OPINION

Clean up dirty politics

Re: "Let's talk about this", (PostBag, July 15).

As a Thai, I am thankful to the ambassadors of 22 Western countries and the head of the European Union Delegation, for expressing their concerns over the current political situation in Thailand.

As you can see, Thailand has the potential to become a proud democracy just like any other country in the world: the country's news media are more robust and replete with freedom than any other country in this region; the majority of Thais also strive for a political system that is best for our future generations -- just like most people elsewhere.

However, political corruption in Thailand over the past 15 years had reached a point where the country could have become bankrupt if something was not done to stem -- if not stop -- it.

Thai politicians of the recent past were not only capable of bilking their country through corruption in a big way, but were also well-versed in their attempts to destabilise the country and cause divisiveness among the people.

Worse, some Western countries have also provided financial and residential help and encouragement for these fugitive politicians -- when they sought shelter from Thai laws as a result of their own unacceptable behaviour at home.

Hence, we Thais will be extremely grateful if you will help us through fairness and understanding.

We also hope this letter will help your Excellencies gain a better understanding of our nation -- especially in the context of democracy and freedom of speech against peaceful coexistence and reconciliation, with the country's sovereignty as the most important thing on everyone's mind.

Re: "Democracy on trial", (PostBag, July 12).

Vint, I can list a number of books that portray Thailand in a very bad light. The fact is that any book, drama or movie that is critical of one institution or the other in Thailand is quickly banned. In the US, you can openly read books or watch movies that expose the government or any other institution, including religion. I suggest that you watch Where to Invade Next by Michael Moore or Religulous by Bill Maher. Perhaps, it will clarify the meaning of "freedom of expression" to you and others who have grown up in Thai society. You have to taste real freedom to think freely.

There are books and movies available in the US and Europe that even condemn Jesus Christ. One has to feel sorry for young Thai kids who can think. They can end up in jail just for thinking differently. So please do not try to compare an eagle to a durian, or as we say, apples with oranges.

Re: "Irritating things", (PostBag, July 11).

Hans Westphal stated here that he will never understand the painting of meaningless zebra crossings. To enlighten him: motorists know that it is a good place to park their cars. Every day, one can see cars parked on zebra crossings. I recently asked one of the major police stations in Bangkok to lock the wheels of those cars. However, there has been no action in the Thong Lor and Ekamai areas where I usually walk and try to use zebra crossings.

Re: "Bread delivery man murder trial begins", (BP, July 14).

I think we all might guess the outcome prior to the trial. If this were England, the famous betting parlours would be having a field day. Sons of top-ranking policemen, yeah, sure. The police investigators already dismissed the premeditated murder idea. Didn't take them long, did it? Anyone want to put odds on the results of this trial?

A true democracy needs not only open dialogue and free debate, but also fair debate. Participants need to agree on a set of facts and base their arguments on it. Unfortunately, in Thailand, certain participants choose to resort to dirty tactics such as spreading false rumours and misinformation. They use these tactics because they work, with no or little negative consequences for themselves. One can keep attempting to clear up the misunderstanding. But that is not what fair debate is.

It was disgusting seeing a photo on your front page (BP, July 15) of Miss Universe Thailand contestants sitting on the backs of elephants. As many as three people (two of them sitting in chairs) could be seen riding the elephants at the same time, putting enormous pressure on their spines. That can frequently cause severe spinal injuries to the elephants.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the junta would show the same enthusiasm cracking down on animal cruelty as they do when they crack down on freedom of speech? That'll be the day!

Re: "Senior officer shunted over promotion row", (BP, July 15)

I was shocked to read that having allegedly received a "donation" of 700,000 baht, a senior police officer apparently failed to give a police captain the promotion he promised.

I mean, if you can't trust someone you bribed, who can you trust? It seems there is just no honour any more.

Re: "Senior officer shunted over promotion row", (BP, July 15).

Does Thailand have an exclusive hidden island somewhere in the Andaman Sea to send all those police and army officers accused of corruption, who get, "transferred to an inactive post"? I can picture a resort island, pristine beach, hotel style living quarters, golf course, bar, free internet service, servants, maids, everything else a corrupt officer transferred to an inactive post might desire.

Perhaps this is why so many do in fact become corrupt. It sure beats working.

Re: "'Hi-so' figure accused of charity fraud", (BP, July 14).

