What do you say to a court verdict giving 15-years imprisonment to a dirt poor, old peasant couple for collecting mushrooms in a national forest?
Unbelievable?
What do you say to a court verdict giving 50 hours of community service to a husband _ a university lecturer _ for beating his wife to death?
Outrageous?
Unbelievably and outrageously heartless and unjust. That is what I'd say about our judicial system.
Given the corrupt police system, the court's costly and time-consuming process, and ample room for cultural biases to shape judges' interpretation of the law, it's an understatement to say that our judicial system is unfair to the poor majority.
People's lack of faith in the system is evident in this saying "Kin kee mah dee gwa kha kwam". It means "eating dog excrement is better than going to court".
Get the picture?
The case of Udom and Daeng Sirisorn of Kalasin, facing a 15-year jail term for collecting mushrooms in the woods, does not only expose the naked cruelty of draconian forestry laws, but also the unjust legal process that ensued.
If you know a thing or two about rural life, then you'd know that forests are considered a "supermarket" for the locals and the mushroom season is their season of joy.
Reportedly, the police were chasing after a group of poachers while the old couple foraged for mushrooms. Startled by the raid, they started to run too. The police couldn't catch the poachers, so they arrested the old couple and charged them with poaching and trespassing in the forest. That was in July.
I'm sure Grandpa Udom and Grandma Daeng tried to present their case. No one listened. Not the police. Nor the judge. The judges' standard argument is their verdicts are based on reports from the police.
Grandpa Udom has at least been temporarily released from jail as he needs medical treatment, but Grandma Daeng is still behind bars.
They are not the only victims of the draconian forestry laws, which deny and punish traditional cultures of human settlements in tropical forests.
The laws were written by forest authorities to give themselves sole power to own and manage national forests and punish people living in them with harsh prison terms.
We are talking about millions of people here.
Thailand needs reform on all fronts, not only in forest laws. But fierce resistance from the centralised bureaucracy has made it a pipedream. Should we then support protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban's calls for empowering his people's council for a year or two to usher in comprehensive national reform?
Pmove and the Assembly of the Poor have been holding street protests to demand the decentralisation of natural resources management, as well as land and taxation reform for decades. Still, they struggle in vain.
Yet, both grassroots movements have backed the Feb 2 general election, urging political parties to compete through national reform policy platforms.
I asked grassroots activist Krisakorn Silarak of Pmove why. His answer: "As much as we want change, we have to play by the rules of the game".
Allowing a suspension of the democratic process will only set a bad precedent for it to happen again, he said.
"It's not that we didn't go through a similar process before. After two previous coups, we had two constitutions that gave villagers' community rights to co-manage forests and other local natural resources. Yet arrests and forced evictions continue unabated," he said.
"Why? Because the bureaucracy opposes change. So does the government with its policies that destroy the environment and the locals' livelihoods. This won't change even after the best constitution from the people's council."
So what should we do?
"We should do what the mass rally did on Nov 24 to abort the blanket amnesty bill," he said. "Show the power of the people to curb the power of the government and to push for change. But don't fetch that power for yourself."
By courting the support of the military and big business, Mr Suthep's reform agenda is bound to fail, added the activist, because these two players are among the main beneficiaries of the status quo.
"And what's the point of power when you can't rule?" he asked. "Don't forget that the other side also has mass support to force you out. Do you want to see more bloodshed?"
I have my answer. Do you?
Sanitsuda Ekachai is editorial pages editor, Bangkok Post.