In an update, The Nation had an editorial updating the violence:

According to assistant professor Dr Srisompob Jitpiromsri of Prince of Songkhla University Pattani's Deep South Watch, the number of violent incidents linked to insurgent activities, including gun murders and bombings, as well as overall casualties, has gone down since July.

Deep South Watch, which has been monitoring violence in the southern provinces of Yala, Pattani, Narathiwat and Songkhla since it began in January 2004, said in its latest report released yesterday that only 114 violent incidents took place in the whole of September, compared to 147 in July. The number of people killed in September was 125, compared to 209 in August.

The number of bombings fell from 37 in August to 26 in September, while cases of gun murders dropped from 95 to 74 during the same period. Deep South Watch attributed what appears to be a marked improvement in the situation in the strife-torn region to the month-long observance of Ramadan, which ended this month, as well as a change in the tactics used by government security forces.

As in previous years, guerrilla activities dropped slightly during the holy month of Ramadan when devout Muslims fast from dawn to dusk. But this year, an even steeper drop in the number of incidents was recorded as security forces conducted more aggressive searches to arrest suspected insurgents in areas infiltrated by armed separatists.

COMMENT: Dr Srisompob's report in Thai is here.



Larger image is here.

NOTE: Red = deaths; Yellow = injured

The number of people killed and injured in September was 125, compared to 209 in August. If The Nation looks at the number killed it goes from 57 in July to 73 in August to 65 in September, hardly a trend downwards.

If, as The Nation does, uses July as a reference point for the number killed and injured, we have 148 injured in July, to 208 in August to 125 in September. I am not saying the arrests haven't helped, but compared to 2006, 2007 has been very violent. There was a massive increase in the number killed and injured in the aftermath of the coup - the number of killed and injured roughly doubled. Now, that the violence has reduced over the past couple of months this is good news. However, as Dr Srisompob states in his report, the numbers have been going up and down for a while now - like a yo-yo really. I will wait a few more months before I say there is significant downward trend.

The government is buying time with detaining the suspects for 37 days, voactional training for 4 months and preventing their return for another 6 months. This will certainly help in the short-term. As another commentator, the former editor of TJA News (an independent news service), also writing at Deep South Watch on this noted the possible negative side effects of the 4 month detention policy, but in conclusion noted that there are not that many options for the government and that the policy allows a period of respite for the violence where the government can go in and restore law-and-order. I just hope the government gets it right. If not, this short-term plan could worsen the situation as the primarily young Muslim men will likely come back, mad and angry. I am not so sure the government/military has a long-term strategy or plan as I haven't seen them adopt a comprehensive counter-insurgency policy so far - more on this later.

The rest of the editorial is below:

The use of overwhelming force to surround whole villages or communities to flush out suspected insurgents has proved successful since the new tactics were introduced earlier this year.

Virtually no civilian casualties have been reported since the beginning of this year because security forces have received better training in how to conduct their raids in populated areas and they have been instructed to respect the local people's rights.

However, such a positive turn of events could be short-lived as insurgents living in the midst of civilians may have chosen to lay low for a while, waiting to strike again when the opportunity presents itself or when security forces let their guard down.

It is quite obvious that the Islamic militants/Malay separatists have chosen to engage in small-scale guerrilla warfare in their fight against the Thai state because it is convenient for them and suits their long-term objectives. A full-fledged insurgency against government security forces, with their superiority in numbers and advanced weaponry, would be suicide.

The Thai government, security forces and the Thai public must realise that militants intend to drive a wedge between mainstream Thai society, which is predominantly Buddhist, and Thai Muslims of Malay descent in the deep South by instigating a sense of mutual distrust and racial hatred. Thailand, as a society renowned for its remarkable tolerance, must not fall into the trap laid by the insurgents. The armed forces and the police are doing the right thing by laying down a clear-cut strategy to combat insurgents. At the same time, the government must try to win the hearts and minds of local people in the southernmost region through well thought-out political initiatives, and economic and social development programmes aimed at improving living conditions and integrating Malay Thais into society without compromising their cultural identity.

At the same time, security forces must explore new tactics based on improved intelligence to try to quell the insurgency. Surely, the government, which successfully put down armed separatist movements in the deep South in the 1980s, is capable of ending the insurgency in the region over time. To do that, the government and security forces must be guided by sound policy-making backed by good strategic thinking and flexible tactics to counter the ever-evolving ploys of insurgents who combine hit-and-run guerrilla tactics with the use of terrorism to advance their cause. No one says it will be easy to defeat the insurgents. But defeating hate-filled insurgents and their twisted interpretation of Islam and winning peace depends on Thailand, as a society, doing everything right in a sustainable manner.

Last year, I blogged on two corruption cases against former deputy interior minister Vatana Asavahame. An update from the Bangkok Post including on the 23 billion baht Klong Dan project corruption case:

It was a no-show for Vattana Asavahame's first trial date on the Klong Dan wastewater treatment project in Samut Prakan Province on Tuesday.

Former deputy interior minister, Mr Vattana was accused of malpractice in the corruption plagued Klong Dan project, where it is believed he colluded with eight land officials to issue fake land deeds for the site of the project between 1992 and 1993.

He had been summoned by the Supreme Court to attend a first hearing in the morning but judges were told by his lawyer that Mr Vattana was unable to attend due to an illness.

The hearing was rescheduled for November 13, 2007.

COMMENT: Vatana has recently been the news as The Nation reports:

The [Pua Paendin (For the Motherland)] party appointed Vatana Asavahame as the party chairman, and Police General Pracha Promnok as party chief adviser. Vatana introduced his two sons, Chonsawat and Poolpol as Samut Prakan MP candidates.

COMMENT: His children have also been in the news recently as well and the Asavahame clan have a long history of election issues (from Chang Noi in 2001):

At the last election, the Asavahame gang were convicted of stuffing 20,000 votes, but escaped punishment on a legal technicality. This time their Samut Prakarn constituency was under intense scrutiny. Wattana Asavahame’s two sons, brother, and daughter-in-law all lost, while Wattana and his old cronies failed on the party list. In a truly touching post-election scene, the Asavahame clan petitioned the Election Commission about their opponents’ electoral malpractice.

COMMENT: Yes, really touching.

In an update to the story on whether Thaksin will be extradited from the UK back to Thailand (see previous post here), we finally have some clarity as the Bangkok Post reports:

Public prosecutors are worried that evidence to convict ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra may be too weak to have him extradited to Thailand.

Sampan Sarathana, chief prosecutor for foreign litigation, said after having met with UK authorities recently that evidence may not be enough for extradition to be proceed.

Mr Sampan led a team of public prosecutors to London to try to convince the British government and courts to extradite Thaksin and his wife Potjaman so they can face court charges in Thailand.

The couple face graft charges in connection with the purchase of land near Ratchadaphisek Road.

Mr Sampan vowed to continue preparing more on the documentation, which he said would take more than two months, before sending them to UK authorities.

COMMENT: So the junket trip told them that? More than two months? It sounds like they are burying the case in paperwork.

In an update to the leaking of the CNS documents to suppress the PPP vote in the upcoming election (see here and here), the Bangkok Post reports:

Those who leaked what are claimed to be classified official documents of a state agency and released them to the public are "guilty according to law," acting chairman of Council for National Security (CNS) Chalit Phukphasuk said Tuesday.

ACM Chalit was speaking on the case where People Power party (PPP) leader Samak Sundaravej uncovered classified documents of an agency understood to be the CNS, the military junta which controlled the country after the Sept 19, 2006 coup.

The documents, printed in many newspapers and on several websites, detailed plans to prevent Mr Samak and his party from rising to power, and have been identified as authentic by Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont.

ACM Chalit said related agencies are checking the authenticity of the documents.

He insisted that the CNS and the government do not have a policy to prevent the resurrection of the "old power clique," meaning the supporters of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra from rising to power. There is nothing the government can do if the PPP wins the Dec 23 election.

"CNS does not hope to suppress an old power clique," he told reporters.

When asked if there is going to be another coup if PPP wins the upcoming election, ACM Chalit said it is "unlikely" but refused to rule it out.

Staging a coup "is not easy," he said. "People must not oppose it," if the coup is to succeed.

The Bangkok Post reports:

Despite hints by army commander-in-chief Gen Anupong Paochinda that he knew where the documents had come from, the question of who was responsible for leaking them still remains.

"It is an internal matter," Gen Anupong said. "I know who leaked the classified documents but I am unable to comment on who was responsible and whether the documents had been faked."

COMMENT: Actually, I have tried to find what either Gen. Anupong or Gen. Chalit said in Thai, but all the articles I have read paraphrase them without direct quotes. If the military knows who leaked the classified documents, aren't they admitting then the documents are real? Naaw Nah quotes a PPP member saying exactly this. It is laughable that the CNS are still investigating the authenticity of the documents. The documents have a document number, they can quickly check whether the document number corresponds with September 14 and whether the document number matches the topic and then compare the documents to what is on file. Does this really take that long to do?

btw, according to Kom Chad Leuk there are reports that ACM Chalit will move to the For the Motherland Party.

The other day I blogged:

btw, I don't remember the name of the very minor party, but there is a party out there who are, wait for this, promising 10 billion baht for each province. A village fund on a massive scale with close to 800 billion baht of spending. This will probably be the only piece of news we get from them this election cycle.

As usual, not long after I posted I remembered the name of the party, the Prachamati party, led by Pramual Rujanaseri,* have taken the concept of populist policies to a new level as they outline at the party website:

6. Allow the Provinicial Treasury to issue bonds to develop the province to the value of 10 billion baht a province to the value of 750 billion baht

13. 70% of all stamp duty to be directed to provinces, 30% to the central government, and remove taxes for state pensions.

14. Reduce personal income taxes to 20% and private pension plans shall be free of tax

15. Allow Bangkok to issue bonds to the value of 250 billion baht to develop public infrastructure projects

16. Free water and electricity for those who earn less than 500 baht a month and free delivery of babies at public hospitals

18. Free education until doctorate level

COMMENT: Wow, this will incur a lot of debt, yet they are still reducing taxes. I should note that they are wanting fundamentally change the province-central government relations. They want to create a special administrative region for the 3 southern provinces and they each elect a governor. Also, have local elections and the ability to institute a recall at all levels.

*Yes, he is the author of the Royal Power book:

HM the King’s authority is retained in the Constitution, argues an MP

After the 1932 Revolution that put an end to more than 1,000 years of absolute monarchy in Thailand, most people have formed a general misconception that His Majesty the King is under constitutional rules.

On the contrary, as Pramual Rujanaseri, a party list member of Thai Rak Thai, argues in his best-selling book “Royal Power”, the King has never lost his legitimate power.

“The royal hand-over of democracy to the Thai people in 1932 represents a reduction of absolute monarchy to the exercise of royal power through the Constitution,” he said in the book.

“But it does not mean that the Constitution is above the monarchy.”

Thailand witnessed 16 constitutions during the politically unstable period of democratic development, highlighted by military coups. In all this time, no single party dared to push out a new constitution without seeking prior royal signatures. In particular, the 1978, 1991 and 1997 constitutions all sought royal permission from His Majesty the King first. This has made the institution of the monarchy of Thailand unique.

Pramual has written “Royal Power” to clarify further details about the King of Thailand’s legitimate power, which is embedded formally in the Constitution and informally – which is equally important – in the ancient Thai culture, beliefs, values, procedures and royal traditions.

The current controversy surrounding Auditor-General Khunying Jaruvan Maintaka’s nomination and the attempt by politicians and government officials to remove her from this royally-commanded post has made it necessary to understand His Majesty the King’s royal power.

Jaruvan has defied political moves to oust her from office, arguing that since she got the job by royal command she would only leave it with the King’s signature. The Senate’s appointment of Visut Montriwat to replace Jaruvan three months ago has so far failed to get royal endorsement, and Thailand has plunged into a political and constitutional crisis.

Pramual said in an interview with The Nation that some people were trying to override the royal power of His Majesty the King, whose appointments of state officials could not be overridden.

“But I assume that they have done so because they lack knowledge of His Majesty the King’s royal power,” the author added. “The public also has the misunderstanding that His Majesty is under constitutional rules.

“The fact is that His Majesty will endorse every constitution before it can be implemented. His power apparently overwhelms what’s stated in the charters.”

You can read Thongchai Winichakul's criticism of the book here.

The Nation reports:

The Democrat Party yesterday dismissed allegations that the inclusion of the sons of a key junta member and a Cabinet minister in its tentative line-up of election candidates betrayed its links with the Council for National Security (CNS) and the Surayud Chulanont government.

Democrat deputy spokesman Sathit Pitutecha said Sakonthee Phattiyakul, a young businessman and son of CNS secretary-general and Defence Ministry permanent secretary General Winai Phattiyakul, had applied for party membership of his own accord.

Sathit quoted Sakonthee as saying that he had faith in the Democrat Party as a political institution and wanted to start his political career with the party.

"Unlike some other candidates, Sakonthee is a young man who has never asked the party for financial assistance," he said, adding that it was likely that Sakonthee would be a Democrat candidate in the December 23 election.

He said whether Sakonthee's joining the party was a sign of support from the junta was a matter of personal opinion.

"Time will tell. But the poll body will manage the rules of the election," he said.

Besides Sakhonthee, either Suwong or Pongsak Yodmani, sons of Tourism and Sports Minister Suvit Yodmani, are likely to run for the Democrats. While one of Suvit's sons will contest either the Bang Khen, Don Muang or Sai Mai constituencies in Bangkok, Sakonthee's constituency is yet to be determined, according to party sources.

COMMENT: The son of the CNS member gives the perception of a closeness with/support from the CNS. Whether this is true or not - we'll never know either way - and as it coincides with rumours of the CNS favouring the Democrats, some voters might perceive them as being aligned with the military. Yes, just after the coup, the military was popular for "rescuing democracy", but that was last year. The economy is in the dolldrums now and consumer confidence is low. The Democrats, outside of the South, receive strong support from urban, middle-class voters and such voters are concerned with the economy. Some of them are also concerned about democracy and military influence in future governments, but more for the fact that the technocrats and military haven't, or at least are perceived not to have, managed the economy as well as many hoped so concerns of the CNS perpetuating their power could negatively affect the Democrats.

Just as importantly, I don't think the candidate offers anything positive for the Democrats in Bangkok. He doesn't have name recognition on his own - I've never heard of him and have asked a few people who have never heard of him either and a google search of his name and variations bring up nothing - thus he will have trouble differentiating himself from his father. I can only assume they will put him in a seat with a large number of military voters, but he could still turn off some Bangkok urban, middle-class voters. I think this could help PPP, particularly on the party-list vote. PPP are trying to paint themselves as the anti-coup party and for some swing voters they might see this as further evidence of links between the Democrats and the CNS. Those who hate PPP, but saw the Democrats as a possible alternative might now decide to get for an alternative party as a "protest vote" or not vote for any party at all.

* I wonder whether it might help Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana who are probably the only other party who at one stage was trying to appeal to progressive/intellectual urban types. Many of these voters are anti-Thaksin, but are not necessarily pro-military either. However, given the musical chairs nature of recent months, I admit I have no idea what Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana stand for now and what kind of candidates they will be putting up so it is difficult to know their exact appeal to the progressive/intellectuals.

btw, I wonder whether Kitty will offer a comment on her Democrat connections now.

In an update to this blog post on Matichima Thippatai's populist policies, The Nation reports:

"The Matchima Thippatai party is contesting the election with a total of 42 state welfare and populist policies. These policies will lead to free healthcare for everyone, including for some kidney ailments that are currently not covered by the state welfare system, and free education, plus free food and books for kids.

"In short, our welfare package will be more comprehensive than the previous Thai Rak Thai-led government. Then, we'll overhaul the budget system to separate the investment budget from the fixed expenditure budget.

"The problem is our current fiscal budget of Bt1.66 trillion is mainly for fixed expenses such as salaries (which altogether amount to some Bt1.2 trillion), leaving only some Bt400 billion for public investment.

"Such an amount is too small to drive economic growth so we have to come up with a separate investment budget financed by government bonds.

"Then, we'll help drive economic growth by launching more mega-infrastructure projects such as a total of 10 mass transit lines in Bangkok and the suburbs, the Kra Isthmus canal scheme, and double railway tracks nationwide.

COMMENT: Big infrastructure projects by Matchima Thippatai. I think TRT probably went to the limit, if not over it, in its term of office on government spending. It will be difficult to finance without the government going into debt and hence the government bonds mentioned by Prachai - surely this would constitute government debt? Wouldn't any bank be nervous in giving any money that went through Prachai's hands? Then again, they can promise a lot and know they wouldn't need to deliver on any of it as they are not a major party.

btw, I don't remember the name of the very minor party, but there is a party out there who are, wait for this, promising 10 billion baht for each province. A village fund on a massive scale with close to 800 billion baht of spending. This will probably be the only piece of news we get from them this election cycle.

On PPP, The Nation reports:

The party yesterday also announced 12 policies for its campaign platform, most of them borrowed from ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's Thai Rak Thai party.

Deputy secretary-general Noppadon Pattama said the party would utilise and adapt the populist policies of the Thaksin government as well as improve on policies of the current administration.

Among the policies the party promises to implement if it wins the election are: no tax increases; a debt moratorium for farmers; further development of the Village Fund; allocation of the Small Medium Large fund (Bt300,000, Bt500,000, Bt700,000), implement the second stage of the One Tambon One Product project; set up a People Bank; increase capital for small- and medium-sized enterprises; distribute one million cattle to 100,000 farms; price guarantees for agricultural produce; allow people who find employment overseas to pay the job placement fee after starting work; and proceed with CEO-style provincial governors.

The party also promised to improve the Bt30-per-hospital-visit scheme by allowing people to use ID cards for any treatment, including emergency healthcare. Workers with social security will enjoy coverage for their families as well.

Students will be given educational loans that they can pay back after they get jobs, a project which would be funded by the two- and three-digit lottery. The party pledged to help teachers reduce their debts and give village heads the same healthcare coverage enjoyed by bureaucrats.

The party also promised to build proper roads connecting every village and to replace the dirt roads within four years. It also plans to establish centres to help vocational students start businesses and a new Thailand Knowledge Park project to develop online libraries.

COMMENT: Comparatively, PPP look like fiscal conservatives. Very rural and lower class orientated although personally I am not so sure on the debt moratorium, price guarantees, and allowing people to pay the job placement fee after starting work. The later one will probably win some voters, I am just not sure how a system could be set up and how cost-effective it would be although I assume it is designed to save people from borrowing from loan sharks, but I am not sure this would really help as they will still have to borrow for any "unofficial fees".

I have seen other mention of infrastructure projects that apparently PPP support although no specifics so I assume this policy will be rolled out later. I think they are looking a little infrastructure light at the moment.

The article also mentions:

The party also announced the line-up of its 35 women candidates, saying it would field the most number of women candidates among the political parties contesting the election.

The women candidates include former MPs and MP candidates such as Karuna Chidchob, Puwanida Khunpalin and Supamas Isarapakdi. Among the new women candidates are Leelawadee Watcharobol, Chinnicha Wongsawat, Parichart Chaleekrau and Pattana Sangkhasap.

COMMENT: On the surface it seems they are supporting female candidates, but look as some of those surnames and you can see they match the surname of TRT members who were banned (Chidchob would surely be a Newin relative/spouse). Nevertheless, it is a somewhat creative way and particularly for some middle-class women it might make PPP seem a more attractive option as they appear to be supporting women - compare with the Democrats where women candidates are scarce. PPP still needs as many party list votes as possible. I doubt it will win a large number of votes, but emphasising a differences is important in a campaign and doesn't cost that much either so it seems like a smart move.

I realise the source is not that partial, but Thaksin's website has a fuller translation (although like moi, there are a number of grammatical mistakes) of the CNS documents on suppressing the PPP vote. You can see the comparison with The Nation's summarised translation which I blogged on. From my reading up until "Meeting regarding Campaign against Election Fraud" section it generally corresponds with what I read the other day, but after that I can't find the specific Thai language version they are translating from - there are some additional documents floating around so if anyone finds a Thai version which is readable of these documents please e-mail me or leave a comment.

Both the Bangkok Post and The Nation have editorials strongly criticizing the CNS campaign.

The Bangkok Post's editorial:

The documents detailing military-led plans to undermine the People Power party (PPP) ahead of the general election serve to underline the hypocrisy of the coup leaders. Worse, they make a mockery of their much-heralded attempts to make the upcoming election "free and fair".

PPP leader Samak Sundaravej released the classified documents on Wednesday in which an operation by state agencies to stop the party from prevailing at the election was detailed. Included in the plan was the use of official media as well as unofficial channels to point out similarities in policy between the defunct Thai Rak Thai party and PPP, to show that the corruption associated with the old-power clique would return with the PPP and create fear that if the PPP wins the election, chaos will ensue and another coup might be staged.

That Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont admitted the documents detailing a campaign of disinformation against a political party were authentic was damaging enough. However, he made matters worse by suggesting there is nothing wrong with the documents because they contain no information that proves the Council for National Security (CNS) planned to use violence to destroy the PPP or the old power camp. He then threw a hot potato at the CNS, saying it was its job to investigate the matter and explain it to the public.

Deputy Prime Minister Sonthi Boonyaratkalin, who was army chief and head of the CNS when the documents were prepared, said he would rather leave it to the army to explain.

That the powers-that-be are ducking the issue is understandable. Such a campaign, using state mechanisms against a political party, is difficult if not impossible to defend.

However, as hard as it may be for those who worked to bring Thaksin down to swallow, the PPP is a legitimate political force, albeit a direct descendant of the Thai Rak Thai party they hoped had been destroyed.

The PPP, as well as other political parties, have every right to campaign on the platform they deem fit within bounds set by the Election Commission. And only the EC should have the power of referee. The attempt by other powers to curtail any party's chance at the polls would jeopardise the credibility of the poll, which is a much-needed new beginning for Thai society.

The Nation's editorial is quite similar:

Let's not forget that there are many people in this country who still admire Thaksin and his policies. These people are eligible voters who have equal rights with other Thai citizens, and they must be allowed to choose representatives who share their views and offer them a policy platform they find attractive. Any attempt by the military or state apparatus to cripple the PPP simply because many of its high-profile members are closely associated with Thaksin would make the December 23 poll the opposite of free and fair, and that can't be good for democracy - in the same way that disenfranchising millions of people who still admire Thaksin cannot be good for democracy.

The secret documents released by the PPP outline a junta plan to use state-run mass-media organisations to both to counter that party's verbal attacks against the CNS and the junta-appointed interim government, as well as to expose the party's alleged ulterior motives. All these activities are supposed to be carried out by the CNS in the name of maintaining national security.

It is assumed that if the PPP wins the election and achieves power, this would lead to Thaksin and members of his family - who are facing serious criminal suits in connection with corruption scandals - being let off the hook completely, if not also staging a triumphant political comeback.

But the people of Thailand will make the decision on whether to elect PPP candidates in large enough numbers for them to gain power. The military has no business making that decision for all of us. Such a heavy-handed approach at this juncture is totally uncalled for. Besides, no democracy-loving people in this country want the military to exert undue influence on the election outcome. Nor do they want the armed forces to continue to play a dominant role in politics for much longer.

Indeed, the military should start making preparations to go back to barracks. Military leaders should start familiarising themselves with the idea that after the democratically elected government takes over power from the junta-appointed interim government, they will be taking orders from civilian leaders who represent the people.

The contrast in the next two op-ed pieces between two different The Nation columnists couldn't be more stark. First, Pravit Rojanaphruk writes:

Relief because for the past year the kingdom has been accustomed to hearing junta leaders in the Council for National Security (CNS) talk about the need to return democracy to Thailand. There are moments when this writer wonders if the junta really means what it says about going democratic. But people's anticipation and aspirations must have been irrevocably dampened by the documents. Thank you, Khun Samak, for once in your life you're doing Thailand a service. And we won't be looking for any ulterior motive.

Now, after reading the secret documents, which have been verified by junta-appointed prime minister Gen Surayud Chulanont as authentic, the public has the opportunity to get a rare glimpse of the junta's true mentality.

The mentality may be disturbing, but it's real - so get used to it. What's more, the junta is not alone in Thai society in having the problem of a gross discrepancy between what it says in public and what it thinks and writes in private.

COMMENT: Pravit then also translates some part of the documents and is extremely critical of the CNS.

Sopon Onkgara, as expected, has his own unique take on things. His op-ed really needs to be read in its entirety to understand his position:

Samak Sundaravej's revelation regarding the so-called classified documents supposedly issued by the Council for National Security was supposed to be a major political slam dunk for him, forcing the military junta to retreat quickly from a plan to stop the People Power Party in its bid to regain power for Thaksin Shinawatra.

It looked this way after the first day of Samak's revelation. It was in fact suspected that he was being above board when he lamented possibly being a victim of political assassination.

The public was shocked, to a certain extent, to learn that classified documents of such significance were leaked through certain channels to the People Power Party, which declared itself to be Thaksin's political nominee party at the time of its inception. The shock was deepened by the fact that it was Samak who made the disclosure.

COMMENT: I have read military/CNS retorts about Samak apparently saying he was assassinated, but the only thing by Samak I have read is him saying, in Thai and English, is that the CNS was out to destroy him/PPP. A google news search doesn't bring up any statements by him. Did Samak really say this? Anyone have a link to Samak's words.

Samak's rhetoric and tantrums have lowered the public's belief in the authenticity of the documents considerably.

Judging from Samak's track record when it comes to revealing documents in and outside the House of Representatives throughout his political career, a strong possibility exists that the papers were either doctored or fake.

Critics have regarded Samak as a politician who cries wolf, with several libel suits against him to back this claim. He came very close to serving jail time for libel and defamation suits and he is currently appealing another libel suit, which marked him for a two-year jail term.

COMMENT: I wasn't aware that Sopon was such a fan of lawsuits against the media - Samak was not a politician at the time, but hosted a talk show type program so was part of the media. Sopon seems to still hold out some false hope that the documents were fake. All we have from the government (Surayud and Gen. Sonthi) is that they have seen initialed/signed photocopies, but hasn't seen the "originals". In any government distribution list, initialed copies are handed out and are relied so it was a very weak non-denial denial by both of them. If the documents were really fake, it would be easy for the CNS to prove and surely they would have done so by now. Why wouldn't they?

With his long experience in gutter politics, Samak should have sensed that there was something odd with the documents and that someone might have set him up for more trouble with military authorities and the Election Commission.

In fact, the September 19 military coup was staged to boot out Thaksin and his cronies from power following years of corruption scandals and self-serving activities. Any campaign to uproot the remnants of the deposed leader's regime would not be unusual. Such campaigns are necessary, but the Surayud government did not pursue this mission, much to the dismay of the CNS leaders.

In other countries with a cut-throat political tradition, purges of corrupt politicians are usually bloody and brutal. In Thailand's case, not a single shot was fired and no blood was spilled. Even so, democracy-loving people condemned it without looking at the big picture.

What happened after the initial excitement of Samak's disclosure? The CNS came out with a denial initially. Then Surayud admitted that the papers might have been genuine, for reasons only he knows, with a senior military figure later pointing to the possibility that the documents might have been doctored and adapted to cause harm to the armed forces.

COMMENT: Yes, but Surayud specifically admitted he had seen an initialed copy of the documents - surely this meant he had received another copy aside from Samak's copy. The military just speculated that documents could be forged, but didn't specifically refer to the documents that Samak has.

Samak must have realised that such documents, which seemed to give him an obvious upper hand, might eventually turn out to be false. After the uproar, the Election Commission (EC) was curious as to whether the classified documents were authentic, particularly as they related to Samak's claim that he might have been marked for death.

