Prem the Flimflam Man

On Sunday, Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda gave the opening speech at an international seminar held to mark the Office of the Ombudsman’s 13th anniversary yesterday.  Of course, who better to open the inauspicious anniversary (13) of an inauspicious group (Ombudsman) then one of the most inauspicious humans on earth. 

But even calling Prem human is somewhat questionable. Does anyone else remember Exeter, the leader of the aliens from the planet Metaluna in the 1955 movie “This Island Earth”?

I’m just kidding. Prem is probably not extraterrestrial but he actually may be Thailand’s biggest flimflam man.  

Prem definitely comes with an agenda. Without the King, Prem would be insignificant.  And the more the King is revered, the more significant Prem is.  So he is going to glorify the King whenever and wherever the opportunity presents itself – even if it means fudging the truth.

For instance one item in particular the Bangkok Post reported was Prem said in his speech that “Thais are blessed because His Majesty the King has dedicated himself to fighting poverty.”

Really? Whose poverty has the King dedicated himself to fighting? His own?

A Forbes article reports that King Bhumibol Adulyadej is worth over $30 billion dollars, making him, by far, the richest monarch on the planet (Earth, not Metaluna).

One depressing aspect of Thai politics is the susceptibility to charlatans which is partly why an Office of the Ombudsman is needed in the first place.  And when someone speaks glowingly of Thailand’s King, they are hailed as a great person. And nobody checks the facts.

So has Thailand’s King “dedicated” himself to fighting his subjects’ poverty as Prem stated? And how is that “fight” going?

One way to address that last question, is to look at the professional measure of a country's income distribution inequality called its "GINI Coefficient".  Basically, the GINI Coefficient describes an income distribution for the entire population. A value of 0 indicates that the income is divided equally among the citizens, while a value of 100 means total inequality.

Thailand's Gini Coefficient in 2009 (the last reported value) was at 40.02 according to the World Bank.  Other ASEAN countries have the following Gini Coefficients: Malaysia 46.21 (2009); Philippines 42.98 (2009); Laos 36.74 (2008); Vietnam 37.57 (2008); Cambodia 37.25 (2008); Indonesia 36.76 (2009); and Singapore 42.48 (1998).

The graph of Thailand’s Gini Coefficients over time shows that fighting poverty has only been mildly effective at best with little improvement to show and certainly no startling differences between the other ASEAN countries GINI Coefficients (where the Thai King hasn’t “dedicated” himself to fighting poverty).

So why have so many in Thailand, especially in the news media, been taken in by Prem’s flimflam? It’s not just inability or willingness to do the research, although that’s part of it.  There’s also deference to power — make no mistake about it, Royalism is a powerful political force, so one mustn’t point out that its heroes have no clothes.

But they don’t. Prem is just a fraud who makes no useful contribution to the debate over Thailand’s future.

Thai Politics in Black Robes

Courts are supposed to independently and dispassionately apply the law, without being influenced by the preferences and demands of politics…but not in Thailand.

All this "stuff" about the Constitution from the Thai courts is merely a charade in Thailand and Constitutional law is nothing more than just politics in black robes. The Constitution Court justices just vote their own political preferences. They have delivered rulings that have dissolved political parties, banned hundreds of politicians and brought down two democratically elected pro-Thaksin governments. 

The impartiality of judges, who are often accused of serving the interests of the anti-Thaksin establishment, is often questioned. But any questions have now been put to rest as the Constitution Court President, Wasan Soipisuth, openly admitted to such in a seminar on the court’s role in maintaining the balance in Thai politics (organized by the court itself, of course).

Wasan confessed that the rulings to disqualify former Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej and to dissolve political parties were, in his word, "careless" and that the court procedures relied too much on individual judges’ personal opinions, and failed to clearly establish what the facts were before making the decision.

He referred to the court's resolution to dissolve the People Power, Chart Thai and Matchima Thipataya parties: “If various groups had not staged so many rallies at the time, the decision might have been different.”  “If the country at that time had been peaceful, the government and the opposition could have joined hands, the country could have moved forward, and I believe most of the judges would have decided not to dissolve the parties," he said. "But the country at that time was chaotic and the Constitution Court had to use its judgment to maintain law and order," he said.

