Saturday July 12, 2008

By KFH RESEARCH

THAILAND’S economy accelerated in the first quarter of 2008 as the first elected government since the coup in 2006 took office, underpinning a rebound in consumer confidence and spending. GDP growth for 1Q08 came in at 6% y-o-y (1.4% q-o-q), the fastest growth in two years and higher than the 5.7% recorded in 4Q07.

The better-than-expected GDP result for 1Q08 partly suggests that restoration of a democratically elected government in early 2008 has provided a boost to consumer spending and investment, supported by the new administration’s pro-growth economic policies.

However, political stability still remains an issue, and the recent political tensions, which culminated in anti-government street protests and concerns of a coup, are expected to hurt investor confidence, already reflected by the downward slide in the country’s stock market.

In addition to concerns about political turbulence, rising oil prices are another source of worry for the Thai economy. High fuel costs are slowing the US$206bil economy, and the risk of inflation remains on the upside.

Inflation in May soared to the highest in a decade at 7.6% y-o-y. In view of the downside factors related to the global environment (oil prices and external demand) as well as Thailand’s political and policy environment, a slowdown in the upcoming quarters is highly likely.

Thus, we expect Thailand’s GDP to grow by a revised forecast of 4% - 4.5% in 2008, compared to 4.8% in 2007. On May 23, Fitch Ratings affirmed Thailand’s long-term foreign and local currency Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs) at BBB+ and A, respectively, with outlook on the ratings remaining stable.

A strengthening external financial position, improving public finances, clearer and more stable policy environment, the restoration of democracy and the ongoing financial reforms all help to support the sovereign ratings.

Downside risks for domestic demand

Domestic demand, which picked up in the 1Q08 after having remained sluggish throughout 2007, was the key driver of growth during 1Q08, and is expected to remain bullish in 2008.

However, private domestic demand faces significant downside risks over the next six months as consumer sentiment is highly susceptible to politics and inflation.

Nonetheless, domestic demand is expected to drive growth in 2008. Consumer confidence began rising amid anticipation that a democratically elected government would pursue policies more designed to promote growth than those of the military junta it replaced.

Private consumption rose 2.6% from a year earlier, following the government’s economic stimulus measures. While the 2.6% y-o-y rise in consumer spending was still weak by historic standards, it represented the biggest gain in five quarters.

The Consumer Confidence Index rose to 79.9 points in April 2008 from its low of 75.5 points recorded in October 2007, signalling a regain in confidence amongst consumers.

Similarly, an encouraging 5.4% y-o-y increase in investment provided key support to the Thai economy in the quarter.

Although the new government elected in early 2008 brought the democratic process back in place in Thailand’s political landscape, the political scene since has not been without tension.

In May 2008, protestors led by People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) movement, took to the streets to demand the resignation of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej and his coalition government, following their plan to amend the present constitution. Political tensions continue to remain high.

Impact of political uncertainties

Expectations are that the new government will pave the way for clearer policies, but political instability could potentially delay the recovery of private investments and household consumption.

Continued social and political unrest in the central and southern provinces of Thailand could halt funds inflow and serve as a potential drag on overall economic sentiment. It is encouraging that the Business Sentiment Index moved up to 43.0 points in April 2008, from a low of 39.3 points the previous year, as this reflects an improved investor perception.

However, political instability after prolonged street protests by PAD in May and political uncertainties moving forward could cause Thailand to lose foreign-investment attractiveness.

So far, FDI has not been impacted by the political turmoil, as the value of investment projects approved by the Board of Investment rose 10% y-o-y in the first four months of 2008. However, if the political uncertainties continue, new investment for full year could be affected.

Investments by the private and public sectors as well as household consumption should pick up from the low rates last year.

In 2007, domestic demand remained in a slump, growing at only 1.7% y-o-y, as a result of sluggish private consumption growth and a contraction in private investment, according to the World Bank.

As compared to other countries in the region, Thailand’s private consumption has remained relatively low as political uncertainties have impacted confidence levels.

Recovery in private consumption and investment could be fragile as there remain large downside risks to their growth, but could be mitigated by additional fiscal stimulus.

Risks to growth this year comes mainly from external factors such as the high oil and food prices and the potential significant slowdown in world economic growth.

On the domestic side, if uncertainties in policy directions return, such as from a change in government, consumer and investor confidence will be adversely affected. However, in the case that the global environment turns out to be more unfavourable than expected, Thailand’s strong fiscal and macroeconomic stance would be able to cushion some of the negative impacts. The government’s fiscal deficit and public debt are currently low at 2% and 38.5%, respectively. Foreign reserves have climbed to over US$90bil, or some four times short-term external debt. There is therefore room for additional fiscal stimulus if needed.

Fuel for inflation

On May 20, Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee announced that the government would increase spending to counter cooling economic growth as rising oil prices spurred inflation and potentially constrained consumer spending.

The government plans to spend 1.84 trillion baht (US$57bil) in its fiscal year starting October, a 12% increase from the forecast 1.64 trillion baht expenditure this year, helping the government meet its target of expanding the economy.

On the inflation front, headline inflation will likely rise to 5%-5.5% this year, which is an upward revision of our previous forecast of 3.5% on the back of soaring oil prices.

In April 2008, headline inflation hit a two-year high of 6.2% y-o-y, underpinned by rising costs for energy (+16.8% y-o-y or 3.2% m-o-m) and uncooked food (+14% y-o-y or 5% m-o-m).

Food inflation hit a 10-year high, with rice prices surging. Price controls on liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) will expire in July. Therefore, severe food inflation is expected to continue until at least August.

Other factors that may contribute to inflation are an average 5% rise in labour costs, as the minimum wage has been increased from June 1, and a tentative 13% increase in transportation fees.

Preliminary figures show that Thailand’s inflation rate in May soared to 7.6% y-o-y, the highest in nearly a decade, due to the unrelenting rise of oil prices. Risk to inflation remains on the upside moving forward.

The relatively upbeat national accounts data in the first quarter, coupled with upward pressure on consumer prices, increases the risk that the next interest rate adjustment by the Bank of Thailand will be upward.

We believe that the monetary authorities are not yet committed to such a move, as the core inflation rate remains a relatively subdued 2.1%. However, any significant pick-up in the June inflation figure would almost assuredly trigger a round of tightening at their next policy meeting in mid-July.

The rising Baht

We believe that given the current inflation targeting framework, monetary policy can take care of exchange rate as long as there is no conflict with inflation.

Foreign exchange market is intervened when there is too much volatility in the market. The objective is to smooth the country’s adjustment during the transitional period.

Looking forward, the baht movement will depend largely on external developments and also internal drivers: large surplus in current and capital accounts.

The Thai stock market remains one of the most popular destinations in emerging markets for foreign investors, given its relatively low P/E ratio. Such inflows together with foreign direct investments have also added pressure on the currency.

The baht will continue to appreciate as the balance of payments remains in surplus and the USD continues to depreciate. The baht continued to appreciate in 2007 by 9% compared to the USD.

In terms of the real effective exchange rate (REER), the baht has appreciated by 6.6% last year on top of 8.9% in 2006.

The baht’s appreciation was more than other currencies in the region except for the Philippines peso and the Indonesian rupiah. The baht’s REER should appreciate further this year as the balance of payments remains in surplus and the value of the USD continues to fall.

We believe the baht will appreciate to above 30 to a dollar in the near term. While the government is also expected to bring out new policies to curb baht appreciation, other near-term factors convince us that the outlook for onshore baht is positive. Thailand’s current account, which has been recording a surplus since mid-2006, posted its first deficit in 21 months in April, as surging oil prices increased the import bill to record highs.

For 2008, the surplus is expected to trend lower to 2.1% of GDP from 6.1% last year as Thailand’s trade balance is reduced substantially on the back of anticipated lower exports but higher import spending.

In 1Q08, exports of goods and services were up a solid 8.7%, but the increase was overshadowed by a 10.3% jump in imports.