The EC demanded to see the papers and the People Power Party was initially happy to let the EC investigate. After sensing the possibility that the papers might be false, the party delayed a meeting with the EC. They wanted more time to study the papers and discuss its consequences.
For those who understand the mechanisms of entrapment and disinformation, it is not difficult to convert authentic classified documents into doctored or fake ones to circumvent an inconvenient truth, so to speak. Samak's papers, which he thought had given him the upper hand, have put him in a precarious situation.

Samak must have sensed again that he could have been set up. That's why he refused to show up with the documents at the EC's office. The People Power Party assigned a political greenhorn to handle the messenger's task but decided later to postpone the submission.

If the papers were doctored and Samak's claims were his own exaggerations, he and his party would be in serious trouble. Making false allegations for the benefit of political campaigns could lead to a trial by the Constitution Tribunal. What the verdict would be is anybody's guess, but surely this would not be pleasant for Samak and the People Power Party.

COMMENT: So does Sopon think that Samak is being entrapped? That the government/military knows the documents to be false, but is somehow hoping to snare Samak in a trap. Wouldn't this itself be disturbing if true.

That's why Samak has become quiet after his big show, something seemingly unusual for a man of his character and habits. The political slam dunk might see the outspoken and combative politician, now long past his time, lying flat on the floor to be laughed at by political watchers.

A call for a free and fair election is wishful thinking, especially with the complicated and cumbersome rules set by the EC. With more than 60 parties registered, it is impossible for government officials, the media and others to put all contenders on a level playing field.

Unfair practices began with the inception of the political parties. Those parties with big money are competing with also-rans with negligible campaign funds who simply joined the race to see themselves in contention.

The world of politics is unfair. Neutrality is non-existent. Yet some people still demand to have the impossible.

COMMENT: Sopon has changed his tune since last year.

Finally, I have just seen Chang Noi's thoughts on the matter published in today's The Nation:

The Council for National Security (CNS) document leaked last week gave further clarification. The document pictures current politics as a contest between "the Army" on one side and "opposition groups" or the "old power" on the other. We can forget the political parties, the one pretty boy and all the ugly old men. The key figures in this election are Thaksin and Sonthi.
...
The military's other great political asset is its capacity for intimidation. This capacity is greatly enhanced by the imposition of martial law, whether or not the provisions of the law are actually enforced. Sonthi was very clear about this, saying shortly after the coup: "Those who might be planning unrest would be deterred by the power of the law".
...
The document released last week is a detailed plan for using state media in this crucial period before nominations close. Among the specific proposals are: "create news to attack the old power… spread rumours about the connections between Thai Rak Thai, Singapore, the People Power Party, and the trend towards presidential rule… spread rumours that Thaksin paid foreign media to run articles attacking the institution".

COMMENT: With all Chang Noi's pieces read the whole thing. Remember the executive and the military are meant to remain impartial.

Gen. Sondhi and Sondhi L of the Manager are on the same page. Smear through rumors. Talking about presidential rule, what do we have now? A military cabal who want to control things with Gen. Sonthi as their leader and unaccountable to anyone.

Attacking Singapore is not new, Gen. Sonthi has done so previously and the CNS claimed credit for a protest outside the Singapore Embassy earlier this year. I am sure the Singaporeans have noticed.

I wonder what else the CNS has cooked up which hasn't been leaked?

The Bangkok Post reports:

The Election Commission voiced concern about the People Power party's plans to appoint ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra as a key adviser, saying it would raise doubts about his five-year political ban.

Election Commission secretary-general Suthiphon Thaveechaiygarn said such an appointment would be inappropriate.

Mr Suthiphon's comment came as PPP secretary-general Noppadon Pattama was preparing to consult the EC on the party's plan.

The idea has already been heavily criticised by anti-Thaksin groups as an attempt to directly rebuild a "bridge" between Mr Thaksin and politics.

Mr Suthiphon said although appointing the former prime minister as party adviser was not illegal, "socially and politically, the move is not appropriate because it [the advisory position] apparently involves politics".

The party plans to appoint Mr Thaksin as its adviser if it wins the election.

Mr Thaksin is among 111 executives of the now-defunct Thai Rak Thai party who were banned for five years from running in elections, being party executives or setting up any new parties.

The ban was the result of a verdict handed down by the military-appointed Constitution Tribunal on May 30, which found the party and its executives guilty of election fraud early last year.

"They should show spirit by not publicly supporting any political party to avoid possible chaos in society," Mr Suthiphon said.

Mr Thaksin was at the center of deep social divisions that eventually culminated in the Sept 19 coup last year and has promised several times since that he has no intention of returning to the political arena.
...
However, according to the EC, election law does not prevent him from taking on an advisory role.

COMMENT: The EC's job is to enforce the rules and it is not the arbitrator of moral judgements. The EC has already ruled that if any of the 111 executives was to act as an advisor that such a move is legal, but should the EC be now commenting on the appropriateness of such a decision and also telling people not to vote for a political party? Surely, this is what is inappropriate as the EC are meant to be impartial.

The other day I blogged on a new set of bills before the junta-appointed parliament which would make a criminal offence punishable by a minimum 10 year jail sentence for insulting Buddhism. The Nation reports on a recent protest:

The recent public backlash against two award-winning paintings that criticised Thai monks could lead to self censorship by artists and prize-giving committees. Artists, art academics and critics said the reaction could also close the door on expression of opinions of the clergy through art.

"It is very likely," Silapakorn University art lecturer Thavorn Ko-udomvit told The Nation.

"It will certainly happen and lead to the unwanted consequence of the public at a certain level giving monks an untouchable status," said artist Manit Srivanichaphum.

The artists behind the controversial works, Anupong Chantorn and Wartiht Sembut, said they would continue painting but would think twice before submitting their work for awards in future.

Monks and religion were among taboo topics until the past few decades, when Thai society developed a more democratic mindset.

Manit said the two incidents had suddenly brought back the "untouchable" status to Buddhist clergy. "It's a very bad sign," he added.

The controversy first arose in September, when Anupong's painting of monks with crows' beaks, titled "Bhikku Sandarn Kar", was awarded the gold prize at the 2007 National Artist Awards.

Awards organiser Silapakorn University immediately faced opposition from several hundred members of a Buddhist alliance led by monks, whose protests brought the issue into the limelight.

The alliance demanded that the award be withdrawn and that the painting should not be displayed at exhibitions of this year's award-winning works to be held around the country.

The university rejected the demand after consulting experts in relevant fields, prompting the alliance to file a lawsuit against the university in the Administrative Court for defaming Buddhism.

"Painting monks with beaks like crows or dogs wearing monk robes is nothing but defamation of Buddhism. Are the artists Buddhist?" asked Sathien Wiphornmaha, one of the protest leaders.

"It puts monks in general in a difficult situation and inconveniences them. Why didn't the artists paint positive pictures?" asked Phrathep Wisut Kawi, a senior monk from Mahamakut Wittayalai University, an institution for Buddhist monks.

However, most artists, art academics, social commentators - and even a large section of monks - disagreed with these sentiments.

COMMENT: There is a big difference between someone taking you to the Administrative Court and the police filing charges where you are facing a minimum 10 year jail sentence. Turning a taboo into a criminal offence is quite a step. You can see how any future law, if it passes, would be used. Insulting monks will equal insulting Buddhism. You don't need to insult actual monks either. Is this really where Thailand should be heading? What if a monk does something wrong and there is some evidence to support his, would you as a journalist dare to even report it because you would need to establish that the insult was true (I assume truth will be a defence, if not it is even more draconian) to escape punishment.

Now, some people might say they don't want to finance or support insults to Buddhism and I can understand this, but do you really want to make it a criminal offence?

It wasn't really surprising that Chalerm Yoobamrung joined up with the People's Power Party (PPP) given he has also been odds with the military in the past (he was in the 1991 government when the coup was staged and has had a number of other skirmishes over the years), but then again I wasn't surprised that problems arose as The Nation reports (this was almost 2 weeks ago):

Controversial politician Chalerm Yoobamrung yesterday threatened to leave the People Power Party if it refuses to field his two sons as candidates in the December 23 election.

Chalerm made the threat following reports the party would not pick the sons to run for seats in Bangkok.

He said he joined the party after being approached by a leading member. But he insisted his two sons run on its ticket in the capital.

"If People Power does not select me and my two sons - Wan and Duang - as Bangkok candidates, I'll be ready to leave the party," Chalerm told a news conference at his home.

He said he sought no financial support from the party but would be willing to run its election campaigns in Bangkok and the provinces if it entered his sons in the Bangkok race.

Chalerm will not seek help from former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra over the matter.

"The bottom line is that it must accept me and my sons as a package," Chalerm said.

Chalerm said if he left People Power he might join Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who has suggested he may establish a party. He will talk with Chavalit today.

People Power secretary-general Surapong Suebwonglee said Chalerm's conditions were unacceptable. Surapong said selection of candidates would be done systematically through provincial and regional-level committees, with the party's executive having the final say.

"If Chalerm sets it as a condition that he will work with the party only after his sons are given the opportunity to contest the election as its candidates, I'll say we won't be able to accept that," he said.

"We have committees to consider candidate selection. We can't make any promises. And it will be unfortunate if that is so unacceptable he cannot work with People Power."

Chalerm has long sought to bring his children into politics. In 2001:

Chalerm Yoobamrung, the outspoken deputy leader of the New Aspiration Party, failed to pull his two sons into the lower house, despite putting them up in constituencies where his family influence used almost be a guarantee of a seat.

The fact the sons are better known for barroom brawling than political theory was not, before the last vote, considered any impediment to a career in politics.

COMMENT: Unfortunately, one cannot say the same thing now. His children are, to put it bluntly, political toxic waste. They were involved in numerous fights over a couple of years with one of them culminating in the death of a police officer who was shot at point-blank range in the head, by a gun owned by Chalerm. Duangchalerm, one of Chalerm's sons, was charged and eventually acquitted. Chalerm was delighted and told everyone that it was this mysterious person named "Pued" who was behind the death, but no one has found any existence of Pued.

NOTE: The saga of bringing Duangchalerm to court is outlined here.

For the Bangkok public, Chalerm's children are just political negatives. Thaksin is a polarising figure, but he has his supporters and detractors. However, how many supporters are there for Chalerm's children? I don't think they have a big constituency. Chalerm, on his own, doesn't have the same power and influence he once had, but is an effective debater when he is on song. So it would be a loss for PPP if Chalerm left, but then again when people hear that it was because PPP wouldn't let his sons run I don't really think it is a negative. If anything it conveys the message that PPP has standards!

Any party that puts Chalerm's children on a party list or in a constituency seat deserve the negative consequences that flow from this.

Finally, the mentioning of Chalerm joining Chavalit brings back memories. Yes, Chalerm was Deputy Leader of the Chavalit New Aspiration Party in the 90s, but things haven't always been that friendly between the two as this NYT article from 1990 shows:

With the Thai Prime Minister in Austria on his way to the United States, tempers cooled in Thailand today after the fervid political and military maneuvering on Monday.

With the Thai Prime Minister in Austria on his way to the United States, tempers cooled in Thailand today after the fervid political and military maneuvering on Monday.

The crisis was set off by the sudden resignation of the Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister, Gen. Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, the former army Chief of Staff, amid military shows of strength, rumors of a coup and assertions of corruption. The tension was heightened by Prime Minister Chatichai Choonhavan's scheduled departure that evening for the United States and a meeting this week with President Bush.
...
'A Moving Jewelry Box'

That minister, Chalerm Yoobamrung, heads a party with only five members of Parliament, but is regarded as an independent figure who could be damaging in opposition, diplomats said. General Chavalit, who agreed to join the faltering Government 10 weeks ago, has made a public stand against political corruption while in the army and in office, and has indirectly criticized Mr. Chalerm, who has responsibility over state television and radio, on those grounds.

Mr. Chalerm struck back, indirectly criticizing General Chavalit and calling his wife, Khunying Phankura Yongchaiyudh, ''a moving jewelry box.'' She called Mr. Chalerm ''a moron.'' Despite the petty tone of the exchange, the army became offended on behalf of its former chief and said its honor was at stake and its patience short.

General Chavalit's resignation on Monday seemed intended to press Mr. Chatichai, who was eager to have a strong front for his trip to the United States, to act.

COMMENT: A moving jewelry box? They, of course, patched things up later.

Excuse the shameless self-promotion, but The Star's (Malaysia) Philip Golingai has a profile of me today. I am not sure what his Asia News Network colleagues at The Nation would have to say about this.

NOTE: I have updated the "About this blog" link in the sidebar.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

Deputy Prime Minister Sonthi Boonyaratkalin has asked the Supreme Court to lend him a judge, who is a daughter of Election Commissioner Sodsri Sattayatham, to help with his work next month. But Gen Sonthi's request may not be easily granted because the Judiciary Commission and the Supreme Court had previously resolved that it was ''inappropriate'' to allow judiciary officials to assume political posts, as that could be in conflict with their judicial status, a Supreme Court source said.

A letter, signed by Loyluen Bunnag, deputy secretary-general to the prime minister, was sent to Supreme Court president Wirat Limwichai, seeking permission for judge Konna Sattayatham to assist Gen Sonthi with his work until his term in the cabinet ends.

The Nation reports:

Chaturon Chaisang, an adviser to the People Power Party, yesterday called the special committee against vote-buying unconstitutional.

"The Cabinet should dissolve the panel," he said.

According to the charter, the Election Commission has the duty to ensure a fair election, not the executive branch.

That means Prime Minister Sonthi Boonyaratglin, who obviously wants to destroy the old power clique, should not have been appointed panel chairman, he said.

"Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont should re-assign a role for Sonthi. He should skip every task relating to the election because he comes from the junta," he added.

COMMENT: Has Gen. Sonthi not heard of separation of powers? Or does he not care?

There is no break-up of the Mahachon-Chat Thai-Democrat alliance yet, but each of them has their own little problem.

First, while Mahachon has denied merging with Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana, its party leader Sanan Kachornprasart is leaving the party as The Nation reports:

Mahachon Party leader Sanan Kachornprasart is poised to downgrade his party as a shell while working with the Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana Party as campaign manager in order to boost the odds for victory of both parties, party sources said on Thursday.

A political hookup of Ruam Jai Thai and Mahachon

Sanan and his son and former MP Siriwat will join the race under the Ruam Jai Thai banner although there will be no merger because the Mahachon banner is to be kept as a backup party in case of a "political accident".

Ruam Jai Thai secretary general Pradit Pataraprasith and Chat Pattana group leader Suwat Liptapanlop have played an important role in wooing Sanan.

Former deputy prime minister Somkid Jatusripitak also helped persuading Sanan to clinch the deal.

With the arrvial of Sanan, the party expects to win sufficient House seats to ensure a coalition slot.

COMMENT: This might not necessarily be bad for the Democrats as Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana is a coalition party for them although it is still far from certain Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana would join up with the Democrats. Nevertheless, the alliance can't count on Mahachon anymore as they are now in the Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana camp.

Thai Rath has an explanation from Mahachon deputy party leader Akrapol Sorasuchart on problems for Mahachon which provides an explanation over Sanan's departure. and that is the 80 party-list MPs, which are divided by proportional representation, will be counted in eight districts of provinces. For Phicit province, Sanan's home and where Mahachon are strongest, they are grouped with provinces of the Northeast and this has caused big problems for the party, as a small party.

There is some infighting over at Chat Thai as well as the Bangkok Post reports:

Kanjana Silpa-archa has publicly criticised Chuwit Kamolvisit for criticising her father's selection of candidates for his Chart Thai party in Bangkok, saying it was "disrespectful" of Mr Chuwit to talk behind the Chart Thai party leader - meaning her father - behind his back.

Ms Kanjana, who is deputy leader of Chart Thai as well as the leader's daughter, said Mr Chuwit had cast her father in a bad light before the media many times before.

"During all this, he has offered his apologies for acting inappropriately, only to repeat his actions," she fumed.

"Whether he will be among the first to be selected to contest the general election in Bangkok remains to be seen," she said. "All decisions will be based on maintaining the party’s good reputation, not on a certain individual," she stated.

"If Mr Chuwit is unhappy about any future decisions, he is welcome to leave the party."

COMMENT: I realise Chuwit is not everybody's favourite, but he is very articulate and is often interviewed on TV and radio. Yes, he is a complete media whore, but Banharn is old and struggles in interviews unless he is thrown complete softballs. Chat Thai needs Chuwit in parliament as he is one of their more effective debaters. He also has a constituency amongst certain sections of the community, but as Banharn=Chat Thai, we will have to see whether they will kiss and make up. There are other options for Chuwit too.

The Democrats are having their own problems with a well-known party member resigning and publicly criticising Abhisit and the Democrats as the Bangkok Post reports:

Democrat party executive Kriengsak Charoenwongsak announced on Thursday that he has decided to resign from the party because he didn't get what he wanted for the coming election.

Dr Kriengsak, who has been with the party for 27 years, said with tears that he planned to sue party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva at the Criminal Court.

Dr Kriengsak said he has lost confidence in Mr Abhisit, claiming the leader was "unfair" and "good at building his own image."

The resignation came after Mr Abhisit didn’t allow Dr Kriengsak contest the eastern Bangkok constituency covering Phra Khanong, Bangna, Praves and Suan Luang districts, even though Dr Kriengsak claimed he had received previous approval by Mr Abhisit.

COMMENT: Wow! There is a sense that he is throwing a little temper tantrum as he didn't get what he wanted, but he is a very prominent intellectual and could cause the Democrats some bad press - a brief bio of him is here. Perhaps, he should have listened to himself about power in politics and the Democrat Party. It will all depend on how loud he is in denouncing Abhisit and whether this is just seen as sour grapes for him not getting what he wanted.

Matichon reports it slightly different quoting Kriengsak who states he felt he was maligned by someone, but Abhisit believed the allegations without investigating and Abhisit went back on his word about the seat he was to get. In response, the Democrats didn't seem too perturbed just saying that some people miss out.

I have previously blogged on Democrat Party, Chat Thai, and PPP TV ads, but there is another political party with ads on Thai TV. The newly formed and also newly renamed Matchima Thippatai, led by Prachai Leophai-ratana, have a new TV ad where they promise free education until the end of university, free healthcare, and a social welfare system of up to 1,500 baht a month for the elderly.

COMMENT: Why not just go the whole hog and throw in free beer too? If Thaksin and TRT were such big spenders, what should one call Matchima Thippatai?

Their policy sounds like an update to the policy advocated by the 2005 Democrats although Abhisit recently ruled out free university education under a Democrat government so there is some point of distinction. The current military-installed civilian government has already made healthcare "free" so I am not sure how "freer" they intend to make it here. Unsurprisingly, they are very short on details now and don't state how they will finance such policies.

I do hope the media will ask for costings and further details of policies promised by each party. Many policies will need to be fleshed out over the next couple of months, but policies cost money and no party should be able to get away without stating how these policies will be financed as a Post Today editorial, translated by the Bangkok Post noted (cache):

However, none of these parties has declared how they will get the money for the projects. Therefore, economic experts should analyse these economic platforms and spell out their good and weak points. This will help the electorate make a good decision at the polls.

Good ole Prachai was in full display in the ad. Word on the street is that he is financially backing a number of different "third alternative" political parties. There is another ad which solely focuses on Prachai and doesn't make any mention of the party - will this continue beyond today as election advertising is now banned? It talks up his "leadership qualities" and his achievements in "successfully" running his company. This reminds me of Nattakorn's op-ed (cache) last week in the Bangkok Post. Key quote:

The real disappointment here lies in Somsak, for why would he associate himself with the likes of Sondhi and Prachai, knowing full well what these two are after. If this is not an about-face U-turn, I wouldn't know what is. Please don't tell me it is because of the money; that answer is not good enough. And let's not even compare Prachai to Thaksin.

One ran his company into the ground, amassing millions of dollars of debt after the financial crisis, and is still bent on a personal vendetta that dates back to as far as July 1997.

The other made his company into a multi-billion-dollar telecommunications conglomerate before becoming foreign affairs minister and deputy prime minister.

If Thaksin is not fit to be leader, Prachai certainly does not even come close.

It is fair for society to question the motive behind Prachai's push for the premier's post. If not to pursue a personal cause in reclaiming Thai Petrochemical Industry, what then is it for?

This is not necessarily a man who has ostensibly fought for political causes in the past, except for ones which related to his own firms.

COMMENT: Will he go back to his little sand bit once all the kids give him his little toy (TPI) back? Exactly, how does he expect to get TPI back? Buy out the shareholders at full market value? Or "nationalize" the assets and "donate" them to the Leophai-ratana clan?

I have previously blogged about the relationship between the Thai state and Buddhism here. In an update, the Bangkok Post reports (cache):

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) will today consider a bill that will introduce harsh punishments for various forms of offences against Buddhism, including sexual affairs with monks, novices and nuns and, for the first time, officially recognise the status of nuns. The bill was proposed by a group of 179 NLA members, some of whom tried in vain to promote Buddhism as the national religion in the 2007 Constitution.

They reasoned that although Buddhism is the religion of most Thai people, there has been no law to protect and promote the religion seriously and cover Buddhist people in general.

There is only a law to govern the organisation of Buddhist monks, who altogether account for only 0.5% of all Buddhists in the country.

The bill sets a jail term of 10-25 years and/or a fine of 500,000-1,000,000 baht for insulting, offending, imitating and distorting Buddhism and the Lord Buddha and a jail term of 5-10 years and/or a fine of 100,000-500,000 baht for damaging Buddhist objects, personnel and places. People who have any form of sexual affair with monks, novices and nuns are liable to five to 10 years in jail and/or a fine of 100,000-500,000 baht. However, the bill does not include any punishments for monks, novices and nuns who engage in sexual relations.

NLA member Patara Khumpitak said this point could be addressed during the bill's scrutiny process.

Punishment for physically assaulting monks, novices and nuns would be three times those stipulated by law.

COMMENT: So to protect Buddhim, you need to jail people for a minimum of 10 years for insulting Buddhism? The powers that be seem to have the numbers and after failing with their amendments to lese majeste law are further trying to restrict free speech.

I can just imagine some story of someone being raped by a monk and yet it will be the victim who is prosecuted. Who in their right mind would press charges against a monk? If the monk argues it was consensual and the monk is believed, the victim will get at least a 5 year jail term.

There are two issues to the release of the CNS documents about the PPP. First, the content and second, the media circus over the last day with non-denial denials by the CNS and the government - implicitly confirming the documents are real.

Content

A commentator alerted me to the hi-thaksin post about a few days ago where they have scanned one of the documents. The Nation summarised the documents and has some additional information so I will use their version and add my own comments - to make sure it is accurate. The article starts:

The party released the documents on Wednesday via the Website, HiThaksin.net.

COMMENT: At least one of the documents was released on Monday at the Hi-Thaksin website as this post indicates from the date stamp of 22 October and a comment on Monday in this post linking to the documents. All documents have been scanned and can easily be accessed at Prachatai. The Nation leaves out the central overall objectives of the information campaign which I have summarised below:

To create greater harmony in the nation, by the following:
1. to create and promote harmony amongst the public so they have the same objective
2. make the Thai people aware of punishment for those who are divisive

The article continues:

The documents comprise two parts - the classified report prepared by the Army Operations Department in its capacity as an ad hoc unit in the Council for National Security and the attached work schedule for information dissemination.

The action plan has been put into action since September 14 when Deputy Prime Minister Sonthi Boonyaratglin was the junta chief. He resigned his office on September 30 to join the interim government.

COMMENT: One of the documents is actually addressed to Gen. Sonthi which means he (1) read it and lied that he knew about, or (2) doesn't bother to read classified documents that are addressed to him.

The plan for information dissemination has two major goals - foster national unity and discredit the opposition forces against the junta and the interim government.

On the discredit of the opposition forces, the junta plans to achieve five targets:

1. Prevent the middle class from leaning toward the opposition.

2. Expose the flaws of populist policies to grassroots people.

3. Deter and discourage grassroots people from rallying in Bangkok.

4. Circumvent opposition activities.

5. Deter civil servants from supporting the opposition.

For information dissemination between September and the general election, the junta will strive for the following five objectives:

1. Inform the middle class about the facts relating to various political parties and their activities.

2. Point out the similarities between policies of disbanded Thai Rak Thai Party and those of People Power Party.

3. Encourage grassroots people to see the harms if ousted politicians were to return to power.

COMMENT: Not quite,

ชี้นำ/ชักจูงให้ประชาชนรากแก้วต่อต้านการกลับมาของกลุ่มอำนาจเก่าผ่านทางพปช. โดยแสดงให้เห็นว่านโยบายต่างๆ ของทรท.ซึ่งเป็นผลเสียต่อประเทศและประชาชน ก็จะกลับมาด้วย

[My own summarised translation: Make the grassroots people to oppose the return of the old power through PPP by showing that the various policies of TRT were bad for the country and the people and will return]

The article continues:

4. Warn about the repeat of corruption and illegitimacy should the People Power Party were to grab power.

5. Build up the public sentiment to oppose the return of the ousted leaders via the People Power Party.

In discrediting the People Power Party, the junta has assigned all military units under its jurisdiction and militarycontrolled media outlets, including Channel 5.

COMMENT: The state reason for this was to create an appropriate environment and to promote political parties who for advancing the community. The document then further states that to prevent the a certain group who only look after their interests an opportunity to run the country it is necessary for the authorities concerned to implement this plan up until the election.

There are a number of actions plans which are difficult to read, but it is just a continuation of the CNS propaganda campaign.

Is this called taking sides? No doubt Nongnuch Singhadecha, a Matichon writer, is happy about this. So how can the election be free and fair?

Now, on the absolute circus that has happened since yesterday. Samak started the ball rolling declaring (cache):

The 72-year-old former Bangkok governor later said the person in question is now in charge of a state committee to prevent vote-buying in the general election scheduled for Dec 23.

The PPP is made up largely of former members of the defunct Thai Rak Thai party, which was dissolved after it was found guilty of poll fraud.

"The documents mention the PPP. They are reports about what actions have been taken and what plans have been prepare, to suppress the PPP in line with orders given," said Mr Samak.

According to him, the alleged plots mentioned a set of action plans, each to be carried out by a certain state agency, right after the Aug 19 referendum on the draft constitution until Nov 16 upon completion of the registration of candidates for the Dec 23 polls.

A major focus of the plots was the use of state broadcast media outlets to produce and deliver publicity stunts, in the form of news features, to cast the PPP in a negative light, Mr Samak claimed.

Among them would be stories attacking the PPP leader who has been accused by the military-appointed Assets Scrutiny Committee of corruption.

It would be pointed out that should the PPP win the election, the corruption charges against the party leader would prevent him becoming the next prime minister, Mr Samak said.

The plots also specified that those media outlets must provide equal space for all political parties when it comes to reporting news but they must present the PPP in a bad light, said Mr Samak.

Moreover, the plots included plans to instigate rumours about the old power clique and the PPP attempting to change the nation's ruling parliamentary system into a presidential system, he added.

"I wonder why the PPP leader has to be attacked and bullied," Mr Samak said.

He questioned if it was constitutional for the then CNS chairman to hatch these plans while he was still a government servant and at the time when the new charter had already come into effect.

The man could not escape these questions even though such actions specified in the plots might occur after he had left the CNS to become a deputy premier, Mr Samak said.

Then you had the non-denial denial by the CNS:

Col Sansern said the allegation is aimed at destroying credibility of the army, and that the documents that Mr Samak used in backing up his claim might be a fraud.

"No one will write reports on a confidential matter like this," he said in a television interview. "It is possible that some military figures may have created the fake documents to ask for money from the PPP leader because they know he has a lot of money."

