From: col@megadata.mega.oz.au (Colin Newell)
Subject: Re: Subject of 'unusually rich' politicians
Organization: Megadata P/L, North Ryde, Sydney, Aust.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 03:24:49 GMT

In article <Bt9oHn.LEB@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, ssg9328@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Samart Srijumnong) writes:
> col@megadata.mega.oz.au (Colin Newell) writes:
> 
> >At the start of 1991 there was a military coup in Thailand.  One
> >reason given by the coup leaders for their action was to remove
> >from power 'unusually rich' politicians.  This action had some
> >popular support as it was widely believed throughout the country
> >that the accused politicians were guilty.  Such politicians were
> >barred from being members of parliament.
> 
> It was the NPKC that raised such accusations to JUSTIFY their coup.
> Yet, Suchinda was not reluctant to seek cooperation from the politicians
> whom were accused by he and his NPKC colleages as "unusually rich." 
> Ironically, it was Chatthai Party, the party of Chatichai who was ousted
> by the NPKC, which centered the support for Suchinda. If the House Speaker,
> Dr. Arthit Urairat, did not perform his surprising nomination of the PM
> to the King, it would have been Somboon Rahong, the Chatthai Party's leader
> who would become the PM. 
> 
> 
> >Now here we are 18 months down the track.  A highly respected man
> >is leading the country, and organising elections.  Who is standing
> >for election?  Many of those accused politicians!  How can that be?
> >Incredibly it seems that after all this time, the courts have
> >not yet decided whether the politicians were guilty or not!
> >As long as the courts have not found them guilty they can
> >enter parliament.  It is a state of limbo.
> >Is it not incredible?  I really wonder about Thailand's future
> >when it lets issues like these just hang about without tackling
> >them.  
> 
> In political discourse, there are some truth. Yet it is mixed with some
> politicization. The accusations were done in non-jurisprudent condition
> in the first place. The NPKC appointed a group led by Gen. Sithi Jiraroj
> who until being appointed had long been known at "Mr.Clean." He could
> come up with dozens of names of those who were "unusually rich." There
> was a deal between these politicians and the military at the time. Some
> who assured the military a support in the coming election were known to
> released from the list. I understand this deal went beyond the control of
> "Mr.Clean" who later suggested those "unusually rich" politicians be put
> on trials. The whole thing is just a political game. The military had
> ignored the legal system in the frist place by staging the coup. What the
> hell they meant when they said the whole thing would be cleared in the
> court? Now let's return to the concern expressed by Khun Colin about
> the future of Thailand. In Khun Colin's words, "I really wonder about 
> Thailand's future when it lets issues like these just hang about without
>                        ^^
> tackling them." I want to stress the term "it." If Khun Colin intended to
> represent Thailand with such pronoun (it), he is probably equating Thailand
> with some advanced Western countries in which most societal instutions 
> are well integrated. In Thailand the legal system are not one of the 
> three branches of power as believed in Western world. When a coup occurs,
> the first thing the coup makers would do is to transfer all legal authority
> into their control, e.g. by abolishing the Constitution, setting up martial
> court, and the likes. The notion of "unusually rich" was initiated by
> the military. When they lost their influence, their jargon has gone with 
> them. I am not saying that there was not corrupt politicians but to 
> let the military set themselves as a "moral authority" undermining the
> legal system is not a solution. 


Yes, I agree that it's ludicrous that the militiary should be a moral
authority.  My point however is this:  even though the military has
lost it's power, even if naming people as 'unusually rich' WAS
just a political game, people are still using that term.  The politicians
are still under those charges.  The charges have not been dropped
or laid to rest.  There is still talk about them being tried.  I say
you should wind it up : acquit them, or convict them.  