Key risks for the Thai economy in 2008 include:

(a) An escalation of tensions in the southern region, which would derail efforts to boost FDI in the country,

(b) A drastic slowdown in global economic growth, which would inevitably reduce export growth,

(c) Political tensions or instability, which may erode investor confidence, and

(d) Persistence of high crude oil price or renewed hike, which would lead to high domestic retail oil prices and consequently spark higher inflation

Jul 10th 2008
From The Economist print edition

Legal cases mount against the former prime minister and his allies

ENEMIES of Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand’s deposed prime minister, hope that a sudden blitz of court cases will achieve what protracted street demonstrations and even a military coup failed to do: finish off him and his allies for ever. On July 8th the Supreme Court in Bangkok began hearing the first of several criminal cases against Mr Thaksin and people close to him. In a separate case the court banned one of his lieutenants from politics for five years, which could trigger the disbanding of the pro-Thaksin People’s Power Party (PPP), the winner of December’s election.

The Constitutional Court was also busy: it struck down an agreement the government had reached with Cambodia in a territorial dispute over a Hindu temple—a ruling that prompted the foreign minister’s resignation and could eventually lead to criminal charges against the whole cabinet.

When the army toppled Mr Thaksin in September 2006, following months of protests against him, it cited “rampant corruption” in his government as one of its main justifications. But it has been a long struggle to muster convincing evidence. Until a few weeks ago it looked possible that no charges might ever reach court. Now, however, things are moving fast.

In Mr Thaksin’s first trial he is accused of having, when prime minister, influenced a state agency to sell his wife some land in Bangkok for well below its market value. In June three of his legal advisers on the case were jailed after giving court officials a bag holding 2m baht ($60,000). They said it had got mixed up with another, containing chocolates—but the court decided it was blatant attempted bribery.

Mr Thaksin’s original party, Thai Rak Thai, was dissolved last year by a tribunal created by the coupmakers but his allies regrouped in the PPP and won the largest number of seats in December’s polls. It now rules in coalition with five small parties, with Samak Sundaravej, Mr Thaksin’s self-described “proxy”, as prime minister. Now the PPP risks disbandment. The Supreme Court this week barred Yongyuth Tiyapairat, a PPP parliamentarian, from office for vote-buying. Since Mr Yongyuth is a party boss, the Election Commission can now ask the courts to judge the PPP itself guilty and disband it.

Various other cases are due in court soon, including one in which the Thaksin government allegedly made illegal loans to Myanmar so it could buy services from a telecoms firm then owned by Mr Thaksin’s family. Similar accusations are being made in the case of the disputed Preah Vihear temple on Thailand’s border with Cambodia. Mr Samak’s government signed an agreement supporting Cambodia’s bid to have the temple recognised as a “world heritage” site (which a United Nations committee accepted this week). The opposition accuses the government of selling out Thailand’s sovereignty to help Mr Thaksin’s business interests in Cambodia. This week’s ruling that the agreement was unconstitutional, because parliament was not consulted, may now be used to press charges against Mr Samak’s cabinet.

Sadly all this judicial activity does not seem to amount to a thorough cleansing of Thailand’s endemic political corruption and impunity. Thaksinites see the cases as part of a plot by their foes—Bangkok’s conservative, royalist elite—to destroy them. Thailand’s poorer, rural majority may indeed feel angry that they keep voting for Mr Thaksin and his allies, because they like his policies, such as cheap health care and microcredit schemes, only to have their will frustrated by the capital’s elite.

The Thaksinites hope that even if ousted from office again they can regroup once more and win another popular mandate. They are said to have created yet another party in case the PPP is banned. Their foes hope that, as guilty verdicts mount against Mr Thaksin and company, and as high inflation erodes living standards, popular support for Thaksinism will wane. Meanwhile the country faces more uncertainty, with the government fighting for survival instead of tackling Thailand’s mounting economic problems.

5 months after elections, divisions that led to coup resurface

By Seth Mydans

Published: July 10, 2008

Street rallies have been held in Bangkok almost daily for more than a month. They are being led once again by the People’s Alliance for Democracy, an unaffiliated opposition group. (Chaiwat Subprasom/Reuters)

BANGKOK: Just five months after a military junta handed power back through a parliamentary election, Thailand’s latest try at democracy is being severely tested by street demonstrations and a barrage of court cases.

On Thursday, the foreign minister, Noppadon Pattama, was forced to resign by a nationalist furor over a centuries-old dispute with Cambodia regarding ownership of a 900-year-old Hindu temple on their common border.

In contemporary terms, the temple dispute has become a vehicle for growing pressure on the government as the divisions that led to a coup in September 2006 have begun to resurface.

The coup, which deposed former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, had the support of much of Bangkok’s elite and middle class, which staged months of protests and accused him of corruption and abuse of power.

Through his populist policies, Thaksin had harnessed the support of Thailand’s rural majority to become the most popular prime minister in Thai history. At the same time, the establishment saw its influence slipping as a new order asserted itself.

Thaksin’s rule exposed what one commentator called “an irreconcilable conflict” between the aspirations and needs of the poor and those of the more comfortable middle class.

The forces unleashed during Thaksin’s tenure are here to stay, and that means Thailand’s clash of cultures will continue, said the commentator, Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political analyst at Chulalongkorn University.

The coup was intended to reverse this shift, but the December election put Thaksin allies in power and the nation remained as divided as ever. Street demonstrations like the ones before the coup have been held almost daily for more than a month. They are being led once again by the People’s Alliance for Democracy, an unaffiliated opposition group that has become an almost institutionalized street opposition.

Now there is a new player in the political scene - the courts - with roots that go back to the annulment of an election won by Thaksin a few months before he was removed in the coup.

Although the election last December produced a government with strong ties to Thaksin, the courts have become a political counterweight, bringing cases against current and former cabinet ministers, as well as Thaksin himself.

In addition, the various constitutional bodies created to monitor corruption, elections and the law, which were largely co-opted by Thaksin, have swung back in the other direction and are mostly under the leadership of people who supported his ouster.

Noppadon was the second cabinet member to be forced from office this week because of a court verdict. On Wednesday, the Constitutional Court disqualified Chaiya Sasomsap, the public health minister, from office for violating asset-disclosure rules. Noppadon was a close associate of Thaksin and was once his personal lawyer. His resignation Thursday came two days after the Constitutional Court found that he had violated the Constitution by reaching a compromise agreement with Cambodia without due consultation.

Also on Tuesday, the Supreme Court convicted another Thaksin associate, Yongyuth Tiyapairat, of electoral fraud and banned him from politics for five years. Yongyuth, a former speaker of the house and an executive member of the pro-Thaksin governing party, the People Power Party, had earlier been convicted of vote buying in the December election.

If the Election Commission finds that he was acting in his party capacity in the electoral fraud, the party itself - like Thaksin’s former party, Thai Rak Thai - could be forced to dissolve, creating a government crisis.

Also last week, the Supreme Court issued an arrest warrant for Watana Asavahame, chairman of one of the government’s coalition parties, when he failed to appear in court to hear a verdict on a charge of corruption.

Thaksin himself is the target of a number of cases on charges of corruption and abuse of power. In February, he returned from self-imposed exile, spent mostly in London. Since coming back, he has kept a low political profile despite having close ties to people in power.

Thaksin’s political future has been the subject of debate since the coup. His connections, his electoral popularity and his wealth seem to point the way to renewed political dominance. But as the leaders of the coup appear to have intended, Thaksin could be crippled for some time by a battery of court cases against him.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard the first witnesses in a trial of Thaksin and his wife, Pojaman, on charges stemming from her purchase of land in Bangkok while he was in power. The attorney general is scheduled to decide this month whether to prosecute them on charges of failing to properly disclose stock holdings.

In addition, the Supreme Court must decide this month whether to proceed with charges against Thaksin and 47 former cabinet ministers accused of breaking the law in setting up a lottery system. Three of the accused are members of the current government.