He also said this could be a political ploy, adding that some parties may want sympathy votes from the people.

Col Sansern insisted that army chief Anupong Paochinda has a clear policy that the army stays impartial and does not back any political parties.

"The CNS has also reduced its roles," he said. "I do not see any CNS members who take an active role in attacking allies of ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra. There are only those who spark new issues."

COMMENT: As soon as I read this, I knew that they weren't fake as you need to carefully parse a non-denial denial - it is an accurate translation of the Thai version which can be found here. Bill Clinton might not have had sexual relations with that woman too. So after his non-denial denial, he doesn't leave at that, he poses some ridiculous theory that the PPP might have brought the documents. Obviously, The Nation and the Bangkok Post lapped it up - the Post led with "CNS denies anti-PPP plot". What on earth was the CNS spokesman thinking?

The, Gen. Sonthi stated:

"The Army should clarify the matter because I haven't had a chance to see original copies of documents purporting to be the plan against People Power," Sonthi said, easing off on his outright denial on Tuesday.

COMMENT: So he saw a copy, but he doesn't trust us subordinates to pass on the correct documents? He is trying to cast doubt on documents which he knows are real.

Finally, Surayud comes out to admit along similar lines that he already had a copy of the documents, but that they contain "no information that the CNS planned to use violence to destroy the PPP or the old power clique" (Bangkok Post). Thai Rath quotes Surayud as saying he had already read the documents previously. He says there is nothing to the documents (ไม่ได้มีอะไร) and it is "only during the election period" (เพียงแต่ช่วงที่จะมีการเลือกตั้ง). He stated the reason was so that CNS could proceed to work and be consistent with the with the work of the government in arranging the election so there can be transparency and fairness (และจะขอให้การดำเนินการของ คมช. สนับสนุนและสอดคล้องกับการทำงานของรัฐบาล ในการสนับสนุนการเลือกตั้ง ให้มีความโปร่งใสและเป็นธรรม).

COMMENT: Oddly, the newspapers seemed to take Surayud's admission as meaning the documents were real when he just really repeated what Gen. Sonthi had said and that he had seen the documents before, but just wouldn't confirm they were real. I mean lets be honest if they weren't real, he would have told us.

It was hardly earth shattering news either to anyone who had followed the news. The government and the CNS will use all means possible to suppress the PPP vote. Now, will the media stay silent or will they be outraged by this manipulation? This is the interesting question that we all need to watch.

Prachatai reports:

On Oct 18, the Ranong Provincial Court conducted a hearing on complaints filed by families of southern suspects detained in Rattanarangsan military camp for a 4-month occupational training programme. Families of 10 detainees had asked the court to order their immediate release claiming the detention is unlawful.

Before the hearing, 4 of the 10 detainees withdrew their complaints, saying they wanted to continue receiving training as the celebrations at the end of Ramadan, which they originally claimed as the reason for asking for release, had already passed, and the occupational training was due to finish on Nov 24, only about a month away.
The Provincial Prosecutor called two witnesses including Deputy Commander of Surat Thani Province Army Col Pornsak Punsawat and National Human Rights Commission's sub-committee member Pongjaras Ruayram.

Col Pornsak told the court that the occupational training was proposed by the NHRC Sub-Committee on Rights Protection, and was run with budget provided by Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) Region 4 and the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security. He presented documents on the training programme and an order by the 4th Army Commander dated July 22, 2007 prohibiting those who received the training to enter the three southernmost provinces and part of Songkhla province for 6 months, out of concern over the ongoing counter-insurgency, as authorized by the 1914 Martial Law Act.

Col Pornsak said that all trainees were linked to the insurgency; some were arrested with evidence such road spikes, camouflage outfits, or residue of explosive substances on their bodies, and some were implicated by others or by informants.

He said that participating in the training was like studying in boarding school with strict control and rules by military personnel. If they were permitted to leave the camps, they might be physically assaulted. The military cannot release them until the training is finished. Even if immediately released, they still cannot return home due to the order of the 4th Army Commander, or their safety cannot be guaranteed, he said.

NHRC sub-committee member Pongjaras testified that he himself was responsible for bringing 30 detainees to receive the training voluntarily, with only one of them staying at the Rattanarangsan military camp and not seeking a release. The other detainees in other camps were brought in by the military, he said.

Then the court asked the 6 detainees if they were forced to receive the training. All of them replied that they were forced and needed to return home immediately.

The court will read its decision on Oct 30.

In total, there are 203 detainees receiving occupational training in military bases in Ranong, Chumphon and Surat Thani provinces. Families of several detainees have filed complaints at all three provincial courts. The other provincial courts have conducted hearings and will also give their rulings on Oct 30.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

In Pattani, the Fourth Army raised many eyebrows with its six-month ban on 384 alleged insurgent suspects from entering Yala, Pattani, Narathiwat and four districts of Songkhla, which came into force yesterday. The four districts of Songkhla are Chana, Na Thawi, Saba Yoi and Sadao.

The abrupt nature of the order which did not disclose the suspects' names raised questions over transparency and possible human rights violations among legal experts and the local media.

Fourth Army commander Lt-Gen Viroj Buacharoon approved the ban on Friday, using the power vested in him through the emergency decree implemented in September last year.

The announcement reads: ''For the purposes of military operations, suppression and maintaining peace and order, the people named in the attached list and any additional list issued by military authorities are not allowed to enter or reside in Yala, Pattani, Narathiwat and Songkhla for a period of no longer than six months.''

National Legislative Assembly member Niraman Sulaiman saw the order as a breach of basic human rights.

''I've heard about the order but haven't seen it. It is worrisome because the scope of the order is very broad,'' he said.

He also questioned the offences which landed the suspects on the blacklist and whether the army had any solid evidence. He said army intelligence had at times proven ineffective.

''The order will rub salt into the wound and not do any good. The solution [to the southern unrest] must be based on forgiveness, giving those teenagers a chance to change. It is the security officers' duty to win over the locals' hearts and minds,'' he said.

COMMENT: First, I should note that I don't necessarily oppose the government/authorities can sending people on a 4 month training camp, but there are certainly doubts on whether there is any legal provision that allows them to forcefully do so. It is a principle of the rule of law that the executive can only act in accordance with the law as summed in the classic 18th century English case of Entick v Carrington:

The justification is submitted to the judges, who are to look into the books; and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law. If no excuse can be found or produced, the silence of the books is an authority against the defendant, and the plaintiff must have judgment.

NOTE: Actually, the only mention of a training period is contained in the new ISOC Bill.*

Second, the military has power under section 11(7) of the Martial Law Act 1914 to prohibit any person from entering or living in an area where martial law is declared. Surprisingly, given all the recent debate about the ISOC Bill that no one bothers to mention how wide the powers in the Martial Law Act are and gives the military virtually unlimited powers. Section 6 of the Martial Law Act 1914 specifically provides that the "military has greater powers than civilians" (มีอำนาจเหนือเจ้าหน้าที่ฝ่ายพลเรือน)in areas where martial law is declared. Even the ISOC Bill no longer does this. Should we rejoice if the ISOC Bill is rejected, but we are left with Martial Law?

NOTE: I think the Bangkok Post gets it wrong when it states the power was vested in the State of Emergency Decree as this power needs to be specifically authorised by the Prime Minister first and published in the Government Gazette. I've looked and I can't find the authorising power for that provision in the State of Emergency Decree and also that a state of emergency has been extended to parts of Songhkla either, it only applies for the 3 southern border provinces whereas martial law applies in those parts of Songkhla.

Third, who would they be assaulted by if they were released, the military? That is an interesting use of "protective custody". So will they suddenly not be attacked after 4 months of vocational training and 6 months of being prohibited to live in the area? And where are they going to live and what are they going to do then?

*Based on Chris Baker's translation (PDF) of the ISOC Bill. Section 19 states:

Within the area assigned for ISOC operations under a Cabinet resolution in Section 14, if an investigating officer believes that any accused person has committed an offence which affects internal security as designated by Cabinet by mistake or out of ignorance, and that granting the suspect the opportunity to reform will be of benefit to the maintenance of internal security, the investigating officer shall submit records about that accused along with his opinion to the Director.

If the Director concurs with the opinion of the investigating officer, the Director shall
send the aforesaid accused to undergo training at a designated place for a period not exceeding 6 months and under any other conditions so designated in place of court proceedings, according to principles, methods, and conditions determined by the Cabinet.

The procedure under paragraph 2 may be carried out only when the accused agrees to undergo training and abide by the aforesaid conditions. When the accused has undergone training and fulfilled all the conditions, the investigating officer shall submit the matter to the public prosecutor to order the withdrawal of the case under his responsibility, and when the public prosecutor has ordered the withdrawal of the case against the accused, nobody shall bring charges against the accused for the same offence.

COMMENT: Again though, the accused/suspect cannot be forced although I wonder how a court will interpret issues of compulsion/duress. To be honest, the provision of this provision is not to compel the accused to undergo training, as they have to agree to do so anyway, but it provides some certainty that they cannot then be "punished" twice. At the moment, they are relying on the police/prosecutor's word. So in this sense, the provision is an improvement on the current situation.

On the merits of the training, as Niraman Sulaiman states in the Bangkok Post article above there are some merits in having a policy of forgiveness and this is much better than an amnesty. From what I have read it doesn't mean that people will not be charged with crimes, but that in many circumstances it might be difficult to obtain sufficient evidence to prove the elements of an offence beyond reasonable doubt. This almost operates as a plea-bargaining provision and provides individuals with a "second chance" where the charges are dropped in exchange for participating in the training. The benefit for the accused is there life is not in limbo either as they would likely not receive bail.

I still think the authorities need to prosecute anyone they have strong evidence against because they can't restore law and order by, literally and figuratively, letting people get away with murder.

Nevertheless, to play devil's advocate, I do have some reservations of putting together a bunch of mainly, if not exclusively, young men who have links to the violence together. Will they not then just form links with each other and some of the harder elements further indoctrinate the others?

Lyle Walter has e-mailed me to alert me to Kitty's new post on what the government is doing to Thailand Creative and Design Centre (TCDC). Kitty blogs:

Apparently the new government is trying to extinguish anything that was created during Thaksin's years and that includes the TCDC. Just like what they did with ITV, they are planning to destroy the board members and merge the whole thing with a more traditional, more conservative National Discovery Museum which has nothing to do with anything TCDC does and supports.

There are two contrasting views in the media on the issue. First, The Nation has primarily critical coverage of the TCDC as evidenced by this article:

The Office of Knowledge Management and Development (OKMD) has responded to criticism over its "extravagant spending" by merging seven of its units into five and slashing its annual budget from Bt2 billion to Bt700 million.

OKMD chairman Apinan Poshyananda said the agency was launched in the Thaksin era as a public organisation to promote Thailand's competitiveness.

Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont assigned Apinan to run OKMD with "economical, efficient, transparent, and fair" policies. The agency was deemed to have spent too much money, while providing limited services and failing to engage communities.

These problems were in line with an assessment by the Auditor-General's Office, which found four problems: improper establishment as set out by the Royal decree, overspending, poor management and inappropriate salaries for some directors.

The seven units under the OKMD banner are the National Institute for Brain-Based Learning (NBL), the National Centre for the Gifted and Talented (NGT), Thailand Knowledge Park (TK Park), the National Discovery Museum Institute, the Thailand Creative and Design Centre (TCDC), the Thailand Centre of Excellence for Life Sciences, and the Centre for the Promotion of National Strength on Moral Ethics and Values.

However, some of these units will now be merged: the NBL will merge with the NGT, thus becoming the Centre for the Promotion of the Gifted & Learning Innovations; while the TCDC will merge with the National Discovery Museum Institute, thus becoming the Thailand Discovery & Creative Centre.

Apinan said the board will cut TCDC's operational budget by half to Bt75 million and slash salaries by 30 per cent.

He said TCDC has been renting office space at Emporium Tower for Bt5 million per month and paying one of its directors Bt370,000 a month. The office rental contract will be terminated in May and the agency will sign a six-year lease for 2,000sqm of space at Chulalongkorn University's Jaturas Jamjuri Building near Siam Square, he said.

The OKMD board also assigned Professor Chaianan Samudavanija as chairman and Professor Surapol Wirunrak as acting director of the Thailand Discovery & Creative Centre until a new director can be found within 45 days.

"All the board members have worked carefully and there was no bullying or political agendas. All staff will get paid and continue to work without being laid-off, contrary to the rumours," he said.
The mergers would create a new energy, he said.

On October 25, the OKMD board will meet again to set details and officially announce the establishment of the Thailand Discovery & Creative Centre.

Chaianan said the mergers were a good thing and co-operation between the units would now be better.

The contract of one of the former overpaid TCDC directors would expire in 2010, so he will be asked to step down early; however, the board would not name the director.

National Artist Professor Sumet Chumsai na Ayuthaya, a member of the sub-committee to find a new location for TCDC, said the new location near Siam Square was just as good as the old spot because it could be easily accessed by young people.

The overall budget has been reduced from Bt2 billion a year to Bt700 million. For the fiscal year 2008, TCDC will get Bt145 million, the National Discovery Museum Institute will get Bt34 million, and the OKMD will get Bt25 million.

COMMENT: The new location is at Exit 2 of the Sam Yan MRT station - see here and for a Google Earth image here.

The Bangkok Post has a similar article (cache) and The Manager have a similar line in many articles.

Some segments of the Thai language media, in particularly Thai Rath, offer a different view from The Nation and provide additional facts. This Thai Rath article reproduced over at this Pantip thread which I have summarised below provides a different view:

On October 17, the Minister of the Office of Prime Minister called a meeting of the Board of the Office of Knowledge Management and Development to decide whether to dissolve the TCDC and to merge it with the National Discovery Museum.

The Board resolved to remove Chaiyong Ratana-unggoon, the Director of TCDC from his position and to dissolve the Board of TCDC.

Rumours are that this government wanted to dissolve TCDC because it was was an entity set up by the Thaksin government. The government has changed the Board of the Office of Knowledge Management and Development

The effect of this is similar to what happened to ITV and will affect its 15,000 members who paid a subscription fee to use the library who will get nothing in return because the decision does not provide for any compensation.

TCDC has been opened for 2 years, has 15,000 members, and has had 685,000 users of this services [visitors?]. There have been 14 exhibitions and they have opened branches in 5 provinces and intending to open 5 more in 2008.

Reports indicate that previously the Board of the Office of Knowledge Management and Development resolved to move the TCDC and entities under the Office of Knowledge Management and Development to a new building, Chamchuri Residence Square, with a budget of 400 million baht for the project. Two of the members of the sub-committee are Sumet Jumsai Na Ayudhaya [สุเมธ ชุมสาย ณ อยุธยา] and Nithi Sathapitanonda [นิธิ สถาปิตานนท์] and this sub-committee considered the new location. The building at this new location is yet to be finished and one of the project executives is A49 which Mr Nithi is a shareholder in.

COMMENT: As noted in the Pantip thread, Nithi's connection is more than as a shareholder of A49, he established A49 some 24 years ago and is the owner (source - Thai language only)

Via the same Panthip thread, we have another Thai Rath article which I have summarised below:

Today (October 22nd), OKMD chairman Apinan Poshyananda said the merged new name will be called Thailand Discovery & Creative Center and led by Chai-anan. Apinaan stated that that TCDC had been "very successful", but had to be dissolved and the merger had to take place because its budget was slashed by 50% and could no longer continue operations at the Emporium and had to move.

Mr Sumet said that Chamchuri Residence Square was chosen from 7 different places as it was not charging rent for the first 3 years, but just the "building administration fee" of 250 baht a square meter for more than 2,000 square meters and it connected to the MRT and could attract the new generation. Mr Sumet said [actually it is in quotes, but I am just paraphrasing] Up until now, I was very impressed that TCDC was located in the Emporium and it had the same standard compared with central design centers around the world, for example New York, and the standard that TCDC set.

Mr Sumet denied he benefited from A49 company who selected the location. When asked what the plans for the TCDC in its new form, he said that there were no plans and would need to wait for the Board to meet first. "If you want TCDC to remain in its current location, you should get Pansak, the old Chairman of TCDC and OKMD, to tell Thaksin to buy it".

Additional reports state that the cost of the move is 150 million baht and there additional costs of 276 million baht, but the old venue cost just 200 million baht and had only been used for 2 years.

The project has been criticised on Pantip and has the most comments at more than 300 comments and they mostly attack the decision.

COMMENT: I am sure some of you are thinking, what is TCDC? More at the end of this post* on what it is and its founding. Some comments and thoughts are below - the figures between Prachatai/Thai Rath/Pantip vs The Nation/the Bangkok Post/Manager vary so it is difficult to know which figures/amounts are correct.

First, why is the interim government making this decision? Couldn't it have left the decision to the newly elected government? Why the urgency? The new building is not even finished yet and some reports suggest it is not scheduled to be opened until May 2007 - the same time the old contract runs out. One hopes there is no delay. The 5 million baht a month and 370,000 baht a month director's fee seem high, particularly the director's fee, but was this sudden action necessary. Also, according to the Bangkok Post, the director's fee is only being cut by 30% so we are not talking that much money especially since the size of the place being managed has fallen by 50%.

Second, there seems to be a large reduction in size from 4,490 sqm at the Emporium for the TCDC alone to the more than 2,000 sqm ( Pantip says 2,562 sqm) at its new location, but the move is very expensive and it comes after 200 million baht was initially spent on TCDC 2 years ago? Is it really worth it now?

Third, was it really that expensive with a budget of 145 million baht per year? TCDC also earns money from its activities of the restaurant, members fees, renting of exhibition venue etc - quoted as 76 million baht here (assume this is per year) so won't revenue also decrease given they have half the space? If so, this should be factored into any supposed savings - unsure whether it is factored into the 400+ million baht, but it would seem difficult as we have no details on what services will be offered at the new venue.

Last year, even the notoriously anti-Thaksin The Manager had a very positive article on the TCDC. The article even praised for the TCDC on its low cost. It compared to a similar project in Singapore which cost 6 times as much to set up (200 million baht vs 1.2 billion baht).

NOTE: The head of TCDC at that time was Pansak who was a close advisor to Thaksin, but had been very close to The Manager's Sondhi in the past and associated with his media company, The Manager Group. Then again Thaksin was close to Sondhi as well and well that didn't stop any Sondhi criticism of Thaksin.

NOTE: Of course, The Manager is not so positive on the TCDC project now, but then again one of its columnists Chai-anan will be taking over as the new head.

Fourth, as noted in the Pantip thread, Nithi's connection is more than just as a shareholder of A49. He established A49 some 24 years ago and is the owner (source - Thai language only). One blogger states he is also the largest shareholder. I haven't been able to confirm this yet, but last year, Bangkok Biz Week sourced a quote from Nithi and stated he was the Chairman of A49 so he certainly has or had some connection with the company.

Fifth, it is good that rent is free for the first 3 years, but a 250 baht per square meter fee for "building administration fee" [kah suan glahng] is very high compared to average condos in Bangkok where friends tell me is usually about 20-30 baht per square meter - yes there is a difference between the two and services are not directly comparable, but there is still a big price difference. This seems to suggest the rent is not "free" and I wonder what the rent will be for the final 3 years - this Manager article mentions it will be a "government rate" without actually saying what this figure will be. There is mention in another Thai Rath article that they will save around 40 million baht in rental each year - not an insignificant amount - but we do have the added 426 million baht to make up. It is unclear whether this figure is for the first 3 years or the final 3 years and whether it also includes the building administration fee. But lets say the rental fee is 600 baht a square meter - which is still cheap given the location - added together with the building administration fee of 250 baht a square meter and rental savings would be, the total rental cost including the building administration fee would be 2,177,700 million baht a month. Yes, a saving, but the vagueness over the rental fee is surprising and makes me wonder if it was that cheap, wouldn't they tell us? It seems the high building administration fee significantly subsidies the rent so it is important the total "rental" costs are compared.

Sixth, the current budget of OKMD is not actually 2 billion baht as The Nation states/implies. In 2005, the budget was 120 million during the planning stage. This increased to 2.251 billion during the construction in 2006 and the budget reduced to 1.069 billion in 2007. This will drop to 810 million baht in 2008 (source - Thai language only). Also, are the moving costs included in the 810 million baht budget figure?

*TCDC has been described as:

Asia's first design learning and resource facility, the Thailand Creative and Design Centre (TCDC), was established to foster the country's creativity and inspire innovative ideas among design professionals and entrepreneurs. TCDC is part of the Thai government's attempt to build Thailand as a knowledge-based society under the supervision of the Office of Knowledge Management and Development.

According to Pansak Vinyaratn, Chairman of the TCDC, Thailand can no longer compete with other countries in terms of lower labour costs. "To maintain competitiveness in the global market, we need to capitalise on creativity in designing products and services to better meet with market requirements. Thailand has to further boost export revenues in a bid to keep its trade position in surplus," he said. "To be able to achieve these targets, we need to make knowledge more accessible to people, that will inspire their creativity and enable them to develop their product originality. The TCDC is the source of knowledge and self-experience with an atmosphere that stimulates imagination and creativity."

The 4,490 square metre TCDC is located on the sixth floor of The Emporium Shopping Complex, and houses state-of-the-art facilities like the largest design library in Asia with over 15,000 design books, related publications, as well as a large selection of films, video and other multimedia work. There's a permanent exhibition that provides basic design knowledge from all over the world and leading design centres, a 130-seat convention facility, a creative space for new generation designers to display their work at no expense, a shop and a restaurant.

TCDC's 2006 report (PDF) - which is worth a read to give you a good idea on what the TCDC does and how they operate - provides additional details of how it was set up:**

The establishment of the Thailand Creative & Design Center (TCDC) was approved by the Thai cabinet on 2 September 2003. As one of the human resources development projects, such as the National Center for the Gifted and Talented and the Thai Knowledge Park, that were being initiated at that time, the Prime Minister established the Office of Knowledge Management and Development (OKMD), according to the Royal Decree Establishing the Office of Knowledge Management and Development (Public Organization) B.E. 2547 issued on 4 May 2004. The OKMD is responsible for devising human resources development strategic plans, by building the knowledge base that will lead to the enhancement of Thailand's competitive advantage, and managing human resource development projects. TCDC was officially established on 18 June 2004 as an organization under the aegis of the Office of Knowledge Management and Development (Public Organization) under the Office of the Prime Minister and funded by the Bureau of the Budget.

Some photos from a recent visit are available here.

**While one should not judge a book by its cover and while it is not a government agency, just compare how professional and informative their report/profile is compared to anything you have ever seen coming from a Thai government agency. It is a bilingual report.

Nebraska TV reports:

The Well, a Christian ministry in Thailand, reaches out to women employed in the sex industry there.

In her visit to central Nebraska this week, Prang Kamram shares her story of leaving prostitution to work for the Well.

In the English she's only known for a year, Kamram said, "The Well helps ladies from the bar... and help work in the Well, and have a good life and know about God."

She now earns a living making purses, jewelry and cards for the Well in Thailand.However, just one year ago, she was a prostitute; not like those found on the streets of Bangkok, but inside like most.

"It's women who go to work in a bar and they get paid by the bar," said Michaela Weeks, a supporter of the Well's mission from Omaha. "When customers come in, they pay a fee to the bar to take the women out. And then they'll talk to the women and tell her how much they'll pay to take her out. Then she can say yes or no."

Though an estimated two million women do the same kind of work in Bangkok alone, the issue is garnering much less attention than other sex crimes in the country. Just days ago, police in Thailand arrested Canadian teacher Christopher Neil. He's suspected of sexually abusing young males in pictures posted on the internet. The photos had been digitally altered to disguise the man's face, but Neil is similar to the men Kamram remembers from the go-go bars - American, European or simply Westerners.

COMMENT: 2 million in Bangkok alone? Holy [insert copious four letter words], where on earth do they get this kind of crap? Bangkok has anywhere between 6-10 million people. So even taking the 10 million figure, one in 5 people in Bangkok is apparently a female prostitute. They must all be hidden away in massive warehouses somewhere. I have seen so many varying figures, but I would be surprised if there were more than 100,000 female hookers in Bangkok.

How can one link sexual activity between consenting adults and what Neil is alleged to have done?

The Nation in an editorial today:

According to Sangsit Piriyarangsan, chairman of the NLA's finance committee and an advocate of the special lottery, the Thaksin government managed to grab around Bt100 billion a year from a total annual turnover of Bt300 billion enjoyed by the underground lottery business during the two-year period that the two and three-digit lottery was active.

Citing research, he said that underground lottery operators gained Bt150 billion from punters after the suspension of the lottery from September 19 last year until recently. Sangsit and his supporters want to amend Article 3 of the old lottery law by changing the definition of lottery to cover two- and three-digit lotteries and Article 22 to allow the Government Lottery Office (GLO) board to offer more prizes so that underground lotteries would seem less attractive.

Sangsit also said that Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont wants the government to begin the special lottery as soon as possible to prevent proceeds from underground lotteries being used to buy votes in the general election on December 23. To further back up his stance, Sangsit said that Assumption University carried out a survey that found that some 35 million people wanted the government to start the lottery.
..
While gaining support from Sangsit, Chalongphob and other government leaders, the special lottery issue has divided NLA members on the grounds of political correctness and drawn strong opposition from prominent social and political figures including former Bangkok governor Chamlong Srimuang and former senator Wallop Tangkhananurak. The outcry from those opposed to the plan seems to have failed to sway the government's stance and the GLO has even planned more aggressive sales of tickets for the special lottery using modern technology. The agency said it was considering selling tickets for the new two- and three-digit lottery online and via vending machines, the installation of which could begin in 60 days at 6,000 locations nationwide.

COMMENT: How on earth could anyone discern from a survey that around 35 million people supported the lottery? Surely, one would quote a percentage of people as opposed to a number?

As usual, Wallop and Chamlong are in the "let's ban and hope it goes away camp". I am sure the underground mafia are happy with the extra 150 billion baht they have managed to take in.

Part 1 of the interview is here. The Krungthep Turakit continues:

และฉายภาพความรุนแรงของปัญหาดังกล่าวว่า ตามหมู่บ้านต่างๆเริ่มมีการจัดโครงสร้างระบบการจัดตั้งหมู่บ้านของกลุ่มก่อความไม่สงบมาตั้งแต่ปี 2537 -2545 เรารายงานไปไม่มีใครสนใจเลยทั้งๆที่ระบบการสื่อสารของเราเร็วมาก มันมีการทำงานของโครงสร้างในระดับต่างๆออกเป็น 5 ระดับตามที่มีข้อมูล คือ

1.กลุ่มอุลามะห์ พวกนี้ส่วนใหญ่เป็นพวกอุสตาชและโต๊ะครูที่เรียนจบมาตากต่างประเทศหรือเคยเข้ารับการอบรมจากต่างประเทศ มีหน้าที่ในการเผยแพร่แนวความคิดในการวางยุทธศาสตร์

2.กลุ่มเศรษฐกิจ พวกนี้ทำหน้าที่ในการหาเงินเข้าองค์กร

3.กลุ่มการเมือง(politic) ซึ่งจะมีหน้าที่ในการเฝ้าดูสถานการณ์ความเพลี่ยงพล้ำแล้วก็วางแผนปรับยุทธศาสตร์การต่อสู้

4.กลุ่มจรยุทธ์ จะประกอบด้วย Commando Rkk และเปอมูดอ -เปอมูดี ที่กระจายกำลังคุมอยู่ในหมู่บ้านต่างๆที่มีการจัดตั้งไว้แล้ว และสามารถปฎิบัติการได้ทันทีที่มีคำสั่ง

5.กลุ่มมาซา หรือกลุ่มเสี่ยงที่จะกลายเป็นเยาวชนเปอมูดอ โดยผู้ที่ถูกอบรมให้เป็นแนวร่วมจะกระจายอยู่ในหมู่บ้านมีสัดส่วนอยู่ที่ 50:50 และมี ตุรงแง เป็นผู้คอยให้ความช่วยเหลือทั้งในเรื่องการหาข่าวส่งให้กับกลุ่มและการช่วยปล่อยข่าวลือในพื้นที่ ซึ่งการทำงานจะรวดเร็วมาก

[My own summarised translation: The image of the violent problems in the various villages can be seen by the insurgents establishing some form of structure between 1994-2002. We reported this, but no one was interested. We have information about 5 groups:

1. The Ulama unit are mostly Ustaz and Tok Guru [Islamic religious teachers] who graduated overseas or who have been trained overseas. They have the role of publicising their strategy.

