Uncomfortable Bedfellows

Thailand and Human Rights are uncomfortable Bedfellows. The “powers-that-be” in Thailand don’t really like HR. The Democrat Party represent the sort of people who are opposed to the idea of spreading HR more widely. This puts them in a dilemma.

Regular readers will know that I have precious little good to say about Abhisit Vejjajiva, but I have heard him claim that there is democracy in Thailand and that in order for democracy to flourish you need debate. He has said words to this affect in English, to the international media.

The actions of his government have gone against his own words though.

Internet censorship is at an all time high. In a recent Internet study, Thailand has gone from “nearly free” to “not free”. Pretty damning when you interpret the meaning of “Thailand”, which is “land of the free.”

Many of the “governing class” are unhappy with the people having access to information. Information is power. Give the people knowledge and you give them the opportunity to better themselves. On a smaller scale, give people knowledge and wisdom and they might not accept the amarts superiority, and that would never do.

It is somewhat ironic that someone is going to make an awful lot of money when 3G is finally allowed in Thailand. 3G will help to finally show the ordinary Thai people who the amart are and what they have done to amass their fortunes.

But what does 3G have to do with Human Rights? Recently the United Nations passed a resolution that says that “access to the Internet is a Human Right.”

Thailand is a member of the UNHRC. As a member they should be furthering HR in its own country, as an example to the rest of the world! I think even someone who supports the Democrats would be hard pressed to defend the record of the Abhisit led coalition government.

We have only concentrated on one aspect of HR in this article. There are many other HR that the present government either ignore or stamp all over without regard.

The HR right to a fair trial. The HR to freedom of speech. Section 112 of the Thai laws, governing Lese Majeste and the Computer Crimes laws need urgent attention.

Over-use of the draconian LM laws are now damaging that thing they were designed to protect. Whether this is by design or accident, who can say?

You can follow @TonyHedges on Twitter.

The Stage Is Set.

With the Thai General Election less than a month away the stage is set for real change.

Many political commentators seem to be stuck in the revolving door of finger-pointing at the past.

I have always preferred to look forward, we must never forget the past, but we must use our experience of the past to shape the future.

What has happened in the past can’t be changed. People can be made to answer for their part in past events as a way of drawing an end to a shameful part of history (for example), the hope being that perhaps it would dissuade bad things being repeated in the future.

We can act today to change tomorrow. All Thai citizens of voting age can do this. They do it by voting. I would personally urge you to vote for PheuThai, but as an outspoken advocate of democracy, just voting for a party in Thailand is good.

Don’t be tempted to vote “no”. I am sure that the option is there in the hope that disaffected Redshirts vote no, somehow sleighting the government. Voting no is a waste of time. It doesn’t matter. If you make the effort to vote, vote for a political party.

As the people of the Kingdom consider who to Vote for, a look at the polls show a lead for the PheuThai party. If everyone who can vote, does vote, it looks as though the largest party will be lead by Yingluck, Thaksin Shinawatras sister.

Assuming that she will be allowed to form a government, I can only be optimistic about the future. The first lady Prime Minister of Thailand can only be good for the country. A period of reconciliation and a coming-together of all Thai people in an effort to heal wounds inflicted ever since the last military coup would be more than welcome. I believe that this would be easier under a female PM.

These are, of course, my opinions. That is why I am writing this blog. Many may disagree, as is their democratic right. I won’t be reflecting any disagreement here, though I would defend everyones right to disagree.

I hope that Yingluck and PheuThai party win enough seats in the election that they can govern without needing the support of smaller parties. This would be the quickest route to Thailand’s recovery from the repression of the Abhisit led coalition government.

Don’t waste your vote. Every vote counts. It is the only time that you can help to shape your immediate future.

Tony can be followed on Twitter, twitter.com/TonyHedges

The State Of Play (part 2)

Follow @TonyHedges

Following on from yesterday’s post, in which I put the case against voting for the Democrats, now we will have a look at the merits (or otherwise) of the smaller parties.

In the political system (and dual voting) in Thailand, it is very unlikely that some of the so-called smaller parties would ever be elected on a wave of emotion, to make a government in its own right. Indeed most small parties in Thailand are not geared up that way. Nor indeed do they field enough candidates to make more than a small ripple in the political pond (if you follow my colourful metaphors).

This runs contrary to the usual way political parties work in the West. With a first-past-the-post (hereafter referred to as FPTP) system political parties, if they want to govern, have to think and act big.