On July 30, the Supreme Court will decide whether to hear charges that Thaksin’s government illegally gave soft loans to the government of Myanmar in order to benefit the giant telecommunications company he owned. The day after that, a criminal court will rule in a tax evasion case against Thaksin’s wife and her brother.

Saturday July 12, 2008

THAI TAKES WITH PHILIP GOLINGAI

The Supreme Court is set to do what a coup, an election and street protests could not – break former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’ political grip.

ON A rainy afternoon on Wednesday, strong winds uprooted a big Rajapreuk tree as Thailand’s prime minister Samak Sundaravej arrived at the Government House, the seat of the Thai government.

Reporters covering the Government House beat saw the uprooting of the national tree as a bad omen for the embattled prime minister who had returned from chairing an urgent People’s Power Party (PPP) meeting on how to cope with its judicial crisis.

This week several court verdicts hammered Samak’s five-month-old coalition government.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled that former speaker of parliament Yongyuth Tiyapairat was guilty of vote buying in the recent election and banned him from politics for five years.

And if the Election Commission found Yongyuth, a former PPP deputy leader, was acting in his party capacity in the electoral fraud, his party could be dissolved.

If this happened, it would be a repeat to the Constitutional Tribunal decision in May 2007 to dissolve Thai Rak Thai (the PPP’s predecessor) and bar its 111 executives, including party founder Thaksin Shinawatra, from participating in politics for five years.

On the same day, the Constitutional Court ruled that foreign minister Noppadon Pattama acted unconstitutionally when he endorsed Cambodia’s application to have the disputed Preah Vihear temple registered as a World Heritage Site without consulting parliament.

Two days later, Noppadon resigned.

“The country is more important than my political position. Therefore, although I have done nothing wrong, I will take responsibility by resigning,” he said.

On Wednesday, the Constitutional Court disqualified public health minister Chaiya Sasomsap from office for failing to declare that his wife held more than 5% of stock in a private company, within 30 days of his taking office.

Is Samak worried about his party’s judicial crisis?

PPP spokesman Kudeb Saikrajang said Samak told his party executives in the Wednesday meeting that he was unmoved by what had happened to his government.

The prime minister, The Nation reported, told party executives that what had happened to his government was not beyond his expectations.

Samak, it reported, said that despite its election victory, the PPP had been “targeted for demolition” because it was viewed as a tool for Thaksin to regain his political power.

While Samak is “unmoved” with his party’s judicial defeats some political pundits are writing the doomsday scenario for his coalition government.

On Thursday, The Nation gave three possible scenarios.

Scenario I: Samak tenders his resignation as prime minister to pave way for A) a new nominee of Thaksin, B) Banharn Silapa-archa, the Chart Thai Party leader, C) Abhisit Vejajjiva, Democrat leader, or D) a non-elected prime minister.

Scenario II: Samak dissolves parliament and calls for a snap election.

Scenario III: Samak hangs on but will not last long because A) the Constitutional Court case will rule whether the prime minister’s hosting of a TV cooking show on commercial television was in breach of the constitution, B) he is appealing a libel case that carries a jail term, or C) he faces corruption charges related to the procurement of fire trucks when he was Bangkok governor.

It is not only Samak and his Cabinet colleagues who are swarmed by a litany of litigations.

On July 4, the Supreme Court barred Thaksin, who is seen as the man behind the Samak-led coalition government, from leaving Thailand due to alleged corruption and tax evasion cases involving him and his wife currently before the courts. The billionaire politician also has several cases pending in court.

In an article analysing how Thailand’s political landscape is being altered by the judiciary, an Inter Press Service (IPS) journalist Marwaan Macan-Markar wrote:

“Little wonder why a new expression has been coined and is being advanced within academic and media circles here to describe the judiciary”.

“We are witnessing a new trend involving the judiciary.

“This month’s cases are the latest. It is being called a ‘judicial revolution’,” Thanet Aphornsuvan, dean of the liberal arts faculty at Bangkok’s Thammasat University, told IPS. “The courts are playing a more decisive role in politics than before.”

Some pundits see the judicial revolution as a judicial coup which can do what a coup, an election and street protests could not - uproot Thaksin’s political grip.

By Marwaan Macan-Markar

BANGKOK, Jul 10 (IPS) - Several rulings handed down by Thai courts recently suggest that the country’s political landscape is being altered by the judiciary. Some are calling it a ‘’judicial revolution’’.

It comes as Thailand goes through a rocky period, with many asking if the government of Prime Minster Samak Sundaravej, elected late-December, will survive. In parliament, the Samak administration came in for trenchant criticism by the opposition Democrat Party during a parliamentary session in June, while the independent press has given the government little respite from a regular pummelling of critical stories and commentary.

The street has been as hostile, too. Since late May, an anti-government group, the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD), has held daily protests in a historic part of Bangkok to expose the many flaws of the alliance that Samak heads. These protests, which have attracted thousands, scored a symbolic victory by breaking through police ranks in late June to block Government House, the seat of executive power, for days.
Yet neither the opposition, the press nor the PAD has shaken the government in the way the judiciary has with its recent verdicts. On Tuesday, the division of the Supreme Court that looks into election malpractice ruled against the former speaker of the parliament, Yongyuth Tiyapairat, for electoral fraud. The punishment for the offence is political rights being revoked and a ban from politics for five years.

But Thai law does not stop with that, since Yongyuth is a former deputy leader of the People Power Party (PPP), which is the dominant partner in the coalition government that Samak heads. In Thailand, an entire political party can be banned if an executive of the party is found guilty of committing electoral fraud.

On the same day, the Constitutional Court ruled that Foreign Minister Noppadorn Pattama had broken the law over the joint communique Thailand signed with Cambodia to pave the way for disputed ancient Hindu temple on the Cambodian side of the Thai-Cambodian border to be recognised as a World Heritage site. The government failed to place this issue before parliament, for scrutiny, the nine-member bench ruled in an 8-1 verdict.

On Jul. 4, the Supreme Court barred the country’s former prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, from leaving the country due to alleged corruption and tax evasion cases involving him and his wife currently before the courts. The twice-elected Thaksin, who was driven from power in a September 2006 military coup, remains a key, behind-the-scenes figure of the ruling PPP.

Other cases that could hurt the government are due to be heard later this month. In the dock are Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee, Labour Minister Uraiwan Thienthong and Deputy Transport Minister Anurak Jureemas. The PAD, however, may have little to cheer, after a lower court ruled last week against its demonstrators permanently blocking streets to hold its rallies.

Little wonder why a new expression has been coined and is being advanced within academic and media circles here to describe the judiciary. ‘’We are witnessing a new trend involving the judiciary. This month’s cases are the latest. It is being called a ‘judicial revolution’,’’ says Thanet Aphornsuvan, a historian and dean of the liberal arts faculty at Bangkok’s Thammasat University. ‘’The courts are playing a more decisive role in politics than before.’’

The immediate beneficiary will be the country’s nascent, struggling democracy, Thanet explained in an interview. ‘’The judiciary is helping to strengthen the checks of executive power for the good of our democracy. The public is welcoming the presence of the judiciary in our political struggle.’’

The manner in which the courts have taken on sensitive cases and delivered verdicts against the powerful has even shaped the way Thai politics is being scrutinised in universities. ‘’This shows that Thai people will have to rely more and more on the courts to resolve political problems. This is creating new concepts in Thai politics,’’ Siripan Nogsuan, a political scientist and Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University, said at a recent seminar under the theme, ‘Crisis, Brinkmanship and Stalemate: What Next for Thailand?’

The excitement about a judiciary with a backbone is understandable in light of how the courts have been viewed in this South-east Asian country over the last decades. ‘’There has been a long-standing belief that courts are so corrupt, so biased, that people had no faith in going to them,’’ says David Streckfuss, an U.S. academic specialising in Thai political culture.

