Nick Nostitz has a useful report at New Mandala on the first day of funeral rites for Samak Sundaravej. The red shirt reaction to Newin Chidchob and Democrat Party members is worth noting. Another short report here.

Nov 24, 2009
They said, they saw Samak Sundaravej ghost in the council… Everyone saw the same thing…

ASTV wrote that Samak wore his full white dress. The image was appeared in the middle of LCD monitor. He respected in Thai style. Then, all lights were shutting down… They do believe that what they saw is real Samak Sundaravej, because there is none of Samak’s photo in any computer. All is 4 seconds.

Samak Sundaravej died with liver cancer at Banrungrach Hospital at 9.33 AM. He had been 25th prime minister of Thailand, and Bangkok Governor. He is famous in cooking, but I do not know how he cooked to get the cancer in himself.

I would like to let you know that everyone has to die someday. We cannot brougth any money with us. The only thing that we can leave for this world is our name. Notorious or Honorable. We should not pay our honor to get dirty money. We should not be selfish. We are not materialism. We will be happy when we can make others happy, rather than be happy on others’ sadness.

Please think, when you die, what kind of liquid will be dropped on your corpse, tear or savila?

—

I did draw something for him long time ago.
Thai people call him, Rose Apple, because of his nose.
You may look up wikipedia to read his stuff.

Drawing for Samak Sundaravej about age ago.

Samak finds food and politics don't mix

Former Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej died yesterday. He succumbed to liver cancer in Bangkok’s Bumrungrad Hospital, aged 74.

Samak was PM when I moved to Thailand in April last year. He was quite a character and his presence – along with the movements of his rivals and his interactions with the press – could at times be quite comic, if not downright farcical. Before Thai politics turned sour with mob protests, airports seiges and coups, it could even be quite fun to read about Samak’s exploits.

He was the first of three PMs in my time here (three leaders in 19 months in itself is an indictment of the state of Thai politics) and by far the most memorable. He was nowhere near as photogenic as current PM Abhisit Vejjajiva, nor was he anything like as polite as his successor, Somchai Wongsawat, but that is precisely why he made his mark. He behaved aggressively, he was beligerent to the media, he sulked in public, he was unafraid to belittle people if he felt they deserved it, he was stoic in the face of political pressure – and his hardened appearance matched these, ahem, qualities.

In deeply-divided Thailand, he certainly had his critics and enemies. It was his very presence as PM – and the fact that he was an open supporter of Thaksin Shinawatra and his ideology – that sparked the “yellow shirt” protests of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD), who laid seige to the grounds of Government House for weeks while Samak was in charge, and which ultimately – under Somchai’s premiership – led to deaths and the one-week closure of Bangkok’s two airports, causing untold damage to the nation’s economy and reputation.

But I respected Samak’s single-mindedness in the face of such pressure, with not only the PAD but also significant political commentators calling for his head. Not for him the weak attempts to appease all of successor Somchai, whose two and a half months in office were among the more forgettable even in a country known for the transciency of its leaders. Nor for him the squeaky clean, ever-smiling PR profile of Abhisit, who was surely appointed (notice I didn’t say elected) more for his appearance and undoubted charisma than for any heavyweight political credentials.

No, Samak told it the way he saw it, and while that of course didn’t mean he was always right, it did at least show he had the courage of his convictions, and to express himself publicly without first needing a spin doctor to polish his words.

Now, as stated before, I’m not a political analyst. This is not my area of strength, although like most people I have my own political opinions. But the news of Samak’s passing gave me cause to remember some of his more colourful moments.

Cake-eating cat

First of all, before the squabbling erupted into violent demonstrations, there was the usual tit-for-tat name-calling in Government House, with one opposition politician (I forget her name) bringing Samak to task for his choice of cafeteria food. As a man in his seventies, she said it was inappropriate for him to choose a piece of cake for lunch, washed down with a glass of bright red soft drink. She suggested Samak seek psychological help, because Adolf Hitler was known to have similarly immature tastes.

Now, even within the realms of political cat-calling, which often amounts to no more than childish spats along the lines of “You smell!” “Yeah? Well, you smell worse!”, this was adorably convoluted. Never mind education, employment and crime – “Prime Minister, would you care to justify buying that cake? Because I’m rather worried it is a sign you may be a tyrant in the making, capable of ordering the slaughter of millions.”

Samak, as was his wont, barely dignified the comment, choosing instead to fix her with a customary silent staredown.

But Samak’s finest hour would not have looked out of place in an episode of Fawlty Towers, such was the level of high farce.

Pursued on motorbikes by a press pack from Government House to Chatuchak Market, Samak sought refuge in a public toilet. Not wishing to speak to the media, he remained in a cubicle, but unfortunately for him the journalists proved even more stubborn than he. More than an hour later, Samak could no longer stand the heat, moisture, smell and mosquitoes (I have been to the toilets at Chatuchak Market and they’re no place for a dignitary, let me tell you), and emerged, furious and doused with sweat.

He ignored the reporters’ questions (surely the fact he spent an hour inside a toilet cubicle would have told them he was in no mood to speak?), instead bearing down on them with a fuming glare of which Charles Bronson would have been proud. After staring them into silence, he set about berating them and their conduct, and labelling them “disgusting” no less than a dozen times.

Reaction to this incident depended, of course, on which side you were on – either Samak was rightly defending himself against media intrusion, or he showed an arrogant disrespect towards the free press, who were just doing their job in the public interest.

There’s a bit of truth to both sides, but the bigger picture for me at the time was the fun factor of living in a country where the PM is forced to flee halfway across a city as hungry hacks literally chase him into a stinking, mosquito-blown long-drop. Add to that the picture of the nation’s leader stewing there for over an hour, followed by his ultimate outburst, and clearly you can see Samak Sundaravej was not your average politican.