So why are there so many small parties in Thailand? Is it a result of the Electoral Commission having too strong a say, in that with only scant evidence they can disband parties and banter party executives? I don’t know the answer.

What surprises me about some of these small parties is that they appear to operate like a “thiefdom” for the leader of the party. They count on the fact that it is likely that the party that wins the most votes/seats won’t have a majority big enough to govern on their own. [Only Thaksin's TRT party has done this in Thailands recent (and sadly short)  political history.] They figure that if the winner of the election has to “do deals” with the smaller parties, to get their support and become part of a coalition government.

This is all well and good and accepted political behaviour in Thailand, irrespective of it seeming alien to Western political practice.

What annoys me about this practice is the seeming lack of ambition. If you go into an election not expecting to win why bother, you legitimately could ask.

Perhaps it is showing us a different form of ambition? If the small party were led by a politician who believe themselves to be important. That they could agree to be in a coalition purely to see what they can get out of it, is in my eyes and disgraceful and underhand way of operating.

This is why I am surprised that BhumJaiThai has MP’s. Up until by-elections last year, many BhumJaiThai MP’s were originally elected to the last parliament as members of the People Power Party (PPP). After that was disbanded (some say unfairly – remember it turned out Suthep had offered to pay some people to lie to EC about vote buying – and when this emerged the EC effectively shrugged its shoulders and said, what can we do now? And did nothing.)  some members of the PPP joined in newly formed BhumJaiThai. Nothing wrong with that, however, when they then go on to support the Democrats, helping to keep them in power, it makes me wonder how well they are serving their electorate who (remember) voted them into parliament as PPP.

My point, if you haven’t got it yet, is that politicians are voted in to represent their constituents. What BhumJaiThai did in essence was say, thanks for electing us, but now we are going to persue a path that suits us and not the wishes of our constituents. When the people of Isaan voted them in as PPP, i doubt that they wanted their MP to keep the Democrat Party in power.

I was very surprised that many BhumJaiThai MPs kept their seats in by-elections last year. I can only assume that there must have been a degree of ignorance in the voters minds. There was certainly voices raised about possible vote-buying and shinanigans happening. This is hardly surprising when you look at the de facto (behind the scenes) leader of the party, Newin Chidchob.

If you live in Isaan I would suggest that a vote for BhumJaiThai is a vote for a party that is more interested in furthering its own influence (at the expense of its own voters if needs be). They appear to be in politics to see how deeply they can stick their collective ‘noses in the trough,’ with a ‘what’s in it for me’ attitude.

This is why I refer to BhumJaiThai as BhumJaiKwai. Please do not vote for them.

Follow @TonyHedges

The State Of Play (part 1)

Since my last post I have been to Thailand, come back home to the UK and a general election called. I notice that my last post was in February! My apologies for sluggishness, but there’s only so many ways you can illustrate the fairly widely held view that Thai PM Abhisit Vejjajiva is a political lightweight and potential target of the International Criminal Court.

The posturing and general electioneering has been, on the whole, fairly predictable. I am pretty convinced that PheuThai Party will win a majority of the seats, but things are not cut and dried.

If people intend to vote PheuThai they should do so, don’t take it for granted that they will win. Your vote is extremely important. Your vote can determine who governs the country for the next few years. Don’t be tempted to sell it, people could not give you enough money to truly pay for it. You should think about your livelihood and how it will be affected by the different policies the main parties have said they will put in place.

The Democrat Party are hoping that you have either forgotten that they are responsible for the worst case of mass killing of their own citizens in Thailands checkered political history.  Either that or they hope you believe their lies and distortions, that somehow it was the unarmed Redshirts that somehow contributed to their own deaths.

I wonder whether the Democrats are hoping that you have forgotten Suthep’s gaffe about Redshirts dying because they ran into the path of bullets fired by the Royal Thai Army!

The lack of a proper investigation and obviously biased statements by the head of Thailands Department of Special Investigation, lead to the conclusion that the Democrats are not interested in truth or reconciliation. This is further backed up by the actions of the Ministry of ICT who have been busy blocking a record number of websites, the result of which has downgraded Thailand to the status of “not free” by Internet watchdogs.

And of course there is Suthep again, reminding us that no one knows who killed JFK, so how they are supposed to find the guilty parties, the Bangkok 2010 killers, who knows?

