ violence and all people breaking the law are charged will we see the crap stop. Its hard to have reconciliation when every one is treated differently depending on their name/wealth/position plus all the corruption allowed to flourish, trouble is no one single entity in Thailand is willing to take the first steps to do so, money is far to important to them all, screw being honest and doing whats right for the country.

don't know what a yellow is but for sure removing violent groups or organisations like the reds would be a step in the right direction, there is no place for violence in a democracy and they have proven time and time again that that is how they try to achieve their goals...........threats bombs guns and extreme violence

[Russbert]

11 minutes ago, smedly said:

that is your opinion I do not agree, while elected politicians continue to enrich themselves they have little to no interest in changing anything, why would they change the constitution or laws or the justice system in order to put themselves in jail, nope sorry - the only way is to make sure the constitution laws and justice system are fully in place before they take office - and also making sure they cannot reverse or change  any of it without public consent - only then will Thailand be ready for an elected fully working democracy

Which constitution do you think most accurately reflects the will of the people

1997 people's constitution

2007 military constitution

2014 military constitution.

 

Can you list exactly what it is that you think that politicians are guilty of but the current  and past military rulers are innocent of?

[Russbert]

8 minutes ago, smedly said:

don't know what a yellow is but for sure removing violent groups or organisations like the reds would be a step in the right direction, there is no place for violence in a democracy and they have proven time and time again that that is how they try to achieve their goals...........threats bombs guns and extreme violence

If you don't know what a yellow is then you're probably not well enough informed to be commenting here. History shows that it is the reds who profit most from non violence (winning elections) and the yellows who profit most from violence (overthrowing those elected governments). 

[Jonnapat]

I'm at a loss to understand the Thai meaning of reconciliation. Does the junta want every citizen to think and act the same like the example set at an early age in schools?

I would say that in every country in the world there are vast differences of opinion in politics, religion and so on.

What they are trying to achieve without any dissention of any kind.

 

[smedly]

47 minutes ago, Jonnapat said:

I'm at a loss to understand the Thai meaning of reconciliation. Does the junta want every citizen to think and act the same like the example set at an early age in schools?

I would say that in every country in the world there are vast differences of opinion in politics, religion and so on.

What they are trying to achieve without any dissention of any kind.

 

you are entirely correct and I refer you to my earlier post, reconciliation was a catchphrase used by Thaksin as he was pursuing his own amnesty while at the same time using his red terrorists to carry out violent acts, everyone has a right to express their opinions and make choices but it must not include violence - inciting violence or spreading hatred, those that want to go down that path need to be dealt with severely in any society in any country not just Thailand

[tomta]

6 hours ago, smedly said:

you are entirely correct and I refer you to my earlier post, reconciliation was a catchphrase used by Thaksin as he was pursuing his own amnesty while at the same time using his red terrorists to carry out violent acts, everyone has a right to express their opinions and make choices but it must not include violence - inciting violence or spreading hatred, those that want to go down that path need to be dealt with severely in any society in any country not just Thailand
 

 

Just out of curiosity, in your opinion, could those peaceful opinions include a desire for an amnesty for Thaksin? Or even the expression of opinion in favour of a republican form of government? Or the opinion that the amnesty for the present junta be revoked and that they be charged with treason? All of these could be opinions that could theoretically be expressed peacefully, I feel.  How far do you think free expression should be allowed to go?

[tomta]

7 hours ago, Jonnapat said:

I'm at a loss to understand the Thai meaning of reconciliation. Does the junta want every citizen to think and act the same like the example set at an early age in schools?

I would say that in every country in the world there are vast differences of opinion in politics, religion and so on.

What they are trying to achieve without any dissention of any kind.

 

Yes

[phantomfiddler]

10 hours ago, Russbert said:

If you don't know what a yellow is then you're probably not well enough informed to be commenting here. History shows that it is the reds who profit most from non violence (winning elections) and the yellows who profit most from violence (overthrowing those elected governments). 

Are you on the same planet ? All of the violence was perpetrated by the paid redshirt thugs, while the yellow shirts chose to do non violent sit-ins and the like. Get real !

[smedly]

1 hour ago, tomta said:

Just out of curiosity, in your opinion, could those peaceful opinions include a desire for an amnesty for Thaksin? Or even the expression of opinion in favour of a republican form of government? Or the opinion that the amnesty for the present junta be revoked and that they be charged with treason? All of these could be opinions that could theoretically be expressed peacefully, I feel.  How far do you think free expression should be allowed to go?

you do realise that Thaksin is a convicted criminal and in my opinion one of the most divisive and violent people to ever have held office in Thailand...........................................how many billions did he make from his proven beyond doubt illegal activities and abuse of power then use it to fund terrorism in Thailand because he was caught out and lost face, oh yes his propaganda machine is still operating and they are all well paid - he won an election by promising the most ridiculous pledges at the last election - win by any means - then tried to push through a reconciliation agenda which ultimately was a drive for his amnesty

 

 

sorry - the only thing wrong right now is that the current government keep using the word "reconciliation" - they have no idea what it means, how about seeking out those that propagate division and hatred and locking them up  

[tomta]

On 7/30/2017 at 11:31 PM, phantomfiddler said:

Are you on the same planet ? All of the violence was perpetrated by the paid redshirt thugs, while the yellow shirts chose to do non violent sit-ins and the like. Get real !

All of the violence? Really? The policeman who kicked a grenade away at a PDRC rally and had his foot blown away was a victim of paid redshirt thugs? Really?

[tomta]

23 hours ago, smedly said:

you do realise that Thaksin is a convicted criminal and in my opinion one of the most divisive and violent people to ever have held office in Thailand...........................................how many billions did he make from his proven beyond doubt illegal activities and abuse of power then use it to fund terrorism in Thailand because he was caught out and lost face, oh yes his propaganda machine is still operating and they are all well paid - he won an election by promising the most ridiculous pledges at the last election - win by any means - then tried to push through a reconciliation agenda which ultimately was a drive for his amnesty

 

 

sorry - the only thing wrong right now is that the current government keep using the word "reconciliation" - they have no idea what it means, how about seeking out those that propagate division and hatred and locking them up  

Yes I realize that Thaksin is under the laws of Thailand a criminal and I realize that for you he is the anti-Christ but you did not answer my questions. They weren't about Thaksin/ They were about free expression and how far it should be allowed to go. Let me repeat them

 

Just out of curiosity, in your opinion, could those peaceful opinions include a desire for an amnesty for Thaksin? Or even the expression of opinion in favour of a republican form of government? Or the opinion that the amnesty for the present junta be revoked and that they be charged with treason? All of these could be opinions that could theoretically be expressed peacefully, I feel.  How far do you think free expression should be allowed to go?

[smedly]

59 minutes ago, tomta said:

.  How far do you think free expression should be allowed to go?

total free expression is a myth - there are limits to what people can say in every country in the world and the limits are changing as terrorism is on the rise - there is no such a thing as "freedom of speech"

 

you decide for yourself where the limit is - I am confident it will not be the same as mine

 

I will not be replying to any more of you very obvious "baiting" posts were you actually do not share your own opinions only ask others for theirs............that is baiting and trolling