Former coup maker Sonthi Boonyaratkalin must have disappointed quite a few people with his refusal to give away the secrets about the real mastermind behind the Sept 19 coup which ousted the Thaksin regime in 2006 for the reason that "telling the truth today will not do any good" to the reconciliation efforts now under way to heal Thailand's colour-coded political divide.
"We must forget the past, think about the present and build the future," he said at the end of an open discussion on the controversial King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) research paper and recommendations on national reconciliation held at parliament yesterday.
The retired general who now heads the House reconciliation committee may be right to keep his mouth shut about some of the sensitive questions raised by Sanan Kachornprasart, advisory chairman of the Chartthaipattana Party, during yesterday's session. The questions included: "Who was actually behind the coup as there is a strong suspicion that an ammart (member of the elite) or an extra-constitutional figure was behind the coup?" and "Was Gen Prem (Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda) aware of the coup and had Gen Sonthi notified Gen Prem about the coup?"
As indicated by the former coup-maker, Thailand's protracted political conflict has arrived at the point where the public in general is more interested in how national reconciliation can be restored so the country can advance rather than wanting to find out from the horse's mouth who the real mastermind behind the coup was. Besides, blowing the whistle now may deepen the conflict and undermine reconciliation efforts.
Nevertheless, Gen Sonthi's committee should be commended for making possible the open discussion on the KPI's research paper and, particularly, its three options for reconciliation. Members of the diplomatic corps from 25 countries were also invited to attend the session besides representatives of political parties, the KPI and other political stakeholders.
The open discussion represents a good start for talks among all political stakeholders to explore a solution to Thailand's political divide. Several valid points were raised by Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva about the KPI's study and he also raised options for reconciliation. Responses from the KPI's were also positive.
But Gen Sonthi's House committee was too hasty in endorsing the KPI's proposed third option which seeks to invalidate all the legal cases investigated by the defunct Assets Scrutiny Committee, including the cases already finalised such as the Ratchadapisek land controversy in which deposed former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra was sentenced to two years' imprisonment.
The same proposal also seeks to absolve all red shirt and yellow shirt protesters of charges for involvement in political violence.
What is most disturbing about this proposal by the KPI is not about the prospect that it will lead to a general amnesty for all the political offenders, Thaksin in particular, but it will undermine the rule of law and set a bad precedent for the future. For instance, there is the case of a red shirt supporter who was sentenced to 38 years by the Criminal Court for firing rocket-propelled grenades at the Defence Ministry and the Temple of the Emerald Buddha. Should he be allowed to walk free and treated as if he had never committed a crime? There is no doubt the KPI has good intentions. But its study and recommendations need to be further discussed with wider participation from all stakeholders. As for the amnesty issue, there will be no opposition to it if it will lead to reconciliation.