2. The Economic unit's role is to find financial sources for the organisation.

3. The Political unit's role of following the situation to look for mistakes and adjusting the strategy accordingly

4. The Fighting Unit consisting of RKK Commandos and Pemuda-Pemude. These groups have been distributed throughout various villages and can carry out orders immediately when instructed.

5. The Masa Unit or Pemuda, the youth wing, who have been trained and are distributed in 50% of villages and there is Dtrong Ngaa who assist in reporting intelligence to the organisation and spreading rumors in the area.]

COMMENT: There are similar reports on the 5 groups in English and in Thai.

พ.ต.อ.นพดล ย้อนภาพเหตุการณ์เมื่อครั้งที่มีการรุมประชาทัณฑ์เจ้าหน้าที่ตำรวจพลร่มหน้าบ้านผู้ใหญ่บ้านบือนังกือเปาะว่า ม็อบวันนั้นมีประมาณ 800-1,000 คน จำนวนนั้นคนอยากรู้อยากเห็นมีอยู่ด้วย แต่มีกลุ่มแนวร่วมแฝงตัวเข้ามาเป็นร้อยแล้วคอยทำหน้าที่ยุยงปลุกปั่นตลอดเวลา เป็นปรากฎการณ์ที่ชาวบ้านซึ่งเข้าร่วมชุมนุมไม่ทราบ เพราะฝ่ายตรงข้ามวางแผนไว้หมดแล้ว

และในส่วนของเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐก็ตามไม่ทันเพราะว่า พื้นที่นี้ไม่เคยเกิดปัญหามาก่อน มันมีการจัดตั้งและวางแผนการตั้งแต่ 7.00-11.00 น.เวลามีให้เขา ในขณะที่เรามัวแต่จะเจรจา วางแผนชิงตัวประกันต้องคิดหนัก เมื่อไหร่ที่กระสุนปืนยิงถูกชาวบ้าน 1 คน ฝ่ายตรงข้ามจะบอกว่าเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐยิงผู้บริสุทธิ์ เขาพยายามให้กดดันให้เกิดเหตุการณ์เหมือนที่กรือเซะกับตากใบ ตรงนี้หมายถึงกรณีการชิงตัวนาวิกโยธินที่ตันหยงลิมอ และเหตุการณ์ที่เกิดขึ้นกับครูจูหลิง

[My own summarised translation: Pol. Col. Nopadol talking about the lynching of the police officers at the village headmen's house. He said there was a mob of about 800-1000 people, although that included people who were observing, but there was a hidden element of about 100.

For the officials they weren't able to get there in time because there had been no problems in the area before. The protest had occurred between 7-11am, we tried to negotiate, to stage a rescue of the hostages. When a shot was fired at a villager, the hidden element said the authorities had shot an innocent.

เขาพยายามทำให้เกิดการต่อสู้ระหว่างมวลชนและเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐ ทำยังไงก็ได้ให้เกิดความแตกแยก เขายอมสูญเสียชาวบ้านเพื่อสร้างเงื่อนไข ส่วนเรื่องการนำประวัติศาสตร์มาปลุกปั่นเพื่อให้เกิดการเปลี่ยนแปลงทางความคิด ไม่ใช่ประเด็นหลักที่ทำให้เกิดความรุนแรง หากการอุ้มฆ่าประชาชน ซึ่งในฐานะที่เป็นตำรวจยอมรับว่า มันเกิดขึ้นจริงในพื้นที่ ตรงนี้คือปัญหาหลัก

“อย่าลืมว่าตอนที่คุณเข้าไปอุ้มพ่อเขาหายออกไปจากบ้าน ลูกอาจยังไม่โตนัก แต่แม่ ญาติพี่น้อง เขายังอยู่ นี่เป็นสิ่งที่อันตรายมากกว่าหากลูกหลานเขาถูกสอนว่าเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐทำอะไรไว้กับครอบครัวของเขาบ้าง โดยเฉพาะหากลูกเขาเป็นผู้ชายแล้วกลุ่มขบวนการเอาไปปลูกฝังทางความคิดตั้งแต่ยังเด็ก ปัญหานี้ไม่มีวันจบสิ้นหรอก มันจะทำให้เกิดความหวาดระแวงและไม่เข้าใจกันระหว่างตำรวจและชาวบ้านตลอดเวลา ยิ่งถ้าตำรวจไปกลั่นแกล้งหรือปฎิบัติไม่ดีด้วยแล้วยิ่งไปกันใหญ่ ไฟมันพร้อมที่จะจุดติด ตรงนี้ตำรวจต้องเข้าใจด้วย”พ.ต.อ.นพดล กล่าว

[My own summarised translation: They were trying to instigate trouble between the people and the state. They were willing to sacrifice villagers. History is not the most important factor, it is the kidnapping and killing of the people which is the important factor.

"Don't forget that when you kidnap a father from his house, the children might not be that old, but the mother and other relatives are old enough [to remember]. This is more dangerous because if their children are taught that state officials did this to the family, especially for the male children. The movement instill thoughts in their mind from when they are still children. This problem will never end. It will cause fear and misunderstanding between the police and the villagers all the time. Especially if police act badly, it will just worsen things. Police can inflame the situation and they need to understand that" said Pol. Col Nopadol.

พ.ต.อ.นพดล กล่าวว่า วิธีเดียวที่จะแก้ปัญหา เจ้าหน้าที่รัฐฝ่ายเดียวคงทำไม่ได้ คือ ต้องให้คนมุสลิมเข้ามามีส่วน แต่ปัญหาถ้าเขาเข้าข้างเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐก็จะกลายเป็นมุนาฟิก หรือพวกนอกศาสนาทันที ในเขตพื้นที่อ.ระแงะ อำนาจรัฐไทยยังอ่อนแอเกินไป คงต้องใช้แนวทางของพระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัวนำเข้าไป คือ การเข้าใจ เข้าถึง และพัฒนา ตรงนี้ไม่ใช่ว่ามุสลิมต้องเข้าใจฝ่ายเดียว แต่เราต้องผลิตข้าราชการที่มีความเข้าใจ และไม่ใช่คนเดียว ต้องทำทั้งหมด ข้าราชการมุสลิมด้วย ซึ่งมันก็ทำยาก หากรัฐหรือข้าราชการไม่เปลี่ยนแนวความคิดและการปฎิบัติ

การแก้ปัญหาในวันนี้อยู่ที่การปฎิบัติตัวของเจ้าหน้าที่ เพราะการใช้ข่าวเพื่อปฎิบัติการอย่างใดอย่างหนึ่งของฝ่ายตรงข้าม มันเร็วมากและเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐเองก็ไม่สามารถแก้ตัวได้ทัน ประสิทธิภาพการทำงานของเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐไม่มีเลย ปัญหานี้มันต้องแก้ที่ตัวเจ้าหน้าทีที่ลงไปปฎิบัตงานด้วย ระบบการศึกษาด้วย เพราะที่นี่มีประเด็นอ่อนไหวทางด้านศาสนา หากฝ่ายตรงข้ามใช้เงื่อนไขนี้มาแบ่งแยกประชาชนออกไป เราก็ต้องเร่งสร้างคนที่มีความรู้ทางด้านศาสนาให้เข้าไปช่วยชี้แจงว่าอะไรคือ สิ่งที่ถูกต้อง ไม่ต้องใช้คนอื่น ใช้คนในชุมชนนั่นแหละ เจ้าหน้าที่เองก็ต้องลงพื้นที่เพื่อไปเรียนรู้วิถีชีวิตของคนในพื้นที่ เรียนรู้ภาษาและวัฒนธรรม มันถึงจะเข้าไปเยียวยาได้ ไม่ใช่หลังเกิดเหตุแล้วส่งกำลังเข้าไปคุม

[My own summarised translation: You can't solve the problem is not by the police alone. You need to involve the Muslims too. The problem with this is if they get to close to the state officials they will be seen as infidels. In Rangae district, the state's authority is too weak. Need to use HM's thinking of understanding, appreciation, and development. This doesn't mean only Muslims need to understand, but we need to change the government officials to have understanding. Not just one person, but all the government officials and Muslims. This is difficult.

Solving today's problems is through the actions of officials because the use intelligence/news for any operation by the other side is very quick. The state officials are unable to react quickly enough. There is no quality in the work of state officials at all. The problems that need to be solved are the officials who come to work in the area, the education system because here they are weak points in relation to religion. If the opposite side use these conditions to divide the people, we need to quickly develop those with religious knowledge to say to others, what is what, what is right. There is no need to use others and just use locals. Officials need to go to the area to learn about the way of life of the people who live there, to learn about the language and culture. This is what is needed to remedy the problem. Not to go into the area after events and to send forces to control the situation.

ทุกวันนี้ประชาชนไม่มีความเชื่อมั่นในเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐ เขาไม่เชื่อว่าจะสามารถให้ดูแลและคุ้มครองความปลอดภัยได้ การทำงานของกลุ่มก่อความไม่สงบมันทำให้ชาวบ้านไม่ศรัทธาการทำงานของเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐ ยิ่งมีช่องว่างมากขึ้นเท่าไหร่ก็ทำให้สร้างความแตกแยกได้มากขึ้น

พ.ต.อ.นพดล กล่าวว่า ตอนนี้เจ้าหน้าที่ของเรามีปัญหา คือ หูหนวก ตาบอดและเป็นใบ้ หูหนวกหมายความว่า ไม่รับทราบ ไม่ได้ยินว่าชาวบ้านพูดถึงตัวเองอย่างไร ตาบอด หมายถึงเข้าไปอยู่ในพื้นที่แล้วไปไม่ถูก บางคนไม่ออกพื้นที่เลย ไม่รู้ว่าประชาชนของตนอยู่ไหนบ้าง ไม่กล้าเข้าไปเพราะกลัว และเป็นใบ้ คือ พูดกับชาวบ้านไม่รู้เรื่อง ไม่เข้าใจ การทำงานของเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐที่ถูกส่งเข้ามาในพื้นที่สามจังหวัดชายแดนภาคใต้เป็นอย่างนี้มาตลอด

[My own summarised translation: Now, the people have no trust in state officials. They don't believe that we can look after them and control the security situation. The acts of the insurgents has caused villagers to lose faith in the work of state officials. Whenever the gap increases, divergence also arises.

Pol. Col. Nopadol said that state officials have problems. They blind, deaf, and "dumb". For deaf, I mean they don't listen to what the villagers say about themselves. I mean they are blind because in the area, they don't know there way around. Some people don't leave their area [barracks?]. They don't know what the people are like and won't go into their area as they are afraid. They are "dumb" because they can't communicate with the villagers. They don't understand. The work of state officials who come to work in the 3 southern border provinces has been like this for a long time.

ดังนั้นถ้ายังเป็นอย่างนี้อยู่บอกได้เลยว่า การแก้ปัญหาภาคใต้ลำบาก เราไม่ทันเกมฝ่ายตรงข้าม เพราะเราไม่รู้ว่ามีใครที่จะแก้ปัญหาได้ตรงจุดจริงๆ แล้วที่ผ่านมารัฐก็ไม่เคยเข้าไปดูแลชาวบ้านเลยว่า เขาต้องการอะไร และเราต้องทำอะไรอีกบ้าง เราขาดข้อมูลจริงๆ

“เรื่องนี้ผมไม่โทษใครหรอก อัลเลาะห์เท่านั้นทราบดีว่าเกิดอะไรขึ้น และคนที่ก่อเหตุจะต้องได้รับกรรมอย่างแน่นอน เวลามีปัญหาเกิดขึ้นผมไม่อยากให้โทษว่า คนมุสลิมเท่านั้นที่ก่อความวุ่นวายให้กับชาติบ้านเมือง เราเองก็มีส่วนที่ทำให้เกิดความแตกแยก การที่เจ้าหน้าที่มองชาวบ้านอย่างหวาดระแวงตรงนี้สำคัญ”พ.ต.อ.นพดล กล่าว

[My own summarised translation: Thus, if things continue like this, I can say that it will be difficult to solve the southern problems. We will be behind in the game with the opposite [behind the 8 ball] because we don't know who can really solve the problem. So far, state officials have not gone to look after the villagers and see what they want and what we need to do more. We seriously lack information.

"On this matter, I don't blame anyone. Only Allah knows what happens and those who are behind the violence will face karma. When problems arise, I don't want to put blame onto only Muslims who are creating problems for the country. We [as state officials] are part of the problem and how we view the villagers with suspicion, this is an important problem" Pol. Col Nopadol said.]

COMMENT: Without getting into much detail in this post, Pol. Col. Nopadol certainly understand what part of the problem is and not that is to succeed in a counter-insurgency operation, military/police can't just stay in the barracks and isolate themselves from the community they are meant to be protecting. Pol. Col. Nopadol is not the only person to note this problem, Zachary Abuza wrote in July:

The security presence in the south was minimal. In five days of driving, last week, I rarely witnessed patrols. The vast majority of security forces, including army, police, rangers, and border patrol police were in fixed static positions, usually behind sandbags and concertina wire. Checkpoints are unmanned during the days, and only once was my vehicle stopped and searched. The security forces tend to go out only in reaction to events, rather than on active patrols. In only one case, did I see five soldiers on foot patrolling/searching. Most of the soldiers who are killed or wounded are on security detail for teachers; hence they do not like to leave their barracks.
...
Otherwise, they are passive, giving insurgents a fairly free reign in the countryside. Very simply, without a degree of protection, a small security presence to deter insurgents, people have no choice but to accede to the threats and demands of the militants.

Counterinsurgency (COIN) theory suggests, as evidenced by the latest US COIN Field Manual, that this is fatal:

1-149. Ultimate success in COIN [Counter-insurgency] is gained by protecting the populace, not the COIN force. If military forces remain in their compounds, they lose touch with the people, appear to be running scared, and cede the initiative to the insurgents. Aggressive saturation patrolling, ambushes, and listening post operations must be conducted, risk shared with the populace, and contact maintained. . . . These practices ensure access to the intelligence needed to drive operations. Following them reinforces the connections with the populace that help establish real legitimacy.

From “Counterinsurgency/FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5”

I should note, in case it was not clear, this is not a criticism of the current government, but a criticism of successive governments (yes including Thaksin). I will try to outline more of the problems. It is refreshing to read though that that at least one senior police officer, Pol. Col. Nopadol, did understand what the military/police are doing wrong. Lets hope we can see the authorities fix this.

Postscript: Just after the incident, he was interviewed by Thai Rath and stated his intention to go back to the South - he lost an arm and a leg in the explosion in April and it was also initially he would be blind. He was also recently interviewed by Sorayuth's Jub Kao Kui on Saturday night on Channel 3 - embedded version available below (audio is out-of-sync after a while and then for me is non-existent after half of the interview).

COMMENT: Interview with Lt. Col. Noppadol, his wife and his daughter. At the beginning of the interview, they have a video compliation of Mariah Carey's Hero to images of him. There are numerous posts/comments supporting him in the Thai language blogosphere/comments board. You can see his artificial leg, left leg, clearly in the interview. His right leg is still in some cast/plaster.

Give the almost doubling of the military's budget since the coup (from 80 billion baht to 140 billion baht), the military is certainly flush with money and spending up big before a civilian government comes along. Numerous questions have been raised about the 4 billion baht purchase of armoured personnel carriers from Ukraine, but this is really chump change compared with the 34.4 billion baht spent buying fighter jets from Sweden (yes, just of that money is for future purchases). So has any newspaper bothered to ask any serious questions about this purchase? No, of course not, but fortunately the blogosphere is not silent and has raised questions (well one blogger has). Thailand Jumped the Shark has a very informative post, a must read, which raises a number of serious questions about the purchase of the fighter jets. A brief excerpt:

Do the math: It comes out roughly to $90 million plus change a plane.

$90 million is a lot of money for one fighter craft.

According to Wikipedia, one Gripen jet should be $45-50 million.

TJTS then looks at a number of corruption scandals on the purchase of Gripen jets in other countries - those Swedes, eh. Perhaps, some journalist might want to dig a little deeper into this purchase, as many did into Thaksin's financial dealings, but then I imagine some journalists could bring themselves to believe that our national saviours, ala the military, might be involved in something corrupt.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

Deputy Prime Minister Sonthi Boonyaratkalin yesterday shrugged off the prospect of the controversial internal security bill being blocked from reaching the National Legislative Assembly. The bill, despite being revised to remove excessive power from the military, drew opposition from academics and some NLA members.

It was approved by the cabinet on Tuesday and will be debated in the NLA.

Gen Sonthi said that resistance was normal but it was unlikely to keep the legislation from being vetted by the NLA, which would have the final say on the bill's passage into law.

''It all depends on the NLA. If the assembly rejects the bill, it's over. If it approves it, so be it. We are in a democratic system,'' he said.

COMMENT: Hummm??? The NLA was appointed by the CNS and was not democratically elected. What "democratic system" fit into the equation?

I have blogged previously about the Democrats and their good polling results, their plans to move into the Northeast, their big spending plans, and their TV advertisements, but today's About Politics column (cache) in the Bangkok Post provides an opportune time for an update on their prospects.

The article begins:

Although few political observers will dare bet that the Democrat party will sweep the majority of House seats in the Dec 23 elections, Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva is confident his party will emerge as a major force in the next parliament, with no fewer seats than the People Power Party, the new incarnation of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai party.

Mr Abhisit believes that both the Democrats and PPP, under veteran politician Samak Sundaravej, have a chance of winning a minimum of 150 seats each out of the total of 480 lower house seats up for grabs.

COMMENT: Interesting he puts the Democrats on par with PPP. PPP should win around 30-40 seats more than the Democrats. If the Democrats are level it will either be (1) a mammoth effort on their behalf, (2) a poor PPP performance, or (3) show how effective Gen. Sonthi has been. Crispin recently also estimated that the Democrats might win about 150 seats:

The Democrats are expected to win all of the southern region's 54 seats, take the majority of Bangkok's 37 seats, place strongly in the central region, and make strong inroads in the north and lesser ones in the northeastern regions, which should give them about 150 seats among the Lower House's 400 elected MP positions.

COMMENT: I think this is a bit optimistic. More like 135-140. I would say other parties would likely win up to 4 seats in the South giving the Democrats about 50 and even with another 25-30 in Bangkok they will need 70 in the rest of the country which will be a tough ask.

NOTE: I think Crispin's mention of 54 seats in the South and 37 seats is slightly off - see below only 36 seats in the article for

The article continues:

The Democrat party was heavily beaten by Thai Rak Thai in the Northeast in the past two elections _ but PPP is not expected to repeat the Thai Rak Thai sweep of the region.

Since being disbanded by the Constitution Tribunal earlier this year, Thai Rak Thai has split into a number of factions, with many of those splinter groups joining other parties, not just PPP.

And some observers believe the Thai Rak Thai split may help the Democrats gain some much-needed ground in the Northeast.

Mr Abhisit is also upbeat about his party's chances in the Central Plains.

The new configuration of constituencies as stipulated in the military-backed 2007 Constitution, should help the Democrats win more seats in the region, except for in Suphan Buri province _ the perennial stronghold of the Chart Thai party.

COMMENT: The Democrats should do better in the Central Region and lower North and lower Northeast as well as possibly some other urban areas of the North and Northeast, but most of the North and Northeast will still go PPP's way.

The article continues:

And the situation in Bangkok seems much the same.

Former Thai Rak Thai strongholds could be split between a number of parties, while the Democrats appear to have retained wide support across the capital.

The party's main support bases in the inner city still seem promising, while there is a high chance that the Democrats will also be able to gain some votes from suburban areas once dominated by Thai Rak Thai.

The confidence in the party can be seen by the 96 candidate hopefuls who have expressed interest in running under the Democrat banner in Bangkok, although there are only 36 seats available.
...
These hopefuls come from various circles, and are made up of both old and new faces.

However, the huge interest is posing a few problems for Democrat deputy leader Apirak Kosayodhin, who is the party's director for the election in the city.

Mr Apirak, also Bangkok governor, has examined the list of potential candidates several times but has not yet whittled it down to a shortlist.

However, one potential Democrat candidate who has a high chance of running under the Democrat banner in Bangkok is Samran Rodphet, a key activist in the People's Alliance for Democracy and a current member of the National Legislative Assembly.

He is likely to enter the poll together with former actress Nattaya Daengbu-nga in the Bang Kapi-Saphan Sung constituency.

PPP, meanwhile, is likely to field former actor Danuporn Punnakan, who was a former government spokesman in the Thaksin administration, in that constituency _ pitting the TV stars against each other.

COMMENT: I don't think you can ignore PPP in Bangkok particularly with Samak coming on-board. It will be interesting to see how many "third alternatives" there will be to split the vote. The more there are, the better it is for both PPP and the Democrats - this this could depend how much cooperation there will be in constituency seats. A strong third alternative will in addition to drawing away votes from TRT, will likely draw away votes from the Democrats as well an thus lessening their gains in some areas.

The article continues:

Kraisak is the Democrats' great northeastern hope

There is no turning back for former senator for Nakhon Ratchasima Kraisak Choonhavan who is dead set on contesting the Dec 23 general election on the Democrat party ticket.

The son of late prime minister Chatichai Choonhavan has joined the country's oldest political party, which has hopes of making inroads in the Northeast, especially in Nakhon Ratchasima, with the help of Mr Kraisak and other former northeastern senators.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, at least one member of Mr Kraisak's team has had a change of heart and has parted ways with him.

Former Ubon Ratchathani senator Niran Pitakwatchara broke all records by joining the Democrat party and then quitting less than 24 hours later.

He was reportedly talked into going with the Democrats by Suriyasai Katasila, secretary-general of the Campaign for Popular Democracy.

When he submitted his party application Democrat deputy leader Wittaya Kaewparadai was so excited he put Mr Niran's name in the membership database immediately.

Mr Niran was in line to run in Ubon Ratchathani's constituency 1, but quickly had second thoughts about running on the Democrat ticket.

The following day, Mr Niran turned up at Democrat party headquarters and broke the news he was moving to the Matchimathipatai party.

Rumour has it the new party, led by former TPI boss Prachai Leophairatana, offered him the highest "bid" for his election campaign purse.

Mr Niran's change of heart is said to have driven Mr Kraisak up the wall. It had never occurred to him his colleague would desert him.

As a matter of fact, Mr Kraisak, a human rights advocate, was undecided about his future.

A few months ago he was considering applying for a seat on the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).

But at the encouragement of fellow senators and academics he decided to give the Democrats a shot and met with party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban to discuss his options.

When Mr Suthep promised to revive the Democrat's controversial Sor Por Kor 4-01 land reform scheme to help the poor in the Northeast, Mr Kraisak made his decision. The ex-senator is a keen supporter of the land reform scheme, which he believed did a lot of good for hundreds of thousands of poor farming families in the Northeast.

Now that Mr Niran has turned his back on him, Mr Kraisak is hoping against hope that Somkiat Pongpaiboon, a core member of the anti-Thaksin People's Alliance for Democracy, will keep his word.

Mr Somkiat has reportedly promised to contest the election alongside Mr Kraisak, if no one else is up to the job, that is.

COMMENT: Is it really wise for the Democrats to tie themselves to tightly to the anti-Thaksin PAD? Moderate voters, who don't like or necessarily dislike Thaksin and want "reconciliation", might have second thoughts about voting for the Democrats. The question then is, where will all the other PAD members go? Matchimathipatai will likely get a few as well and Gen. Panlop has joined up with the Motherland party. Then you also have Admiral Bannawit and Gen. Saprang who are yet to be affiliated without any party. In essence, the anti-Thaksin vote will be split between a number of parties. The Democrat's Northeast strategy hasn't been that successful either as Crispin more recently outlined:

The earlier front-running Democrat Party has failed to generate enough funds for a successful election campaign and the party’s drive to penetrate the crucial northeastern region has been hobbled by internal squabbling over leadership and strategy, according to sources close to the party.

COMMENT: With other parties and financiers, like Prachai, who is rumoured to be spending up very, very big to compete against, the Democrats will struggle to get 150 seats.

From The Nation front page:


Protesters try to climb over fences of the Government House on Thursday during their protest. They demanded the government to solve their debt problems.//Vorawit Pumpuang

COMMENT: Isarn-style pretties?

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) panel investigating Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont's controversial land holding on Khao Yai Thieng mountain will broaden its inquiry after finding the property is owned by the premier's son.

The team will now investigate whether the prime minister concealed his assets.

The panel was appointed by the NLA sub-committee on police and human rights, chaired by Sqn Ldr Prasong Soonsiri, who led an ethics debate last week against the prime minister and his cabinet ministers.

Chumpol Sangthong, a member of the panel and a close aide of Sqn Ldr Prasong, said his team wonders if Gen Surayud accurately disclosed all assets to the National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC).

Gen Surayud said he had owned the land and a house on Khao Yai Thieng mountain since 1982, and has consistently paid local taxes on the property.

But on Nov 7 last year, a month after he came to power, the name of the registered owner of the property was changed from Gen Surayud's wife, Khunying Chitravadee, to his son, Chul Chulanont.

On receiving a report on the findings, Sqn Ldr Prasong said his sub-panel has assigned the team to gather more information from the Department of Military Maps, the Royal Forestry Department and the Land Department, and submit the findings next week.
...
The land was initially two adjacent land plots. They were sold to Noppadol Pitakwanit by villager Bao Sinnok in 1993 and 1994. Ownership was transferred in 1997 to Maj-Gen Surarit Jantrathip, then a Channel 5 director. In 2002, it was transferred from Maj-Gen Surarit to Khunying Chitravadee

The Nation has Surayud's version of events:

Surayud confirmed his earlier comments that the plot was in the name of his wife Thanphuying Jitrawadee. He and his wife did not own the land, but had the right to use it based on annual property tax payments to local authorities.

He said his wife named their son as the household leader for the vacation home they built on the plot. This should not be construed as land ownership, which is a separate issue, he added.

For families having more than one home, it is common practice to assign different members as household leaders, he said, noting he maintains his address at a Pibul Wattana home, while his wife is the household leader at their Lat Krabang residence.

The Khao Yai Thiang plot is part of the forest reserve and authorities have yet to rule whether the original settler, who passed on the land rights to Surayud, legally settled or encroached on the land.

The area was declared forest reserve in 1965 and a Cabinet resolution in 1998 granted exemption to original settlers from eviction pending checks that they had lived on the land before the zoning and their settlements did not encroach on watershed areas.

In a related development, National Counter Corruption Commission member Wicha Mahakhun said he saw no justification to pin a charge of asset concealment on Surayud.

Wicha said the change of household leader happened after Surayud had filed his asset statements upon assuming office. Procedure says Surayud can declare the change after leaving office or update records following his concurrent appointment as Interior Minister.

