Nearly four years after the end of the huge street protest by the now-defunct People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC), and the country's public prosecutors have finally decided to press charges against nine leaders of the Bangkok Shutdown movement that brought many parts of the metropolis to a standstill.
The snail's pace in prosecuting the leaders of the pro-military group, who protested against the Yingluck Shinawatra government, does not come as a surprise. Earlier legal action against a previous protest movement which shares the same political stance as the PDRC, the also-defunct People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), has also not been quickly processed.
The criminal lawsuit filed by public prosecutors against 98 PAD leaders and members, in connection with their 2008 airport shutdowns, will begin witness hearings in March, almost 10 years after the incident.
Meanwhile, criminal lawsuits against some leaders and protesters of their opposition, the anti-military United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), have seen much faster progress.
Many political analysts and common men on the streets have questioned why one half of the protesters has been in jail for years while the other side has seen prosecutions endlessly delayed, and why several lawsuits against politicians from one camp were quickly pursued by authorities while those against their rivals have lacked significant progress.
Last Wednesday, the nine PDRC leaders pleaded not guilty when they were arraigned at the Criminal Court on charges ranging from insurrection, criminal association, illegal assembly and obstruction of elections. Among the nine who were released on bail, only two -- namely protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban and Chumpol Julasai -- were charged with terrorism, which carries execution as the maximum penalty.
The protesters and their leaders faced charges after the then-Yingluck government invoked special security law to ban the protests and then eventually dissolved parliament in December 2013.
The Yingluck government then called nationwide polls in February 2014, but in January 2014 huge crowds of demonstrators blocked Bangkok's main streets, determined to "shut down" the government. Protesters in Bangkok and the South, the political strongholds of the Democrat party, prevented advance voting for the general election. The Democrat party had opted to boycott the election.
The PDRC protest eventually succeeded when the military under the leadership of Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha, the current premier, staged a coup in May 2014.
Nearly four years since the coup, the cases collecting dust on the tables of the prosecutors finally saw the light of the day with the moves to prosecute nine of the suspects.
The prosecution of these nine is just the tip of the iceberg. According to a probe by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) which had forwarded the cases to the prosecutors in 2014, there were a total of 57 individuals involved.
Chartpong Jiraphan, deputy director general of the Department of Special Litigation, said that out of the people whose cases have been forwarded, 34 have sought postponement and that prosecutors would consider their request on a case-by-case basis while charges against another 10 would be dealt with separately.
To take it a step further, some of the PAD leaders have openly come out to state that they will not fork out the 522 million baht in damages that the court has ordered them to pay, and yet they continue to walk free.
There are also questions being raised over the timing of the prosecutions of the PDRC members. They come just when the military government is looking to shore up its support in the hopes of winning voters from the strongholds of the political big hitters, be it the Pheu Thai or the Democrat party, in the next general election.
The Pheu Thai party remains vociferously anti-military and their support is invaluable for any political party aspiring to make inroad into Thai politics. Some have suggested that the long overdue prosecution of the PDRC leaders is an attempt by the government to show its "neutrality". But it could be too little, too late in order to change the mindset of the voters in Pheu Thai heartlands.
More questions have been raised than answered over the years when it comes to the application of the rule of law against politicians and protest leaders aligned with the two opposing political camps. This has undermined the ability of the military government to bring about reconciliation.
Over the past four years the word "reconciliation" has been mentioned many times but no concrete steps have been taken. Over the remaining time the government needs to expedite this much awaited process by ensuring impartial and fair justice processes for all politically motivated cases, if it really wants Thailand to progress in the years after it allows democracy to return.