The emphasis on the expression of thanks is made dramatic, as an act of sarcasm should be. Indeed, the gesture could have come across as being excessively theatrical had it not been tinged with a measure of sincerity.
With a wai, the white-haired, bespectacled and well-dressed old lady said with a firm voice that she had to thank the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) guards for simply beating her son up, not killing him and dumping his body into a river.
The mockery — of injustice, of thuggery and of a failure of everything in this country that is supposedly set up to protect people from this type of thing — was obvious in Bang-ornrat Wattanakul's words.
But it’s noticeable also that the 73-year-old mother was genuinely thankful that her son Col Witthawat is still alive.
Col Witthawat, who works for the Directorate of Joint Intelligence, was assaulted and shot by PDRC guards at the Chaeng Watthana rally site controlled by monk Luang Pu Buddha Issara on April 25. He suffered bullet fragment wounds to his ankles and injuries to his face. The attack occurred when Col Witthawat got out of his car to remove a barrier placed on the road near the site.
Speaking to the media on Sunday, Mrs Bang-ornrat vowed to pursue justice until it has run its course.
Justice. It’s astonishing how such a seemingly basic and clear-cut concept has become the most loaded term in the Thai lexicon in just the past few years.
The Pheu Thai Party and Thaksin Shinawatra want justice for winning the majority of the vote at the last election. The PDRC and Suthep Thaugsuban demand justice for their minority voices. Both are also calling on the judiciary to deliver justice that will be seen as acceptable by all sides.
All the main players are portraying themselves as victims of injustice of some kind. They need redress. And they are not willing to settle until they eventually win.
Under the circumstances, it’s not surprising that a proposal to break the apparent impasse by Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has failed to win even the tiniest hint of support from the caretaker government or the PDRC, who are the main parties at odds at the moment.
Mr Abhisit has set out to seek a compromise and his plan for the country to go forward is in essence a settlement. A settlement never gives justice. A settlement is but a possibility for conflicting parties to get out of a dispute that they either didn’t want in the first place, that they can’t win, or that will cause great damage no matter who wins.
It’s not surprising that Mr Abhisit’s first attempt to forge a compromise has failed. It’s undeniable that the proposal does have its flaws, especially in assigning the Senate speaker to select an interim, neutral prime minister who will appoint a reform assembly. That is just too elitist, too exclusive and too lacking in legitimacy to work under the current atmosphere where half the country is demanding another one-man, one-vote election to settle the conflict.
What is disturbing, however, is amid the chorus of criticism and rejections there is a conspicuous void of better alternatives.
In the face of compromise, the government and the PDRC choose to become more entrenched in their current mutually exclusive stances — either a reform or an election but not both. In a sense, even if the two main parties in conflict have realised they are unlikely to win the battle, they would rather plough on and die another day than strike a compromise.
Even though both sides know the challenge of redefining democracy so that it works for a more diversified Thailand is a long-term effort that will take at least a generation to accomplish, they somehow believe they are running out of time and have to ensure a hegemony for their side of the argument now.
This means the leadership contestants in Thailand have chosen entrenchment and prolonged divisiveness over a settlement that may possibly see a more peaceful transition.
In the news lately is the case of Northern Ireland’s republican leader Gerry Adams who is being prosecuted for the murder of Jean McConville some 40 years ago. As Adams is a key peace broker of the accord that ended the 30-year bloody conflict there, there is now a notion that in this case peace ''takes precedence over justice’’.
I am sure that Mrs Bang-ornrat and her family will find it hard to agree to that. What I am afraid of, however, is what we will see and think when we look back to this conflict, maybe after 30 years have passed?
Atiya Achakulwisut is Contributing Editor, Bangkok Post.