And his eventual dismissal from office in September 2008, after just eight and a half months, was also unorthodox, if not comic for its irony. While the country’s leading industries of tourism, exports and foreign investment were taking near-death blows from the effects of the protracted demonstrations, and while the spectre of corruption hung over everything Thaksin and his allies did, it was none of these concerns which spelled the end for Samak. No, he was booted out because he had twice appeared on a TV cooking show. Innocent enough, except politicians are not allowed to accept money for working with private enterprises. Samak’s fee was nominal and his appearance of no bearing whatsoever to his political standing, but this was a conflict of interest. Not quite along the lines of Thaksin using his position to allow his then-wife Potjaman na Pombejra to purchase multi-million-baht swathes of land, but still, rules are rules…

Ultimately, it may have been a face-saving move. As pathetic a reason it may have seemed for removing a democratically elected PM, Thailand was at the time being virtually held hostage by protesters, with the international news coverage doing the country no favours. There were far bigger concerns than the PM’s appearance on a cookery show, but Samak was steadfast in his refusal to stand down or dissolve the cabinet, the two main demands of the PAD, despite the presence of 30,000 protesters camping out on the lawns of his workplace.

So while the cookery show controversy was of negligible importance, by following the law to the letter, the courts could remove him from office legitimately. And with that removal came a lull – as temporary was it was – in the tensions. The PAD had not been placated, as the Thaksin-backed People Power Party was still in charge, but tempers were nevertheless calmed, and at a critical time.

It also proved timely for Samak himself. Despite being disqualified from the premiership, he had the opportunity to return to power if voted back in, but instead he accepted the judgement and retreated from politics. It seemed strange for such a combative man to slip away from the spotlight so quickly and readily.

But then news came less than a month later that he had been diagnosed with liver cancer, and it all made sense. It’s unknown how long he’d been sick. Indeed, it’s likely he was running the country while ill. Considering how stressful a task that must have been in the late summer of 2008, that shows either remarkable devotion or unwavering stubborness. In Samak’s case, it was probably a bit of both.

He flew to the US for treatment in the new year, returning to Bangkok and continuing to be treated at Bumrungrad, one of the country’s best hospitals. After roughly a year battling the disease, he passed away at 8:48am yesterday morning.

Samak Sundaravej passed away and the obituaries are dissecting his past and noting that he was a complex political figure. PPT doesn’t plan to add too much to those discussions. Samak was one of Thailand’s old guard who was able to stay on the scene and politically relevant because many basic features of Thai politics remained unchanged. In other words, because the political environment changed relatively slowly, the political dinosaurs have been able to adapt and even thrive.

Samak was an anti-communist rightist who spared little time for human rights. That’s pretty much true. His period as Minister of the Interior under the palace’s prime minister Tanin Kraivixien (still a member of the king’s Privy Council) in 1976-77 was one of the most repressive in the modern era. Samak had hundreds of alleged leftists arrested and his tactics led to many fleeing Thailand or joining the CPT in the jungle.

Earlier, he had a critical role in the events that resulted in the massacre of students at Thammasat University on 6 October 1976. Samak is seen to have encouraged ousted dictator Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn to return to Thailand, setting off demonstrations that led to the Thammasat massacre. At the time, Samak was a close associate of Queen Sirikit and Samak claimed that the king wanted Thanom to return. When the royal family showed up to welcome Thanom on his return, Samak’s claims were vindicated.

More than this, Samak organized anti-government rightists to bring down the government and contributed to the extremist actions that led to horrendous events. Samak continued to deny the Thammasat massacre until the end.

Another rogue of this period, Chamlong Srimuang, whose role in the 1976 events is far murkier, has commented on Samak’s passing. In the Nation (25 November 2009: “Samak never knew I voted for him : Chamlong”), Chamlong says that things that show another side of Samak.

Chamlong says he used to vote for Samak when he was a “young-blood politician…”. In other words, when Samak was a hard-core rightist anti-communist. They became enemies as time went on. Chamlong explains that Samak “didn’t like the Santi Asoke Buddhist sect that much and I happened to be one of its members.” They also clashed over abortion rights when Chamlong was secretary-general to then Prime Minister Prem Tinsulanonda. Samak want a “liberalisation of abortion” whereas the fundamentalist Chamlong mobilized to kill the bill. And, Chamlong explains that Samak was not prepared to be at Prem’s beck and call. So not all bad.

That animosity between Prem and Samak was reinvigorated when Thaksin Shinawatra nominated Samak to lead the People’s Power Party following the 2006 military-palace coup and the dissolution of the Thai Rak Thai Party and banning of its leading members. That bitter rivalry eventually saw Samak ousted on very minor charges essentially trumped up by courts that sort every means to defeat the “Thaksin regime.”

Like so many of the dinosaurs that continue to stride the political stage, Samak’s longevity had much to do with the conservatism fostered by the weight of authoritarian and undemocratic institutions like the monarchy, bureaucracy and military. Until that hold is broken, human rights in Thailand are doomed to more dark days.

Update: Ji Ungpakorn has a comment here and here.

Samak Sundaravej, the 25th prime minister of Thailand, died of cancer on Tuesday morning. He was 74. Samak had been treated for cancer in Bamrungrat Hospital in Bangkok for months. He went into coma on Sunday and died on Tuesday.

He was pronounced dead at the Bamrungrad Hospital at 9:33 am Tuesday. He would be remembered as one of the most colourful and controversial figures in Thai politics. He was known for his sharp tongue and short temper.

The veteran politician was also a celebrity cook, a newspaper columnist and owner, a Bangkok governor elected with the highest number of votes, a multiple-term MP, and a Cabinet member serving in many ministerial portfolios, including interior, transport and agriculture.

The Nation

Thailand seems to be following Singpoare’s lead on ensuring that it officially responds to news stories and “setting the record straight.” A reader pointed the latest effort out to PPT.

Vimon Kidchob, Director-general, Department of Information in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has a short letter in the latest Economist, responding to a report from 17 October. The letter appears under the headline “Thailand’s monarchy.”