Of course when Wasan says “use its judgment,” he actually means “abuse its power.”  In 2010, there was even more chaos but when the ruling Democrat Party’s dissolution case came up, the court went out of its way to dismiss it due to a technicality.  

He also said that the ruling to dissolve the Palang Prachachon and Chart Thai Pattana parties was also "necessary in order to avoid political chaos".  I suppose it didn’t matter if they were guilty or not.

The favorite law book of Wasan and his cohorts on the bench must be Lewis Carroll’s “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.”  Sentence first, verdict afterwards (we’ll actually debate the case later if we have time). This would confirm the notion that the Constitution Court is a backwards court.

In an effort to try to paint himself and fellow judges as knights in shining armor protecting the kingdom from the evils of Shinawatra, self back patter Wasan went on to say that “the Constitution Court has historically sought solutions for the country in times of political gridlock.” Never mind that these court “solutions” actually did more harm than good and instead of moving Thailand “forward” as he suggests, the court put the country in “full reverse”.

In order for Thailand to be a democracy, the judiciary, i.e. the Constitution Court, needs to be independent and non-political. If not then what is good for the people and for Thailand will continue to be ignored in favor of judgments that favor a particular political party or viewpoint.

Fanaticism, Ignorance And Two Laws

Last Wednesday, lèse majesté bunco artist Tul Sitthisomwong led about 100 ultra-royalists to Thai PBS headquarters in order to call for the resignation of that organization’s executives.  

Tul and the rest of the knuckleheads who attended were upset at that station’s week-long special of its interview and  discussion program "Tob Jote Prathet Thai" (“Answering Thailand’s Issues”).  The last two episodes of the five part series were debates between Thammasat University Professor Somsak Jeamteerasakul and royalist nut job Sulak Sivaraksa, focusing on the draconian lése majesté law.

This proves that fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and continuously needs feeding in Thailand. Now, the police are even investigating the possibility that a criminal offence was committed. Evidently debating the controversial lése majesté law is a violation of the lése majesté law to some ultra-royalists.

But that’s the problem with a poorly defined and wicked law like lése majesté.  It’s upholders can initially make it a crime to threaten the monarchy, then the next day they can make it a crime to even discuss the law itself.  Pretty soon, they’ll be banning even more books, newspapers, websites, radio stations and television stations. And with banners flying and with drums beating they’ll be marching Thailand backwards into the dark ages.

The ultra-royalists clearly desire to incite fear, causing everyone to become afraid to even talk about anything remotely concerning the monarchy. It’s becoming quite clear that Thailand can’t have both free speech and a monarchy.

If any law was broken in the debates then it would be Godwin’s Law. In the final debate, Sulak did bring up Hitler. And whoever is the first to play the "Hitler card" has lost the argument as well as any trace of respect, as having to resort to bring up the most infamous mass-murdering dictator in history generally means that person has run out of better arguments. Thus, once such a comparison was made, the debate should have immediately ended with Sulak automatically losing the debate.

There are some things stupid arguments can't solve. 
For everything else, there's the Hitler Card. 

If only Tul and his ilk would be as fervent supporters of Godwin’s Law as they are with the lése majesté law.

U.S. State Department Makes a Statement Regarding Somyot - Finally

In my previous post I discussed the inaction of the U.S. Embassy in Thailand towards the unjust treatment of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk. Somyot was the editor of a now defunct Thai magazine who was recently convicted of lese majeste and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.

While the U.S. Embassy has still been inactive there has been a statement regarding Somyot by the U.S. State Department in Washington.

In their daily debriefing/press conference at the White House on January 30th, as a response to a question by a reporter the State Department finally made a statement.

"We are deeply concerned by the criminal court's decision to sentence Mr. Prueksakasemsuk ... to ten years imprisonment for violating Article 112 of the criminal code and for an additional year for a sentence that was previously suspended. Obviously, no one should be jailed for peacefully expressing their views. We regularly urge Thai authorities on a regular basis, both privately and publicly, to ensure that expression is not criminalized and freedom of expression is protected in accordance with Thailand's international obligations."

It's kind of weak but better than nothing at all. I'm wondering when the U.S. government will stop being "concerned" and start being "aggressively agitated" when it comes to Thailand's inhumanity towards others as a result of lese majeste. 