On the political front, too, the superior courts in the past did not stand up to power, when Thailand was under the grip of its many military dictators. ‘’In the 1950s, the courts were happy to justify coups and legitimised the laws introduced by the military dictators that undermined the very laws the judges were supposed to defend,’’ Streckfuss told IPS. ‘’The courts were not taking cases to determine standards and the rule of law, making the government accountable.’’

But new legal mechanisms, which emerged out of a 1997 constitution, the country’s 17th charter, and a seemingly more confident judiciary during Thaksin’s first term as prime minister, from 2001-2005, combined to create a more vibrant judiciary.

Then came the April 2006 speech by the country’s revered monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej. He told the judges of the administrative and supreme courts to do their job to help resolve a political deadlock and growing tension on the streets. Within weeks, the constitutional court annulled the results of a controversial parliamentary election where the party Thaksin led won sufficient seats to create a one-party state.

‘’Until April 2006 there hadn’t been much awareness that the courts should and could play such a decisive role in the country’s politics,’’ says Streckfuss. ‘’The king’s speech directed the courts to be more active. And since then, the courts have been causing the government a lot of grief.’’

‘’The courts are emerging as a possible key entity to redefine the relationship between the people and the government,’’ says Thanet, the historian. ‘’What we have is a new power equation. Governments will have to face up to it.’’

(END/200

Verdict Adds Tension in Thailand

By JAMES HOOKWAY and PHISANU PHROMCHANYA
July 9, 2008; Page A10

BANGKOK — Thailand’s Supreme Court ruled that a key ally of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was guilty of vote fraud, a verdict that could lead to the banning of the ruling pro-Thaksin People Power Party and deepen a two-year-long political crisis in one of Southeast Asia’s largest economies.

Yongyuth Tiyapairat

The court banished former parliamentary speaker Yongyuth Tiyapairat from politics for five years Tuesday for buying votes. Under Thai law, the party he belongs to can now be ordered to disband by the country’s Constitutional Court. The same court banned Mr. Thaksin’s party following the military coup that toppled him in September 2006.

The verdict is likely to heighten political tensions here and further unnerve foreign investors. The benchmark Stock Exchange of Thailand Index has fallen 18% since street protests against the government began in mid-May.

“The government seems to have only two choices,” said Aphisit Limsupanark, an analyst with BFIT Securities PCL in Bangkok. “One is to dissolve Parliament. The other is to buy time waiting for the final verdict from the Constitutional Court.”

HSBC Global Research said Tuesday it has downgraded Thailand’s stock market to underweight from overweight and closed its position in Thai equities because the country’s “serial political instability” is becoming too entrenched.

But political analysts said the Supreme Court ruling shows that Thailand’s courts maintain an independent streak despite the political drama that has been playing out in the country since the 2006 coup.

Mr. Thaksin’s allies in the People Power Party, or PPP, won a general election when democracy was restored in December 2007 and now lead a six-party coalition government with a strong majority in Parliament. Opponents of the PPP have staged regular street protests, accusing the populist telecommunications billionaire of running Thailand from behind the scenes.

However, political power obtained through elections doesn’t necessarily equate to power over the judiciary. People familiar with the situation say many of Thailand’s judges tend to steer clear of politics and are encouraged by the country’s influential monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, to reach their own verdicts.

Also on Tuesday, the Supreme Court began a corruption trial involving Mr. Thaksin in the first criminal proceeding he has faced since the Thai army removed him from power.

Prosecutors allege that Mr. Thaksin used his political influence as premier to help his wife buy a prime piece of real estate from the country’s central bank at a bargain price. If convicted, he and his wife each face up to 13 years in prison. Mr. Thaksin denies any wrongdoing.

Suchit Boonbongkarn, a political-science professor at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University and a former Constitutional Court judge, said it is hard to predict whether the Constitutional Court will choose to disband the PPP, which is widely viewed as a reincarnation of Mr. Thaksin’s old party, Thai Rak Thai, or Thais Love Thais. Mr. Thaksin has declared that he has retired from politics and doesn’t exercise any authority over the party.

It wasn’t immediately clear how the PPP, led by Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, will respond to the Supreme Court ruling. Deputy PPP leader Kan Tienkaew told reporters Tuesday he will propose to his party that Mr. Samak dissolve Parliament if the PPP is banned and then contest a fresh election under a new banner.

There is also the possibility that Mr. Samak and other senior PPP officials could be banned from politics if the party is dissolved, as happened to Mr. Thaksin and more than 100 Thai Rak Thai party leaders in 2007.

Leaders of the People’s Alliance for Democracy, which has organized the street protests against the PPP-led government for 45 days, are growing concerned that Mr. Thaksin’s supporters are strong enough to win any future election simply by advocating his populist policies, which are popular with Thailand’s rural poor.

One of the key anti-Thaksin leaders, publisher and broadcaster Sondhi Limthongkul, on Friday proposed what he described as a “new politics” for Thailand. Under his proposal, only 30% of parliamentarians would be elected and the rest would be appointed by various associations and institutions. Such a radical move would require major constitutional changes, however, and would be unlikely to attract broad popular support.

“The rationale for [the opposition] wanting to dismantle Thailand’s electoral system is evident: Pro-Thaksin forces keep winning elections,” said Michael Conners, a political-science professor at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Australia, who specializes in Thai politics.

–Wilawan Watcharasakwet contributed to this articl

Page last updated at 09:54 GMT, Thursday, 10 July 2008 10:54 UK

Thailand foreign minister quits

Noppadon Pattama insists he did nothing wrong

Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama has resigned after a top court ruled he had violated the constitution by signing a deal over a disputed temple.

Cambodia had been petitioning to have the temple on the Thai-Cambodian border listed as a World Heritage site.

But judges ruled the government should not have backed Cambodia without asking parliament, as the temple is built on land disputed by the two countries.

Some Thais saw the move as an implicit surrender of sovereignty claims.

The Preah Vihear Hindu temple, near the Thai-Cambodian border, was awarded Unesco World Heritage status on Monday.

Assertive courts

Mr Noppadon made the announcement that he was stepping down on national television.

Tranquil temple at centre of a storm

“But I insist that I have done nothing wrong. I have not sold out the country. I love Thailand, and would not cause any damage to the country,” he said, fighting back tears.

“I want to see national reconciliation. In order for the government to continue working to solve the country’s problems, I resign.”

Always a controversial choice as foreign minister - he used to be a lawyer for former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted in a military coup in 2006 - Mr Noppadon’s position became untenable after backing the Unesco World Heritage bid.

His support for the temple’s listing sparked a wave of nationalist anger, and matters were made worse when the Constitutional Court ruled two days ago that the minister’s actions had violated the constitution.

Mr Noppodol is the second minister to resign from Thailand’s embattled government, and according to the BBC’s South East Asia correspondent Jonathan Head, he may well not be the last.

Another minister resigned in May over allegations he had insulted the king.

The constitutional court, one of the country’s top three judicial bodies, also disqualified the health minister from office this week.

The courts have become unusually assertive in punishing government officials for what in the past might have been viewed as minor offences, our correspondent says.

The role of the judiciary was strengthened by the new constitution, which was drafted under military rule last year, so it could act as a check on the power of elected governments.

As prime minister, Mr Thaksin was often accused of abusing his power - a principal reason given to justify the coup that ousted him.

The coalition government now led by his allies risks being crippled by these repeated judicial interventions, our correspondent adds.

The 900-year-old Hindu temple has been the subject of a border dispute for decades.

The International Court of Justice ruled in 1962 that it belonged to Cambodia and has been at the centre of a bitter dispute between the two neighbours ever since.

Thai impeachment drive gains ground

Wednesday, July 09, 2008
08:16 Mecca time, 05:16 GMT

Noppadon’s backing of Cambodia’s Unesco application was ruled unconstitutional [AFP]

Thailand’s political opposition is gathering support to impeach the country’s foreign minister over his involvement in a dispute over territory and an ancient temple in Cambodia.