“SIR –The Economist painted too dark and pessimistic a picture of Thailand’s political situation (“Exile and the kingdom”, October 17th). Since 1932, and despite many ups and downs along the democratic path, Thais have persevered towards a true parliamentary democracy with a constitutional monarchy. Irrespective of their political colours, Thais share an unwavering respect for the monarchy. The current political impasse reflects different perspectives about what Thai democracy entails, and efforts are being made to bridge such differences peacefully through parliamentary means.

Meanwhile, the Thai people enjoy their constitutional rights, not least the right to peaceful assembly, which has been continuously exercised and respected.”

What can PPT say? The path to (Thai-style) democracy may be as stated, but not the path to democracy, which the elite has worked to dig up and block at every turn. And still does.

The right to peaceful assembly exists for some – such as the yellow-shirted supporters of this government – but not for others like the red shirts who assemble under the auspices of the draconian Internal Security Act and prevented from assembling in particular locations (Phuket, Dusit area, Hua Hin/Cha-am), while the Democrat Party-led government puts numerous obstacles in place that are not there for the royalist yellow shirts.

Vimon is paid to be a mouthpiece for the government, so he has to come up with a story that is at least moderately plausible. But then put it together with this story in the Bangkok Post (27 October 2009: “Suthep sets Hun Sen straight on Thaksin”) and PPT wonders whether the government isn’t beginning to believe its own spin.

In this story, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban is said set Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen right on the “real” story of the ouster of former premier Thaksin Shinawatra. Suthep explained that “Thaksin had not been unfairly treated,” that he had “broken the law and was sentenced to imprisonment in a proper judicial process.” Hun Sen was told to forget all those stories about the 2006 coup, because Thaksin was only fleeing the jail sentence.

And, by the way, that “post-coup government stayed for only one year and a new constitution was approved by the people in a public referendum.” Of course, Hun Sen needed to know that “Thaksin and his men accepted the constitution, took part in the elections and their party was the winner and subsequently formed governments in which Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat were the prime ministers.” Those governments only fell “because they had broken the law…”.

Only the most gullible of observers and staunch yellow shirts would accept this story with a single flinch, although even they might correct the factual error and acknowledge a military-back and royalist government of 16 months. PPT thinks that the government continues to spin and Suthep and Vimon do the government and themselves any credit by such misrepresentations.

Or could it be that there are fairies in the back gardens of houses occupied by deputy prime ministers and director-generals.

Yellow shirts rise up

The first item on the agenda is to fill in the gaps between September 2008 and September 2009, before I will start writing about more timely stuff, as and when it happens. I will be concise, because 12 months is a long time to chronicle, and will perhaps return to certain points in more detail at a later date.

There have been two major anti-government protests during my time here. The first, aforementioned one culminated in the “yellow shirts”, or People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) closing down Bangkok’s two airports for a week in November. This essentially forced out the then-government led by Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, to be replaced by the unelected then-opposition Democrat Party Abhisit Vejjajiva.

The PAD, despite the use of the word “democracy” in its name, was protesting against a government which had been democratically elected, and happy enough that their favoured premier took the reins without the public having been asked their opinion on the matter.

Inevitably, there was in turn a corresponding protest against the new government, this time by the “red shirts”, or United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD). This protest, in April, was shorter-lived but more violent, as the army, which sat idly by when the entire nation was essentially held hostage by the PAD’s closure of the capital’s airpots, suddenly sprang to life and quelled the UDD’s uprising in very short order. When you compare the two incidents, it doesn’t take much to suspect that the army – which is supposed to be an independent defender of the nation’s security - might be acting on orders from higher powers with vested interests in who runs the country.

But things have quietened down since then. Sure, there are still gatherings and arguments, and I suspect the situation is simmering rather than solved, but PM Abhisit, despite his tenuous rise to power, seems to be a calming influence – charismatic, good-looking, multilingual and media savvy, with more presence than Somchai, a less combative stance than Samak Sundaravej and – on the surface, at least – without the scandals that follow Thaksin Shinawatra. Abhisit could just be a PR job, but he is for now providing at least a symptomatic cure, and there is value in that.

done

so… they just fall on each other and seventy-eight died
…nobody intended to kill them. they died because of their physical…
so… what’s wrong with that? quoteb by

Samak Sundaravej 25th Prime Minister of Thailand

After my passing good and bad experince and so on  , it confirm me the path that I have to go along in the rest of walk of life  ,even sometimes I lost to any  wrong way , suddenly turn back to right path .  You know what I mean . keep do the right things , what goes around comes around.  quoted by hiab 17 oct 2009

Several newspapers report that the government has agreed with police-proposed draft legislation that would further limit political and other rallies. [Update: For the Bangkok Post's editorial supporting the proposal see here. The Post editorial is clear if wrong-headed: "the violence [of 7 October  2008] could have been averted had there been a legal mechanism, such as a law to control public gatherings, which would have empowered police to take precautionary steps to pre-empt such demonstrations from getting out of hand. The need for such a law became even more apparent in light of the Songkran riots in Bangkok and the storming of the Asean Summit venue in Pattaya by the red-shirted supporters of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in April this year.” In other words, the Post editorialist believes that these demonstrations could have been prevented from violence from such a law. As PPT indicates below, this is a fallacy. Laws need exist already. This proposal is simply a way of limiting rallies.]

As the Bangkok Post (7 October 2009: “Public protests come under strict scrutiny”) points out, there were proposals to “restrict public gatherings … mooted when Thaksin Shinawatra was in power” and again under the “Samak Sundaravej administration … to deal with protests by the People’s Alliance for Democracy.” It is true that the latter proposal ” was dropped after coming under fire from critics.”

PPT will be interested to see if these critics are again vocal or are simply partisan supporters of the PAD.

The reason we think they should be critical of the cabinet decision to enable stricter policing of public protests is that the government already has laws in place to cover almost all of the issues in the proposed bill – the exception is the requirement for the advanced notice of protests. They also have – and use in ways that infringe human rights – the ISA.

The draft bill is being sent to the Council of State to see if it might infringe civil liberties. This is a ruse on the part of the Democrat Party-led government for the repeated use of the ISA already does this.