> 
> >This situation reminds me of most of the other pressing problems
> >facing Thailand today: e.g. politican and traffic congestion in Bangkok
> >being 2 good examples.  The Thai authorities will not face problems
> >until they are already out of hand.
> >(I was recently in Bangkok and was amazed by
> >the worsening traffic conditions.  As we sat in a mind-numbing
> >traffic jam, my old boss proudly pointed to a
> >freeway under construction: "all the traffic problems will be over
> >in 5 years" - I had to laugh.  The freeways (and skytrain) are a case
> >of too little too late and will do practically nothing to help
> >Bangkok's immense traffic problems.)  Ten years ago, Bangkok had
> >appalling traffic, Chiengmai was OK.  What is the situation today?
> >Chiengmai's traffic is regarded by many as worse than Bangkok's!
> >The reason: the government will not plan ahead and tackle problems
> >as they arise.  Why spend public money on infrastructure when it
> >will only reap a benefit 3 to 5 years down the track.  Better to
> >just ignore such problems.
> 
> I don't see the analogy between these two problems--the politics and
> the traffic broblems. Yes, every problem involves politics but to say
> they are analogous might not be helpful in deriving a solution. It is
> legitimate to be concerned with the (political) future of Thailand. 
> Yes, it is also legitimate to be concerned about such physical problem
> like traffic jam. Khun colin attributes these two problem on the same
> ignorance Thai people have. I can agree that we have been ignorant and
> short-sighted in the case of traffic jam but we have not been ignorant
> in the case of political development. The impact of traffic jam is real

I never used the word 'ignorant' : please do not try to paint my
arguments in this light.  The appearance presented by problems like
the one of 'unusually rich' positions is that the authorities in
Thailand don't like facing up to problems: they would rather keep
turning a blind eye and running away from problems rather than face
them. (It is this sort of mentality that has led to problems like
the traffic in Bangkok.)  I would not have much problem to dig up
a whole lot of references in Thai newspapers where authoritative
figures in Thailand have said EXACTLY THAT!


> while the impact of not dealing with those "unusually rich" politicians
> (which was created by the NPKC) is much less substantial. To put those
> whose names were listed by the NPKC's appointed investigating commission
> to the court does not, IMO, help boosting political development. Khun Colin
> might have not realized that Thailand's political reality is far more
> complex than it may appear. The military has not been completely "buried".
> It is struggling to return to the power center. Every move on the part
> of civilian government much take this reality into consideration. In
> such political reality, there is priority of things to be done. With just
> a little mistake, the fruit of the May event would be swept away. The US
> court may be able to lead Nixon to resign. The Thai counterpart, by any means,
> should not be expected to put any powerful men in jail. Yes, the legal 
> system needs change. Such change will not come if political context is
> still the same. 
> 
> BTW, any government planning is naturally politicized. It involves priority.
> Even such priority can be finalized, it still involves another round of
> politics,---the allocation of resource. Bangkok suffer from too many cars
> beyond the capacity of its streets. Too increase the cars is done by
> lobbying efforts on the part of the car dealer corporations. To increase
> the capacity of the streets either by building more space or by regulating
> the usage of such space is  the sole effort on the part of the government
> both at national or local levels. IMO, Bangkok (or Chiangmai) traffic jams
> are not sole engineering problems. It is human ecological problem. Bangkok
> needs to let go its monopoly in all aspects--military, education, business,
> culture, transportation, government, etc. How about moving the military units
                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> which are supposed to be the "fense" of the nation to the border. 

	Oh yes, you'll get know argument from me about this, and I'm
	glad that so many people in Thailand are now saying this
	sort of thing.

> Khun Colin.
> (at Don Muang). It takes at least 30 minutes to pass through it (assuming 
> there is not traffic congestion). This ecological solution is of course 
		^^^^ I don't know what you mean here

> much harder than the engineering one. Unless the military submits to
> the polity, the idea of moving them will be put off. What if they want to
> stay, and the others are moved? How about the notion of the new capital
> city? All these ideas need more constructive political context. The power 
> must be in hands of those who are authorized to use it. This our first
> mission to be achieved!
> 
> >Best regards,
> >Colin Newell
> 
> Same to you,
> Samart Srijumnong