COMMENT: I don't think much of the public is really shocked, but it still does tarnish Surayud's image. After all the complaints about Thaksin transferring assets to his family members and servants, it doesn't look good for Surayud who had a "clean" and "honest" reputation before becoming PM last year. While Surayud's transfer is on a much minor scale, he will be held to a different ethical standard to Thaksin as he came to power through a military coup which argued that Thaksin's government was not transparent and abuse of power was rampant. It is the timing of the transfer that will raise eyebrows as it seems a little convenient and was designed to circumvent scrutiny. Unsurprisingly, the NCCC won't investigate. If it had been Thaksin, the property would have been seized by now. I wonder, who pays for the upkeep of the property and any taxes, Gen. Surayud or his son? When will there be a bigger fightback against Prasong, he must have skeletons in his closet too.

On a possibly related theme, the Bangkok Post reports:

Chief Privy Councillor and statesman Gen. Prem Tinsulanonda on Wednesday called on all the Thai people to be united for the sake of the country's prosperity.

Presiding over the opening of the Machine Museum Fair held at the Royal Irrigation Department, Gen. Prem expressed concern over the situation on the eve of the general election and wanted all people to be united and in harmony.

Should politicians think of the common interest rather than the personal benefit, he said the country would not experience a multitude of problems like it had faced at present.

COMMENT: Unity, harmony, blah blah. Was this necessarily aimed at Thaksin? Was it a hidden message to Prasong and Surayud to stop their public spate? If so, will either of them, particularly Prasong, listen?

One of the reasons why the coup was necessary, according to the junta white paper, was Thaksin's suppression of the media (or in junta teminology "Blocked information that checked the government and the prime minister"). In 2006, Thailand was ranked 122nd in the world for press freedom by Reporters Without Borders (RSF).* Thailand has now dropped to 135th:

Military coups that were supposed to restore democratic order in Thailand (135th) and Fiji (107th) in fact led to a deterioration in the situation of the news media. The Bangkok-based media continue to be relatively free, but the military prevented the deposed prime minister’s supporters from launching a TV station, and several website editors and bloggers were arrested.

COMMENT: Also see my earlier post which mentioned the decline of civil liberties since the coup according to Freedom House. This is hardly surprising and military coups don't restore civil liberties, they just further reduce civil liberties.

* RSF's methodology:

Reporters Without Borders compiled this index by sending a questionnaire to the 15 freedom of expression organisations throughout the world that are its partners, to its network of 130 correspondents, and to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists. It contained 50 questions about press freedom in their countries. The index covers 169 nations.

COMMENT: Personally, I think their methodology is far from ideal, but this same index was quoted against Thaksin a number of times by The Nation and sections of the media so they can hardly repudiate the methodology or the results now.

A staff writer for the Stanford Review recently visited Thailand and wrote:

The current political process illuminates the obstacles still facing a democratic Thailand. A deeper look into the process, however, reveals major strides forward for the Thai people. This is the first of the 17 constitutions on which the Thai people were allowed to vote. While I was in Thailand, the Bangkok Post and The Nation newspapers debated the advantages and disadvantages of the constitution in numerous op-ed pieces. Voters publicly campaigned in favor of or against it, reflecting a desire to move on to the scheduled December elections. The Thai people have had a greater say in the drafting and approval of this constitution then ever before.

COMMENT: While I am sure some like to despair about Thailand-based foreign correspondents and their lack of language skills, but at least they are not naive to somehow think that a few op-eds in the English language press signifies anything. Given the combined circulation of both papers pales in comparison with Matichon let alone Thai Rath, I am not such how much weight you should really give to the English language press. God forbid anyone thinks The Nation or the Bangkok Post are representative of the country. If he had done some research, he would have known this.

I generally agree with the idea of a plebiscite to approve a referendum, but the referendum was hardly free and fair with half the country under martial law at the time of the referendum and the government warning those "distributing leaflets" against the draft referendum that they will be "severely punished". The Bangkok Post specifically noted in an editoria (which the author didn't seem to pick up):

What is the point of holding a referendum on something as important as the constitution if people are so ill-informed about what it says?

I would argue that the Thai people had a significantly greater say in the drafting process for the 1997 Constitution. While there was no plebiscite then, democratically elected politicians voted on the Constitution. There was no martial law and suppression of the and there was a long drafting process throughout the country.

In an update to my post on PPP advertising, the Bangkok Post reports (cache):

PM's Office Minister Khunying Dhipavadee Meksawan yesterday distanced the government from a TV ban on election campaign spots of the People Power party (PPP).

She said the power to decide whether to run any advertisement rests solely with each television station, which has a special committee for the job.

The National Broadcasting Committee (NBC) had delegated the power to decide to these committees.

The decision to ban the PPP's campaign spots was therefore made by each individual TV station, she said.

''The Public Relations Department has already clarified the issue and the stations should ask the NBC or the PRD if they have any questions,'' she said.

Khunying Dhipavadee declined to comment on an observation that the TV stations were ''playing it safe'' by refusing to air the PPP's campaign spots.

She also insisted there was no discrimination against the PPP, even though campaign spots of other parties including the Democrats and the Chart Thai were being broadcast on television.

Another PM's Office minister, Thirapat Serirangsan, said the Election Commission (EC) should lay down regulations on election campaigning to ensure fair practice and to minimise problems.

Speaking on deposed premier Thaksin Shinawatra's plan to place on the internet a video recording of his life in England for viewing by his supporters in Thailand, Mr Thirapat said it was best to let the EC decide whether this would be regarded as part of the PPP's election campaign.

The PPP said it would today petition the Broadcasting Censorship Board to review its decision to reject the party's campaign spots.

Chusak Sirinil, the party's legal officer, said the campaign spots were neither against the election law nor any code of ethics, so banning them would be unfair to the party.

The censorship board on Friday rejected the PPP's campaign spots highlighting the populist policies of the dissolved Thao Rak Thai party, saying the PPP must first seek approval for them from the Election Commission.

The PPP planned to argue in its petition that the censorship board's decision to reject the advertisements might not be legal since a royal decree calling a general election had yet to be issued and come into effect.

The EC said it was not involved in approving any poll campaign spots because the election decree was not yet in place. Poll commissioner Prapan Naikowit also said the censorship board was the agency authorised to rule on the campaign ads.

COMMENT: It seems the petition worked as I understand on Thai TV tonight (Channel 3, Dtee Sip program) at least one PPP ad ran. The ad made mention of the OTOP project and stated goods things will return. The new PPP logo was on display as well as the words palang prachachon. All very mundane really.

It seems the "For the Motherland" party also had the same problem.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

The Internal Security Operation Command has been ordered to promote the democratic process in the build up to the general election on Dec 23, Isoc spokesman Col Thanatip Sawangsaeng said yesterday.

The order was issued by Deputy Prime Minister Sonthi Boonyaratkalin, who chaired an Isoc meeting yesterday for the first time since being appointed to the cabinet.

Gen Sonthi told the Isoc to put more effort into ensuring voters understand democracy so the new lower house would have well qualified representatives, the spokesman said.

Gen Sonthi had a similar message on Friday when he told Interior Ministry officials to help stop vote buying, make the elections free and fair and teach voters to be careful in supporting candidates who would best serve the national interest.

COMMENT: To see Gen. Sonthi's comments see this Thai Crisis post.

His instructions at the Interior Ministry were seen as an attempt to prevent those with links to ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra returning to power.

Isoc is one of several agencies under Gen Sonthi, who was assigned by Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont to be responsible for security affairs. The others are the Defence, Interior and Labour ministries and the National Security Council (NSC).

The director of Isoc is army chief Gen Anupong Paochinda.

Gen Sonthi told yesterday's meeting he wanted all national security agencies to follow NSC policy.

''We have to integrate the work of all national security agencies to be under the NSC policy framework, in the interests of unity and greater efficiency,'' Isoc secretary Gen Montri Chompoochan quoted him as saying.

Gen Montri, who is also army chiefof-staff, said Gen Sonthi suggested the army and Isoc send troops to positions close to people all across the country to boost its network of intelligence gathering.

COMMENT: Promoting democracy by having a network of intelligence gathering operatives. Oh how Orwellian. ISOC are there simply to use any method to prevent PPP from gaining as many seats as possible.

In his latest weekly TV interview, Gen. Surayud is asked about Burma (questions in italics) as the Bangkok Post reports (cache):

Academics believe that the time is right to keep the anti-junta momentum going. Otherwise, political developments in Burma would go nowhere. What is your opinion?

Who do you think should maintain such a momentum? Even the world community has so far not been clear about its intentions. The statement issued by the UN Security Council after UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari's visit to Burma has not yielded any significant developments. At this point, I cannot see any potential in terms of resources, institutions and funding to make the democratic struggle in Burma successful.

Thailand is in a difficult position as an immediate neighbour and a major trading partner of Burma. Do you think the government has done its best?

We have taken the most appropriate action given the position this government is in. Please don't forget that I am not an elected prime minister. I cannot preach too much about democracy if our government is not an elected one. If the Burmese junta shoots back with the question who put me in this position, what would I say?

We can say a lot more if a government is not a product of a coup d'etat. If we are not an appointed government, we can speak loud and clear about the advantages of having a democratic system. We must not forget who we are and where we stand before thinking of pressuring the Burmese junta.

COMMENT: Well, at least we don't get any spin from Surayud this time. One might call this moral authority.

The Nation reports:

The irregularities over the Army's Bt4 billion purchase of armoured personnel carriers (APCs) from Ukraine provides virtually all the ingredients for a full-blown corruption scandal. The Defence Ministry has a duty to thoroughly investigate the case, publicise its findings and punish wrongdoers. Defence Minister Boonrawd Somtas did the right thing in suspending the controversial deal to buy 96 APCs pending investigation to determine whether the procurement agreement was made in compliance with rules and regulations, and whether the vehicles meet the criteria set by the Army.

Boonrawd was about to sign the deal as recommended by an Army procurement committee and approved by the Cabinet, but decided to put it on hold after members of the National Legislative Assembly cautioned against it on several occasions, including last week's censure debate against the interim Surayud government.

The Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) has scrutinised the procurement agreement and found irregularities, including the fact that the Ukrainian company NGV did not submit a tender within the deadline but still won the deal. According to the OAG report released to the media after Boonrawd ordered the suspension of the deal, NGV may have been given preferential treatment at the expense of other companies that participated in the bidding.

The OAG report also mentioned the dubious quality of Ukrainian-made vehicles that would affect their performance in combat situations. The issues include armour plating that is too thin to withstand rocket-propelled grenades, and rubber tyres that are not bullet-proof. The report also noted that the request by NGV to submit its tender after the May 16, 2007 deadline was addressed to then-Army commander-in-chief Sonthi Boonyaratglin. The Army HQ also did not officially acknowledge receipt of the request, but somehow NGV was allowed to participate in the bidding.

It is interesting to note that the controversy over the deal led to a confrontation between Sonthi and Admiral Banawit Kengrien of the Navy. Banawit, the most outspoken critic of the deal, was recently moved to an inactive post.

In the meantime, Banawit who, for the past two years has been in charge of the Battery Organisation (a state enterprise under the Defence Ministry), has also been under attack for alleged poor performance. This is because the state firm, engaged in the manufacture of vehicle and industrial batteries, has failed to make a profit.

The defence minister has ordered an investigation into the loss-making Battery Organisation to determine the causes of its poor performance. The move was in response to remarks made by NLA member Gen Somjet Boonthanom, who is closely associated with Gen Sonthi. The tit-for-tat between Banawit and Sonthi looks more like politicking than a principled debate to safeguard the public interest. The defence minister owes the whole truth to the public.

The question is whether Defence Minister Boonrawd has got what it takes to do his job without fear or favour. All too often, investigation committees assigned to look into irregularities or alleged corruption in arms deals come up empty handed, or simply whitewash the whole affair. That is because the corruption-prone patronage system is so deeply rooted in the armed forces and is very much part of the corporate culture. It is virtually impossible for anyone in the Defence Ministry to enforce high standards of honesty, good governance and transparency in decision-making without hurting superiors, peers or junior colleagues. Faced with such a dilemma, even honest military officers who make it to the top are reluctant to take action against corrupt elements in the rank and file. They invariably turn a blind eye to corruption.

For as long as anyone can remember, the military's self-portrayal as a force for good and a promoter of democracy has never really been challenged. Now is the time for the public to put pressure on the Defence Ministry to pursue cases at hand in a straightforward manner. The public has a right to know who was at fault and who cheated, if that was, in fact, the case. The military that staged the coup last September purportedly to clean up dirty politics must demonstrate beyond doubt that it has the will and courage to put its own house in order by undertaking to clean up corruption in its hierarchy.

COMMENT: The media won't challenge the military's position as most of them were complicit in supporting the coup and swallowed the "national saviour" argument. Yeah, like all coup leaders don't make that argument, yet military installed governments are by always oppressive. Give the almost doubling of the military's budget since the coup (from 80 billion baht to 140 billion baht), the military is flush with money, but we have no media investigation into corruption by the military. It is only an issue now as Gen. Saprang, amongst other things, didn't become Army C-in-C. Should we know have another coup to save us from the current government?

More infighting among the anti-Thaksinites. I don't think the relationship between the groups can be repaired easily or anytime soon. It is just a matter of how much they bring down each other. If time permits, more on that later.

UDPATE: I posted this early this morning, but wrote most of it Sunday night. Unfortunately, I backdated the post so it was stuck way down the page. This has changed now.

With the Democrat Party and Chat Thai, amongst other political groups, now advertising on TV, one must ask the question where is the Samak-led PPP TV advertisements? The Nation reports:

The People Power Party yesterday threatened legal action against the Television Advertising Censorship Board after it refused on Friday to sanction a party message.

The board told the party it first needed Election Commission (EC) approval for the campaign spot.

Party secretary-general Surapong Suebwonglee yesterday said it would ask for board approval again today. If refused, it will go to court.

He argued that while an Election Act has been announced, the law would take effect only following a royal decree setting a poll date.

"The board might be misunderstanding this point, but it cannot use misunderstanding as a legal excuse,'' he said.

He said the party submitted the ad for approval on Friday and the board rejected it with the recommendation for commission sanction. He insisted the party would not approach the commission.

Party leader Samak Sundaravej addressed supporters on Friday at Sanam Luang and spoke out against the decision, saying it was totally unfair.

Surapong called on the government to accept responsibility for damage incurred by the party in fines paid to television stations for booking advertising time but being unable to provide them with content.

The one-minute television spot is produced by How Come Entertainment. It highlights populist policies of the former Thai Rak Thai Party, including the Bt30 universal-healthcare scheme and the war on drugs. The ad producers followed regulations governing media buying, he said.

Surapong believed the ad gave voters "hope and confidence" in the coming election. "The content does not throw mud at anyone or compromise national security. We see no reason why this spot is banned from broadcast."
He said other parties had advertised for months. The rejection was "unfair" to People Power. He added he was unaware of the identities of the board members.

Following the setback, the party will post the ad on its website ppp.or.th and distribute it on compact disc and in other forms.
EC member Sodsri Satayathum questioned the board's decision. "Commission ads promoting the national referendum had to receive board approval. The board is authorised to decide if ads are against the law," she said. "As yet the commission has not been contacted about the People Power spots. The election decree is not effective and the commission cannot see why it should have to view the ad.

"When the decree is effective, political parties will have the right to advertise their policies on television."

Sodsri said the EC would announce election and campaign regulations once the election decree is issued. Political parties can advertise however they like as long as they do not break those regulation or advertising-related laws.

Public Relations Depart-ment director-general Pramoj Rathavinij said the department was officially uninvolved.

The department delegated decisions on ads to station ethics boards. If they are unable to decide on appropriateness, they approach the department.

Pramoj said he had unofficially asked television station boards about a Democrat Party spot.

He said this situation would change after the passage of the decree when the department would meet with the commission to learn of its campaign regulations.

Thai Rath also reports:

นพ.สุรพงษ์ สืบวงศ์ลี เลขาธิการพรรคพลังประชาชน (พปช.) กล่าว วันนี้ (14 ต.ค.) ว่า ทางพรรคฯ ได้จัดทำภาพยนตร์โฆษณาเหมือนกับพรรคการเมืองอื่น เช่น ประชาธิปัตย์ ชาติไทย และเพื่อแผ่นดิน แต่เมื่อทำหนังสือขออนุญาตส่งภาพยนตร์โฆษณาออกอากาศทางวิทยุโทรทัศน์ พร้อมสำเนาเทปภาพยนตร์โฆษณา กลับถูกคณะกรรมการตรวจพิจารณาการโฆษณาทางวิทยุโทรทัศน์ ที่มีมติเมื่อวันที่ 12 ต.ค. 2550 ไม่อนุญาตให้นำไปโฆษณา โดยให้เหตุผลเพียงว่า ให้นำภาพและเสียงทั้งหมดไปปรึกษาคณะกรรมการการเลือกตั้ง (กกต.) โดยทำให้พรรคฯ ต้องยกเลิกแผนการโฆษณาทั้งหมด และเสียค่าปรับหลังจากที่จองเวลาโฆษณาเวลาตามสถานีโทรทัศน์ต่าง ๆ

[My own summarised translation: Dr. Surapong Suebwonglee, Secretary-General of the People Power Party (PPP) stated today (October 14) that the party had made advertisements, the same as other parties, for example, the Democrat Party, Chat Thai, and the Motherland Party, but when they submitted a written document seeking approval for the showing of such advertisements on TV and radio, together with a copy of the advertisements the [Television Advertising Censorship] Board who reviewed the radio and TV sports issued a resolution on October 12 not to allow the advertisements to go ahead stating that thy needed to be submitted to the ECT. This resulted in the party stopping all their advertisements plans and have fines imposed for the bookings already made on TV]

เลขาธิการ พปช. กล่าวว่า โฆษณาที่พรรคจัดทำขึ้นมีชื่อว่า “ความสุข” เป็นเรื่องที่ต้องการให้ประชาชนเห็นอนาคตที่ดีกว่า และเชื่อมั่นว่าไม่ได้ไปกล่าวร้ายป้ายสี ไม่ได้ไปทำลายความมั่นคงของประเทศ โดยการกระทำดังกล่าวเห็นได้ว่าพรรคพลังประชาชน ไม่ได้รับความเป็นธรรม

[My own summarised translation: The Secretary-General stated that the party's advertisements where called "happiness" and the storyline was so people could see a better future and didn't believe it was mud-slinging and it didn't threaten national security. Those actions show PPP haven't been treated fairly]

ส่วน นายองอาจ คล้ามไพบูลย์ โฆษกพรรคประชาธิปัตย์ กล่าวถึงกรณีที่คณะกรรมการบริหารวิทยุกระจายเสียงและวิทยุโทรทัศน์ (กบว.) และหน่วยงานที่เกี่ยวข้องได้ระงับการเผยแพร่สปอตโฆษณาของพรรคพลังประชาชน ว่า กบว.หรือหน่วยงานที่เกี่ยวข้องไม่ควรห้ามการเผยแพร่ สปอตของทุกพรรคการเมือง ทั้งนี้ หากสปอตของพรรคการเมืองใดมีข้อความที่ผิดกฎหมายหรือระเบียบ หน่วยงานที่เกี่ยวข้องควรเชิญพรรคการเมืองมารับทราบ ให้แก้ไขให้ถูกต้อง เพื่อออกอากาศได้

[My own summarised translation: Spokesman of the Democrat Party, Mr. Ong-art Klampaiboon stated in relation to the decision of the Television Advertising Censorship Board to suspend the advertisements of the PPP that the TACB or other agencies shouldn't prohibit political party advertising. If there is some message which is in breach of the law or regulations, the responsible agencies should inform the political party of this so they can fix the issue.
โฆษกพรรคประชาธิปัตย์ กล่าวด้วยว่า พรรคประชาธิปัตย์เคยมีปัญหากรณีเดียวกันทั้งในรัฐบาลที่ผ่านมา และรัฐบาลปัจจุบัน แต่ได้ยื่นขอแก้ไขปรับปรุงจนออกอากาศได้ พรรคจึงอยากขอให้หน่วยงานที่เกี่ยวข้อง ช่วยพิจารณาให้พรรคการเมืองปรับปรุงแก้ไข เพื่อให้ได้ออกอากาศ จนกว่าจะมีการประกาศพระราชกฤษฎีกาเลือกตั้ง ทางพรรคฯ ไม่อยากให้มีการห้ามโดยไม่มีคำอธิบายเพียงพอ

[My own summarised translation: Spokesman of the Democrat Party stated that the Democrat Party had such the problem with the previous government and this government too, but had adjusted the advertisements so they could be broadcast. The Party wants responsible agencies to consider so political parties can solve the problems and the advertisements can be broadcast until the Election decree is issued. Parties don't want prohibiting without sufficient explanation.]

COMMENT: Some other details in this Manager article. So was an explanation provided to PPP? If not, why not? It seems the Democrat Party didn't have to submit their TV advertisements to the EC, why does PPP have to? Will the Board backtrack on Monday? Is it part of Gen. Sonthi's plans to "educate" voters so they vote for "good people"?

Suppressing PPP's access to the media doesn't appear to be working as Crispin noted* the other day:

The earlier front-running Democrat Party has failed to generate enough funds for a successful election campaign and the party’s drive to penetrate the crucial northeastern region has been hobbled by internal squabbling over leadership and strategy, according to sources close to the party.

“The tide has changed completely,” says one political analyst with close ties to the military. “At first [the coup-makers] thought they could destroy Thaksin’s influence but now they realize they’re going to have to live with the guy. It’s like Caesar: everyone is scared of being stabbed in the back and so the hardliners are thrusting first.”

More significantly, perhaps, the interim government infighting comes at a time when Thaksin’s supporters have dangerously upped the ante of their anti-junta propaganda campaign which makes liberal use of the Internet to counter the message of government-controlled media inside the country.

A senior Thaksin adviser told Asia Times Online that recent internal polling surveys allegedly conducted by the military all showed that the PPP would outpace other political parties at upcoming elections, based upon still strong voter support for Thaksin in the pivotal northern and northeastern regions. Asia Times Online could not independently verify the information with the government, but the prediction is in line with many political analysts’ view of the upcoming polls.

The Nation reports on how PPP (oops I mean Thaksin as it is not political advertising) is circumventing the mainstream media:

Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra will reach out to supporters in Thailand by video, available on compact disc and his website, according to his legal adviser in this country.

Noppadon Pattama said Sunday the videos would be recorded in England and would contain mostly business advice.

"For example, the video may show Thaksin in a department store shopping for brandname goods. He will explain to businessmen here how they can add value to their products," Noppadon said. -

COMMENT: Surely, these are related, right? I wonder what the powers will say.

*the article is a must-read. I doubt I will get time to do a separate blog post about it, but there are some interesting details over a negotiated settlement between Thaksin and the palace, details of the recent Prem videos on YouTube, the possible delay in elections as well as these two very interesting tid-bits:

One strong signal that some sort of compromise with Thaksin may indeed be in the offing was the recent abrupt and unexplained halt to the strongest corruption case against Thaksin, involving his wife’s purchase of a government disposed plot of land in Bangkok. Others in Thaksin’s camp point to the government’s apparent refusal to allow anti-Thaksin protest leader Sondhi Limthongkul to return to the country after he gave a controversial speech which touched on the monarchy in California last month.
...
Note
[i] The ruling Council for National Security sent out an official version of history surrounding the coup, including the firm assertion that the palace and Prem had no foreknowledge of the September 19, 2006, military intervention, which was sent to selected foreign journalists based in Bangkok with a request that they sign and return mail a document acknowledging they had read and understood the “truth” about their putsch.

COMMENT: So is it really true that Sondhi is still overseas? This is news to me and surely Crispin would know - Asia Times is associated with Sondhi's media empire although details of how they are associated are hard to find - The Manager online frontpage has numerous links to Asia Times articles and Asia Times about us page mentions the connection without going further.

Should one take it that Crispin doesn't acknowledge the "truth"?

The election campaign is moving into full campaign mode with Chat Thai now advertising on TV as the Chat Thai website reports:

ที่ทำการพรรคชาติไทย วันพุธที่ 10 ตุลาคม 2550 นายบรรหาร ศิลปอาชา หัวหน้าพรรคชาติไทย กล่าวว่า พรรคชาติไทยเริ่มออกสื่อโฆษณาประชาสัมพันธ์หาเสียงเลือกตั้ง ผ่านทางสถานีโทรทัศน์และสถานีวิทยุต่าง ๆ แล้ว โดยจะทยอยออกอากาศไปจนกว่าจะมีพระราชกฤษฎีกาเลือกตั้ง แม้ขณะนี้จะพบปัญหาในการกำหนดตัวผู้สมัครรับเลือกตั้งมาก เนื่องจากในพระราชบัญญัติประกอบรัฐธรรมนูญ ว่าด้วยพรรคการเมือง กำหนดให้สาขาพรรคต้องมีการจัดประชุมใหญ่เพื่อให้ความเห็นชอบผู้ที่จะลงสมัครรับเลือกตั้ง ก่อนส่งรายชื่อให้กับพรรค ซึ่งจะต้องจัดประชุมใหญ่เพื่อทำการอนุมัติตัวผู้สมัครอีกครั้ง แต่จนถึงขณะนี้ยังไม่สามารถดำเนินการใด ๆ ได้ เนื่องจากยังไม่มีความชัดเจนเรื่องการแบ่งเขตเลือกตั้ง เพราะต้องรอขั้นตอนที่ กกต.จังหวัดส่งข้อมูลให้ กกต.กลางพิจารณา ทำให้เชื่อว่า พรรคการเมืองต่าง ๆ ก็ประสบปัญหา ไม่สามารถประกาศตัวผู้สมัครรับเลือกตั้งทั้งแบบแบ่งเขตและแบบสัดส่วนได้เช่นกัน

[My own summarised translation: On October 10, 2007, Banharn Silapa-Archa, Chat Thai leader stated that Chat Thai has began broadcasting TV and radio advertisements and that they will continue to advertise until there is an election decree. Even though there are problems in selecting candidates as the Act Amending Organic Law Governing Political Parties [published in the Government Gazette on August 17, 2007 (PDF)] stipulates that party branches must organise a meeting to approve candidates before submitting the names to the party. Thus, it is necessary to arrange a meeting to approve candidates, but they are unable to do so as there is no clarity on the electoral boundaries as they are waiting for the Provincial Election Commissions to send information to the central Election Commission for their consideration. He believes that other political parties are also suffering the same problems and are unable to announce the constituency and party list electoral candidates.]

“ใจผมอยากให้ผู้ร่าง เชิญชวนมาลงสมัครรับเลือกตั้งคราวนี้หน่อยได้ไหม ท่านจะได้รู้ว่า สิ่งที่ท่านเขียนมามันทำได้หรือเปล่า มีเรื่องยุ่งยากมากที่สุดเลย ตั้งแต่เลือกตั้งมา 30 ปี ไม่เคยเจอครั้งไหนลำบากยากเย็นเหมือนครั้งนี้เลย เพื่อป้องกันอย่างเดียวการซื้อเสียง แต่วิธีการกำหนดกติกาที่เข้มงวดจนเกินไป ซึ่งบางอย่างไม่สามารถปฏิบัติได้ ก็มีเกิดปัญหาขึ้น ที่จริงแล้วน่าจะเป็นบทเฉพาะกาล เอาไปเลือกตั้งคราวหน้า จะเหมาะสมกว่า” นายบรรหารกล่าว

[My own summarised translation: "In my heart, I want to invite the drafters to be candidates this time. They will then know the [law] they wrote, can it be done [is it workable]? There are so many difficulties. In my 30 years of elections, I have never experienced troubles like this before. All to prevent vote buying, but the processes stipulated are too strict and in some cases cannot be complied with and problems will occur. It should be a transitory provision and used in the next election, that would be more appropriate" said Banharn.]