The bill proposes “prohibiting demonstrators from laying siege to government offices and royal property, destroying state property and from carrying weapons of any kind.” Laws already cover these instances.

At the very same time that Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is trumpeting a commitment to civil liberties, he has seen no contradiction in using the ISA again, and for an exceptionally long period, at the ASEAN summit in Hua Hin.

Meanwhile, the government has taken delivery of  “20 bullet-proof vehicles at a cost of eight million baht each to ensure the safety of government leaders attending the Asean Summit.”

None of this suggests any real commitment to civil liberties. Now is the time for the so-called critics to stop the further erosion of people’s rights.

PPT has been reading and watching the recent spate of legal decisions with some interest. For us, they raise real questions regarding the rule of law and the politicization of the judiciary.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has made much of his repeated calls for the rule of law to be important in Thailand. For example, in hisspeech at Columbia University, Abhisit twice mentioned “rule of law” in the context of institutions that promote this. For example, he said: “We certainly want a kind of democracy that is based on the rule of law, responsibility and accountability.”

So what is the Democrat Party-led government and its powerful backers in and around the palace and military doing to promote a democracy that has the rule of law as a central element?

The answer it seems is very little. Indeed, recent decisions confirm that the  judiciary is highly politicized and undermining the rule of law.

Government supporters might point to the recent Asia Foundation report that says the courts come out on top in terms of  integrity. But read more carefully. They come out on top amongst a set of institutions that are aggregations and relatively poorly defined. The report says that the “courts have by far the highest integrity rating among institutions rated, with two-thirds (64%) assessing them positively.” Ranked second was the army. In the central region only 55% assessed the courts positively. In terms of politicization, more than one-third thought the courts were biased in their decisions.

This is not a huge vote of approval and as more decisions are made that suit particular political interests, this rating must fall even further. Recent cases illustrate this.

The obvious cases for consideration are the decision by the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders exonerating all involved in the rubber saplings case, the decisions on the above-ground lottery, the “treaty” case against Samak Sundaravej and Noppadon Pattama, and the case against Yongyuth Tiyapairat. With the exception of the first link, each of these links is to a Bangkok Pundit post on the cases. PPT isn’t going to add to the points made by BP on the specifics of the cases, missing logic and on the political shenanigans involved.

Rather, we simply link to a story that illustrates our point.  Supalak Ganjanakhundee in The Nation (30 September 2009: “NACC ruling a relief, but Hun Sen happy to be a headache”), in referring to the Samak/Noppadon case  states: “In Thailand, legal judgement is always subject to the political situation.” PPT added the emphasis.

Supalak then makes the necessary and blatantly obvious related point: “As politics have changed, many people who once sat in the same boat with Samak and Noppadon are off the hook since they have chosen to sit in another boat with the current government.”

In other words, in this politicized world of judicial decision-making, the government’s current supporters are let off the hook so that they can continue to support Abhisit and keep government in the hands of the Democrat Party-dominated coalition.

It seems that when Abhisit speaks of the rule of law he means rule by law controlled by the government and used for political gain.

Update: Unconfirmed reports are that Darunee has been placed in solitary confinement.

Prachatai (10 September 2009: “Da Torpedo’s life behind bars”) has a detailed story on Darunee Charnchoensilpakul in prison. We won’t detail the report, but highlight a coupple of points.

Along with the lese majeste charge that resulted in an 18 year sentence, Darunee was accused of insulting and defaming 2006 coup conspirator General Saprang Kanlayanamitr. Asked in court about this, she replied: “I didn’t address Gen Saprang alone, but also Gen Sonthi, Gen Prem, Gen Vinai, and many others who were involved [in the coup].”

Initially, she was depressed when arrested and locked up, “complaining that the politicians she supported did not offer any help as she had expected.” She said it “would have been better if I had been arrested under the junta’s rule. But this is our government [Samak Sundaravej].” She added, “It’s sad that I am locked up under a democratically elected government.”

While things for her have deteriorated in prison since her conviction, Darunee says: “I don’t have high hopes. I just want my case to serve as a historical record for the next generations to learn from, like the case of Pridi [Phanomyong].”

Contact Darunee with postcards to:

The Central Women’s Prison, Klong Prem,

Ngarm Wong Wan Road,

Lat Yaow, Chatuchak

Bangkok 10900

Note that cards that include political comment wil be kept by the warders.

The Bangkok Post (19 April 2009) reports that the “government has not decided to lift the Emergency Decree in Bangkok and five neighbouring provinces yet, Government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn said on Sunday.” The committee responsible for overseeing the state of emergency will continue to make reports to the PM.

Only when the government considers that the situation has “fully stabilised,” would the Emergency Decree in the capital and the five provinces of Nonthaburi, Samut Prakan, Pathum Thani, Nakhon Pathom and Ayutthaya be lifted. Panitan tied this to “people’s safety, movements of political group leaders in the country and abroad, and potential gatherings…”. HRW has earlier identified the powers the decree allocates to unaccountable officials:

· Prohibiting any person from leaving a dwelling place during the prescribed period;

· Prohibiting the assembly or gathering of persons at any place or any conduct that may incite or lead to unrest;

· Prohibiting the publication, distribution or dissemination of letters, print materials or any means of communications that may cause fear among the people or are intended to distort information to cause misunderstanding of the emergency situation affecting security or public morality, both in the area or locality where a state of emergency had been declared or in the whole country;

· Prohibiting the use of communications routes or vehicles or prescribing conditions on the use of communications routes or vehicles;

· Prohibiting the use of buildings or barring entry or exit;

· Evacuating people from a designated area for the safety of civilians or prohibiting any person from entering a designated area.
The emergency decree is valid for 30 days. There is no limit to how many times it can be extended by cabinet approval.”

HRW notes that these sweeping power “creates the risk of indefinite, arbitrary and disproportionate limitations on rights and freedoms protected under international law.”