And kudos to the reporter for inquiring about Somyot in the first place. It is interesting to me that he first asked the question two days prior to this and the State Department had no response.  Maybe next time the State Department's response will come quicker and won't be buried in the back of their "debriefing playbook."

The Treatment of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk and Hypocrisy by the U.S. Embassy

The Bangkok Criminal Court sentenced news editor and political activist Somyot Prueksakasemsuk to 10 years in prison last Wednesday (January 23rd) for two articles the court ruled had “insulted” the Thai monarch. Somyot didn't actually write the articles, he just published them.  And they didn't appear in articles of fact, but in two fiction stories. Oh, and they didn't even actually mention King Bhumibol Adulyadej by name. One of the pieces published in the now-defunct magazine centered around a murderous ghost that the court determined was a stand-in for the King, in a tale that "conveyed connection to historical events."

Somyot has been held since April 30, 2011 in the eastern province of Sa Kaeo, just 2 days after he participated in the launch of a campaign to collect 10,000 signatures to remove the lese majeste article from the Thai criminal code.  He was later reproached for refusing to reveal the identity of the author of the two articles, written under the pen-name of Jitra Polachan.

The court denied Somyot bail on twelve different occasions during his 20 month pretrial detention. He was also paraded around Thailand (four different provinces) in shackles. This wasn’t just meant to punish Somyot for his views but was what amounted to a demonstration for all to see how the courts could humiliate someone who doesn’t "toe the line" when it comes to their version of what to think.

Somyot in Chains - A lesson by the Thai Courts that this could happen to you.

The Thai justice system’s treatment of Somyot clearly illustrates the erosion of due process and the dilution of even the most basic of human rights.  Since the royalist courts have taken it upon themselves to be the defender of the monarchy, they have savagely used the lese majeste law; not to uphold justice, as the lese majeste law has nothing to do with justice. Instead they use the lese majeste law to exercise control, authority and power in the interests of oppression and personal gain.

But not all the disgraceful action was committed by the Thai courts.  Even though a representative of the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok attended the trial on January 23rd, there was no resulting public condemnation of Somyot’s conviction and sentencing. No comment at all.

Of course, the U.S. embassy had a perfect opportunity to speak out. After all, January 21st was Martin Luther King Jr. Day and President Obama’s Inauguration.

So, leading up to and the verdict on January 23rd, the U.S. Embassy was posting various quotes by Dr. King on their facebook page.

And on January 21, the U.S. Embassy posted this part of Obama’s inaugural speech:

All of these quotes are very inspirational. But it appears like the U.S. Embassy wasn’t too inspired by them because on January 22nd, when closing arguments by Somyot’s lawyers were being held, this was posted on the U.S. Embassy’s facebook page:

Yes, a posting of a picture of a monkey with an explanation of what the phrase "monkey see, monkey do" means. Well, at least the folks at the U.S. embassy know what that phrase means. Judging from the fact that there were no explanations of the Martin Luther King, Jr. quotes nor the Obama quote, should we infer that they have don't have a clue about their meanings? 

And on January 23rd, when Somyot’s sentence and conviction was handed down, the only posting on the U.S. Embassy’s facebook page was some pathetic fluff article about Obama surprising White House visitors.

As Americans, we should expect more from our Ambassador, Kristie Kenney.  

What about the facebook postings? "...with the voices we lift in defense of our most ancient values and enduring ideals." - What voices? 

Personally, I’m at a loss as to why Ambassador Kenney did not speak out.  Was it because she supports the royalist movement in Thailand? Or is it because she is scared that royalist will protest against her and she’ll lose popularity – something she apparently craves?

From this picture of her, the answer is still elusive.  It could go either way.

Ambassor Kenney sporting a big yellow streak down her back

Of course, we can expect the “quiet diplomacy” spiel.  But “quiet diplomacy” has yielded scant results if any when it comes to protecting people from Thailand’s draconian lese majeste law.  So I expect that “quiet diplomacy” actually means "no diplomacy at all" and the American public is being lied to by representatives of the State Department, which wouldn’t be the first time.  By the way, just what really did cause that September 11 attack in Benghazi?