นายบรรหารกล่าวอีกว่า ขอเร่งรัดให้หน่วยงานที่เกี่ยวข้องดำเนินการเรื่องเขตเลือกตั้งให้เสร็จสิ้นโดยเร็ว พร้อมกำหนดวันเวลาในการดำเนินการเกี่ยวกับการเลือกตั้ง เช่น วันรับสมัคร ส.ส.แบบแบ่งขต และ ส.ส.แบบสัดส่วน ให้ชัดเจน โดยพรรคชาติไทยจะส่งผู้สมัครรับเลือกตั้ง ส.ส.แบบแบ่งเขตประมาณ 200 เขต ส่วนผู้สมัครแบบสัดส่วนจะส่งครบทั้ง ๘ โซน อย่างไรก็ตาม รู้สึกเห็นใจ กกต. ที่ต้องกำหนดรายละเอียดต่าง ๆ ตามที่กฎหมายประกอบรัฐธรรมนูญบัญญัติไว้ ซึ่ง กกต.มีเพียง 5 ท่าน การดำเนินการต่าง ๆ จึงอาจต้องใช้ระยะเวลาบ้าง

[My own summarised translation: Mr Banharn stated further, he would like related agencies to quickly proceed with the setting of electoral boundaries including stipulating the date to proceed with the election, the date for accepting constituency and party list candidates. Chat Thai will have about 200 constituency candidates. For party list candidates, they will send full list of candidates for all 8 lists. Anyway, he feels for the Election Commission who have to stipulate the various details that the Act Amending Organic Law Governing Political Parties stipulates. The Election Commission has just 5 persons and to proceed with all the details takes time.]

COMMENT: First, on the ads, I can't find them on Chat Thai's website, but I have heard that Carabao, or at least someone who sounds like him, sings a new song for Chat Thai. I understand ads are short on any policy statements or vision for Thailand, but this just seems to be getting the party name out to the public as there seems to be little news about them recently.* With leader Banharn getting on in years, the party needs to project an image to differentiate themselves with the other political parties, particularly the Democrats.

Second, this is the first I have heard about the delays to the selection of candidates being as a result of newly amended laws. It is still 10 weeks away from the December 23 election, but it will be a frantic November and December - with campaigning likely to stop for HM the King's 80th birthday celebrations in early December-

*well about the only news involving Chat Thai recently is news over the last few days that Janista Liewchalermwong (Bam) would be moving to the Democrats. Bam was a TV star before joining Chat Thai and the news story was apparently that Banharn was throwing her out of the party. Banharn has denied this, along the lines, that there is no way he would do this given how long it took him to convince her to join the party in the first place. She is a celebrity candidate, but certainly helps the party's profile in Bangkok. To be cynical, one could speculate that the news story was manufactured by Chat Thai through a leak so they could issue a denial and remind Bangkok voters of one of the party's star attractions because it would be nonsensical to let Bam move to the Democrats. For the Democrats to accept her would also cause problems in the Mahachon-Democrat-Chat Thai alliance.

On Friday, the newly formed People Power Party had a rally in Bangkok as the Bangkok Post reports:

The People Power party (PPP) drew around 25,000 people for its first major rally in Bangkok at Sanam Luang yesterday where the party promised to continue the legacy of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

The Nation reports:

PPP leader Samak starts his rally at Sanam Luang
People Power Party leader Samak Sundaravej has started his speech in a party's rally at Sanam Luang at 4.30am.

Around 3,000 people have attended the rally, "PPP meets people."

However, the number is lower than the party had expected due to the wet location after rain overnight.

2Bangkok.com refers to The Nation's article and states:

These are photos of the People Power Party rally on Friday evening. Despite reports that the turnout was smaller than expected, the crowd was very, very large. However, the crowd was solidly made up of country people (non-Bangkokians).

2Bangkok.com has posted video of the rally at YouTube:



COMMENT: There is a possibility that the discrepancy is due to the fact that more people turned up later in the evening - given it was a weekday this is a possibility - but I can't find anything else on the rally on The Nation's website and through a google news search so does The Nation believe there were only 3,000 people there?

There has been a lot of consistently bad news coming out of Thailand particularly over foreign investment with concerns over new laws - see this post for one example - but it is not all bad news. This post will look at what some positive news for foreign investment - to balance out some of the negative news I have posted in the sidebar.

TNA reports:

Investment in Thailand during the first nine months this year soared 23 per cent and investment, both from the public and private sectors, is likely to rise further next year, according to Deputy Prime Minister and Industry Minister Kosit Panpiemras.

Investment in the country will play a significant role in driving economy and a clear picture will be seen during the second quarter of 2008, Mr. Kosit said.

During the first nine months of 2007, investment seeking promotional privileges from the
state-related Board of Investment (BoI) amounted Bt446.1 billion compared to Bt362.3 billion during the same period of last year, up 23.1 per cent, he said. More than 158,000 new jobs were created during the period.

Projects that received the greatest BoI promotional privileges during the first three quarters of this year were goods transport, research and development of auto tires, and hotels, Mr. Kosit said.

"Investment during the remainder of this year is expected to rise further as more foreign investors, especially Japanese, Americans and European Union members, are returning to Thailand," said Mr. Kosit.

The NYT reports on one recently announced investment:

As it proceeds with plans to cut jobs and close factories in North America, the Ford Motor Company is expanding aggressively in Asia, announcing a $500 million investment Tuesday to build a car plant in Thailand just two weeks after opening a $510 million manufacturing center in Nanjing, China.

Both investments were made with Mazda, the Japanese company that Ford controls through a 33.4 percent stake — a partnership that provides Ford with both cash and manufacturing skills.

“We’re looking for profitable growth,” said John Parker, Ford’s executive vice president for Asia and Africa. “You have to put some foundations in place.”

Ford’s strategy appears to be to save money by curtailing operations in North America while making money by expanding in growth markets in Asia and elsewhere abroad.

The company announced worldwide losses of $12.7 billion last year and said it planned to idle or close 16 North American facilities by 2012, including seven vehicle assembly plants.

Its operations outside the United States provide Ford with a lifeline of liquidity, including $551 million in pretax profit in South America in 2006, $469 million in Europe and $168 million through the association with Mazda.

The company lost $185 million in Asia last year, mainly because of a collapse of sales in Taiwan and shifting tastes in Australia away from larger cars, but rebounded in the second quarter of 2007 to $26 million in profit.

The plant in Thailand will produce 100,000 small cars, with 80 percent of them to be exported to other Southeast Asian countries as well as Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Ford has no plans to export the small passenger car, known in the industry as a B-class, to the United States, Mr. Parker said.

Exporting to the United States could antagonize the United Automobile Workers, the union facing layoffs as part of Ford’s corporate overhaul under Alan R. Mulally, the chief executive appointed in September 2006 to help turn around the carmaker. U.A.W. talks with General Motors last month led to a short strike. Chrysler is being threatened with a walkout in current talks, and Ford will be next to negotiate.

Thailand will export about 625,000 vehicles this year, 70 percent of them pickup trucks, of a total output of 1.25 million vehicles.

American pickup truck makers are shielded to an extent from foreign competition by a 25 percent tariff imposed in the 1960s, known colloquially as the chicken tax because it was initially levied in retaliation for duties imposed on American chicken exports.

The investment by Ford and Mazda helps cement Thailand’s place as the third-largest Asian car manufacturer, behind Japan and South Korea. The expansion of Ford and Mazda into small cars helps Thailand diversify beyond pickups.
Last week, the Thai board of investment approved plans by Honda to double its annual production capacity here to 240,000 cars.

Japanese carmakers, led by Toyota, have gradually shifted some of their production to Thailand over the last decade. Nissan, Mitsubishi, and Isuzu and its partner General Motors, also have major plants in the country.

“It’s a big vote of confidence for Thailand,” said Frederic Neumann, chief Thailand economist for HSBC, referring to Ford’s and Mazda’s investment.

Vallop Tiasiri, president of the Thailand Automotive Institute, a government agency that plans strategy, says Thailand will have a manufacturing capacity of two million cars in the next five years.

COMMENT: I am not sure whether you can specifically credit the current government for this, but at least it hasn't stuffed things up and it is really part of a long-term plan to make Thailand a major car manufacturer. While there have been questions of Thailand being able to compete with some of its neighbours for foreign investment, particularly Vietnam, many still view Thailand has a favourable market for foreign investment as The Nation reports:

Thailand is ranked 12th among the most attractive economies for foreign direct investment (FDI), trailing Vietnam in sixth place, according to Unctad's World Investment Prospects Survey 2007-2009 released yesterday.

In particular, South and East Asia will be increasingly attractive destinations for FDI, with China and India mentioned as the top two most favoured destinations by the transnational corporations (TNCs) surveyed. Among other countries ranked in the top 20 were Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and Japan.

According to the survey, FDI flows are expected to increase over the next three years despite concerns about global financial instability and protectionism in some countries.

One area where Thailand has a comparative advantage is food exports as TNA reports:

Thailand's food exports are expected to increase by 7.8 per cent from last year to Bt600 billion this year and to further rise by 10 per cent next year due to the free trade area (FTA) agreements and an increased demand for products as a result of global warming, according to industry executives.

Yuthasak Supasorn, director of the National Food Institute of Thailand, said the country's food exports totaled Bt395 billion in value in the first 8 months of this year, up 9.7 per cent from the previous year.

Products that enjoyed export growth include rice, sugar, cassava, and fresh vegetables, while those which declined are processed tuna fish and canned pineapple.
...
So, it would bring up the expected value of the food exports for the whole year to Bt600 billion, up 7.8 per cent from the year before.

The Bangkok Post reports further (cache):

Hundreds of Japanese food processors that have relocated to China from Thailand over the past decade are expected to return due to growing concerns over food safety, says Paiboon Ponsuwanna.

Mr Paiboon, the chairman of the Food Processing Industry Club of the Federation of Thai Industries, said worries about chemical contamination and food safety had affected confidence among Japanese consumers of goods produced in China.

Thailand could be a strong beneficiary, as Japanese small and medium-sized producers who had relocated to China consider returning to Thailand, he said.

The FTI plans to hold talks with the Japanese Chamber of Commerce and the Japan External Trade Organisation about matchmaking activities and building trading networks between local and Japanese businesses.

Mr Paiboon said Thai ready-to-eat products could be positioned as premium-grade goods, with Chinese products marketed as more basic products.

He said the enactment of the Japan-Thai free-trade agreement starting next month would also lead hundreds of Japanese food processors in the country to expand their production capacity to take advantage of tariff gains.

The National Food Institute (NFI) said exports of food products this year are expected to reach $17.72 billion, up 18.3% from last year. In baht terms, food exports are projected at 608.04 billion baht, up 7.8% from last year.

COMMENT: Those pesky FTAs are not all bad it seems. Things aren't that bad for foreign investment and hence this post.

In an update to my previous posts - here and here - on what influence that Thailand has over Burma, Irrawaddy reports:

Thailand has more economic muscle than China to influence the military regime in Burma to moderate its repressive policies, according to some regional analysts.

The Bangkok government through state-owned agencies such as PTT and EGAT—the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand—is the biggest purchaser of Burmese gas, contributing between US$1 billion to 2 billion a year to the regime.

Although some observers might argue that Thailand is thus dependent on Burma, other analysts argue that it’s really the other way round.

Because of the pipeline set up, the Burmese military government has no option but to keep selling the gas to Thailand—or see its much-needed income dry up.

“A pipeline imposes what we call in economics a ‘monopsony,’ a one-only buyer that likewise one might suppose enjoys some power over the seller,” explained Dr. Sean Turnell, an economist at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia, and editor of Burma Economic Watch.

“Short of going the full measure of turning the gas off, Burma has few options with respect to its pipelines into Thailand. After all, it can’t deliver the gas some place else,” he told The Irrawaddy.

COMMENT: I don't expect any real action by the Thai government though, but it is nice to see that people are talking about the influence that the Thai government has over Burma. Now, we can quibble over exactly what the Thai government should do and what will work, but the Defence Minister's position that nothing "would happen unless China, India and Russia exert serious pressure on the junta" without mentioning that Thailand could exert pressure on Burma too.

I didn't get time to post at the time, but on September 17, 2007, just before the protests in Burma really gathered steam, The Nation published an editorial criticising India's policy in Burma:

New Delhi's support of the regime in Rangoon severely damages its international credibility

It was amazing to witness how India chose to respond to questions on its relations with Burma. When visiting Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee was in town last week, he was immediately taken to task on the issue. Questions from the floor by American and British diplomats as well as journalists focused exclusively on relations between India and Burma. After all, India, the world's largest democracy, is actively supporting one of the world's most famous rogue states, which continues to oppress its people.

Confronted with uncompromising and undiplomatic questions, Mukherjee simply recited the textbook answer that one of India's cardinal principles is not to interfere with the domestic affairs of another country. When he was asked how India could back a regime with one of the world's worst human-rights records, he responded with a deadpan expression that it is essentially the job of the people in the country to decide what government they want.

It is very disappointing that India has chosen to maintain this strange policy of support concerning the military junta in Burma. Certainly, one realises that India, which shares a border with Burma in Nagaland in eastern India, would have to accommodate the leaders in Rangoon to a certain degree on issues of common concern along the border, especially insurgents. But nobody would have expected India to kowtow to Burma in such a way.

India's policy towards Burma is a shame. The Burmese people have already decided that they do not want their government and India is doing nothing. The Indian foreign minister's answers help explain why India will remain aloof in the scheme of things in Asia, especially when it comes to institutional building.

No wonder that when India is compared with China, China prevails. Even though China is also a supporter of Burma, the reasons its leaders give for relations with Burma have been more circumspect and sensible. Following growing international pressure, including that from UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, China has begun to assert pressure on Burma in discreet ways. Burmese foreign minister Nyan Win was summoned to Beijing recently.

If India wants to "Look East" and continues to deal with Burma in such an unaccountable manner, its future position and reputation will be greatly jeopardised. One of the few reasons why India was not admitted into Apec this year in Sydney was its support for the Burmese regime. With the US, a key Apec member, lashing out at Burma, it would have been odd for India's membership bid to receive support. If New Delhi continues with its current policy, India will be caught in a dilemma, as the country would become Burma's only strong supporter.

Since 1991, India has pursued a Look East policy to very good result. It started out courting the economies of Asean and East Asia. In the following years, it has forged closer ties with Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia and Japan. The country's relations progressed and resulted in the overall strengthening of ties between India and Asean.

The abrupt change in its policy towards Burma in the mid-1990s was in response to China's southward policy in Southeast Asia and domestic concerns over insurgents in Nagaland. That was understandable, but the trouble is that India has been doing more by strengthening the regime in the past several years with ammunition and arms. Mukherjee denied outright that India has sold arms to Burma. Maybe India did not sell the arms but simply gave them to the junta. India has to answer these questions in front of the international community.

Obviously, India-Burma relations cannot go on forever like this. It does not make sense.

COMMENT: The Nation is a Thai publication and criticises India for its Burma policy, but fails to mention Thailand. If you are to blame India for selling arms to Burma, why no mention the country that is the largest investor in Burma and takes almost 50% of all Burmese exports (10 times that of China)? Thailand!

Gen. Sonthi is also a proponent of its an internal matter for Burma.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

The National Counter Corruption Commission will make its own corruption perceptions index (CPI) survey to monitor graft in the country. NCCC commissioner Pakdee Pothisiri, who is responsible for the CPI survey, said his sub-panel on foreign affairs development would complete the CPI survey within six months.

The respondents would be foreigners working and living in Thailand.

''Once finished, it will be an academic tool to help create and design reliable measures for monitoring the corruption situation within the country.

''The results of the survey will be distributed within and outside the country,'' said Mr Pakdee.

The NCCC had decided it should have its own survey after Transparency International released its 2007 corruption perceptions index and Thailand was ranked a disappointing 84th among 179 countries, slumping from 63rd place last year and 59th in 2005.

Mr Pakdee said the NCCC was worried the findings of Transparency International could create the wrong impression that Thailand has made no efforts to stamp out graft.

He said Transparency International had conducted the survey by asking only about the feelings of the respondents. It did not take into consideration other factors such as the anti-corruption measures adopted in each country.

COMMENT: If the measures/efforts are actually working, won't the country be perceived as being less corrupt? However, if those measures/efforts are not successful and are ultimately futile, do they want bonus points for trying?

The worsening CPI is not because Thailand is not making any effort to stamp out corruption, it is that the "efforts" are ultimately futile. Creating some new index won't help this. Instead of directing attention in rooting out corruption, we are creating some index to get more favourable results.

Will the new survey be anonymous? If not, what foreign resident would be stupid enough to tell the government that it is more corrupt. They'll just get answers they want to hear, if not some foreign residents might find they are not being "helpful" and asked to reassess their mark. The whole exercise is pointless because if Transparency International's CPI gives Thailand a lower score, but NCCC's CPI gives a higher score, who would pay any attention to the NCC's CPI? Ok, some segments of the Thai media will lap it up, but who else?

An update to the proposed (and then withdrawn) amendments to the Lese Majeste law which I blogged about yesterday. The Bangkok Post is all over the story.

First, a news article (cache) on the withdrawn amendments:

A bill to amend the Criminal Code was withdrawn from the National Legislative Assembly yesterday after a member of the Privy Council expressed reluctance to enjoy protection under the proposed amendment.

Pornpetch Wichitcholchai, who led a group of 64 NLA members suppporting the bill, decided to pull the amendment, which was to be tabled for the NLA's consideration today.

Mr Pornpetch, who is the Supreme Court chief judge, said a member of the Privy Council telephoned him, saying the Privy Council felt uncomfortable with it and did not want the protection afforded by the amendment.

Mr Pornpetch said he then decided to withdraw the bill for revision.

He declined to unveil the name of the Privy Council member who rang up.

The proposed bill aimed to protect privy councillors and representatives appointed by His Majesty the King from defamation, insults or threats.

A source at the NLA said the bill would be revised and returned to the legislative body without the proposed provisions extending protection to members of the Privy Council and representatives appointed by the King.

Protection for Their Majesties' children would remain in the proposed amendments, the source said.

The current Criminal Code covers only Their Majesties, the heir to the throne and the regent.

The bill was seen as an attempt to protect privy councillors in light of incidents involving the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship of Thailand (UDDT), which launched scathing verbal attacks on Privy Council president Gen Prem Tinsulanonda during its anti-coup protests.

Six of their leaders were arrested after they led a demonstration that culminated in violent clashes in front of Gen Prem's residence in Si Sao Thewes in July.

The same source said that another proposed bill to amend the Criminal Procedure Code to restrict media coverage of lese majeste cases would also be dropped.

The amendment aimed to empower the court to prohibit all kinds of media from making public the information in lese majeste cases and expressing criticism and opinions about them while the investigation, the hearing and the trial of people charged with offences against the King, the Queen, the heir to the throne or the regent were in progress.

COMMENT: In the end, the new amendments are really much of the same and they likely be no fuss. What possessed the 64 NLA members to propose the amendments?

The article continues:

The NLA members representing the media have come under fierce criticism for backing the bill to bar the media from covering lese majeste cases.

Among them are former Thai Journalists Association president Phattara Khampitak, Samran Rodpetch, and Kamnoon Sitthisman.

Supinya Klangnarong, secretary-general of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform, said it was shocking to find that these veteran media professionals supported the idea of passing a law that would curb the freedom of the media.

The bill, if passed, would plunge media freedoms in Thailand to their lowest level ever, she added.

"The powerful defamation law poses enough limitation to the media's work. Now the NLA is proposing another restriction by allowing investigators, the prosecution, or the plaintiff to seek a court order to ban media coverage of a lese majeste case," she said.

But Mr Phattara played down the concerns, saying that the proposed amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code on media coverage was not a restriction on media freedom as critics understood.

"The media can still report lese majeste cases as usual.

"The ban on media coverage will be imposed only when the court sees that the case has been abused for ill-intent," he said.

Current news coverage of lese majeste cases was limited because the media had been very careful in handling such cases for fear of causing damage to the parties involved or interrupting the legal process.

So imposing such a law should not have any impact on the media's work, Mr Phattara said.

COMMENT: Has Phattara read the amendment? As a Thai Post article reported on the basis for the amendment and that was to ban criticism or opinions which have an effect on the institution (การวิพากษ์วิจารณ์หรือแสดงความเห็นในสื่อสาธารณะอันจะกระทบกระเทือนต่อสถาบัน). The court would consider whether there are necessary reasons to protect institution (มีเหตุอันสมควรเพื่อการคุ้มครองปกป้องสถาบันพระมหากษัตริย์). There is no requirement for ill-intent or to prevent an abuse of process.

Former senator Jon Ungphakorn is scathing in his opinion piece (cache) in the Bangkok Post:

These are bills relating to the extremely sensitive issue of lese majeste in Thai society. Had they not been withdrawn at the last minute, they would have been considered by an unelected legislature appointed by a military junta that took power on Sept 19 last year.

The NLA has no right to consider these bills!

The fact that prominent media representatives are sponsoring the bills is simply outrageous!

There has been no public hearing or debate on the contents of the two bills, which clearly infringe upon the basic rights and freedoms guaranteed in our new constitution.

Media reporting and commentary on the bills has been muted due to the reluctance of our media to engage with politically sensitive issues.

Already Thailand has one of the most severe lese majeste laws in the world. The penalties for infringement against the King were increased to a maximum prison sentence of 15 years by Order No. 41 of the military junta which took over the country after the bloody killings of Oct 6, 1976.

The need to resort to such a severe law in a country where the overwhelming majority of the population revere the monarchy, is questionable. People who insult the monarchy are likely to face widespread social condemnation without any need to resort to criminal proceedings.

In democratic countries such as the United Kingdom and Norway, such laws exist but are very rarely utilised.

The problem with our lese majeste law is that it has become a weapon used by powerful political forces to discredit their opponents, and by high-ranking government officials to bring charges against their competitors on the promotion ladder.

His Majesty the King, in his 2005 birthday speech, indicated that indiscriminate use of the lese majeste law could be damaging to the Monarchy and had required him to intervene on a number of occasions.

The problem is that the wide interpretation of the law prevents legitimate democratic debate on the role of the Monarchy in Thai society and legitimate comments on the actions and speeches of members of the Royal Family.

Already the lid clamped on such discussions is building up pressure in Thai society.

The first bill seems designed to stifle all criticisms against General Prem Tinsulanonda by anti-coup or pro-Thaksin groups who believe that Gen Prem was involved in the Sept 19 coup.

It also has the apparent effect of raising the status of privy councillors to the ranks of royalty. Is this really wise?

Whether the accusations are correct or not, Gen Prem is a public figure who is a legitimate target for political opinions, particularly considering the fact that he himself has made many comments on political issues during the past two years, as can be seen on his official website.

He is already protected from defamation by criminal law.

The second bill is most dangerous to civil rights in that it would expose defendants in lese majeste cases to very possible abuse by authorities, since the public could be prevented from being informed of their cases and even of their identities.

In the long run both bills, if they have a way of coming up on the table again, could have the very opposite effect to their stated intentions, causing both damage to the Monarchy and to the Thai justice system, not to mention the effects on our democracy.

COMMENT: He doesn't mince words now does he? I generally agree with him too. The lese majeste laws are bad enough now, but would have been made far worse if the amendments had taken place. The proposed amendments would have made Privy Councillors untouchable. There are no defences for lese majeste, but truth is a defence for defamation.

The Post's editorial (cache) is equally scathing:

The point, however, is that lawmakers should still stop the debate immediately and leave the issue for an elected Parliament. First of all, it should be made clear that opposing lese majeste laws or their extension is in no way tantamount to disrespecting the Royal Family. As a constitutional monarchy, Thailand upholds His Majesty in a position of extreme reverence and the lese majeste laws are in place to punish those who criticise the King. Still, lese majeste laws have problems, largely because anyone can file a lawsuit accusing someone of insulting His Majesty. As many legal scholars have noted, lese majeste charges in Thailand are often used to discredit or silence a political opponent instead of genuinely seeking to protect the monarchy.

David Streckfuss, a Southeast Asia scholar who did a PhD on lese majeste and defamation in Thailand for the University of Wisconsin-Madison, wrote recently: ''Somehow, Thai society has dead-ended itself, unable to go forward or back, unable to even address the extremely problematic nature of this law. Thai society has narrowed its options, leaving a single unavoidable logic of suppression: the law protects the monarchy. Anyone who questions the law must not care about protecting the monarchy. Such a person must be disloyal to the monarchy, and must be suppressed.''

His Majesty the King has signalled that the lese majeste law troubles him. In his annual birthday speech in 2005, the King said: ''Actually, there should be criticism. And I am not afraid if someone criticises and points out to me where I went wrong. Because then I will know. If you say the King cannot be criticised, it means the King is not human.''

His Majesty went on to indicate that when people are jailed for lese majeste, he was ''in trouble'' and had to pardon them. Given the King's own words and example, as well as the troubling application of the current lese majeste law, it seems inappropriate for the government to consider extending the law further.

COMMENT: We are in weird times now.

The Nation has just published an excellent op-ed from Thongchai Winichakul. It is worth reading in its entirety so I will just leave you with his conclusion:

In the end, if the amendment bill is passed, the revised lese majeste law will certainly increase the number of violations, the number of political cheap shots. Similarly, the number of court cases will put the monarchical institution in the spotlights even more. It will result in special privileges for many people, including non-royals, who act above the public interests and who do not deserve special protection above the law.

Yet they cannot be punished, even when they do harm to the monarchy.

Lessons from all over the world suggest how such unusual privileges eventually led to public dissatisfaction and turmoil.

The lese majeste law has done more harm than good to the monarchy. The amended one would do even more harm.

The proposed amendment is reckless. Despite its withdrawal, the idea and effort behind it should be condemned.

We must not let it be revived again.

COMMENT: Strong words.

I should note the amendments have now been withdrawn, but I still think that so many issues have arisen out of this story to ignore.
The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

A group of 64 members of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) is seeking to extend protections against criticism for members of the royal family and Privy Council members as well as representatives appointed by the monarchy. The group, led by Pornpetch Wichitcholchai, an NLA member and Supreme Court chief judge, plans to propose amendments to the Criminal Code in which Their Majesties' children, privy councillors and representatives appointed by the monarchy will be protected from defamation, insults or threats.

The draft supporters include Borwornsak Uwanno, Sujit Boonbongkarn, Samran Rodpetch, Suchada Kiranand, Vallop Tangkananurak, Khunying Jada Wattanasiritham, Kamnoon Sitthisman, and Phattara Khampitak.

Under the draft proposal, offenders would be subject to a maximum jail term of five years and/or a fine of between 10,000 and 100,000 baht.

The current Criminal Code covers only Their Majesties, the heir apparent and the regent, and carries a maximum seven-year prison term and/or a maximum 140,000 baht fine.

The NLA members also seek to amend the Criminal Procedure Code to restrict media coverage of lese majeste cases.

In the course of the investigation, the hearing, the trial of cases against people charged with offences against the King, the Queen, the heir to the throne or the regent, investigators, the prosecution, or the plaintiff may ask the court to prohibit all kinds of media from publicising information on the cases, or expressing criticism or opinions on them.

The draft amendments are expected to go to the NLA tomorrow .

Mr Phattara, one of the NLA members, said the amendment was introduced to prevent attempts to use lese majeste allegations as a political tool and so offend the monarchy. ''We think when someone is accused of offending the King, Queen, heir apparent or regent, it [the case] should not be covered by the media or used as a political tool.''

However, he noted that some critics might consider the proposed extended protection for the Privy Council as a move to protect Privy Council president Gen Prem Tinsulanonda, who was recently dragged into political turmoil.