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva met with commanders of the four armed forces and high-ranking security officials. He ordered “officials to develop a better understanding with the public about the police and military crackdown on red-shirt rioters.”

Clearly, the state of emergency is a political device being used by the government to facilitate its crackdown on the UDD/red shirts, giving the government time to defeat its opponents. Abhisit  seems to believe that a state of emergency is a way to defeat those he identifies as “enemies of the state.”

Not all states of emergency have the same connotations it seems. Back in September 2008, when the Samak government imposed a state of emergency in the capital, it was opposed by: PAD, the military commander, senators, the president of the National Institute of Development Administration, and groups of rural doctors and dentists and academics from Chulalongkorn University, Mahidol University and Naresuan University. The  National Human Rights Commission issued a statement opposing the state of emergency declaring that it was “a draconian security measure” and the Thai Journalists Association, the National Press Council of Thailand and the Thai Broadcast Journalists Association said the law allowing for emergency decrees “was against the intent of the Constitution as it restricts people’s right to know.” Most of these people and organisations are now silent on these matters.

One side is belligerent, while the other is “stubborn”. Does that sound very familiar? Whereas the red-shirted movement seems to be following the People’s Alliance for Democracy manual step by step, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is demonstrating the resilience of Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat combined.

Unlike Samak and Somchai, though, Abhisit doesn’t have to look over his shoulder as his enemies on the streets grow in numbers and aggression. Even without the allegiance of the military, and when the judiciary was closing down on him and his party, Samak managed to stave off pressure after pressure from the PAD. Somchai, also facing unfriendly generals and courts, scraped through Thailand’s politically bloodiest day since May 1992 and only crumbled weeks later as a result of a court ruling.

Abhisit’s advantage is obvious without having to mention the fact that the “real leaders” of the red-shirted campaign, the ones believed to have provided the bulk of the financial supply to date, may no longer be able to operate locally. Most, if not all, members of the Shinawatra clan have gone overseas, and speculation is rife as to whether they will, or can, come back in the near future.

Therefore, the call for Abhisit to resign or dissolve Parliament will not be met. Turmoil in the city will be dealt with according to the severity of the situation. His battle has only one front, the red shirts, and how relieved he must be at the moment knowing that Newin Chidchob, a leading mob strategist and organiser, is now on his side.

Whether the red protesters will ever feel abandoned is anyone’s guess. Even without the Shinawatras nearby, the movement has got the required momentum to last many more days, if not weeks, provided the ongoing provocation manages to escape a crackdown. But the protesters may feel disheartened if there is any truth in some fresh rumours coming out of the anti-Thaksin camp yesterday.

The rumours have it that Thaksin had phoned a senior general in a bid to strike a deal. The fugitive allegedly made three demands

1 Abhisit must dissolve the House.

2 The government turns him [Thaksin] into a political refugee.

3 Which is only possible through the dropping of criminal cases (including one involving the frozen assets) and granting of clemency for previous convictions.

This kind of contact rarely gets confirmed, so everyone can feel free to discard it, especially if one believes in Thaksin’s yelling, table-banging claims he makes every night that this is a fight for democracy and justice for the poor, not himself.

By Tulsat@hotmail.com
The Nation

Newin Warns Thaksin to Stop Insulting the Monarchy

Newin Chidchob, who was once the right-hand man of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, launched an offensive against his old boss today, claiming Thaksin’s only goal is to regain his personal power and wealth. He also warned Thaksin not to do anything to damage the Monarchy.

After facing harsh criticism during the anti-government red-shirt rally, Bhumi Jai Thai Party founding member Newin Chidchob struck back at his former boss today during a press conference at Siam City Hotel in Bangkok. Newin warned Thaksin to stop “destroying” his country and attacking the Privy Council.

Newin said any attack on the Privy Council could be considered an indirect attack on the Monarchy because His Majesty the King appointed all Privy Council members. He said he believed Thaksin’s and the red shirts’ attacks are intended for figures beyond the Privy Council. He noted that the anti-government Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship, or DAAD, stated in January that they planned to reform the country and its institutions.

Newin vowed that anyone who wanted to harm the Monarchy would have to cross his dead body.

Also, Newin said the DAAD plans to incite violence nationwide in a bid to tear the country down, and warned that anyone who participated in their demonstrations might themselves become victims of violence.

Newin claimed the DAAD’s goal has shifted from fighting against the previous military-installed government and on behalf of democracy to fighting only for one man – Thaksin.

He said that no matter how much loyalty he feels toward Thaksin, he will never support Thaksin as long as he loves himself more than his country.

TOC News

คลิป เนวิน ชิดชอบ แถลงข่าว ขอให้ยุติการชุมนุมเพื่อประเทศชาติ

(cradit: Bangkok Post Cartoon)

Newin to Thaksin: Tell your men to stop hurting the monarchy

Former confidant says those who disagree with Thaksin are hunted

A tearful Newin Chidchob on Tuesday launched a stinging attack on former boss Thaksin Shinawatra and asked him to put a brake on the red shirted movement’s activities that may have upset His Majesty the King.

His voice choked with emotion, Newin said if he could ask for two things from Thaksin after “risking my life” for him, he would want the former prime minister to “tell his men” to stop “hurting” the monarch and ending activities that could damage Thailand as a whole.

The political drama unfolded on TV as Newin and his colleagues appeared at a press conference to rebut claims by the redshirted movement that they had “betrayed” Thaksin.

The “real betrayal” and “utter show of ingratitude”, he said, was Thaksin’s treatment of Samak Sundaravej when he was made to believe that Thaksin was 100 per cent behind efforts to reinstate him as prime minister last year. Newin claimed Thaksin betrayed Samak by asking coalition allies and some People Power Party MPs to back Somchai Wongsawat as prime minister after Samak had been disqualified in the cooking show controversy.

Newin asked red shirted protesters who planned to join in a mass rally on Wednesday to reconsider their decision, saying their leaders had ulterior motive beyond toppling Abhisit government.

