Nation needs more conviction politicians

Nation needs more conviction politicians

The World Wildlife Fund recently placed the Leather Back Turtle, the Javan Rhino and the Western Lowland Gorilla on their critically endangered list. I'd like to add another to this list: The Conviction Politician.

So what is a conviction politician? It's very likely that most people have never seen one since they're so scarce these days. A conviction politician is someone who bases their politics on a set of deeply held beliefs and ideas, rather than on a cluster of policies that would most likely win them popular votes.

These types of politicians are true leaders and are often very reluctant to compromise if it results in serious transgressions of certain basic principles.

If there ever was a conviction politician, Margaret Thatcher was it. A housewife with the courage of a lion. By God, she could lead!

It was Thatcher, the first prime minister I knew growing up, who started my lifelong obsession with British parliamentary politics. During prime minister's question time (which was twice a week in those days), she used to hit Neil Kinnock, the leader of the opposition, for six on a consistent basis. It was a joy to see.

But what I admired most about the Iron Lady was her courage to stick to her guns when it came to matters of principle.

If your intention was to try and bully her into submission, like Argentina or the trade unions attempted to do in the 1980s, you could be sure you had a fight on your hands.

She was a breath of fresh air and when she said "the lady's not for turning", she meant every word. Thatcher's personality and brand of conviction politics is sorely missed to this day.

I can't think of anyone in Thailand that wouldn't look like a modestly dressed pygmy standing next to Thatcher. Thailand may be the land of plenty but when it comes to leaders, we have been found wanting; because there are pieces of banana peel being chewed on by the endangered Sumatran Orangutan that would make better politicians than some of the ones we have.

Our parliament has become a circus. Good for late night entertainment but totally lacking on matters of national relevance. Shouting matches, chair hurling, cat fights and the occasional breakout of balding middle aged men trying to strangle one another have become commonplace.

In stark contrast to the usual rancour in parliament, the silence from our MPs was deafening when Section 112 on lese majeste was again outrageously and fraudulently used by one feuding brother against the other.

This was a landmark case involving Section 112, that clearly demonstrated how this heinous law can be unleashed to inflict needless pain and anguish. No credible evidence of criminal wrongdoing was available. On the contrary, the only evidence available was at best flimsy, coming from a vengeful brother who wanted to rid himself of a rival sibling.

Thanks to a judge equipped with some courage and common sense (also a critically endangered species), Thanawat Manok was acquitted of all charges, albeit having wasted a full year of his life languishing in jail for a crime he never committed because bail was twice unjustly denied.

My question is this. Where is the political conviction when it comes to Section 112? This is the perfect opportunity for someone with at least mildly held beliefs about justice to step forward and show some mettle. Section 112 is a sinking ship, we all know this, but this is the only case where the rats (far from being endangered) are swimming towards it.

So why is the Democrat Party refusing to go into bat for the innocent and defenceless in the face of gross injustice? Why is the Pheu Thai Party, which promised the abolishment of this law, betraying the very voters who sent it into office to rid the people of this instrument of unapologetic oppression? And where are the stern voices of our senior statesmen who profess to be defenders of the monarchy in this grave and depressing hour?

In my view, the police and the public prosecutor involved have been a total disgrace to their profession by allowing this frivolous case to go to trial in the first place. They have wasted taxpayer money, one year of a man's life and more importantly tarnished the reputation of our highest institution. They should not go unpunished.

So let us judge our leaders not by their political posturing but by their actions. For those that harp on about how much they love their King, this is the time to put your money where your mouth is.

I revere my King, that's why I am compelled to speak out. We should not stay silent while more lives are waiting to be ruined by this sinister legislation which belongs in the 18th century and has no place in modern day democratic society.

Therefore, let me invoke the memory of Madame Roland, who was led on Nov 8, 1793, to the guillotine. Before placing her head on the block, she bowed before the clay statue of Liberty in the Place de la Revolution, uttering the famous words for which she is eternally remembered;

"O Liberte, que de crimes on commet en ton nom!" (Oh Liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name!)


Songkran Grachangnetara is an entrepreneur. He graduated from The London School of Economics and Columbia University. He can be reached at Twitter: @SongkranTalk

Songkran Grachangnetara

Entrepreneur

Songkran Grachangnetara is an entrepreneur. He graduated from The London School of Economics and Columbia University.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (3)