COMMENT: Might consider? Does the name Phattara ring a bell? He the news editor of Post Today newspaper and was Vice president of the Thai Journalists Association until his appointment to the NLA (source). He is one the sponsors of the bill and publicly supports it. So we have a news editor who wants everyone to be restricted from reporting on issues. This issue has brought to a head something I have been meaning to blog on for a while. Frankly, no one can be both a news editor and a member of the legislature. Can we have critical coverage of him and the supporters from his own newspaper? One of the main sponsors was a judge. This just takes "judge made law" to new heights. Separation of powers issues anyone? How can he be a judge and a member of the legislature.

64 members is a fair number of active supporters of a piece of legislation. I think the current NLA is a good indicator of what the elected senators will be like. Such amendments usually happen during military governments. It was in the aftermath of 1976 that lese majeste law was strengthened itself.

So why the bill/amendments now? Reuters provides more details:

"We don't want any offence to the monarch to be repeated in the news or become an issue of any criticism" inside or outside Thailand, Supreme Court chief judge Pornpetch Wichitcholchai told Reuters.

Those protected by the expanded law would include sons and daughters of the monarch and royal advisers known as privy councillors, Pornpetch said.

"The current law doesn't cover privy councillors, some of whom have become political victims," he said.

Last month, the government threatened to block clips on video-sharing Web site YouTube that accused chief royal adviser Prem Tinsulanonda of masterminding last year's bloodless coup.

Such allegations against Prem have been made by supporters of ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra during demonstrations and denied repeatedly by the generals and government they appointed.

COMMENT: Lets be frank, this was designed to protect Prem - as is made even clearer below.

Actually, the Thai language Thai Post (not to be confused with the Post Today) has more in this article with the headline "Prem's children* in the NLA Back the Law Not to Defame Privy Council". It also has more details on some of those who sponsored the amendments and this includes a number of former senior military officers including Gen Oud Buangbon, Gen Chokechai Hongthong, Gen Surin Pikulthong, Gen Somthat Attanant, and Gen Phermsak Puangsaroj. I note about a dozen mentioned in total.

COMMENT: Gen. Oud is a close aide of Gen. Prem and was the person who set up the Potjaman-Prem meeting last year - his role becomes important below.

Here is one proposed amendment to the Criminal Code as reported in the Thai Post:

"โดยที่บุคคลบางประเภทมีความเกี่ยวเนื่องกับสถาบันพระมหากษัตริย์ และอาจได้รับมอบหมายให้ปฏิบัติหน้าที่บางประการอันเป็นราชการในพระองค์ อีกทั้งได้รับการรับรองสถานะและอำนาจหน้าที่ไว้ในรัฐธรรมนูญเสมอมา ได้แก่ พระราชโอรส พระราชธิดา ประธานองคมนตรี องคมนตรี และผู้แทนพระองค์ ซึ่งพระมหากษัตริย์ทรงมอบหมายให้ไปเปิดการประชุมรัฐสภาสมัยสามัญ และในปัจจุบันนี้บุคคลดังกล่าวได้รับความคุ้มครองในกรณีมีการหมิ่นประมาท ดูหมิ่น หรือแสดงความอาฆาตมาดร้ายเช่นเดียวกับบุคคลทั่วไป จึงสมควรกำหนดให้มีการกระทำดังกล่าวเป็นความผิดและรับโทษหนักขึ้น"

[My own translation: Certain persons who have some connection with the monarchy or who might be given duties by the Royal Family, or who might be appointed and given power under the Constitution including Prince, Princess, President of Privy Council, Privy Councillors, and representatives of the Royal Family who HM the King has appointed to open Parliament on his behalf. Currently, these abovementioned persons are protected against defamatory statements, insults and attacks like others, but it is appropriate that additional punishments be imposed".

โดยเพิ่มเติมหมวด 1/1 ความผิดต่อพระบรมราชวงศ์ องคมนตรี และผู้แทนพระองค์ ดังนี้ "มาตรา 112/1 ผู้ใดหมิ่นประมาท ดูหมิ่น หรือแสดงความอาฆาตมาดร้าย พระราชโอรส พระราชธิดา ต้องระวางโทษจำคุกตั้งแต่หนึ่งปีถึงเจ็ดปี หรือปรับตั้งแต่สองหมื่นบาท ถึงหนึ่งแสนสี่หมื่นบาท หรือทั้งจำทั้งปรับ มาตรา 112/2 ผู้ใดหมิ่นประมาท ดูหมิ่น หรือแสดงความอาฆาตมาดร้าย ประธานองคมนตรี องคมนตรี หรือผู้แทนพระองค์ซึ่งพระมหากษัตริย์ทรงแต่งตั้ง ต้องระวางโทษจำคุกตั้งแต่หกเดือนถึงห้าปี หรือปรับตั้งแต่หนึ่งหมื่นบาท ถึงหนึ่งแสนบาท หรือทั้งจำทั้งปรับ"

[My own translation: An addition was to be made to 1/1 for the Royal Family, Privy Councillors and representatives of the Royal Family. "Section 112/1 Whoever defames, insults or threatens a Prince or Princess shall be punished with imprisonment of one to seven years or a fine of 20,000 baht to 140,000 baht, or both. Section 112/2 Whoever defames, insults or threatens the President of the Privy Council, Privy Councillors, or representatives of the HM the King shall be punished with imprisonment of six months to five years, or a fine of 10,000 baht to 100,000 baht, or both."]

COMMENT: I should note that these provisions would be within the 'Offences against the Security of the Kingdom' section of the Criminal Code as outlined in this post on lese majeste. I think it is the inclusion of the Privy Council which is controversial.

On amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code:

ไต่สวนมูลฟ้องหรือพิจารณาคดีที่มีการกล่าวหาหรือฟ้องในความผิดต่อองค์พระมหากษัตริย์ พระราชินี รัชทายาท หรือผู้สำเร็จราชการแทนพระองค์ ตามหมวด 1 ลักษณะ 1 ภาค 2 แห่งประมวลกฎหมายอาญา ในกรณีเห็นสมควร พนักงานสอบสวน พนักงานอัยการ หรือคู่ความอาจยื่นคำร้องต่อศาลเพื่อขอให้สั่งห้ามมิให้โฆษณาข้อเท็จจริง พฤติการณ์ต่างๆ การวิพากษ์วิจารณ์หรือความเห็นเกี่ยวกับคดีไม่ว่าสื่อประเภทใด

The Bangkok Post's article about correctly summarises this amendment:

In the course of the investigation, the hearing, the trial of cases against people charged with offences against the King, the Queen, the heir to the throne or the regent, investigators, the prosecution, or the plaintiff may ask the court to prohibit all kinds of media from publicising information on the cases, or expressing criticism or opinions on them.

COMMENT: If we are not only talking about sub judice arguments, I think there is less of a problem. Sub judice also helps to protect the accused prior to the decision being handed down, particularly relevant in jury trials in some western countries - not as relevant in Thailand though as no jury trials. Given the stigma or being accused of insulting the Royal Family, I don't think that placing some restrictions on what the media can say during the trial is not necessarily that bad if, and only if, it in the interests of the accused receiving a fair trial. However, the proposed amendments seemingly allow complete banning of even reporting that a trial is taking place. This is massive overreach. As long we can be told everything that happens at the end of trial, I have less concerns about this amendment.

ด้านนายพรเพชร วิชิตชลชัย สมาชิก สนช.และผู้พิพากษาหัวหน้าคณะในศาลฎีกาซึ่งเป็นผู้เสนอร่าง พ.ร.บ.ทั้ง 2 ฉบับกล่าวว่า... และที่สำคัญการหมิ่นสถาบันถือเป็น 1 ใน 4 เหตุผลสำคัญในการยึดอำนาจการปกครองเมื่อวันที่ 19 ก.ย.49
"ส่วนเหตุการณ์ที่ นปก.บุกบ้านพัก พล.อ.เปรม ติณสูลานนท์ ประธานองคมนตรีนั้น ถือเป็นปัจจัยสนับสนุนอย่างหนึ่ง เพราะได้มีการยกร่างกฎหมายมาก่อนหน้านั้นแล้ว และก่อนเกิดเหตุการณ์ดังกล่าวก็มีการล่วงละเมิดประธานองคมนตรีมาโดยตลอด" นายพรเพชรกล่าว

[My own summarised translation: Pornpetch Wichitcholchai, an NLA member and Supreme Court chief judge, who was of the drafter(s) of both amendments stated ... one of the important reasons was insults to the institution was one of the four reasons for the September 19, 2006 coup. "For the incident of UDD storming Gen Prem's house was a contributing factor for this amendment to be drafted and before this event there was violations of the President of the Privy Council all the time" said Mr Pornpetch.]

COMMENT: The lese majeste cases against Thaksin were dropped a long time ago. Was someone not happy about this?

As we know in the early evening today, the proposed amendments were withdrawn, but the reasons are equally disturbing:

Thailand's army-appointed parliament has abandoned plans to extend strictly enforced laws protecting the monarchy after protests from royal advisers it had intended to cover, a Supreme Court judge said on Tuesday.

Sponsors withdrew amendments to expand lese majeste laws after a member of the Privy Council, which advises the monarch, said it did not want such protection, Pornpetch Wichitcholchai said.

COMMENT: The Nation Channel (Thai language only) has more indicating all amendments are off the table for now at least. We also get a more accurate quote from Pornpetch.

“องคมนตรีที่รู้จักกับผม โทรศัพท์มาแจ้งว่า คณะองคมนตรีไม่ค่อยสบายใจ ที่ผมและคณะจะเสนอร่างกฎหมายเพื่อคุ้มครององคมนตรีเป็นพิเศษ ขอบคุณในความหวังดีและห่วงใย แต่ไม่ต้องการรับการคุ้มครองนี้ แต่ไม่ขัดข้องในการคุ้มครองพระบรมวงศานุวงศ์ ดังนั้น จึงขอถอนร่าง พ.ร.บ.ทั้ง 2 ฉบับออกจากวาระการประชุม เพื่อสนองตอบองคมนตรี” นายพรเพชร กล่าว

[My own translation: "A Privy Councillor who knows me telephoned to inform me that the Privy Council was not that happy that I and the committee offered the legal amendments to specially protest the Privy Council. [He] thanked me for my goodwill and concerns, but didn't want such protection. [He] was not against protection for members of the Royal Family. Therefore, [I] will withdraw both amendments for now and in order to present them to the Privy Council" said Mr Pornpetch]

COMMENT: Are we to believe that Gen Prem's close aide, Gen Oud, who supported the legislation did not talk to Gen. Prem beforehand? Did none of the 64 supporters including a number with close links to Privy Councillors not mention this at all to them beforehand? Was it completely out of the blue? Who was the Privy Councillor who called? So if a Privy Councillor tells the NLA to jump, will they respond, how high?

*actually, it translates as "Uncle's children", but there is only one uncle here.

The Bangkok Post in an editorial in September (available from here):

The Bangkok South Criminal Court yesterday approved an arrest warrant for Surin Upatkoon, a major shareholder in Kularb Kaew. Mr Surin has repeatedly failed to turn up to answer police charges that he violated the Foreign Business Act by holding shares of Kularb Kaew as a nominee for Singapore's Temasek Holdings. Kularb Kaew, of course, is a major shareholder in Shin Corp, which Temasek purchased from the family of deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in January 2006. By all means, authorities have the right to prosecute anyone who violates the law. But justice is not served when one person is singled out for punishment while hundreds, if not thousands, go free. In this case, the charges against Mr Surin appear more like political retribution than an honest attempt by authorities to dole out justice.

When the Commerce Ministry's Business Development Department handed over the Kularb Kaew case to police in October 2006, three suspects were named: Mr Surin, former Shin Corp chairman Pong Sarasin, and Suphadej Poonpipat, executive chairman of Thanachart Capital. It remains uncertain why police did not charge Mr Suphadej and Mr Pong as well.

At the time of the Shin sale back in January 2006, Mr Pong and Mr Suphadej held a combined stake of 51% in Kularb Kaew. Back then, Mr Pong told reporters: "Kularb Kaew was established to make Shin a Thai firm after the transactions, but I'll soon have to sell the stake." It's hard to come to any other conclusion but that Mr Pong admitted to acting as a nominee so Kularb Kaew could become a Thai company - the exact crime Mr Surin stands accused of. Mr Pong and Mr Suphadej, who were both found to have backed their "investments" using loans from the banks involved in the Shin takeover, within several months after the deal diluted their stakes to a combined 4.25% in Kularb Kaew. In March 2006, Mr Surin came on the scene, taking a 68% stake in the holding company. While Mr Surin has always maintained that he is not a nominee, the Commerce Ministry concluded earlier that he was, on the grounds that the proceeds used to buy the stake came through a "mysterious channel".

Last year, the Bangkok Post had this background piece on Surin:

Better known in Malaysia as Dato' Lau Kim Khoon, Mr Surin is a major shareholder and director of three listed companies with a combined market capitalisation of $1.1 billion: Magnum Corp, Malaysia's oldest and largest licensed lottery operator; MWE Holdings Berhad, a conglomerate with interests in electronics, textiles and property; and Multi-Purpose Holdings Berhad, a holding company with interests in gaming, financial services and stockbroking.

His involvement in Shin started shortly after the Temasek deal was announced, when Goldman Sachs, Temasek's financial adviser, contacted him about a chance to participate in the transaction.

For Temasek, Mr Surin's investment helps Shin remain majority owned by Thais.

For Mr Surin, the deal was a golden opportunity to make his first investment in his mother country.

"Sometimes you might want to [invest], but it's all about opportunity. When the opportunity comes, you take it," he said in his 40th floor offices high above the Kuala Lumpur skyline.

"Some people ask me, why did you make the decision to invest in Shin, and for such a big amount, all in just a few weeks? I reply, sometimes you make a decision just overnight. If it's a good opportunity, you have to grab it."

He shrugged. "I looked at the numbers, looked at the partners, looked at the people. I have a lot of confidence in Khun Boonklee [Plangsiri, the Shin chief executive officer]."

Mr Surin, who has a personal net worth of $750 million, now owns a 68% stake in Kularb Kaew, a holding company set up by Temasek.

COMMENT: At the time, US$750 would have equated to 30 billion baht. This is a very large amount of money in rich Thai scales. One could also easily surmise he would have paid a slightly discounted price for his stake as the Singaporeans would have been eager to find a suitor. Is not possible he could have paid for this on his own? I am happy to keep an open mind on whether he is a nominee, but what about the Thai authorities, do they have an open mind?

Daniel Ten Kate for FT reports:

“The case has no grounds for the police to issue an arrest warrant,” said Phisit Dejchaiyasak, a lawyer for Mr Surin.

“We can show [Mr] Surin is a big investor in many companies. He has invested in China, Australia and Thailand. Why would a person like this be a nominee?”

COMMENT: So who will be next?

The Scotsman reports:

The rubies of the Mogok valley in upper Burma are cherished for their clarity, quality and the lush red hue known as "pigeon's blood". Yet, as the trade funnels millions of pounds each year into the coffers of the military junta, campaigners now argue the rubies are red with the blood of the people.

While Leonardo Di Caprio and Hollywood have helped educate the public about "blood diamonds" - gems mined in war zones and sold secretly to finance insurgency or a warlord's army - there is a growing demand to have the precious stones of Burma rebranded as "blood rubies" and subject to the same boycott.

In light of the Saffron revolution led by Buddhist monks and the subsequent violent crackdown on the democratic movement by the military government, pressure groups outside Burma are critical of a trade they insist is built on the back of oppression and abuse. "It's said 95 per cent of all rubies come from Burma, so if you see a ruby in a shop, it's gone through the hands of the Burmese generals and is helping to pay for the soldiers and guns on the streets of Rangoon," Mark Farmaner, the acting director of Burma Campaign UK, said.

Debbie Stothard, of the Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma, said conditions in the country's mining operations were horrendous, with owners hooking employees on drugs to improve productivity, and where shared needles are common and AIDS rife.

She said: "Heroin is given to people at the end of the working day as a reward. Young people go off to the mines with big hopes and dreams, and they come back to die. These rubies are red with the blood of young people."

Burma's generals are estimated to have earned about £400 million since they began holding official gem and jade sales in 1964. A far bigger number of precious stones are smuggled over the border into Thailand and China. The official expositions, held twice a year in the tropical heat of Rangoon, are still increasingly popular. More Chinese bidders are attending, attracted by slabs of jade.

Last week, the European Union said it would consider a trade ban on Burmese gemstones, but for the moment there are no such restrictions. However, there is evidence of growing doubt about the morality of trading in such precious stones.

Eric Smith, the co-owner, with his wife, of Eric N Smith, a jeweller in Glasgow, said he was seeking a Burmese ruby for a client who had been insistent on its point of origin.

"Burmese ruby is considered the finest in the world," he said. "Each year, I travel to Bangkok and buy from small family traders who risk their lives to come over the border and sometimes have only two or three stones. The question is, do you cut off them and their families? It's difficult. Until now, no-one has bothered about Burma. It was known to be a topsy-turvy country, but in recent weeks, the conditions have been brought home to us. When I return in February, I will be having second thoughts about what to buy. It is a moral concern."

COMMENT: Read the whole thing.

If there is a ban does this affect only official sales in Burma? What about the rubies smuggled into Thailand?

In an update to my post on How Insignificant is Thailand to Burma?, CSM's Simon Montlake has also noticed Thailand is not an insignificant player:

Isolated by Western opprobrium, Burma's rulers rely on trade and investment with Asian countries. China is in the spotlight – two-way trade with Burma doubled between 1999 and 2005 to $1.2 billion – but it's far from the only player. In recent years, India, South Korea, and Thailand have signed deals for natural gas and other resources. By deferring to China as a dominant diplomatic voice, other countries gain a smokescreen for their own interests in Burma, say analysts.
...
Given its own political drama since last year's military coup, Thailand was caught flat-footed. Junta chief Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratglin, who met last month with Burmese counterpart Gen. Than Shwe, told Thai TV it was an internal affair.

Some politicians have called for stiffer action from ASEAN. "Burma should be expelled immediately," former senator Kraisak Choonhavan, an outspoken critic of the junta, told reporters. But, analysts note, ASEAN's new charter, due to be adopted later this year, has no clauses on expulsion or suspension after Burma and other members objected

COMMENT: Perhaps, someone should tell the Thai media. Should we be surprised by the empty rhetoric from Kraisak? This is my single biggest annoyance with the Thai media. If Kraisak had have been quoted in the Thai media, he wouldn't have had to worry that anyone would care to analyse his statements or seek comment from elsewhere. They would start print the quote verbatim and there is your news story. Shouldn't he be labeled a Democrat now?

The Globe and Mail is even stronger labeling Thailand an "enabler" (via TJTS):

The harsh reaction in Thailand is one of the keys to understanding why Myanmar's military junta was able to crush the protests by the red-robed monks who were marching for democracy last month.

Exiles from Myanmar, also known as Burma, have made three attempts to hold protests in support of the monks in Mae Sot, a Thai border town, over the past 10 days. Each attempt was tightly controlled or suppressed by Thai security and military forces. Dozens of protesters were detained and deported to Myanmar, facing an even worse fate if caught.

By cracking down on its own Myanmar protesters, Thailand is seeking to ensure a smooth relationship with the neighbouring junta. That smooth relationship is worth billions of dollars in trade and investment opportunities for Thai businesses and the Thai government.

Thailand's economic relationship with Myanmar has been vital in propping up the military junta. Thailand, China and India, the three most important states on Myanmar's borders, have provided the economic lifeline that keeps the junta afloat, allowing it to defy the sanctions imposed by Western governments.

All three of these countries expressed concern about the bloody suppression of the peaceful protests in Rangoon last week. But none of the three front-line states has taken any concrete steps to punish the regime for killing and arresting the monks and other protesters.

A close examination of the words and deeds of the three countries suggests that they are willing to tolerate Myanmar's military regime. And their economic connections with Myanmar suggest that all three are profiting financially and strategically from their relationship with the junta.

The front-line Asian states, with their booming economies and rising political power, have served as a profitable replacement for the Western states that have largely disengaged from Myanmar for human rights reasons. Surrounded by fast-growing Asian neighbours, Myanmar has been able to ignore the limited sanctions imposed by Western governments.

Thailand, which rivals China as the biggest foreign investor in Myanmar, has officially criticized the junta for its attacks on the monks. But at the same time it depends heavily on Myanmar for the natural gas that fuels the Thai economy. About 20 per cent of Thailand's electricity is generated by natural gas from Myanmar. The junta collects more than $2-billion annually from Thailand for these natural gas exports, the single biggest source of revenue for the junta.

Thailand is also building hydro dams in Myanmar, offering further billions to the regime and increasing Thailand's reliance on the Myanmar relationship. And Thai traders are enjoying a booming business in importing rubies and other gems from Myanmar, while selling a vast range of consumer goods there.

Despite its official statements of concern about the military crackdown, Thailand often sounds sympathetic to the junta. Thailand's military leaders, who seized power in Bangkok in a coup last year, have hinted that Myanmar's junta was unfairly provoked by the protesting monks. Its business leaders have expressed concern that the protests could lead to border closures, hurting Thai traders. And the government has talked of the need for “peace and stability” in Myanmar, rather than democracy or human rights.
...
The exiles have no doubt of the reason for the crackdown on their protests. They see the thriving trade between Mae Sot and the nearest Myanmar town, they watch the traders going back and forth, and they know the authorities want to avoid any conflict that might lead to a shutdown of the bridge over the border on the Moei River.

“The Thai businessmen here are very dependent on the Myanmar market,” said Kamma Kuthala, a monk of Myanmar origin who led the ceremony at the monastery this week.

“If Myanmar got angry at Thailand and closed the border even for a day, it would hurt them a lot. And the authorities here are concerned only about profits and benefits.”

COMMENT: This is an issue that Thailand needs to confront instead of arguing that it is other countries which have to pressure Burma.

In other Burma news, IPS has this interesting snippet on Burma's interaction with UN Envoys:

The troika that holds the levers of power in the junta includes Gen. Maung Aye and Lt. Gen. Soe Win. Than Shwe who earned his stripes as a specialist at psychological warfare and is also known for his ruthless shoot-to-kill measures, deployed against the separatist Karen ethnic rebels in the east of the country, became the head of the junta in 1992.

And since then, Than Shwe has had a steady stream of U.N. envoys who have sought his attention but who have come away ignored, denied subsequent access and, most importantly, empty-handed. The list begins with Yozo Kokota of Japan, who served as a U.N. human rights envoy from 1992-1996, and Alvaro de Soto of Peru, who served as a U.N. special envoy from 1997-1999.

In all, there have been six U.N. envoys with different mandates who have sought change in Burma. And hardly any of them have enjoyed the liberty to work in a free environment to pursue their various missions. The Orwellian conditions the regime subjects U.N. envoys to was best conveyed during the last visit Paulo Sergio Pinheiro made to Burma in November 2003. The Brazilian diplomat discovered that the room assigned him to interview human rights victims was bugged.

COMMENT: One would expect that all rooms used by UN envoys in Burma would be bugged. To expect anything less would be naive.

The Nation reports:

Meanwhile, Vice Admiral Pajun Tamprateep, a close aide to Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda, yesterday said he did not think the dispute between Surayud and Prasong would become worrying.

"Personally, I want this issue to be settled soon. There are many other problems involving the country, particularly to prevent a return of evil," he said.

COMMENT: A "return of evil"? Is this the return of Emmanuel Goldstein Thaksin? Or the return of TRT like rule through PPP? If the later, given their latest editorial, I wonder what The Nation thinks about the Vice Admiral's words. What about the violence in the Deep South? Not a problem worth mentioning or highlighting? Doesn't this just suggest current priorities of certain people?

Is this person speaking on their own behalf or on behalf of someone else? If on behalf of someone else, is this a message to Surayud or Prasong?

btw, the Vice Admiral's family have been doing well recently as I noted in this post:

Col Pachon, deputy commander of the First Special Force Group, was made deputy chief-of-staff of the elite forces, the Special Warfare Division in Lop Buri. He is a younger brother of Vice-Adm Pachun, secretary to Privy Council president Gen Prem Tinsulanonda.

The Nation reports on some bombs found in Hat Yai:

Police yesterday confiscated 22 small home-made bombs planted in downtown Songkhla and near the main gate of Prince of Songkhla University in Hat Yai, a police source said, suggesting that the operation might have been politically motivated.

Five bombs were placed near the university and 12 near a restaurant in Songkhla, while five were left in a public park in Hat Yai. No details were given.

The bombs were relatively small, without shrapnel or a fuse.

The perpetrator apparently intended to "create incidents" to discredit authorities, said the source.

Hat Yai has been the scene of several bombing incidents, but security officials suspect the devices they found yesterday were politically motivated and not related to the insurgency in the Malay-speaking provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat.

Explosives used in the three southernmost provinces - frequently for roadside bombing attacks against police and passing military vehicles - are much larger and often loaded with shrapnel material.

The Thai language and independent TJA news in a news article/op-ed (think like The Nation political news article) stating that it was only luck that the authorities found the bombs (แต่โชคดีที่ หน่วยข่าวของ  ตำรวจ ตชด.บก.ภ.4 ได้ข่าว และสามารถตรวจพบได้ก่อน). On the question of whether it was politically motivated or related to the insurgency, it would be normal for the separatists to behind the attacks to attack the economy.  Songkhla and Hat Yai are also major targets of the separatists as they hope to disrupt the economy, investment, tourism of southern border provinces (ยังคงเป็นเป้าหมายหลัก ของขบวนการแบ่งแยกดินแดนในการก่อวินาศกรรม เพื่อหวังผลในการทำลาย เศรษฐกิจ การลงทุน และการท่องเที่ยว ของจังหวัดชายแดนภาคใต้).

The article states that one thing to note about the bombs is that that the explosive device and the timing device have been separated which makes them easier to transport. These were low intensity bombs with two timing devices making it difficult for the forensic investigators - similar to the bombs outside Army HQ.

COMMENT: The problem is the authorities would never want to admit that the terrorists were behind any violence. It has to be political movements to discredit the authorities.

The TJA article also notes the authorities have a blind spot and they can't establish how many insurgents there are. No matter how many insurgents are killed or are arrested, they are still other insurgents because ustaz (Islamic religious teacher) who are ready to train youths for terrorist acts.

The Nation also reports on the latest violence:

Meanwhile, three assistant village chiefs were targeted by suspected insurgents in the latest violence in the deep South, with only one surviving with serious injuries.

Assistant village chief Wae-hama Kahamah, 40, a resident of Tambon Prachan in Pattani's Yarang district, was shot dead just moments after he walked out of the local mosque yesterday, police said.

Eyewitness said Wae-hama, who also served as chairman of the village fund, was killed by a lone gunman who walked up and shot him once in the head before jumping on a getaway motorcycle waiting just metres away.

In Narathiwat, assistant village chief Sorpee Maeroh , 35, of Tambon Bango-stoe in Rangae district, was shot four times as he was riding his motorbike on Friday evening.

He survived but is in critical condition.

In nearby Chanae district in Tambon Chang Peurk, Che-por Dae-mah, 53, was shot dead as soon as he left his house to pray at a local mosque yesterday.

He was hit twice in the back and died at the scene.

Also yesterday, a 77-year-old woman was killed by militants in her house in Yala.

More than 2,600 people have been killed since a separatist insurgency broke out in January 2004 in the Muslim-majority south.

Meanwhile, Fourth Army Area commander Lt-General Wirote Buacharoon will double as head of the Civilian-Police-Military 43 (CPM43) in the latest rotation of officers, Army spokesman Colonel Acra Thiproch said.

Witote will replace Maj-General Samrej Srirai, who will be reassigned as deputy commander of the Fourth Army Area.

COMMENT: The violence continues.