Newin, who once a right hand man of runaway ex-PM Thaksin Shinawtara, said that the leaders of the protesters have held people hostage in order to achieve their goals and for their own benefits.

“Please think twice, the red shirt protesters. You all are being used. Your leaders have hidden agenda beyond what they told you, beyond ousting this government,” he said.

Newin’s voice was choked with emotion when he said he was ready to die for the monarchy and would do anything to fight those who wanted to destroy the monarchy.

In his phone-ins, Thaksin has encouraged the protesters to join the mass rally on April 8, to oust Abhisit government.

He directed most of his press conference on denying that he betrayed Thaksin by turning to support Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva to form the government.

“It is Khun Thaksin that betrayed us all, particularly on exPrime Minister Samak Sundaravej. Khun Thaksin and his Thai Rak Thai party had done everything to push for Samak to become prime minister.

However it was him that finally betrayed Khun Samak by not voting for him to be reappointed as prime minister.

The Nation  ( with Nevin’s voice at Press Conference VDO clip )

Newin, sobbing, tells all: I was exploited by Thaksin

Newin Chidchob made a tearful confession today about his breakup with former Premier Thaksin Shinawatra. He revealed for the first time that Thaksin had betrayed Samak Sundaravej when the former decided at the last minute to instruct his party members to vote for Somchai Wongsawas instead of reinstating Samak after the court verdict against him.

“That’s real betrayal,” Newin said. He said Thaksin had called him and many other senior party members to vote for the return of Samak. “He had told me that we must vote for Samak at all cost…but then he changed his mind…”

Newin made this disclosure to counter allegations from the red-shirted protestors that Newin had betrayed Thaksin by joining the Abhisit government despite the fact that Thaksin had “given Newin everything” to make him what he is today.

Newin said the ongoing red-shirted protest was aimed only to benefit one person — and that’s Thaksin.

He accused the red-shirted core members of trying to undermine the monarchy by attacking privy councillors.

“I suspect that the real aim of the April 8 demonstration is not only to topple the government. It goes beyond that. On Jan 15, this year, when D-Station was inaugurated, one senior member of the red-shirts, who is also present in the current rally, declared that they will fight to have a new Thai state. Why does that mean? What kind of a new Thai state was he talking about?”

Newin said he owed Thaksin only one thing: “He taught me the right management style. Apart from that, I owe him nothing. I was elected MP even before Thaksin entered politics. My friends and I were elected in the Lower Northeast based on our own ability. We did not win because of Thaksin or Thai Rak Thai Party at all…”

Towards the end of the hour-long press conference, Newin, choking back tears, said he would like to ask two things of Thaksin:

“One: I would like to ask Khun Thaksin to tell his people to stop tarnishing the monarch. Two: If he really loves this country, he should call off this demonstration.”

Newin said he had been used by Thaksin to “carry out missions that nobody else wanted to do or were capable of doing…but after what I saw him do to Khun Samak, I knew that the same thing would happen to us, sooner or later…and that has come to pass now….”

Thai Talk, Post By : Yoon

RELATED POSTS

Newin asks Thaksin to end protests , Bangkok Post

Newin Chidchob, who used to be Thaksin Shinawatra’s right-hand man, on Tuesday made an emotional appeal to the former premier to stop questioning His Majesty the King’s royal judgement in the selection and appointment of privy councillors

Stop hurting the King : Newin,  The Nation

“When we think differently from Thaksin, we are hunted. We are destroyed,” he said with trembling voice. “With respect, I want to send a message to [former] prime minister Thaksin that we are men, we are human, not slaves.

“I want to tell brothers and sisters joining the rally, I want to tell the [rally] leaders, I was a tool.”

Following the seemingly co-ordinated series of red shirt provincial actions, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has again spoken to his supporters by video link (The Nation, 30 March 2009: “Thaksin threatens to lead protests himself if coup happens”). He is reported as stating that “if soldiers used violence to disperse red shirt protesters or a coup happened, he would return to Thailand to bring out more people to Bangkok and lead the protest himself.”

Thaksin is reported to have continued his attacks on Privy Council President General Prem Tinsulanond claiming that Prem always wanted to maintain his influence over governments. Thaksin says, “He (Prem) always contacted us over the issue [military promotion and reshuffles] till I had to tell him let Thailand has just one PM…”. Further, Thaksin  “accused Prem, the military and the Constitution Court of staging silence coups against governments, citing the removal of [pro-Thaksin prime ministers] Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat…”.

Thaksin called on his supporters to “get our democracy back from the Privy Council, from the military and from the bureaucrats. We want the democracy that brings us our well-being…”.

The former premier also attacked Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya.

Reports flowing from deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s accusations regarding moves to oust him, which eventually led to the 2006 coup, are coming thick and fast. PPT reports them here because they are revealing details about the political events of 2005 and 2006 that have resulted in both deep political divisions in Thailand and the increased use of lesé majesté charges in highly political ways.

In his denial that he was involved in planning Thaksin Shinawatra’s downfall, Privy Councilor (at the time and again now) General Surayud Chulanont (in the Bangkok Post, 29 March 2009: “Surayud says Thaksin coup claim untrue”) is reported to have said that he had “no desire nor was in any position to plot the overthrow of Thaksin.” Even so, the report states that Surayud is considering the call from General Panlop Pinmanee for him to quit the Privy Council.

The Post report has more details than the one in The Nation, mentioned by PPT in an earlier post, and reveals that “he had met prominent judges at the Sukhumvit residence of Piya Malakul, chairman of Pacific Intercommunications company, in early May 2006 as claimed by Thaksin.” It is added that Surayud stated that those at the dinner “never discussed any plan to organise a coup.” The General also “conceded [that] Panlop Pinmanee, the former deputy director of the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) – whom Thaksin claimed had leaked the coup plot involving Gen Surayud to him – was also at the meeting.” Surayud says that “everyone was exchanging views on national affairs over dinner…” but “We never drew any conclusion about seizing power…”. He also is reported to have said that he went to the dinner because, “As a privy councillor, he needed to be well-informed, meet people and seek out information.”