If the will to find the truth is there it can be done. Truth is that the Democrats don’t want to know the truth because the truth is that they are responsible for ordering the crackdown.

So remember this when you think about who to vote for. Do you really want to vote for a party that is prepared to order the army to shoot its own people in order to hold on to power? A party that in opposition cried foul at Thaksin’s ‘populist’ policies and does a complete u-turn when they try to win this general election.

Do not assume that because PheuThai are a head in the polls that they will win and don’t need your vote. Your vote counts, don’t waste it.

The State Of Play

Firstly may I apologise for the gap in my blog. I have been working on a project that has taken me longer than I expected and it has eaten into my blogging time.

Thailands pretend Primeminister.
It should be becoming obvious now to any seasoned observer the difference between a real PM and Thailands pretend PM. No?

The main difference between the two is how they operate. A real PM has been voted into power and is always mindful of the voters who would judge them. They have gotten to their position on the back of majority support in their country and obviously that is good. A clever PM will always have in the back of their mind that if they are seen as doing a good job, that they could win over some doubters and hopefully increase their majority at the next election.
It’s what I call the unseen hand of the electoral mandate cuffing the politician about the head, keeping them inline, nose to the grindstone.

A ‘real’ PM realises that his/her reputation and place in history is shaped by their actions (or lack of action). The title Primeminister literally means ‘First Minister’. It means that any action taken by your government can be traced back to you. In other words, you are responsible for everything your government does.

If you do not take responsibility, then you are (IMHO) not a proper PM. If you try to pass the blame and say “its not my fault, it’s the responsibility of the minister involved”, you aren’t a proper PM.

Every now and then your ministers will make mistakes, this is normal. You call them to your office and you tell them how to put things right or you sack them and out someone else in to their job. You don’t ignore the mistake or try to gloss over it. A proper PM thinks it is my fault for putting XXXXXXX into a job that was too much for them.

A proper PM will look about at society and see what needs fixing and put it right. A great PM will know that an aspect of society would work better done a different way, even if, on the surface it appears to work ok.

Mark A. Vejjajiva is not a great PM, he’s not even a good one (IMHO you’ll be unsurprised to hear) because he is the opposite to all of the above!

All Mark is interested in is holding on to power. He is very fond as passing responsibility for different ‘projects’ to other people, when it should ultimately be the PM in charge.

The ultimate irony is that 100 days into the Primeministership of Samak I recall a much younger Mark A Vejjajiva holding a press conference about “100 days of nothing”, where he criticised the legitimately elected government of doing nothing and wasting the time it had been in office. As you know, Mark A Vejjajiva Is a master of being a hypercrite it.

What do I mean by hypercrite? Just so we all understand a hypercrite says one thing and does another. For example, a hypercrite tells the Army they need to rethink their strategy in dealing with Southern extremists, but doesn’t come up with an alternative plan and more over never served in the Army anyway.
A hypercrite says, do as I say, not as I do. A hypercrite says “I did that” when something goes well and “he did that” when something goes wrong.

A hypercrite says “I welcome debate” when people criticise him and then blocks sites on the Internet that support the opposite view.

The biggest criticism of Mark A Vejjajivas administration is its shortsighted attention to holding on to power and the way they ignore almost everything else. A classic example of this is the huge cues developing at Bangkok Airport. A proper PM would make sure more staff were employed because the delays reflect badly on Thailand and could damage its tourist industry. Mark A Vejjajiva is unconcerned.

Watching the ‘revolution’ in Egypt is very interesting, because of the parallels with Thailand. A country ruled by a dictator has anti-government protesters demanding democracy and the right to vote for whoever they want. The dictator tries to get the population to turn against the protesters. Am I talking about Egypt or Thailand in April 2009?

Mark A Vejjajiva is a British Citizen.

As a British Citizen myself it almost seems madness that anyone could renounce their citizenship! As far as I am aware there is no British legal way to do this even if you wanted to. And why would you want to?

The whole debate on whether or not Mark A Vejjajiva is British or not is a nonsense. He is. He may have dual nationality, that’s fine, nothing wrong with that.

The reason he is trying to say he is not a British Citizen is firstly because he is worried he might fall foul of any Thai law that says foreigners can’t be in politics but mostly he is worried that he could be arrested if he left Thailand by the International Criminal Court, if action against him personally is successful. And we all know how Mark hates to take responsibility.

