I couldn't agree more with the "Two Yes-Two No" movement's statement in support of the right to an election and reform under the democratic system, and opposing coups and violence of all forms.
A group of academics and civil group leaders have formed a network called ‘‘Two Yes-Two No’’ to support elections and reform under a democratic system, and to oppose coups and political violence. (Photo by Apichart Jinakul)
I also agree with the stance of this network of prominent scholars, intellectuals and activists from across the political divide that reforms must be undertaken within a democratic framework, must involve all stakeholders from the top to the bottom, and must address pressing problems such as corruption, and social and economic disparity.
The movement also said the reform process could be implemented simultaneously with the election process.
The network was formed amid public concern about political violence. Last week saw candlelight rallies at various places such as Kasetsart University and at the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre, where supporters wore white, holding posters which read "Respect My Vote" in support of the Feb 2 election.
The key members of the network appeared at Thammasat University on Friday to announce their stance on the political conflict.
Former '70s student leader Seksan Prasertkul said the election was an important starter in the search for consensus on social change because it is necessary for the government and civic sector to work together.
This would help them achieve change that is sustainable and beneficial.
For the reform process to begin, it is appropriate the government should be the coordinator, Mr Seksan said.
Honestly, I agree with most of the points in the statement except one regarding the reform process, which the network said must be undertaken simultaneously with the election.
I wonder what kind of reform the movement has in mind that can be implemented now or in the foreseeable future, as there are only 20 days before the election if the Feb 2 timeline remains unchanged.
Mr Seksan said the election is an important starting point for reform and the government should first receive the consensus of the majority to assume the role of a coordinator in the reform process.
But I beg to differ when he says the election is as an important starter for reform. How many elections have we had since the country was transformed from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy?
It must have been several dozen. But have those elections held to the kind of reforms the people wanted?
For instance, land reform, which has been widely discussed and proposed by the academics themselves, remains an unrealised dream because successive governments have failed to take the issue seriously.
How can Mr Seksan and other members in the network be so sure the Pheu Thai-led government, which will almost certainly win the consensus after the Feb 2 election _ if there is an election at all _ will be different from other governments and that they will carry on with the reform work after the election?
Have Mr Seksan and his associates noticed any healthy signs from the Pheu Thai Party that it is serious about reform?
Take, for example, corruption. The only thing the government did about this problem was have Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra join a group photo, in which she was seen holding hands with her ministers and announcing an anti-graft campaign.
At the same time, the rice pledging scheme, which was beset with widespread corruption, was conveniently covered up.
Do the optimistic scholars really believe the party can change overnight and clean up the scheme after the election?
The movement has offered itself as a go-between with its call for a peaceful settlement to the conflict to stave off possible bloodshed. I do appreciate their efforts and good intentions.
But to get the hundreds of thousands of people who support the anti-government cause to agree to the Feb 2 election, good intentions alone will not suffice.
The protesters are not against an election as a matter of principle. What they want is for reforms to take place first. That is to clean up the house before we go to the polls.
But if the network can convince the caretaker government to make clear-cut, legally binding commitments about the reforms that will have to be implemented after the election, it will be appreciated indeed.
Veera Prateepchaikul is former editor, Bangkok Post.