The opposition Democrat party accuses Noppadon Pattama of supporting Cambodia’s bid to register an ancient temple with Unesco - a temple which Thailand also claimed as its own.

The move to impeach follows a ruling on Tuesday by the Constitutional Court that a joint communique Noppadon signed with Cambodia backing the application to register the Preah Vihear temple as a Unesco World Heritage Site was unconstitutional because the government failed to consult parliament on the matter.

Critics say the government’s endorsement of the communique undermined Thai claims to disputed territory around the temple.

Ong-art Klampaiboon, the Democrat party spokesman, said signatures of party members were being collected and that an impeachment motion was being drafted.

The opposition has used the long-standing temple issue, which has sparked growing nationalist sentiments, as a weapon against the government of Samak Sundaravej, the prime minister.

Some members of the senate have said they may seek to impeach the entire government which just last month survived a no-confidence motion.

Pressure on government

Unesco has named Preah Vihear as a World Heritage Site

Also on Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled against Yongyuth Tiyapairat, a former speaker of the parliament and an executive member of Samak’s People’s Power party, in a case of electoral fraud that could lead to the dissolution of the People’s Power party.

Yongyuth was banned from politics for five years and the Election Commission will now investigate whether his party was involved in the electoral fraud.

It will also forward the case to the Constitutional Court to decide whether to disband it.

Thai election law states that if a senior member of a political party is found guilty of electoral crimes, the entire party could be disbanded if that person is found to have acted on its behalf.

Yongyuth, who resigned from his post as house speaker in February, is a former adviser to Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister who was toppled in a 2006 military coup.

Thaksin has since returned to Thailand from exile to face a slew of court cases over corruption and abuse of power.

Pressure on the government, already reeling from daily street demonstrations, is almost certain to increase because of this week’s court rulings and an impeachment motion could prove possible.

But Kuthep Saikrajang, spokesman for the People’s Power party, remained confident that the six-party ruling coalition, which commands a majority in parliament, would weather the political storm.

“Even though the government is facing some troubles in legal cases the coalition partners reassure us that they are sticking with the People’s Power party,” he said.

The street demonstrators, led by the People’s Alliance for Democracy, say Samak’s government is merely a proxy for Thaksin, an accusation Samak denies.

Posted : Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:13:03 GMT

Bangkok - This is the month of the judiciary in Thailand. Court verdicts this month have already led to the dismissal of two ministers and the downfall of a deputy leader of the People Power Party headed (PPP) by Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej. And there are more political verdicts in the works before July is out.

Watch for July 31, when the Criminal Court is scheduled to rule on whether Pojaman Shinawatra, the wife of coup-ousted former premier Thaksin, evaded taxes in the transfer of family-owned shares to her brother Bhanapot Damapong in 2000.

The ruling will have a bearing on the outcome of several other corruption cases against Thaksin and Pojaman, whose family fortune exceeds 2 billion dollars - amounting to considerable influence in Thailand’s venal arena of money politics.

Thaksin, who was prime minister from early 2001 until September 19, 2006, when he was toppled by a coup, remains a towering political force despite being banned from politics for the next four years.

He is known to be the main backer of the PPP, which won the December 23, 2007 polls, and now leads the coalition government, which after only five months in office is in deep trouble.

This month’s flurry of court decisions on political cases has raised questions about whether Thailand’s judiciary will help solve the country’s deepening political crisis or only deepen it.

“The danger for the judiciary is that it is going to be politicized, and their verdicts seen in partisan terms and it will increase the polarization we have,” said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University.

Thailand’s political polarization has been characterized as a struggle between anti-Thaksin and pro-Thaksin forces, or more profoundly, between the old political elite and new emerging democratic forces that Thaksin has, perhaps unintentionally, unleashed.

So far, the pro-Thaksin forces appear to be losing the court battles.

On Tuesday the Constitution Court charged Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama with violating the constitution by signing a joint communique with Cambodia on June 18 that approved the listing by UNESCO of the Preah Vihear Hindu temple on the Cambodian border as a World Heritage site.

Noppadon had secured cabinet approval for the communique, but not the parliament’s. Under the constitution any signed treaty or agreement affecting national security or sovereignty requires parliament’s approval. Noppadon announced his resignation Thursday.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court for political offences found former House speaker Yongyudh Tiyapairat guilty of committing fraud in the December 23, 2007 polls, for allegedly bribing ten village head men to muster votes for his sister La-ong in the election.

Yongyudh, a deputy leader of the PPP, lost his status as an elected member of parliament and was banned from politics for five years. His sister also lost her seat in parliament.

Then on Wednesday, the Constitution Court found Health Minister Chaiya Sasomsap guilty of failing to fully declare his wife’s shareholdings in a company within 30 days after assuming the post of health minister, as is required under the constitution.

As a result of the ruling, Chaiya, another senior PPP member, has lost his post.

With so many court-dismissed ministers, Prime Minister Samak faces the option of either dissolving parliament and calling for a new election or a cabinet reshuffle.

He is expected to opt for the latter.

Samak faces his own legal challenges. He is appealing a libel suit that carries a jail term and is under investigation for violating the constitution by hosting a TV cooking show (earning him 2,390 dollars a month) while still holding on to his day job - the premiership.

Suddenly, Thailand seems a very legalistic society, in which politicians can no longer get away with anything as long as they have the power of the electorate behind them, as they have in the past.

“In the long run I think this is part of a cleanup that has to come,” said Chris Baker, a veteran observer of Thai politics and co-author with his wife, Professor Pasuk Phongpaichit, of several books on the subject.

Thailand’s political parties are typically packed with provincial politicians-cum-businessmen who have traditionally bought votes in elections and then sought returns through corruption once in power.

Thaksin’s main contribution to the system was to introduce populist policies that have arguably empowered Thailand’s rural poor and unleashed a truly democratic force that endangers the legitimacy of the old elite - the military, bureaucrats and old money.

This is the struggle the judiciary has now joined.

“What it means in the short term is that you are finding the judiciary and rule of law is being pitted against the elected side,” said Baker.

“It’s a really massive clash in the system that is going to put the judiciary under a huge strain but it’s not necessarily a bad thing.”

Sondhi Limthongkul’s plans for a political revolution

Michael Connors

07 July 2008

No longer content with the old slogan of “Thaksin dit khuk, Samak ok pai (Thaksin in jail, Samak out), Sondhi Limthongkul, the core leader of the People’s Alliance for Democracy, has called for a “New Politics.” I heard Sondhi’s New Politics speech delivered from the stage on July 4th, near Government House in Bangkok. It was the 41st day of the People’s Alliance for Democracy’s new round of street protests.

The New Politics turns out to be a startlingly reactionary proposal to move Thailand’s parliamentary system towards a form of appointed corporatism, or what might be called a selectoral democracy. Thirty percent of MPs would come from elections, perhaps one per province, and the rest of MPS would derive from various occupations and associations. Sondhi says the proportion is not fixed, it’s up for debate.

The rationale for wanting to dismantle Thailand’s electoral system is evident: pro-Thaksin forces keep winning elections. And as Thaksin is said to represent everything bad about Thai politics, he can not be allowed to wield power directly or indirectly. Thus, for Sondhi, and it would seem the PAD leadership as whole, there is now a need to bring about a revolution in political representation.

The idea of examining alternatives to electoral democracy is not without some merit, for it is common knowledge that massive amounts of money are required to win parliamentary seats, making parliament a millionaire’s playground and a source of further monopolization and corruption. It wasn’t always so, Sondhi told the rally. In the 1970s socialist politicians in Thailand could get elected on the basis of their ideology and popular support, but the emergence of dirty politics in the 1980s crushed any such possibility in the present.

The New Politics has interesting antecedents. The PAD leadership has clearly been speaking to military figures (this is now well documented in the Thai language press) who tried to stifle the emergence of parliament in the 1980s. Indeed, selectoral democracy nicely fits with corporatist visions of the old “Revolutionary Council”. The Council, to which General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh was said to have an association, held that elections merely led to parliamentary dictatorship and proposed a form of corporate representation to realize the “general will”.

