OPINION

Ruling is inconsistent

I agree with the spirit of the Constitutional Court's verdict on the FFP's loan saga: loans should be considered as contributions. But have the Thai Election Commission or courts previously ruled that loans are, legally speaking, contributions? The Bangkok Post's Feb 21 editorial said: "The EC never ... informed political parties that there are regulations barring them from taking out loans. That's because there are no such rules." Also, if we had such specific and clear rules and laws, our EC and CC would have explicitly based their decisions on them, quoting the section -- but that's not the case.

In the same editorial, the BP also stated: "At least 32 parties, including the FFP, have sought loans to fund their activities over the past few years. Ex-EC Commissioner Somchai Srisuthyakorn said that at least four parties had taken out loans in 2013 ... poll officials had advised the EC that taking out loans was not illegal because it had been done by other parties and had been allowed to take place in the past."

Perhaps other countries were crying foul because the FFP had violated a law which hadn't been written or had followed a long-established practice that had been allowed in many other cases. If either reason is true, then the EC and the courts have been derelict in their duties and must be held accountable.

Tsunami of change?

It has always been known to outsiders that the unholy alliance of all the "sacred" Thai institutions will never allow democracy to flourish. Prof Thitinan has rightly put his fingers on the pulse of the Thai "Game of Thrones". Yes, the sacred Thai establishment with its stooges in the military, police, Election Commission, National Anti-Corruption Commission, and big companies simply would not allow new ways of thinking and doing things.

These entities have a long history of aligning to established centres of power and they remain together with a strong bond of nepotism, cronyism and rampant corruption.

Prof Thitinan is correct that judicial dissolution of political parties has largely gone one way against parties that posed a perceived threat to the conservative status quo. As expected, the Future Forward Party has now been neutralised. Moving forward will require changing the engines of Thai polity. Perhaps, a powerful tsunami that will drown the Titanic can only change the status quo. Sadly, it is not going to happen easily.

Immoral status quo

Re: "Cops on alert for unrest at raft of rallies by students", (BP, Feb 26).

It is encouraging that Thai youth no longer swallow the fake excuses, fake morals and corrupt examples of their elders disgracing the hallowed halls of parliament as they weaponise unjust laws to thwart the democratic aspirations of Thai people. Thai people want a just society of citizens with equal rights to a voice in determining the form of their society, its laws and government. As the students proclaim, the "sovereign power belongs to the Thai people".

Some of those in the cabinet, none of whom have taken the oath of allegiance as explicitly required by Section 161 of the current constitution, have suggested that Thai youth should get special lessons in morals in school. The evidence, however, tells us it is the youth of Thailand, patriotic students now protesting for their nation's future, who are far better qualified to teach morals to the PM and his morally challenged government.

The students are right to be angry and to shout out their anger in strong, peaceful protests against the moral corruption of the status quo undermining their nation for too many decades.