Thaksin’s hidden agenda

By Samart Mangsang

20 July 2006

Aside from the furore that followed caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s accusations that a “charismatic” individual outside the constitutional framework was trying to undermine his administration, the besieged premier further incensed his critics when it was revealed he had written a letter to US President George W Bush.

Respected diplomats, lawyers, politicians and the public at large felt tht Thaksin’s attempt to cozy up to the US president were inappropriate.

The Lawyers Council of Thailand said the letter breached the Constitution because Thaksin had failed to refer to the country as “The Kingdom of Thailand.” These legal highbrows explained that because Thailand is a constitutional monarchy, “The Kingdom” must preface any reference to the country. The council also pointed out that the prime minister should not have referred to Thailand as “my country,” which suggests ownership, but as “our country,” which suggests public participation in a democratic system.

More generally, the fact that Thaksin felt the need to report to the US president about Thailand’s domestic problems raises questions of sovereignty. We are not a vassal state of the US. Neither is it our colonial master. There is no political or diplomatic precedent that says we should explain our internal affairs to another country – even the US, the world’s only superpower.

As for the content of the letter, by calling southern insurgents terrorists, the prime minister can only inflame passions in the three border provinces, as will his suggestion that international terrorists were involved in the conflict. By internationalizing the separatist movement, Thaksin is paving the way for the US – which has declared war on terror – to intervene in Thailand’s internal affairs.

In his missive, Thaksin also tried to explain away the failed April general election. He said the poll was annulled because it was boycotted by the opposition parties, which he said had behaved undemocratically. In fact, he said the whole anti-Thaksin movement is led by those who are opposed to democracy. This allegation is serious and unfair. The caretaker prime minister painted a misleading picture of the political situation. In consequence, the main opposition Democrat party felt duty bound to publicly rebut Thaksin’s claims – as did the People’s Alliance for Democracy, which sent an open letter to the embassies of major world powers on July 14.

These are major issues. By sending this letter, Thaksin has not only breached diplomatic protocol: by trying to court sympathy abroad he has tried to make political capital out of Thailand’s domestic problems.

What prompted Thaksin to risk further alienating himself from the populace? Clearly, by writing to Bush and other world leaders Thaksin wanted to know what they think about our political problems: the dissolution of Parliament, the failed election and the growing anti-Thaksin sentiment.

If Thaksin feels he has their sympathy, he will feel more comfortable about suppressing his enemies. If they were to give him their support, he will claim he has the backing of the international community to crush his adversaries either legally or forcefully. On the other hand, if these same world leaders ignore his correspondence, Thaksin will invariably resign from office.

The prime minister needs allies abroad because he is no longer in control of the political scene. Because of the separation of the legislature and the judiciary, neither he, the Cabinet nor any politician can control the courts. Following the advice given by His Majesty the King on April 25, the Constitutional Court on May 8 nullified the general election. The Election Commission (EC) is also being investigated for malfeasance, and five political parties, including the ruling Thai Rak Thai (TRT) party and the Democrat party, are facing possible dissolution for poll fraud.

The political situation is totally dependent on the court’s verdicts. This had made Thaksin, in his capacity as prime minister and TRT leader, so worried he has tried to enlist support from abroad.

The caretaker premier and his underlings are also trying to disparage the opposition parties and discredit the courts.

The Thaksin regime is clearly planning to launch a major offensive against its enemies. It is trying to mobilize mass support in the provinces and wants permission from abroad.

However, it is generally believed that Thaksin’s letter did not achieve the result he wanted because the public found his conduct unacceptable. Thaksin has run out of options, so he will reluctantly leave the political arena.

If the Constitutional Court decides that the EC is guilty of malfeasance and that TRT should be disbanded, the Thaksin regime will come to an end. It is not just Thaksin who is facing a bleak political future but all those close to him. However, for his subordinates all is not lost – if they leave the party now they might yet survive in politics.

Thai Day

Lawyers launch new salvo against Thaksin’s letter

By Phoojadkarn Daily

20 July 2006

In a relentless public campaign against caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, the Lawyers Council of Thailand (LCT) has issued a second statement condemning the premier’s recent letter to US President George W Bush.

LCT chairman Dej-udom Krairit said it released the second statement to point out that Thaksin should have signed the letter “caretaker Prime Minister” instead of “Prime Minister of Thailand,” as he is no longer prime minister and calling himself such contravenes article 5, 6, 7 and 23 of the regulations of the Prime Minister’s Office.

Moreover, the LCT said Thaksin should have referred to the country as “The Kingdom of Thailand” instead of just “Thailand,” especially since President Bush used the country’s formal name in his reply.

“The caretaker prime minister, caretaker ministers and all other political officers must recognize and act in line with the laws, virtues and regulations of the Prime Minister’s Office…The choice of words in the letter is not in line with the virtues, morals and responsibilities of political officers as stated in those regulations.

“Moreover, in the letter, Thaksin also talked about his political absence and touched on the Monarchy. His claim about [taking a political hiatus to avoid tainting] the Diamond Jubilee of His Majesty’s accession to the throne does not conform to the truth. The letter also slanders other people and those who practice their right [to protest as] enshrined by the Constitution,” Dej-udom said.

Regarding Thaksin’s statement in the letter that the Thai courts annulled the April 2 election on technical considerations, Dej-udom said Thaksin should not have used the plural “Thai courts” because it falsely suggests that many Thai courts worked together to annul the election.

He said any criticism of the Constitutional Court’s ruling on the election must be based in truth and the rule of law and must also show respect for the court’s decision.

“In stating that as only the Constitutional Court annulled the election, by Thaksin’s use of the word “courts” we cannot help but interpret the letter as containing ill will toward the judiciary system of the Kingdom of Thailand…and wanting to make outsiders misunderstand the Thai courts. It is totally inappropriate and not in accordance with the regulations of the Prime Minister’s Office,” said Dej-udom.

Some people in politics have complained that, like Thaksin, the LCT also does not refer to Thailand as “The Kingdom of Thailand.”

However, Dej-udom explained that as the LCT is a private organization and none of its members are civil servants it would be inappropriate for the council to add “The Kingdom of Thailand” to its name because that title should only be used in an official capacity.

“The LCT has the duty of helping the public understand the law and monitoring the government’s use of power…Critiquing the performance of political officials is what the LCT has always done.

“For example, in the last government…the LCT criticized about 11 letters that were inappropriate,” said Dej-udom. “People who volunteer to be political officers must have the maturity and know-how to act morally and virtuously in accordance with Article 77 of the Constitution and other regulations of the Prime Minister’s Office, particularly Article 25, which requires officers to safeguard the dignity of the nation.”

Dej-udom said that the LCT’s second statement, which, for now, is to be its last public comment on Thaksin’s letter to Bush, describes in detail the regulations and laws challenged by the letter.

He said the LCT will only release another statement if it is asked to lodge a complaint with the Administrative Court.

As he is chairman of a committee that seeks to help people understand the law and offer people assistance, Dej-udom said he would be willing to set up a committee to proceed with such a case.

He said the LCT would not file a lawsuit itself, but would offer to act as legal advisor to anyone willing to file a case.

He insisted that the LCT does not have a hidden agenda but only wants to clarify what Thaksin’s letter means with regard to the law.

Thai Day