A former communist, Prasert Sapsunthon, was the inspiration for this Thai appropriation of Rousseau, the French theorist of the social contract. Prasert became a leading intellectual among military circles calling for non-elective forms of democracy. When the Revolutionary Council effectively declared itself a provisional government during the political crisis of 1988 the elected Chatichai government took it to court for treason. It then faded into obscurity, but its ideas have never quite gone away, finding support among small rightist groups and even in some labor circles.

The New Politics is unashamedly pro-military and even codifies the conditions under which military intervention may occur. Sondhi has spoken of four conditions for military intervention: when charges of lese majeste are not acted on; when a government is incompetent; when corruption is rife; when a government betrays national sovereignty.

It is not clear if permissible military intervention according to PAD’s envisaged system of selectocracy is to be in the form of a coup d’etat or the exercise of some new administrative power to compel government agencies to rectify a wrong. But what is clear is that PAD has explicitly sanctioned ongoing military intervention in politics.

Of course anyone looking at the Thai military will know that it is a conflicted organization, with pro and anti-government factions and both corporate and individual commercial interests. How such an organization might work to protect the ‘general will’ of the people is not at all clear, notwithstanding the fact that politicized militaries the world over become deeply corrupt and self-serving. In part the answer for PAD lies in who controls the military. An important feature of Sondhi’s speech that went unreported in the press was the proposal to take the Ministry of Defence out of government control and place it under the crown.

At a time when Thailand is urgently facing the need to institutionalize its politics around public rules, PAD is proposing to formally enhance the power the monarchy.

These proposals have been supported by no less a figure than Phipop Thongchai, a central figure in democratic struggles over the last generation. More absurdly, the New Politics, according to Phipop might also copy elements of North Korea statism, where people receive state housing. It’s a shame they don’t have rights, he noted at the rally.

For many observers, PAD’s latest thinking comes as no surprise. They say that from the start PAD was associated with the opportunistic use of nationalist and royalist discourse in its call for a royally appointed government to replace the Thai Rak Thai caretaker government in March 2006. That PAD should now become an agent of political regression, willing to hand power to the military and bureaucracy flows from the logic of its initial strategy to beat Thaksin with the royalist and nationalist stick.

On the contrary, I would argue that whatever one may make of the early anti-Thaksin movement, its politics were, in part, a form of royal liberalism; it was legitimately concerned with the authoritarian slide during the Thaksin era. And this means that PAD’s current phase is a significant departure from its earlier stance and is of great significance. Most dangerously, PAD’s new turn has the potential to bring to a conservative and reactionary form of corporatism a significant social base. In the 1980s the semi-fascist corporatist politics of the Revolutionary Council were marginalized as Thai politics democratized. The Council became a laughing stock and the organization was dubbed the “Joke Council”. Somehow PAD seems to have reversed Marx’s dictum that history repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce.

PAD’s metamorphosis comes at an odd moment when it seems to be making ground. It played an opportunistic role in capturing the ministerial scalp of Jakraphop Penkair who resigned from office after being charged with lese majeste. It has given support to the legitimacy of the Asset Examination Committee which recently wound up its investigations into alleged corruption during the Thaksin years. Lawyers had attempted to question the constitutional standing of the AEC, but the Constitutional Court affirmed its standing. And if the Office of the Auditor General appears unconvinced of the readiness of many of the cases presented by the AEC, the National Counter Corruption Commission seems ready to take on some of the cases. The recent pastry-gate scandal when Thaksin lawyers were found guilty of contempt of court would seem to further highlight that things are not going Thaksin’s way.

So it is odd that just as its demands are being met, PAD has now put itself at the extreme margins of Thai politics. Many people have already deserted PAD because of its hyper-nationalism and attacks on progressive activists who express views different than its own. Some people have, it seems, been forced to leave. There are reports that speakers from the stage have called on Democrat Party members to leave the rally.

How far PAD has travelled is perhaps illustrated by reference to a rally I observed in the middle of last week. A well known rock star got on stage and called on the spirit of the 1950s dictator Sarit Thanarat to deal decisively with corruption. The best that can be said of that episode is that people were applauding on cue, after four weeks of clapping it’s almost a reflex.

But the PAD leadership has no such excuse, it has embraced a politics so contrary to its starting point that it now looks as bad as that which it sought to slay.
“New Politics” may well be the closing breath of PAD, as those who thought they were fighting for a form of liberal democracy desert its ranks. A protestor I was sitting close to was visibly angry with Sondhi, shouting out “Who are you to abolish parliament?” Actually, that’s an appropriate question for the last generation of Thai politics.

Michael Connors teaches politics at La Trobe University. He is the author of Democracy and National Identity in Thailand (2007). He blogs at
http://www.sovereignmyth.blogspot.com

comments

PAD = Partially Absurd Democracy? : Teeranai Charuvastra

Hmm well let’s guess when PAD would ever be truly satisfied. I would say when 1.) Thaksin and ALL of his associates (including his wife, children, politician friends, housemaid) are either dead or exiled to Mars for life; and 2.) Sonthi and his fellow comrades serve as Revolutionary Council under the guidance of His Majesty The King of Kings.

… : pallop

my proposal: randomly selected MP’s, chosen via lottery from list of all adult Thais to serve 2-year terms. This is the only way to get a truly representative parliament.

July 9, 2008

Observer : desmond : http://N/A

The more one observes Sondhi and Chamlong’s remarks, the more one notices these people are highly unreasonable and undemocratic. What do these people want? Power of course! They pretend to defend the nation, religion, and highest institution. In fact, these clowns are destroying them right now.

July 8, 2008

Proxy War : Tutu

Samak is said to be proxy for Thaksin. For the anti-Thaksin cotorie, Sondhi is fighting a proxy war for some puppet master.

July 8, 2008

… : Flashman

There are indeed elements of truth to The Old Asia Hand’s view on Thai politics, but it is a misleading analysis to leave these problems squarely at the feet of the palace. The Royal Family, perhaps more specifically the King, is an incredibly valuable franchise in Thai politics and those who have benefited from their royal associations have no desire to see this boon lost through populist parties such as TRT/PPP; hence the orchestrated 2 tier system of government that we see today with the populist parties entrenched in the legislative bodies and the royalist ranks entrenched in the more powerful judiciaries. The situation is utterly unsustainable, but cannot progress until it is known who will take the thrown after the King and what sort of popular support this person will be able to cultivate from the people and in turn, pass onto the Palace’s closest advisors. The real question should perhaps be, not how much influence the Palace has, but how much influence does the elite have.

July 8, 2008

good article : earlywarm

This is an excellent article which makes some good observations about the different currents swirling around the difficulties with electoral democracy in Thailand. On the other hand, the exceedingly antidiluvian comment immediately preceding this one does nothing to advance the discussion. Antidiluvian because people just don’t think like European republicans of the 18th Century in modern Thailand. An astute analysis of the political situation here would have to first explain to the world how “patronage” works in Thailand and how the poorest and least educated people in Thailand continue to kow tow to almost anyone with money and power, including movie stars and corrupt village officials.
The current political problem in Thailand is simply about testing the judicial arm of government. Does the rule of law prevail in a truly democratic system in which electoral democracy has been thoroughly discredited by vote buying and unprecedented levels of corruption in government?

July 8, 2008

PAD Undemocratic - What a surprise : The other Michael

No one should be surprised that PAD could come up with such a reactionary proposal. Since failed businessman and his military allies gained control of PAD for the royalists, this group has been heading directly down the anti-democratic road. It would be no surprise to see them repeat the role played by Navaphol extremists in the 1970s. PAD is a dangerous outfit with even more dangerous figures (e.g. self-proclaimed assassin General Panlop) lurking in their backstage area.