This seems to be the season for charity fraud. Following the mystery of the self-replicating 20,000 baht in the story of the lost dog at Klong Toey port comes the alleged embezzlement of a considerably greater sum. In this case a committee accepted the offer from an unknown but, we are told, hi-so female figure to voluntarily manage a charity concert.

Highly commendable of her since it would save the committee 3.5 million baht. So, she was willing to undertake the job carrying a fee of around 3.5 million baht -- for nothing! Something we all do all the time, of course. From that point the whole thing seems to get very complicated (a smokescreen?) and full of childish bickering.

But cynicism and sarcasm apart, is there no way that such operations as this and the Nong Kae episode can be openly and officially audited? I fear that if something is not done then the public, myself included, is rapidly going to lose confidence and faith and stop contributing.

The real tragedy there is that those charities who are more attentive about where their money goes, and the beneficiaries of their genuinely caring representatives, will suffer as well.

Re: "Graftbusters widen light show probe", (BP, July 14).

They said this is misappropriation of a budget by the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration and the governor. This reminded me that no one said anything about a huge park and giant statues by the Royal Armed Forces (army) at Hua Hin diverting their defence budget, in addition to public donations.

I have no objection to their intention to show their respect to our high institute, but this project had not sought prior public consultation. The armed forces should have disclosed the project during its planning stage and asked for public funding.

We have an enormous gulf between the haves and have-nots, causing many of our problems.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha gave himself a mandate to reform and reconcile us, but that lofty goal remains out of reach, as shown by his focus on suppressing open, non-violent discussion of the draft charter.

I recommend that to reform and reconcile, Gen Prayut focus on *all* of us -- especially the working class, who are the masses. As Theresa May said in her first speech as British prime minister, "The government I lead will be driven not by the interests of a privileged few, but by yours (the common man). We will do everything we can to give you more control over your lives.

When we take the big calls, we'll think not of the powerful, but you. When we pass new laws, we'll listen not to the mighty, but you ... This will be the mission of the government I lead …"

PM Prayut, can you make the above your mission also?

Despite China's objection, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) has finally delivered a predicted ruling that China's occupation of the South China Sea is illegal.

Before accepting the ruling, let us first look at the trustworthiness of the PCA.

The PCA is not part of the United Nations' International Court of Justice (ICJ). The South China Sea Tribunal is an arbitrary tribunal acting with the secretarial assistance of the PCA. Four out of the five judges of this tribunal were appointed by Japanese judge Shunji Yanai who was president of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea at that time the case was filed in 2013. The last judge was appointed by the Philippine government.

As in any arbitration case, the arbitrator has to abide by a strict conduct of zero conflict of interest. Japan is a long-time rival of China in the Spratly Islands sovereignty dispute, and Shunji Lanai has a history working at the Foreign Affairs Ministry for the Japanese government.

The main surprise of the ruling is probably that even Taiping Island, an inhabited island with an area of 110 acres where Taiwan has reinforced its territorial claims, is ruled as a rock according to the judges of the PCA. Ma Ying Jeou made a high-profile visit to the island early this year to show that Taiping qualifies as an island.

And for the Tribunal to rule out any historic claims on sovereignty of the islands by other nations is biased and unacceptable.

The US, in engineering the arbitration and demanding a strict respect of sea law from China, is the only UN nation that has not ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Re: "Dastardly dashes", (PostBag, July 14)

My first thoughts were the same as Andrew's when I looked at the map. However, I began to think about how many countries, mostly European, claim sovereignty of land and sea. Often this is not just near another country, but even attached to its mainland (UK has Gibraltar which is attached to Spain as one of many examples). In many cases it's the opposite, ie, hundreds or thousands of miles away (Denmark has Greenland which is closer to Iceland and Canada).

Now it may be that China's claim to sovereignty is not so straightforward. Beijing says its right to the area goes back centuries to when the Paracel and Spratly island chains were regarded as integral parts of the Chinese nation, and in 1947 it issued a map detailing its claims.

It showed the two island groups falling entirely within its territory.

There was a scramble for power and territory in mainland Europe throughout the late 19th century. The absence of true statesmanship led us into the horrors of the Great War and World War II and its long, bitter aftermath. We can see the same lust for control of territory now being pursued by Russia and China. We can only hope that today, diplomacy and statesmanship can triumph where it failed so badly in the past.