Some things Thailand can really do without

I would like to start by apologising for my prolonged absence from the Bangkok Post because I needed that time off to care for a growing family.

Yingluck: Pandering to army by not conducting a review of Section 112.

I thought it would be appealing to share some of my thoughts on the kind of things we don't need in Thailand, because before the country embarks on a shopping list full of the things we desire maybe we should begin with the things we detest and would really rather do without.

Firstly, Thailand doesn't need Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkalin, the instigator and perpetrator of Thailand's most recent coup d'etat. So triumphant was the last coup in introducing permanent sweeping changes to our political landscape that more than four years on Thailand still has a Shinawatra as prime minister, a Vejjajiva as leader of the opposition and a second reincarnation of the Thai Rak Thai Party that remains unbeatable in general elections.

But really, aren't we taking the joke a little too far when the aforementioned general is now allowed to head the House Committee on Reconciliation? Isn't that analogous to making Adolf Hitler the honorary patron of Israel's National Holocaust Museum? It's such a travesty that Thailand is so cursed with such terribly incompetent and hypocritical political leaders that you can't help but imagine where we would be without this wretched lot.Secondly, we don't need the Democrat Party as it exists today because this once proud party serves only as a playground for the Bangkok-based elites with degrees from Oxford, a big fat trust fund and who have never seen an electricity bill and pretend to enjoy eating greasy chicken rice from street-side vendors only when a camera is pointing in their direction. I have nothing against wealthy individuals. But in order to address the deafening complaints from ordinary people about not being able to relate to the Democrats after last election's defeat, maybe it's time Abhisit Vejjajiva starts recruiting competent men or women with backgrounds and attitudes slightly more reflective of society.

The Democrats must reinvent themselves for the sake of our democracy, and therefore must also wean themselves from the narrow interests and outdated ideas of politicians representing the southern parts of Thailand that control the party and do what most of us do every day. That is to look oneself in the mirror and ask: "Where did we go wrong?"

If they are true to themselves, they will conclude that the problem lies in the leadership or in this case the lack of it. Sadly, Mr Abhisit's lack of courage and his team of "yes men" that surround him seem more like groupies, shielding him from much-needed sound advice and the stark reality that is evident to the rest of us; namely under Mr Abhisit's tenure as party leader.

Abhisit: Not a snowball’s chance in Hades of out-manoeuvring Thaksin.

The Democrats have run out of hope, run out of time and most evidently they have run out of ideas. A thriving opposition is not merely required in a democracy, it is indispensable. I hope Thailand's oldest party wakes up from this political slumber and reconnects with its voters again; otherwise it could mean "the people" will be running out of something that is essential for a Democrat Party revival and that is patience.

Thirdly, we don't need the tollway "Easy Pass" lane to be called "Easy", if it's always the most aggravatingly difficult lane to get into! Instead, it should be called "Easy Pass unless some complete idiot decides to enter but doesn't possess an Easy Pass prepaid device Lane". In my view, drivers that commit this Easy Pass crime resulting in other drivers in the Easy Pass queue having to abruptly reverse and join the normal queue is a major cause of traffic jams in Bangkok and should be heavily fined and have his/her picture stapled to every toll booth and banned from going on the tollway for a month.

Fourthly, we don't need Section 112 or any version of it in our constitution. Sentencing Ampon Tangnoppakul, or Uncle SMS, to 20 years behind bars is a punishment that doesn't fit the crime. Moreover, Section 112 is used by power hungry politicians and the military elites to protect themselves rather than His Majesty the King and members of the Royal Family.

The lese majeste law has for too many years been wielded by those in power, be they politicians or the military top brass to silence political enemies and subvert freedom of speech and expression, all wrongly done in the name of protecting our most revered institution. So it's rather disappointing but unsurprising that former prime minister Abhisit who claims to have democracy running through his veins and current Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra who promised the electorate a serious review of Section 112, have both decided to pander to the army and put Section 112 on the backburner.

Ms Yingluck has backed off from her previous stance probably because she didn't want to confirm the fears that many Thais had and still have about her fugitive elder brother and the potent political force he influences that call themselves the red shirts.

However, Mr Abhisit's inaction over Section 112 and subsequent staunch support if it, stems from a much more traditional motive, namely politics. Mr Abhisit knows that without Section 112 he doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of out-manoeuvring Thaksin, because in Thai politics the best way to get rid of a political enemy is still to accuse them of the most serious crime of all; of being disloyal to the Royal Family.

And last but not least, we don't need independent studies and proposals for reconciliation by impartial and respected institutions like The King Prajadhipok's Institute to be rejected or tampered with just because parts of it don't go down well with certain vested interests of either side. Why would the people feel more comfortable with a National Reconciliation draft proposal authored by the Democrat's Nipit Intarasombat, their ace lawyer or the Pheu Thai Party's Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung? Is it not the case that politicians from both sides of the aisle are now proposing their own versions of a reconciliation bill, the very ones that got us in this pickle in the first place? Indeed, Mr Chalerm is acting like a gorilla in heat demanding that he should be able to propose his own reconciliation bill that he confidently claims is ensured majority support in the lower house.

In my humble opinion, any version of a reconciliation bill that has been contaminated by these corrupted agents of vested interests will render any version of this bill similar to grass that has successfully negotiated its way slowly through a cow's digestive system; devoid of any nutritional value and stinking to high heaven!