OPINION

Rules of the game

If someone illegally takes control of a ship its called piracy and it's a very serious offence. When people interfere with the planned flight of an aircraft it's known as hijacking and carries a severe punishment. One would think an even greater offence would be the illegal ousting of an elected government by an armed group, commonly known as a coup d'etat which in some countries would carry the most extreme penalty.

Is there anyone out there who can simply explain to me how in Thailand the rules are different enough that the illegal action of a coup d'etat can be quite quickly converted into a legal takeover of government allowing the newly installed people to make laws, pardon their actions and act with all the power of a normally elected government?

It's not like it's only happened once; it's a common event and there must be some legal rule that deems this a necessary escape route when it is applied. Could a similar action take place in other countries with the same indifference?

The United States is once again bellowing loudly, (as if someone is listening or really gives a care), about the Thai military ceding power to civilians (BP, Aug 9). Most people in the USA are probably watching the Olympics, a respite from their present political circus. How many Americans in the United States at this moment are probably envious of who runs Thailand instead of their on-again, off-again, wishy-washy president?

Re: "Meaning of 'yes'", (Editorial, Aug 8).

I view the "yes" votes as more optimistic than you.

I believe that the result of the Aug 7 referendum can now be hailed as the harbinger of Thailand's political scene with a new style of guided democracy. The plebiscite has not been viewed by any foreign media and agency as a complete sham. The respectability of this regime has grown and Gen Prayut may now appear equal to other participants in future international meetings. I hope that this triumph will not encourage the regime to behave capriciously. In the future political scenes, I expect the following:

First, the personnel of the intelligence division of those embassies warning their compatriots to avoid Thailand on Aug 7 is likely to be told off or sent back home for being so far off the mark. The day was substantially peaceful and it was a good omen that Thailand struck one gold medal at Rio in the morning.

Second, it is not enough for Khun Abhisit Vejjajiva to humbly announce his acceptance of the "yes" vote despite his words last week that the charter was not democratic and not acceptable to him. He should follow his alma mater, David Cameron, who resigned from leading his party when Mr Cameron's stance of remaining in the EU was rejected. It is worse for Khun Abhisit because almost all the strongholds of his party in the South overwhelmingly approved the charter. The nationwide approval is 61% while his southern stronghold's approval is 77% -- 16% higher than the average. It indicates the words of the Democrat Party leader and his mentor, Khun Chuan Leekpai, were ignored by southern voters.

It took David Cameron 24 hours, after the Brexit victory was known, to resign as a leader of the Conservative Party.

Third, the legitimacy of this junta will now become more difficult for its opposition and foreign press to ridicule. The prospect of a smooth transition now appears to be realistic with the least annoyance from foreign comments.

Fourth, the beginning of the end of that thorn in the flesh of that incumbent family may now slowly fade away with the coming of numerous judgments on their past deeds. They will recognise for the first time that silence is golden.

Let us hope that the recent majority endorsement of the junta's constitution does not give cause for further governmental restrictions upon freedom of expression.

We readers need to receive content which is of substance, representing multiple points of view and challenging in every sense of the word. I sincerely hope the Bangkok Post continues to remain free to deliver the goods.