July 7, 2008

… : The Old Asia Hand

A thoughtful and reflective piece, but it avoids the most important point that must be made for anyone to understand what is happening in Thailand today, the one that no one ever really seems to want to discuss. It is this: until the king dies, there is no hope at all for civil government to have any meaningful role in Thailand. After five decades of manipulating a passive and largely ignorant population, the royalists have managed to turn the king into a personal deity for most Thais. And how has this deity repaid the poor and the downtrodden back for worshipping him, for flinging themselves prostrate at his feet everywhere he appears? He has aggressively and consistently wielded the power of the palace to undermine the entire concept of elected civil government in Thailand and supported military rule whenever elected governments showed the slightest indication that any of them might actually take root.
Power in Thailand works this way: first, the palace; second, the army; and absolutely last, elected government. The king has had the opportunity for over fifty years to lead Thailand into the present, even the future, by supporting the development of democratic institutions in a meaningful way. Instead, he has chosen to devote his prestige to protecting the status of the royal family. Thailand is today in all but name one of the last absolute monarchies on earth. That is the true tragedy of this poor, benighted little country.

July 7, 2008

Time to abolish Thailand’s lèse majesté law

Giles Ji Ungpakorn

04 May 2008

Right-wing forces use the lèse majestè laws to stifle dissent, not preserve loyalty to the king

Once again we are seeing the extreme right in Thailand using lèse majesté, or the crime of injury to the royalty, as an excuse to encourage acts of violence against those who stand up for freedom and justice.

Thirty years ago, agitation by the extreme right through such media outlets as the Tank Corps radio station and Dao Sayam newspaper, resulted in the utmost barbarism at Thammasat University on October 6, 1976, when right-wing forces and the military set on students, hanging them, setting them afire and committing other acts of savagery. Therefore the recent swearing of an oath of allegiance to “Nation Religion and King” by the so-called People’s Alliance for Democracy at Thammasat is tantamount to spitting on the memories of those who died and suffered in the bloody events.
Most recently we have seen Manager, the media outlet of big businessman Sondhi Limtongkul, opening its web pages to right-wing thugs who want to encourage violence against Chotisak Onsoong, a young man who chose to think differently and not stand for the King’s song in the cinema. Following this there have been threats of violence, also posted on Manager’s website, against Jittra Kotchadej, chairwoman of the Triumph textile workers union. Jittra’s supposed “crime” was to wear a T-shirt supporting Chotisak’s freedom of expression.

In both cases, their addresses have been published by Manager, an action that is not only illegal in that it encourages violence against others, but is also a serious obstacle to basic rights and democracy. I call on everyone in the Peoples’ Movement to condemn this despicable media outlet and its right-wing owner.

We should not be surprised at Manager’s behavior. After all they supported the September 19, 2006 coup that destroyed democracy and removed legitimacy from the Thai state. Sondhi Limtongkul has never been on the side of freedom, democracy or the Peoples’ Movement. But the important question to ask is: will Somsak Kosaisuk, Pipop Tongchai, Somkiat Pongpaiboon and Suriyasai Takasila have enough basic democratic principles to come out and condemn Manager? Given their close alliance with Sondhi and his media empire, staying quiet would be the same as condoning these actions. I still hope that they will have some principles left, but my hopes are rapidly fading.

On May Day this year, Somsak Kosaisuk, who used to be someone I admired, made a statement on behalf of the Workers Solidarity Committee that workers should unite to fight the capitalists. I agree with his statement. But does Somsak oppose all capitalists? Or will he still build alliances with non-Thaksin ones? And in his so-called struggle against capitalism will he defend “Nation Religion and King,” the slogan of the extreme right who are the sworn enemies and murderers of students, workers and farmers?
Pipop Tongchai had the unfortunate experience of seeing his bookshop burnt by right-wing thugs during the violence of 1976. Will he still maintain, as he did a few years ago at Chula, that he must continue to build an alliance with conservative monarchists?
Lèse majesté is an excuse to silence and use violence against those who think differently. But that is merely one of many reasons why the law should be abolished. The second reason arguing for abolition, as a matter of urgency, is that it is an authoritarian law of the type found in countries with absolute monarchies. No modern civilized and democratic nation in the world maintains such a law. If we are to have democracy we must have the right to express ourselves. There must be the right to criticise the monarchy.

Otherwise the monarch or members of the royal family can behave as they like without any accountability or transparency. Lèse majesté laws actually indicate that conservatives are afraid that if they allow criticism we shall see that many Thais have different opinions. The carefully constructed image of the monarchy will also face serious scrutiny. In other words, the conservatives are afraid of the truth.

If not, why not abolish lèse majesté? I am not afraid myself to face the fact that most Thais at present love and respect the King. Why are the ruling class so afraid? Or is it really about the need by factions of the elite, whether the military or the capitalists, to use lèse majesté to attack their opponents for their own narrow personal gain?

This is an important question that we must all ask. The 19th September coup claimed royal legitimacy, but did this coup take place in order to strengthen the monarchy or to allow one faction of the ruling elite could beat Thaksin? No one can really deny that lèse majesté is a political tool in numerous faction fights between those who all claim to support the monarchy. This is another reason to abolish the law.

Apart from the right to criticise the monarchy, in a democratic society we must have the right to propose new forms of society. It must not be a “crime” to advocate a republic in Thailand. Republics exist in most modern and civilised nations of the world. But whether or not to have a republic must be the decision of the Thai people after free debate.

Thailand actually has a long tradition of differing views concerning the monarchy. Under feudalism the surfs made great efforts to avoid royal conscripted labor and the ruling elites would often kill kings in order to take power themselves. Under the absolute monarchies of Rama 5-7, nobles, civil servants, workers and farmers often showed their displeasure at the centralisation of power or the inefficiency of the king’s rule. This ended with the 1932 revolution. In the period when the Communist Party of Thailand had much influence, many Thais wanted a republic. These are historical facts. So let us not believe the rubbish that all Thais have been royalists throughout history.

Whether a Thai citizen uses scientific or Buddhist philosophy, the common factor here is that respect and admiration should come from reason. We must be free to think for ourselves. It is not possible to force someone to respect anything sincerely.

Therefore Chotisak’s and many other people’s decisions not to stand in the cinema are perfectly natural and legitimate. But if the Thai elite need to use a law to enforce respect that means that they are afraid that Thais can actually think for themselves! Lèse majesté is an obstacle to reasoned free-thinking among Thais. It is high time it was abolished.

Giles Ji Ungpakorn is a member of the Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok

Wednesday, 4 June 2008 14:45 UK

In recent days anti-government protesters have returned to the streets

So there will not be another coup in Thailand.

Army Commander General Anupong Paochinda has said so, and now the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, General Boonsrang Niumpradit, has echoed him.

Both men played an instrumental role in the 2006 coup that unseated then-Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

“I don’t think any commanders want to launch a coup now,” said General Boonsrang. “The problems in the country are too complex to be solved by a coup.”

Of course the military said much the same back in 2006, but this time they seem to mean it.

They found the going unexpectedly tough after they seized power two years ago, and recognised early on that the public had limited tolerance for military intervention.

When the party of Mr Thaksin’s allies, the PPP, did much better than expected in the election that brought back democratic rule last December, the military accepted the result and handed back power without protest.

So why have coup rumours been sweeping the capital, causing the stock market to plunge?

Clash of ideas

The reason is this. Just five months into the new government, the deep conflict in Thai society, between those loyal to Mr Thaksin and his vision of a dynamic new, business-driven democracy (led by his party of course), and those loyal to a fuzzier concept of democracy in which the traditional, palace-connected elite make many of the key decisions, has come out into the open again.

Mr Thaksin says he has no more political ambitions

Since his return from exile in March, Mr Thaksin has stayed in the background and publicly vowed that he has no more political ambitions.

But no-one believes that, least of all the traditionalists who took such a risk when they used the military to oust him two years ago.