The Times (UK) reports:

Vida, 48, and two comrades were among the first monks to escape from Rangoon, crossing the border into Thailand and bringing with them a tale of horror and heroism from the Saffron Revolution and a message of defiance for the world. “In a few weeks the monks will reorganise,” he said. “This is not the end.”
...
Speaking from a safe house in Mae Sot, he said: “Politics is not the concern of the monks but this time we saw the people getting poorer and poorer and their trouble get bigger and bigger. We thought the monks could negotiate between the regime and the people and show loving kindness to both sides.” The overture was met with a deadly fusillade, which Vida believes may have killed some of his comrades, although in the confusion of a panicking crowd, as he ran for his life amid teargas, screams and gunshots, he cannot be sure.
...
The experience has also tried his Buddhist beliefs. “I hate the soldiers now,” he said through an interpreter. “I know I shouldn’t, but I do. Those who killed monks will go to the lowest depths of the Hells. They will not scare us into giving up, though. We are even more determined to continue our struggle against the military. We want peace, national reconciliation, lower prices and the release of political prisoners and Aung San Suu Kyi.

“In about three weeks, after a Buddhist festival is completed, I will return to Burma. We will return to our struggle. Plans are being drawn up.” Asked whether he was ready to die, Vida answered emphatically: “Yes”. He said he did not know whether the monks would return to street protests, or to a more long-term civil disobedience campaign. “I think there will be a different style of protest,” he said.

He described his escape from a bus station where 300 desperate monks had gathered to try to get out of Rangoon. Some had cast off their robes but they were unmistakable with their shaven heads. People were scared to help them, he said, but some managed to summon up the courage to do so, donating money for food, or beds for the night. One monastery in Thailand refused shelter to him and his two colleagues, one of whom was ill.

Other Burmese monks in Thailand have described angry arguments within monasteries in Burma over whether to join the protests, with radical young monks sometimes claiming that corrupt abbots, paid by the regime, tried to hold them back.

Fear levels are high. Siri, one of Vida’s comrades, said: “The military are so brutal. I think they might have had a lot of people shot and beaten.”

Vida added: “They will not last much longer. The monks have the power of love. But we need the international community, too.”

Asia Sentinel also have an article with some choice quotes:

“I think people are quite afraid at the moment, but they are really angry about what happened. It's an insult to their religion," said Aung Thu Nyien, a Thailand-based Burma analyst. "It's different from 1988 because people can see what is happening on TV and listen on the radio. I expect the protests could flare up again in the next one or two months."
...
That report could not be immediately confirmed, but diplomats and human rights groups say some of Rangoon's monasteries are empty. "There is a significantly reduced number of monks on the streets," Shari Villarosa, the top US diplomat in Burma, told the Associated Press. "Where are the monks? What has happened to them?"
...
Others said that it was impossible to tell if a rift occurred, and that nothing has changed on the ground anyway.

"It's pointless speculation," said a Hong Kong-based human rights worker with many years experience in Burma. "Many so-called experts have wasted many years speculating about a possible rift in the ruling junta, and they are basically poking around in the dark."

COMMENT: I'm not sure that speculating about a possible rift in wasting time because unless there is a rift, I don't see any way for any possible change in Burma. If someone relatively senior with some clout senses the end is nigh, this person changing sides might act as a catalyst for reform.

Asia Sentinel also have an article on the conditions of Burma's prisons - they make Klong Prem and Bang Kwang sound appealing.

The choice of Gen Anupong to replace Gen. Sonthi Army C-in-C solidified the fall of Gen. Saprang, who for a period of time last year and this year many speculated would become Army C-in-C. His fall from grace has been so spectacular and public. Gen. Saprang's classmate has been firing on cylinders - see this previous post of mine here on this issue - but it didn't end there.

First, Gen. Bannawit was holding up an arms procurement deal as the Bangkok Post reports:

Deputy permanent secretary for defence Bannawit Kengrian has refused to endorse arms procurement deals with Ukraine and South Africa, which the cabinet and the army had earlier approved.

The decision is being interpreted by a source at the Defence Ministry as a form of protest against retired army chief Sonthi Boonyaratkalin for not picking his close friend Saprang Kalayanamitr to succeed him as army commander.

Under the process, any arms purchases approved by the cabinet or the armed forces also need the ministry's final seal of approval.

One deal concerns the purchase of 96 armoured personnel carriers (APCs) from Ukraine valued at 3.9 billion baht. It was approved by cabinet on Tuesday.
...
But on Friday, the last day of the fiscal year, Adm Bannawit rejected the two projects, sending them back to the army.

He believes the deal for the Ukrainian APCs was not transparent and also questioned the quality of the vehicles from South Africa.

"How can I approve arms procurement deals which are not transparent and involve products that are sub-standard. When I asked the army to send me answers to clarify 12 points the Office of the Auditor-General had earlier asked, the army could not come up with any acceptable answers," he said of the Ukranian deal.
"They must clear my doubts first. Only then will I reconsider whether I should approve the deals," Adm Bannawit said.

He claimed that the ministry had intentionally given him no time to thoroughly study the two projects. "They don't want me to read all the documents, and only want me to blindly approve them. But I'm a soldier and it is also my duty to protect public money. So why should I let this pass in such a state," he said.

But the source said Adm Bannawit had a motive in blocking the deals due to his spats with Gen Sonthi and Gen Winai. "We know the reason why Adm Bannawit is doing this. It's in revenge." Adm Bannawit is unhappy with the biggest replacements in the military and blames Gen Sonthi for it.

COMMENT: Argh, revenge of the bureaucrats. I am glad he is worried about public money being spent, but I would prefer the Cabinet or the Minister making such decisions. Would he have been this picky if Gen. Saprang had become Army C-in-C, I don't think so.

Gen. Bannawit later criticised Gen. Sonthi for becoming Deputy PM:

Adm Bannawit recently criticised Gen Sonthi for accepting the post of deputy prime minister supervising security affairs, saying that “the fairytale had ended and Gen Sonthi should therefore stop trying to prolong his stay in power.”

Gen. Sonthi was not happy about this:

Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkalin has warned Adm Bannwit Kengrien, deputy permanent secretary for Defence and a member of the National Legislative Assembly, to watch what he says to the media because as a military figure, he risked tarnishing the good reputation of the army.
...
"I don’t know if Adm Bannawit was speaking as a military figure or not when he said that," Gen Sonthi said.

"He should be able to determine what should and should not be discussed in public or he risks damaging the good name of both the National Legislative Assembly and the Royal Thai Army. He should be more careful about what he says."

COMMENT: Seeing the video of Gen. Sonthi's response I will say he had a look of extreme annoyance, even disdain. To paraphrase him, he talked about Gen. Bannawit lacking manners (malayaht). Unsurprisingly, yesterday, Gen. Bannawit was removed as Deputy Permanent Secretary of Defence and shifted to an inactive post as The Nation reports:

A well-informed source form the Defence Ministry said Bannawit is expected to face a disciplinary investigation for having publicly criticised former army commander-ini-chief Gen Sonthi Boonyaratglin over the appointment of the new army chief.

The source said permanent secretary for Defence Gen Winai Phattiyakul drafted an order establishing a probe committee and the draft is expected to be signed by Defence Minister Gen Boonrawd Somtas Thursday.

The source said Bannawit would face disciplinary action for violating military regulations that prevent military officers from publicly criticising their direct superiors.

Bannawit has been warned to stop his criticisms but he continued to attack Sonthi and Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont.

COMMENT:I should note that Gen. Bannawit publicly went after Gen. Winai whose relatives were promoted to some Defence positions - the Thai media report on one relative getting a new, apparently senior position, to do with Defence Energy. I should note that Gen. Bannawit is still a member of the National Legislative Assembly. Nice to know those members of the executive branch who are also part of the legislature can be threatened like this. Isn't this why we have the whole doctrine of separation of powers in the first place?

Gen. Anupong has now strengthened (cache) his position even more:

Army chief Gen Anupong Paochinda yesterday made his first major reshuffle of senior officers in what is seen as a move to gain control in the areas once commanded by Gen Saprang Kalayanamitr. Three days after succeeding Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkalin as head of the army, Gen Anupong ordered the reshuffle of 215 unit commanders and middle-ranking officers to make sure the army is under his grip.

The order took effect immediately. Among the key changes were Col Preecha Chan-ocha, Col Apichet Suesat, Col Pachon Tampratheep and Col Apiratch Kongsompong.

Col Preecha, a younger brother of First Army chief Lt-Gen Prayuth, was moved from deputy chief of the Third Development Division to be deputy chief-of-staff of the Third Army, which oversees northern provinces.

Col Apichet was promoted from deputy to be commander of the Fourth Infantry Regiment. The unit based in Nakhon Sawan is under the Third Army Region and played a role in the coup on Sept 19 last year.

Col Pachon, deputy commander of the First Special Force Group, was made deputy chief-of-staff of the elite forces, the Special Warfare Division in Lop Buri. He is a younger brother of Vice-Adm Pachun, secretary to Privy Council president Gen Prem Tinsulanonda.

Col Apiratch, son of late Gen Sunthorn Kongsompong, was transferred from chief-of-staff of the First Army to be commander of the 11th Infantry Regiment, succeeding Col Pisit Sitthisan who is now in charge of the First Division. Col Pisit also played a role in the coup.

A military source said the reshuffle benefited officers under Gen Anupong when he headed the First Army, and also those who worked under Lt-Gen Prayuth. The move was apparently to make sure his people are in key positions, especially in the Third Army which was once under Gen Saprang's command, the source said.

Gen Saprang, who lost out in the recent race to replace Gen Sonthi, is now deputy permanent secretary for defence.

Yesterday Gen Saprang did not show up along with the rest of the Council for National Security (CNS) members to congratulate Gen Sonthi on his appointment as deputy prime minister.

''I am happy with my new life. I will be responsible for paper work,'' Gen Saprang told reporters at the Defence Ministry. But a ministry source said he had requested a 10-day leave for a visit to India next year.

The source said Gen Saprang would be re-assigned by permanent secretary for defence Gen Winai Phattiyakul to handle intelligence and strategy planning. Gen Saprang was said to be unhappy with handling personnel management.

COMMENT: If this had happened under Thaksin, wouldn't the promotion of people based on family ties been called cronyism? Oh by since it isn't Thaksin, perhaps this is what The Nation's Avudh meant by promotion in the military in a post-Thaksin world "once again based on professionalism and peerage evaluation". Yeah and I suppose he believes the tooth fairy is real as well.

Terrorists have often record graphic videos for propaganda as the NYT reports:

In recent months, his video messages and vivid images of violence have been posted on multiple computer servers to avoid downloading delays, with one version designed for viewing on cellphones.

"I would call him the Alexander Graham Bell of terrorist propaganda," said Evan F. Kohlmann, who follows militants' Web sites at GlobalTerrorAlert.com. "It's a new day for these groups because of him."
...
Videotape that showed a masked man, thought to be Mr. Zarqawi, as he beheaded an American businessman in Iraq, Nicholas Berg, in 2004 became a gruesome model for others seeking similar notoriety. Videos later posted in Thailand showed people being beheaded by militants "who looked into the camera and said one word: 'Zarqawi,' " Mr. Kohlmann said.

Since his first communiqué appeared on a jihadist Web forum in April 2004, Mr. Zarqawi's media operation has posted hundreds of others, often with video clips. Lasting only a minute or two, the clips gave jihadist oratory far more immediacy: masked snipers shoot at American soldiers; a suicide bomber's car speeds toward an armored personnel carrier before disappearing in a fireball; a bomb detonates in a truck convoy, with drivers fleeing the flames.

AFP reports on a grisly find in Yala:

Police have found video clips showing the beheadings of a soldier and a Buddhist, while three men were shot dead by suspected Islamic rebels in Thailand's restive south, officials said Wednesday.

"One video clip showed a militant holding the head of the slain soldier," said an army official who declined to be named.

The gruesome clips had been taken by mobile phones which were seized by authorities during a raid Sunday on militant hideouts in Yala, one of three Muslim-majority provinces bordering Malaysia.
...
The video of the beheaded soldier was taken early this year, while other footage showed the killing of a Buddhist married couple and then the beheading of the husband, the army official said.

The Bangkok Post has more:

A third video clip made in June shows the bullet-ridden bodies of seven soldiers.

Other clips show boys and girls five or six years old carrying guns.

A police source said it had been learned that insurgents use children aged 13-14 years old to carry explosive materials from one place to another because they do not arouse the suspicions of the security forces.

Nimu Makajae, an Islamic specialist and former Yala Islamic committee vice chairman, said he could not imagine what the killers had in mind when they made the video clips, or how they had been led astray by others to commit such brutal crimes.

He had seen cows or goats sacrificed as offerings, but had never seen such brutal killing of human beings.

Mr Nimu said Islam required that any sacrifice must be in line with religious instruction and with the Koran. Such slayings of human beings were not allowed.

''In Islamic belief, when a person dies the body will be treated with respect and must receive religious rites within 24 hours, before the body starts decomposing.

''The body will be not harmed or disfigured because it is deemed to be Adam's offspring,'' Mr Nimu added.

In other news from the Deep South:

Four men, including a school principal, have been shot dead by suspected Islamic militants in Thailand's insurgency-torn south, police said on Tuesday.

Three of the victims, including the principal, were killed in drive-by shootings in Pattani province, while the fourth was shot dead in nearby Yala, police said.

COMMENT: There is no end in sight.

I swear this is a true story although you would swear it is something you would expect to read in The Onion:

The Special Branch Police has banned a book on Thai democracy written by respected scholar Sulak Sivaraksa.

The ban on Khawn Sattawat Prachatippatai Thai (Thai Democracy After More Than Half A Century) was issued by Pol Maj-Gen Sombat Supacheeva, chief of the Special Branch Police printed media affairs section, who claimed the book ''undermines social order and public morals''.

Police said sales and distribution of the book are prohibited. They will confiscate copies already on sale.

Mr Sulak said the ban came as a surprise since the book, an anthology of his articles and speeches, was released in March. He doubted the ban was politically motivated.

''Normally I would say this case reflects an attempt to suppress freedom of expression. But this time I think there is a hidden agenda as it will tarnish the government's image and may derail the planned election,'' he said.

COMMENT: Banning books on democracy. We surely don't wanting people to know about such divisive topic!

No blogging today well not until just after midnight Thailand time

UPDDATE: See updates below

The Bangkok Post reports:

Defence Minister Boonrawd Somtas told the AFP news agency that the current protests against the Burmese junta were unlikely to bring any political change to the country run by the military since 1962.

"The ongoing anti-junta movements would start to ease and they are unlikely to lead to any changes" in Burma, he said.

"Such changes would not happen unless China, India and Russia exert serious pressure on the junta," the minister said.

China, Burma's staunchest ally and a main trading partner, has always refused to become involved in the "internal affairs" of the Southeast Asian nation.

Despite global outrage over the Burmese crackdown, China has so far refused to condemn the junta's heavy-handed treatment.

COMMENT: There is one country that the Defence Minister conveniently left of that list and that is of course Thailand. Thailand is hardly unimportant to Burma given it shares a long border with Burma and Burma's largest trade partner:



The NYT also noted this in an article yesterday:

For two decades, Myanmar’s neighbors have grappled with how to respond to the unrelenting repression of the country’s people by its ruling generals. In Thailand, the answer comes each time anyone pays an electric bill.

Natural gas from Myanmar, which generates 20 percent of all electricity in Thailand, keeps the lights on in Bangkok. The gas, which this year will cost about $2.8 billion, is the largest single export for Myanmar’s impoverished, cash-strapped economy.

Thailand’s gas imports highlight the difficulty facing China, India, Singapore and Malaysia, among other countries, as they vie for Myanmar’s hardwoods, minerals and gems — and access to its market of 47 million people.

At a time of rising energy prices, the prospect of extracting resources appears to override the embarrassment and shame of dealing with a junta that has attracted worldwide condemnation. For that reason, the countries with the most leverage over Myanmar seem the most reluctant to use it, analysts say.

For Myanmar’s generals, the gas purchases by Thailand are only the beginning of what promises to be a significant infusion of cash. Myanmar will soon announce the winner of a concession in the Shwe gas fields off the western coast. Companies from India, China and South Korea have bid for those contracts.

In eastern Myanmar, Thai companies are building hydropower plants and have contracts to pay the government billions of dollars for electricity from them.

“For a country that’s used to a hand-to-mouth existence there is suddenly a bonanza of foreign exchange,” said Sean Turnell, a specialist on the Myanmar economy at Macquarie University in Australia. “Burma is now getting the wherewithal to tell the world to bug off.”

The cash has allowed the generals who run Myanmar to buy weapons from China and helicopters from India, order a nuclear test reactor from Russia and construct their new administrative capital north of Yangon.

“The natural gas drastically changed the military government’s fiscal position,” said Toshihiro Kudo, director of the Southeast Asian Studies Group at the Institute of Developing Economies, a research organization run by the Japanese government.
...
Largely because of the gas deal, Thailand now accounts for more than 40 percent of Myanmar’s total exports and has become its biggest trading partner, not China, as is widely reported.

“Thailand and Myanmar are increasingly integrated, increasingly dependent on each other,” Mr. Kudo said. As a result, “I don’t think that Thailand is applying any very serious pressure on the military government.”

COMMENT: It should be noted that Thailand's importance in resulting in change in Burma has not gone unnoticed. Former US Ambassador to Thailand Morton Abramowitz in an op-ed* in the Washington Post in 2003 stated:

A reversal of Thai policy is far more likely to help produce some change in Burma than another American embargo measure

COMMENT: Exactly. Now, I think we can all quibble on exactly what is the best way to engage with Burma, but this doesn't mean - as one could imply by the Defence Minister's singling out of other countries - that Thailand doesn't have any influence on Burma because it does.

UPDATE: Via TJTS two articles, the Bangkok Post:

It said investment made by Thai investors in hotel and tourism businesses in Burma totaled US$228.6 million. Investment projects Thai businesspersons made in the production industry in Burma are worth $614.6 million, the fisheries industry $171 million and agriculture the smallest at $2.7 million.

Power generating projects invested by Thailand in Burma worth $6.03 billion baht involve construction of hydro-power dams along the Salween River, which is expected to take six years to complete.

The project value, combined with that of other investment projects, brought up the total investment value Thailand has in Burma to $7.38 billion.

It resulted in Thailand becoming the biggest investor in Myanmar with Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia coming second, third and fourth respectively.

and Asia Times:

Natural gas exports to Thailand are by far the Myanmar government's largest source of foreign revenues, accounting for nearly US$160 million per month in take-or-pay contracts negotiated before the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis - and well before the recent spike in global energy prices. According to statistics from the Asian Development Bank, gas exports contribute nearly one-third of Myanmar's total official export revenues. And there are several big new bilateral investment plans underway to pump up further natural gas and electricity exports from Myanmar to Thailand.

COMMENT: Thailand is hardly insignificant and thanks to Thailand Jumped the Shark for alerting me to these stories.

The Bangkok Post has an odd editorial today (cache). It doesn't start off too badly, but then they have this howler:

In a democratic system, the value of political parties is strength in numbers. A party with a strong policy platform can elect large numbers of MPs and form, or at least influence, the government. Thus far, the political season in Thailand has been remarkable. Not a single political leader has provided a policy statement to attract voters.
...
The only stated policy of Thailand's oldest and probably most respected political group, the Democrat party, is to share power with Chart Thai and Mahachon. What are voters to make of that _ that the Democrats admit they are too weak to govern at all?

COMMENT: I am simply flabbergasted by this statement. The Democrats have been running ads on TV for at least a month or so - actually I think it is more like 2 months - on various policy initiatives. They have all their ads outlining policies on their website.

They have policies on education, poverty, health, peace in the Deep South, political reform, media reform, and transportation (all links in Thai language only). We are still about 11 weeks away from the election and I am sure they will roll out more policies in the meantime. In fact, I would argue that they will need to re-roll some of these policies during the campaign - which really hasn't started officially yet - in order spread the message to voters. November is a more likely time for the campaign to move up in gear - although with HM the King's 80th birthday at the beginning of December - it complicates a normal campaign cycle.

The next government will be a coalition government. It is not a sign of weakness for the Democrats to say who their intended coalition partners are. In fact, if that was all that was wrong with the Democrats then they would sweep into office.

Can someone make sense of this editorial for me? I checked my calendar and it isn't April 1st.

TNA reports:

At the same time, the team will ask the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) to see the footage of closed-circuit television security cameras (CCTV) near the bomb site to help identify the suspects.

After the explosion, the Army headquarters, the bomb scene and Ratchadamnoen-Nok Avenue, a well-known area for democracy demonstrators, has been guarded under tight security.

Pol.Maj-Gen. Manit Wongsomboon, Commander of Bangkok's Metropolitan Police Division 1 said that the police were alerted of a fire and a suspicious box at a telephone booth outside the Royal Thai Survey Department in Bangkok at nearly 8pm.

The Sunday night bombing took place one day before Gen. Anuphong Paochinda was to replace army chief and September 19 coup leader Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratkalin.

The bomb exploded when a bomb disposal squad was trying to defuse it. Two police bomb disposal officers were wounded.

Pol. Sr,.Sgt-Maj Jiradej Uttaphong was severely wounded with one wrist completely severed, with his colleague Pol.Cpl. Pitthatorn Sunthornchuen suffered minor injuries.

Thai Rath has more details on the bombings which I will summarise the main points below.

Police alerted around 8pm on Sep 30 from the military that an explosion/bomb went off near a telephone booth in front of the Royal Thai Survey Department [BP: Google Earth placement from 2Bangkok.com here or a map here]. There were 3 persons injured including one police bomb squad and two army ordinance officers [BP: Actually it was two police officers who were injured].

Initial reports from the investigation indicate that just after 7pm there was a suspicious man aged 25-30, wearing a blue t-shirt, green camouflage long plants, short hair who appeared to be using the phone booth for about 10 minutes. He was no longer there when some smoke appeared.

The authorities also discovered a 5 litre gallon of petrol in a black paper box with a pile of paper on top. The "baddies" used a motorcycle tire as a fuse for a bomb.

Reports indicate that the explosions were related to Gen. Anupong taking over as Army C-in-C from Gen. Sonthi and a message to Gen. Sonthi.

Gen. Sonthi said that he had been told by Prayuth, the First Region Commander of two possibilities. First, it was burning of rubbish (เป็นการเผาขยะ) and second, it was those wanting to create a nuisance. Not yet sure who and must wait for the forensics. Gen. Sonthi thought it was not related to politics [BP: On TITV he also said that it was not related to the military as soldiers love the country]

One of the injured was seriously injured and had to undergo emergency surgery in the ICU unit of Hua Chiew hospital.

It is the 5th bombing/explosion in Bangkok since the September 19 coup. First, on December 31 the Bangkok bombings, then one month later a explosion at Daily news Newspaper, then inside the phone booth at Major Ratchoyothin, and Ratchawithi Soi 24.

Matichon reports:

Gen. Saprang when asked said "I don't know, I am not related, ask those who have power" ['ผมไม่รู้ ไม่เกี่ยวข้อง ไปถามผู้ที่มีอำนาจ']

Police report it was a low intensity bomb which consisted of gunpowder. A fire was lit and a shirt soaked in petrol and heat was used as an accelerant to set of the explosion. Another senior police officer (head of 191) reported that there was no shrapnel and the components only cost 200-300 baht, but the authorities have taken the components for forensic analysis. The evidence they have gathered suggest two types of "timing devices". If heat as an accelerant didn't work there was also a timer device.

Pol Gen. Assawin, the new metropolitan police commissioner said after a meeting on the subject that they are examining connections to Ratchawithi Soi 24, outside of Major Ratchayothin and the Bangkok 31 Dec bombings. He said that in relation to any connection between the 31 Dec bombings that they also watch as a timer device, but unsure whether other components were the same. He said an ordinary digital watch which used 2A (AA?) batteries and suggests that it was to create a disturbance and not to cause death.

Gen. Anupong said it was highly likely related to politics (น่าจะมีส่วนสูงที่เกี่ยวข้องกับการเมือง ). He didn't comment when asked if it was related to the "old power".

A PPP spokesman said that it appeared to be the work of one group who wanted to create trouble like they did with the last government. He believes that work of those who hoped for benefits from the seizure of power, but have been disappointed

Samak said he didn't want to give an opinion, but said that it was same as those earlier in the year, but they can't the culprits. Asks that they don't try to blame Thaksin.

COMMENT: Note both articles are very, very long so I have just taken snippets which weren't available elsewhere in the English language press.

This PRD report:

The Council for National Security (CNS) steps up security measures at risky areas in Bangkok with roadblocks to prevent ill-intentioned people from traveling to the capital.

TNA also reports:

A bomb blast near the Royal Thai Army headquarters Sunday night might be linked with the series of bombings in Bangkok on New Year's Eve last year as the bomb materials of both incidents are likely to be the same, according to a senior police official.

Deputy Metropolitan Police Commander Pol. Maj-Gen. Kritsada Pankongchuen and a bomb disposal team have inspected the bombing scene Monday morning at a telephone booth outside the Royal Thai Survey Department, which is next door to the Army headquarters.

Metropolitan police investigators promptly initiated an investigation of the linkage between the Sunday bomb and the series of bombings on December 31.

Another PRD report:

The Royal Thai Police Commissioner-General, Pol. Gen. Seripisuth Temiyavej (เสรีพิศุทธ์ เตมียาเวส), says the explosive materials used in the bombing near the Royal Thai Army Headquarters last night are similar to the ones used in another bombing incident in Bangkok.

Pol. Gen. Seripisuth says the police will have to wait for clear evidences and witnesses before determining whether the blast was triggered by the same group. However, he admits that some police officials are still working carelessly following the bombing, but he believes the explosion is unrelated to politics or the southern insurgency.

Some brief notes of mine which haven't already been mentioned above from TITV's Hot News program (9:15pm Thai time):

Gen. Anupong says that not related to military reshuffle.

Gen. Sonthi also said that it was not related as soldiers love the country.

Jotman has a few posts here. Jotman noted that it was likely they would try to pin blame on Thaksin. The lack of mentioning Thaksin's name, to me, shows the level of infighting between the anti-Thakinites particularly over Gen. Saprang not been appointed Army C-in-C (if one was to believe the Manager the world would end if Gen. Saprang didn't take over - ok I exaggerate slightly, but they been warning of danger and peril to the country). Jotman lists 4 possibilities on who was behind the bombings:

1. An anti-coup group angered by Sonthi's appointment as deputy PM
2. Some Thai army faction is angry about who has been appointed as Sonthi's successor to head the Thai military.
3. It's the Southern Insurgents trying to get back at the Thai military
4. It's an attempt by the Thai junta to shore up support for their policies.
   

COMMENT: I don't see it as 4 as the junta /government is really going through the motions at the moment. If anything the bombings show how unsafe things are at the moment for Bangkok residents. It is not really a good look.

I suppose one can't rule out 1, Actually, Gen. Anupong's appointment will likely benefit some of those who "lost benefits", his fellow Class 10 colleagues (Thaksin was in the same class) so what have they to gain.

I am not sure it is the southern terrorists. The injuries happened because they tried to disable the bomb and from reports I have read and photos of the telephone booth there is very little damage in the area and if someone hadn't been alert enough and with the bomb taking a while to go off it is quite possible there would have been no injuries. Seems too small for the southern terrorists.

I suppose you could say that leaves 2 by default which given the location and timing makes sense. I am not sure it is necessarily an army faction. It is not just members of the military who are very upset that the coup hasn't turned out as they hoped. There is a very public war of words between Gen. Sonthi and Gen. Bannawit (see post to come). 2 does seem the most likely option for now.