Further, General Surayud is reported as denying “Thaksin’s allegation he had informed His Majesty the King that Thaksin did not respect the monarchy. The accusation was baseless, as were claims he volunteered before the King to topple the government, Gen Surayud said, adding Thaksin was always paranoid about a coup…. He had no idea why Thaksin attacked him and Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda.”

Meanwhile, Vice Admiral Pachun Tampratheep, an aide to General Prem, said “Thaksin often made veiled references to Gen Prem as a person behind moves to remove him. He said he was not worried those accusations would paint the Privy Council in a negative light as Thaksin loyalists never viewed the council positively anyway. Many people still had faith in Gen Prem, said Vice-Adm Pachun.”

In a related report in The Nation (29 March 2009: “Piya defends Surayud”), Piya Malakul has defended and supported General Surayud. Piya is reported to have claimed that “It was just ‘a dinner among friends.’ It wasn’t, as alleged by former Premier Thaksin Shinawatra, a ’secret meeting to plot the Sept 19, 2006 coup.’ Piya said. Piya told Matichon Online that he had hosted the dinner after His Majesty the King had on April 25, the same year, urged the judges … to find a solution to the country’s political crisis at the time.” Piya added, “I only wanted to hear what the country’s top judges who happened to be my friends had to say about the situation…”. Surayud, in the Post reports, claims that he only personally knew Supreme Administrative Court President Ackaratorn Chularat.

The Nation links to one of their blogs, Thai Talk, by Suthichai Yoon (29 March 2009: “Piya Malakul, the dinner host, said there was no talk of coup”). Drawing from Matichon (29 March 2009: “ปีย์ มาลากุล เปิดตัวยัน สุรยุทธ์ ถก 3บิ๊กตุลาการ”ปัดวางแผนรัฐประหาร แค่ดินเนอร์-แม้ว-อ้อ ก็เคยมา”), the report continues: “He [Piya] first invited Mr Akrathorn Chullarat, President of  the Administrative Court, and Mr Chanchai Likhitchitta, President of the Supreme Court, to the dinner. ‘I had known Mr Akrathorn since we were both boys,’ Piya said. He then called up Gen Surayud and Mr Pramote Nakhonthap, an academic, to invite them to join the dinner. Mr Charan Pakdithanakul, then secretary general of the Supreme Court’s President and currently a member of the Constitutional Court, also joined the dinner.” Piya is adamant: “I can confirm that there was no talk of a coup or about who was going to get what position. There was not a single military officer there. How could we discuss a coup?”

According to Matichon, the 7 attendees at the dinner were Piya, Surayud, Panlop, Ackaratorn, Charnchai Likhitjitta, Charan Pakdithanakul and Pramote Nakornthap. Each of these persons has had particularly high profile roles that have impacted political developments since April 2006.

Piya Malakul na Ayuthaya is a 72 year businessman with close palace connections. Matichon includes extensive details about Piya, in Thai. Other available information on this seemingly colourful and influential figure:

Paul Handley (Asia Sentinel, 8 September 2008: “The King Never Smiles: Book Excerpt”) refers to Piya’s role in 1992 and calls him the “king’s media adviser” and a “palace agent.” In the agitation over Thaksin’s letter to President Bush, Piya is mentioned as one of those who perhaps leaked the letter and promoted the response against Thaksin.

In a note to the McCargo and Ukrist book, The Thaksinization of Thailand, Piya and Pacific Intercommunications are mentioned. The company lost valuable contracts with the army after Thaksin reorganized the military hierarchy in late 2003 (also here). In the struggles for control of iTV, Piya, who was iTV’s vice chairman in charge of news operations, “was removed from the editorial board after he criticised the ‘politicisation in favour of the owner and candidate’,” referring to Thaksin.

When Pramual Rujanaseri’s controversial book (Phrarajaamnat or The Royal Prerogative) came out, the author stated that Piya, an editor at Advance Publishing Company, stated that the king liked his book. The book was very popular, not least amongst PAD leaders like Sondhi Limthongkul.

During his short time as prime minister in 2008, Samak Sundaravej claimed that a “half-bald man” he called Ai Terk was undermining the government and country. It is believed that he refered to Pin.

Credits to http://www.guardian.co.uk/

BANGKOK, Thailand -

Month-long protests in Thailand have caused a damaging effect on its economy that is dependent on tourism as a primary source of revenue. The latest development has it that anti-government group People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) had already stormed and took over two of Thailand’s airports. This despite the change of leadership just months ago when Samak Sundaravej was removed from office for allegedly protecting ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Apparently, he was replaced by Thaksin’s brother-in-law, Premier Somchai Wongsawat, thus the same predicament befell him.

Protesters wore yellow shirts as a loyalty to the king reminiscent of the Philippine’s 1986 People Power Revolution. But the parallelism ends there. Whereas the Philippine revolution was marked by peacefulness and prayer, the Thai protests were marked by unrest and violence. A significant number of people have already been killed or injured in clashes among police, protesters, and pro-government group.

A brief analysis of the situation would immediately discount the possibility of such scenario occuring in the Philippines soon. Even with majority of Filipinos being discontented with GMA and her cast of clowns, there doesn’t seem to be enough prodding and agitation yet from civil society groups to cause them to move into action. Secondly, the opposition is clearly divided with each pursuing his own agenda and political ambition. Lastly, there simply is a lack of major religious figure that can inspire the people to go to the streets again. Oh, how I miss the late Jaime Cardinal Sin!

It’s a truly grim prospect but unless a miracle happens, say the honorable congressmen get finally irked by the domineering of Mikey, et.al. and the impeachment is railroaded from the Lower House to the Senate (again), then we are bound to stick it out with the Arroyo nightmare until 2010 or for keeps.

• Subscribe to Profound Matters

The pre-dawn blast rocked an area where demonstrators had set up camp

An explosion in Bangkok has killed at least one anti-government protester and wounded more than 20.