With his immense wealth and unrivalled political skills, they are convinced he could again amass the kind of unchallenged power he wielded as prime minister from 2001 to 2006.

To counter this they have built their own checks and balances into the constitution, Thailand’s 18th, that they brought in last August.

That charter weakens elected governments in all sorts of ways - making impeachment of the prime minister easier, and making the Senate a semi-appointed body.

Crucially it gives enhanced powers to Thailand’s top judges, those who sit on the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court.

The judges are far less likely to be swayed by the power or wealth of an elected politician, however popular.

Mr Thaksin is also being held back by a five year ban from politics, a number of outstanding court cases against him for alleged abuses of power, and the fact that nearly $2bn (£1bn) of his assets are still frozen.

The military seized power in 2006 - but voters turned against them

Although they campaigned and won the election under that constitution, Mr Thaksin’s allies in the PPP argued that it was a flawed charter which should be amended.

Many Thais appeared to agree with them - in a nationwide referendum last August it was approved by only 58% of votes cast.

But the haste with which the new government moved to alter the constitution after taking office surprised many people, who had expected it instead to focus on reviving the economy.

And the clauses it wanted removed - articles 237 and 309 - looked suspiciously like naked self-interest.

Constitutional change

Every Thai election ends with rival parties’ accusations and counter-accusations of electoral abuses, mostly vote-buying.

It is the job of the Election Commission to decide which accusations have merit. It can then either “yellow card” the offending candidates, meaning they can contest the re-run, or “red-card” them, which disqualifies them from political office for five years.

Instead Thailand is likely to end up with a caretaker prime minister, presiding over a weak, re-constituted coalition

Such verdicts are inevitably accompanied by accusations that the Election Commissioners themselves have been “swayed”.

The new constitution adds some extra bite to the commission’s powers in article 237. If the party is judged to have sanctioned the abuse by the candidate, the entire party can be dissolved.

The PPP and two of its coalition partners now face this possibility because of guilty verdicts against some of their candidates. Their fate will be decided by the Constitutional Court.

Article 309 retrospectively legalises all the decisions made by the government appointed after the 2006 coup.

It effectively protects the soldiers who led the coup from prosecution, and crucially extends the life of the Assets Examination Committee, set up to investigate alleged corruption under the Thaksin administrations.

If the article were repealed, the cases against Mr Thaksin might collapse - and he would get his hands on his frozen assets. He could be a big political player again.

Stalemate

The decision by Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej to push ahead and remove these clauses caused an uproar.

It provoked renewed street protests by the die-hard Thaksin opponents who led the movement against him in 2006.

Mr Samak’s offer to hold yet another referendum on the two articles did not appease them. A complete waste of taxpayers’ money, they said.

The PPP lacks support in the capital - its main strongholds are in the distant north and north-east of Thailand.

The protesters are still there in the old centre of Bangkok, vowing to stay until Mr Samak and his government go.

They do not have the numbers or momentum they enjoyed back in 2006, but the government has been weakened all the same.

Mr Samak has already been forced to back away from his threat to use force against the protesters, under pressure from the military and police, and he has had to abandon his attempt to change the constitution, handing the matter over to a bi-partisan committee in parliament.

So Thailand is stuck in a stalemate again. There is widespread expectation that the outspoken Mr Samak will lose control of his coalition, and possibly his party.

The threat of dissolution worries many of his MPs, who may prefer a more accommodating approach to their political rivals in the hope of forestalling such an outcome.

No parties can afford the expense of another election. Instead Thailand is likely to end up with a caretaker prime minister, presiding over a weak, re-constituted coalition.

That might be exactly the result the traditionalists, those who supported the military coup, would like.

But it would offer no clear leadership to a country which has been without it ever since Thaksin Shinawatra’s fall from p

Protesters have defied a government request to leave the streets

Thailand’s stock market has fallen for the fifth trading day in a row, amid ongoing anti-government demonstrations and rumours of a military coup.

Activists accuse PM Samak Sundaravej of changing the constitution to protect his predecessor Thaksin Shinawatra.

Army chief Gen Anupong Paochinda said the military would not intervene in the dispute and denied rumours a repeat of the 2006 coup was imminent.

The army would “not use force against the people,” his spokeswoman said.

Shaky investor confidence

But investor confidence remained shaky and the Bangkok stock exchange dipped 2.8%, adding to the 4.8% fall it suffered last week in its biggest weekly decline since just before the last coup.

Finance Minister Suraphong Suebwonglee told reporters: “I have to admit that the problems over the past week have affected confidence.”

Protesters took to the streets for an eighth day on Monday to demand Mr Samak’s resignation.

One of the protest leaders said the demonstrators would defy a government request to leave their positions near the United Nations building in Bangkok.

On Sunday, the prime minister backed away from a threat he had made a day earlier to send in the police and military to clear protesters off the streets.

The military removed Mr Thaksin in 2006 after months of unrest by demonstrators who accused the former prime minister of corruption and destroying democracy in Thailand.

Samak Sundaravej won election last December

Mr Samak, whose party won a general election last December, is widely seen as a proxy for Mr Thaksin.

After months of exile, Mr Thaksin returned to Bangkok earlier this year to face corruption charges against him and his family.

The BBC’s Jonathan Head in Bangkok says Mr Samak wants to modify last year’s constitution and remove clauses that curb the power of elected governments.

But his opponents suspect him of attempting to pave the way for a comeback by Mr Thaksin.

The poor performance of Mr Samak’s unwieldy coalition has not helped his cause with the public, says our correspondent.

Opponents of the government fear Mr Thaksin wants to weaken the position of the monarchy, he says.

Last week a minister close to Mr Thaksin was forced to resign after being accused of insulting the monarchy.

Our correspondent says it is a potent charge in a country beset by anxiety over the succession to King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who has been on the throne for six decades.

updated 12:59 p.m. EDT, Mon June 2, 2008

BANGKOK, Thailand (CNN) — Despite winning a string of government concessions, hundreds continued to protest on the streets of Thailand Monday, some calling for the country’s prime minister to resign.

Thai PM Samak Sundaravej stated that he would not use force to end the protests in the Thai capital

The protests have moved into a second week heightening political tensions and birthing rumors of a possible coup.

The around-the-clock protests in Bangkok are headed by a group called the People’s Alliance for Democracy, (PAD).

The group is protesting a proposed change to Thailand’s constitution which would protect former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his followers from corruption charges.

Shinawatra was ousted from power in the country’s last coup in 2006.

The recent polictical turmoil has affected the country’s economy as the Stock Exchange of Thailand composite index dropped more than 2 percent, a state-run news agency reported Monday. Analysts attributed the drop to the political tensions in the country, the agency said.

The agency quoted Finance and Deputy Prime Minister Surapong Suebwonglee Monday about the rumors of a coup in the country.

“I admit the political disturbances in the past week has undermined confidence in the country’s economy. However, all parties still believe the incident will neither turn violent nor lead to a coup,” he said.

Current Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej issued a televised warning Saturday to protesters threatening to bring police to get them off the street. Hundreds of riot police could be seen near the protests this weekend.

On Sunday, the prime minister reversed his stance stating that he would not use force to end the protests, according to a government statement.

For some this was seen as a concession that weakened the position of the prime minister.

“It was brinkmanship and Samak backed down. This made him lose a lot of credibility,” said Tahitian Pongsuthirak, director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. “I think over the past weekend his position has become much more precarious.”

Monday government officials seemed to make another concession to protesters by creating a committee to work on rewriting the constitution and stating that members of the protest group could join the committee, according to reports in the Bangkok Post newspaper.

Bangkok government officials conceded to another of the protesters requests last week to have Thai minister Jakrapob Penkair to step down.

Penzair, who was a minister attached to the prime minister’s office, announced his resignation Friday.

Despite these concessions, hundreds of protesters were seen on streets Monday. And PAD seemed to up the ante by calling for the resignation of the prime minister.

An interior minister said Monday that Sundaravej would never resign, the state-run news agency said.