There’s no getting away from the fact that Thailand is a broken country, but when will someone actually admit it and do something about making it better? It sure won’t be the Democrats.

Police Reform Needed

In a break from my usual carping at the Thai state, I feature the first in a series of blogs that look to the future and discus what needs to be done to reform Thailand. Some people might suggest the old addage that “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, but I would say that this is an ostrich-like approach that is akin to the way the government seems to be dealing with the latest round of Wikileaks that refers to Thailand.

Reform of the Thai Police Force is desperately needed. There are too many officers in the Police force that seem to think that taking bribes and protecting criminals and criminal activity is a legitimate way of making money. Virtually all democratic countries have ‘clean’ Police Forces. This is what Thailand should be aiming towards, because they most definitely do not have at present.

At a basic level a Policeman is there to uphold the law and ensure that society can operate freely. They cannot be seen to operate (seemingly) above the law and by this I mean that if a Policeman commits a crime he/she should be dealt with in the same way as anyone else accused of a crime. Upholding the law means being seen to be abiding by ALL laws. Laws are made to make society operate smoothly. If you let a section of society get away with breaking laws without punishment (PAD for example), you get a fractured society. People opposed to what PAD did in 2008 would be justified in their complaint that justice has not yet been done.

So what sort of things do Thai Police Officers do, that makes me believe that reform is urgent? Police Officers are well known to jump out into roads, in front of car drivers, in order to pull them over, a fine is then levied. Surprisingly this tends to happen at lunch or dinner time mostly. This practise, if not accompanied by a traffic ticket is illegal if not immoral. It is abhorrent and should be stopped. What is worse though is ‘protectionism’. This is where a Police Officer is aware of organised wrong-doing, but abuses their position as a police officer to accept a regular back-hander (illegal bribe) payments from the criminal gang for making sure they are not stopped doing what they are doing (by having other police officers so their duty ect).

This Police protectionism is particularly abhorrent when it comes to the very nasty world of Child Pornography DVD’s on sale in Thailand. As with the recent WikiLeaks, the thai govt has again adopted an ostrich-like approach to this deeply disturbing phenomenon. If the government wont do anything about it, who will? The Police? They should be the agency that deals with the sale of illegal DVD’s, but it seems after making a lot of “noise” about it, they have adopted the position of “head-in-the-sand”.

So if those are the problems, what is the solution?

Firstly, you have to encourage the Police Officers to be part of the solution. Step one is get them aboard the reform process. The easiest way to do this would be through a promise of better pay. At the moment there is probably too many Police Officers. So it would be possible to reduce the numbers of Police Officers, increase the wages of all remaining Officers, and get an improvement in Crime prevention without spending any more in your Police budget. Less Police Officers but subsequently better Officers.

Any Policeman that asks a motorist to pay a fine should be breaking a law, call it extortion if you like. Make it clear to motorists that there will be things that they could be fined for, but that the Police Officer has to issue the driver with a ‘fine ticket’ which must be paid at a local government agency office, not a Police station. No money should be given to a Police officer. In an effort to stamp this behaviour out, you could get Police uniforms changed slightly so that there is an obvious identifying mark (of some sort) to each uniform, so should a Policeman try to extort money out of a motorist, that motorist can report the officer at a later time. Perhaps you could adopt a phrase from Baseball and have a “three strikes and your out” rule? If an officer is found to carry on extorting money and has three complaints against them proven, they are dismissed from the police force and face legal action through the criminal courts, with a prison sentence at the end of it.

If you think this is harsh it is nothing compared to the severity that should be metered out to Police Officers found to be engaging in “protectionism”. No 3 strike rule here. The moment an officer is suspected, he/she should be suspended. More than this, remand in prison may be required to fully be able to investigate the damage a Police officer accused of protectionism could do to obscuring his involvement/guilt.

In dealing with these two major hurdles to a ‘clean’ Police Force you need a new Policing force to be created, for the purpose of this article I will call them the PCD – Police Complaints Division. Their sole job will be to investigate complaints made by the public. They will not be welcome in the Police at first, but after a while will be accepted because when the Police realise that they are there to weed out bad Police, they will understand the importance of the PCD. The PCD is a way to ensure that the ordinary Police Officer you see at any time is an honest man.

General Election Coming Soon

Now I may believe that Abhisit Vejjajiva is an idiot, a political lightweight and a hypocrite but all of that doesn’t really matter too much because I know that some time this coming year he has said that he will call a General Election.

