Let’s be clear, Yingluck Shinawatra’s impeachment wasn’t entirely about a disastrous rice scheme. This was in fact the logical conclusion of a farcical tenure. Notwithstanding political motivations, this was about preventing a repeat of something very undemocratic; a prime minister with zero previous experience, someone who handed the reigns of power to a fugitive — a gambler who bet 600 billion baht of the country’s money and lost, without a care about being held accountable.
She was someone who failed to grasp the concept of responsibility as an elected leader, naive to the very end as her party served her brother’s interests rather than the country who elected her. Had she not been impeached, it is quite likely we would have returned to this unacceptable type of governance. Good riddance.
Matt Balmain
Justice has been served
Two letters in yesterday’s paper echoed the misplaced confusion between democracy and justice, as lamented by Ms Yingluck following her impeachment.
The people of a democracy get to choose their leadership through an organised party system, where the most popular candidate wins the right to govern. Though many voters are quite unqualified to make such an important decision it is the only way.
They are not, however, enabled to mete out justice; that is something done by judges knowledgeable about the law, after careful procedure and consideration.
The National Legislative Assembly may have been appointed, but let’s not imagine for a second that there is nothing wrong with blowing 600 billion baht if the largest portion of people (still a minority) support you in believing your innocence. Otherwise we would revert to kangaroo courts, where the popular are never guilty of anything and consequently bankrupt our country.
Jon Williams
Bring yellows to justice
Re: “Double standards rife” (PostBag Jan 24).
This letter invites a question that will never be answered. Why are the yellow-shirt leaders of the PAD and the PDRC not subject to the same rule of law? Bring them to account. They cost the country a hell of a lot more in terms of loss of income and human casualties than the rice scheme failure ever did.
The fact is that these groups were backed to the hilt by the country’s powerfully rich, and with good reason, since they flourished under totalitarian regimes. Democracy, however flawed, always advances the causes of the electorate, ie. the common man.
If justice is to be seen to be justice then those who brought anarchy to the streets should be brought to account, but there is fat chance of that. Let’s see the scales of justice just a tad more balanced so the system is seen to be fair to all.
Mr P
Troops’ lives are cheap
Re: “Troops left to fight without body armour” (BP Sunday, Jan 18).
How can soldiers have no vests because of budget allocations? Are these not one of the most important items for the army? Why are we buying two submarines that we will never use, except to grow mussels on? Or that useless balloon that came down and is now probably commanding a hefty budget for repairs?
Are the lives of our country’s children not more important than anything else? And why do the public have to donate to fund the vests (not that we are unwilling to do so)?
It’s a shame, isn’t it? No one will fight for the good of the people. Everyone has succumbed to the power of money. Maybe what we need is some kind of peaceful solidarity demonstration like those held recently in France. Unity could get us somewhere, I hope.
The soldiers earn extremely little as is, yet they could be killed while protecting us because the powers that be decided their lives are not worth taking care of, while they wine and dine. Very sad indeed.
Natt Boonthanakit
US wrong on trafficking
This week a senior US Department of State official will arrive to provide Thailand with American wisdom regarding people trafficking. Based on the famous American freedom of speech it is also a good time to offer my understanding of this issue.
The world of academia is reaching new understanding about trafficking that suggests it is far more than a simple criminal justice issue. But American understanding of that issue seems limited to criminal justice. Trafficking laws control movement of people, keep refugees in camps, seal borders, and toss bad guys in prison. That is America’s take on it, which they push onto other countries under threat of sanctions.
When media exaggeration is set aside we can quickly see trafficking as a symptom of a spontaneous mass movement based on population growth and a shortage of unskilled jobs. The poorest people struggle for any opportunity and they turn to traffickers. Abuse of women is the exception not the norm, because there is no shortage of willing sex workers. Many jobs seem slave-like to some, but people want them. America is controlling, even attacking, migration as never before.
It is Thailand that may be on the right track with its new regulation of labour concerns. Countries must begin the process of responding to trafficking as a migration issue and not as a criminal justice issue. Countries that follow the current American leadership will likely find themselves on the wrong side of history.
John Kane
CONTACT: BANGKOK POST BUILDING
136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110
Fax: +02 6164000 email: postbag@bangkokpost.co.th
All letter writers must provide full name and address.
All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.