The pre-dawn blast rocked an area where demonstrators had set up camp in the city’s Government House compound.

Protesters from the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) group have occupied the area since late August.

They are demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat’s government, saying it is too close to ousted former PM Thaksin Shinawatra.

The demonstrators said a grenade had exploded near the main stage of their protest site at about 0330 (2030 GMT Wednesday).

The protests have seen some of the worst street violence since pro-democracy activists challenged Thailand’s army in 1992.

Abuse of power?

The PAD has proved a remarkably resilient movement, forcing the resignation of a prime minister and two cabinet ministers, and nearly provoking a military coup.

Anti-government rallies have been held in Bangkok for months

While the protesters have been targeted by small bomb attacks in recent weeks, the latest explosion could herald the start of more aggressive efforts to dislodge them, our correspondent adds.

An alliance of conservative and staunchly royalist academics, activists and business people, the PAD accuses Mr Somchai and his recently-ousted predecessor, Samak Sundaravej, of simply being proxies for Thaksin.

The PAD wants to replace Thailand’s one-man, one-vote system with one in which some representatives are chosen by professions and social groups rather than the general electorate.

Thaksin, Mr Somchai’s brother-in-law, was forced from office in a military coup in 2006 and remains in exile overseas.

The new government says it wants to start negotiations with the PAD. But it is also pushing ahead with controversial plans to amend the constitution – a key grievance of the protesters who see it as part of a plan to rehabilitate Thaksin.

It accuses him of corruption and abuse of power while he was in office, and has suggested he and his allies have a hidden republican agenda – a serious charge at a time when the country is beset by anxiety over the future of the monarchy.

Thaksin was last month convicted in absentia of violating conflict of interest rules, and still faces several other charges.

The National Counter Corruption Commission resolved Friday to conduct an investigation against 28 members of the Cabinet of former prime minister Samak Sundaravej for their part in endorsing a Thai-Cambodian joint communiqu้.

NCCC, The National Counter Corruption Commission

The National Counter Corruption Commission is set to prosecute the 28 Cabinet ministers of the Samak administration for their involvement in the Thai-Cambodian joint communique

The Constitution Court had ruled that the communique violated Article 190 of the Constitution. The joint declaration was signed by then Foreign Affairs Minister Noppdon Pattama without first receiving approval by Parliament.

The NCCC found the 28 ministers of the Samak administration guilty of participating in the drafting of unconstitutional declaration.

PM Somchai Wongsawat says he’s not worried about the NCCC’s move. He adds that the NCCC’s action will not affect the upcoming Cabinet reshuffle.

A Cabinet reshuffle is expected after the royal cremation ceremony for HRH Princess Galyani Vadhana draws to a close on November 19, 2008.

Source: TOC

 

NCCC decides to probe Samak Cabinet over Preah Vihear joint communiqu

Somlak Jadkrabuanpol, an NCCC member, said the NCCC would inform the 28 former members of the Samak Cabinet of the charges by Monday.

She said the NCCC would investigate the Cabinet members for endorsing the Thai-Cambodian joint communiqu้ in support of the listing of Preah Vihear as a world heritage site without seeking Parliament’s approval first.

Nation / Nov14, 2008

The government will set up a working group to prepare testimony for Cabinet members, including Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, who have been indicted by the anti-graft agency for their endorsement to a communiqu? supporting Cambodia’s bid to list Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage site.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) on Thursday resolved to charge 28 members of the previous Cabinet led by Samak Sundaravej for negligence and violating Article 190 of the Constitution, which states that any treaty that would affect Thai territories or sovereign rights must be approved by the National Assembly.

Many of those indicted are in the current Cabinet, including Somchai, who served as education minister in the Samak administration.

Nation, Nov 15, 2008

Former Foreign Minister Cancels Press Conference on Preah Vihear Ruling

Noppadon Pattama,Former Foreign Affairs Minister

The former foreign affairs minister, who had to resign because of the Preah Vihear Temple controversy, has cancelled a press conference to counter the decision by the National Counter Corruption Commission to charge 28 ministers of the previous government with violating the Constitution.

Meanwhile, the prime minister says he will have to look over documents in the case before meeting the commission to explain himself.
Last night, the NCCC announced a decision to charge 28 ministers in the Samak Sundaravej government for violating article 190 of the Constitution in endorsing the joint communique that allowed Cambodia to solely list Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage Site.

Former Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama originally scheduled a press conference for this morning but later decided to cancel it. Noppadon had to resign from his post over this controversy.

Upon his return this morning at 5am from attending the BIMSTEC meeting in India, Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat commented on the issue, saying it is merely a decision by the NCCC to announce the charge against the ministers. The next step will have to be the ministers’ clarification before the commission. He added that he has not seen documents concerning how the clarification will proceed.

When asked whether this will affect the government’s work, Somchai insisted it will not and said as long as he is in power, he will continue to work until the end of his term. He promised to work for the benefit of the people.

The NCCC announced its charge against 28 ministers in the Samak Cabinet who attended the Cabinet meeting on June 17 this year, which endorsed the controversial joint communique. The 28 include most ministers in the current administration, as well as Somchai himself, who was Education Minister at the time.

The charge concerns violation of article 190 of the Constitution, which states that any agreement that pertains to the country’s sovereignty must be approved by Parliament before it can be signed by the government.

The NCCC will officially charge the 28 within 15 days, after which they can appear before the commission to clarify the charge or forfeit that right. A letter will be sent to former Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej’s house about the charge, and the commission believes he will return in time to clarify the charge even though he is currently in the United States seeking treatment for live cancer.

Six ministers who were absent from the meeting will not be charged. They include former Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee, current Tourism and Sports Minister Weerasak Kowsurat, former Deputy Interior Minister Sitthichai Kowsurat, and former Energy Minister Poonpirom Liptapanlop.

A number of state officials were also let off the hook 

 Source: TOC

 

FURTHER READING

Temple of Gloom Cout verdict stuns Govt

Preah Vihear for Koh Kong and Natural Gas / Oil