Why does this matter? You may ask yourself. Well, it is important for many reasons, one of the primary reasons being that the whole sorry saga of the time since the 2006 military coup has shown people the value of their vote. In this instance, people have been reminded how valuable their vote is because it was stolen away from the majority of Thai people who voted PPP. Those people had their vote cancelled by the dubious actions of the courts in banning the party that won the last free and fair general election.
I was one of the people who argued the case for a new general election sometime in spring 2009. My main point being that without the mandate of the Thai people, the current government are essentially illigitimate.

Abhisit is fond of saying that Thailand is a democracy, and then turns around and restricts the freedom of the media (to report the truth) and the freedom of the people (to say what they want).  On a very basic level a democracy requires a few things to allow it to operate properly. It needs debate in order to come up with new ideas and to shape direction. And it needs a strong but fair media, to question the government and to keep it honest. Thailand has neither.

Those people in Thailand that say that “rural Thais” don’t understand how to vote and sell their vote are not only bigoted but ignorant too. How hard is it to put a cross in a box? The difficult bit is getting people to vote for who you want them to. It seems legitimate in Thailand to accuse the side that wins of vote buying, especially if that party is a party associated with Thaksin Shinawatra.

Why is the ‘establishment’ in Thailand against Thaksin Shinawatra and his political party (parties)? The basic thrust of his parties policies chimes most with middle of the road socialist ideology. Cheap healthcare, job creation closer to peoples homes (rather than encouraging people to find work by going into the big cities). What worries the elite about socialism? Fair taxes! No one has said that they intend on taxing the rich more than they do now, but the rich have more to loose should this tactic be adopted.

Many believe that a group of rich people are behind the government and insisted on the govt taking a hard-line and cracking down on the largely peaceful protesters. This shows us that not only the Democrats but the Amart are willing to kill people to stay in power.

The demographics in Thailand are such that in a free and fair election, the party that is most likely to win a majority in parliament is PheuThai, Thaksins’ party. It is almost a no-brainer. Anyone who believes that the Democrats could win a general election is living in cloud-cuckoo-land, so this group will (hopefully) include most of the Democrat Party and its leadership!

The only fly-in-the-ointment for PheuThai is the BhumJaiThai party. They are likely to lose MP’s in the Northeast of Thailand, if people are made aware of some important facts about BhumJaiThai. Chances are that if you look at each BJT politician, you will see someone who was elected to their current position under the banner of a different party. What I mean by this is that 99% of them were elected to parliament as a member of the (now disbanded) PPP. Rather than joining PT, they made their own party and having been elected as socialists, joined forces with the Democrats (conservatives) keeping them in power. A complete turn around from what they were elected to do.

If you are Thai and you voted PPP in the last general election, only to find that your MP had joined the BhumJaiThai party, you should actively vote AGAINST him/her in a forth-coming general election. I would not dream to tell you who to vote FOR, but it should be borne in mind that you voted for a Socialist and they joined the opposite side. I will tell you who I would not vote for and that is someone who abandons the principals of the party that they got elected with and runs to the party where they think they will have the most influence with. That shows a shallowness. Are they in politics for the people who elected them, or for themselves?

Since Abhisit came to power he has tried to do his job properly, but has failed. He claims responsibility for “steering Thailand” through the “difficult economic times” in late 2009/early 2010. This is rubbish. He did nothing and merely surfed the waves and got lucky. To claim it was his doing that Thailand didn’t get into financial difficulties is bullshit of the worst kind.

What Abhisit has done is shown everyone the importance of their vote. No matter what you do, you definitely do not sell your vote! It is far too important and potentially valuable to sell it. Your vote can determine whether you might be financially better off in the future or worse off.

Abhisit is also hoping that if he wins the next general election he can somehow avoid punishment for his part in the politically motivated killings in Bangkok this year.

In an attempt to further simplify things, Abhisit, the Democrat party and BJT, in effect represent authouritarianism, a retrograde step backwards in politics, PheuThai represents in contrast, the way forwards (in the fairest to all sort of way). There is much to do in Thailand and it would be better for the majority (in my opinion) if PT wins. I think they will, because the majority of people would benefit from their policies and can see this. Abhisit has his place in history marked out already, whether he will be held to account for his part in the massacre of Thai people in order for him to stay in power for a few months longer remains to be seen.