Anonymous pompous and intellectually autocratic Thai Studies academics never subject to adequate scrutiny or debate will eventually bring about the demise of their field!
Les Abbey, my last sentence in (9) was too brief, as I thought my post was getting too long. It referred to the fact that elected members of parliament in Thailand are oppressed by laws and judgements concocted in the barracks and in the palace. The fact that some parliamentarians who are agents of absolutism also suffer could be regarded by the palace/barracks alliance as collateral damage that is unavoidable in their struggle for power with the parliament.
Montesano is right to criticise the judges, because they have swung behind the absolutists, and I think that unfortunately, this was a consequence of the King’s 2005 speech to them.
In a democratic government, the laws are made by elected representatives in parliament/congress, not by these other people. If the morality of elected representatives offends the electorate, then it votes them out. The behaviour of Thai parliamentarians may offend the absolutists, but people corrupted by their own unaccountability are in no position to judge.
Countries that are more democratic, free, and open than Thailand have all been through the same power struggle, and in them, the parliaments have won. Many of the best of them retain their monarchs, who have surrendered their power to the people’s representatives in stable constitutions. Monarchs have disappeared from countries where the struggle for democracy was too bitterly fought.
Fundamentally, there’s only two ways out of this crisis : either –
1) a genuine power-sharing, eg. a two-=party system, national unity government, etc.
OR :
2) “Thailand” – more properly called Siam – breaks up into at least two different states/ countries : eg. Issarn and Lanna, as a state/ country to Bangkok, The central plains, and Southern Thailand, minus Pattani. Both under a common monarchy.
The one hopeful sign is that the still immense reverence both sides hold for His Majesty The King – whose good works helping the poorest of the poor, and many, many others is still loved.
Those who had experienced with Nick’s previous reports on both ‘the red’s movements’ and ‘the PAD’s movements’, will appreciate his straightforwardness in his reports( this one as well ). Nick always conveys the materials directly from his lens and notes in a ‘raw’ and ‘untouched’ fashion, which never fail to impress me. He never show any interest in adding his opinions or try to ‘interprete’ his reports(except a few responses to comments : ) )
Nick had set a benchmark(a very high one) for all the Thai reporters to follow suit.
Well and good for exalted foreigners to come for a time,
get their thesis papers written
then when they are gone home,
make commentary on how it’s just not working in Thailand.
The people out there aren’t rich yet, and that’s bad.
And that’s the fault of the King of Thailand who took action to help.
You believe what you write?
The Royal Projects certainly do improve conditions,
and probably at enormous outlay of money to achieve it.
They invite people like you to study, that’s more generous than I am.
They impose organization and order…which does not come naturally.
The scourge of opium in the Golden Triangle is all but wiped out.
That alone counts as a worthy accomplishment,
even if their farms didn’t grow the finest most expensive produce in town.
I’m a foreigner here for a time and a season…
one day I will leave and never look back.
I farm with migrant Burma labor.
They are happy enough with B100 / day, working less than half their days.
They have no concept of conservation…if they have it they spend it.
They have no idea of diligence for an effect greater than their need today.
They will steal at night from the same farm they received a wage from in the day.
It’s not so much that they are poor in money,
but rather poor in any sense of preparing for tomorrow.
If you paid them B150 they’d still be as poor
because they’d spend it frivolously,
and you’d be able to complain they don’t make B200
I outright challenge you well meaning folk with snappy keyboards
to show concrete results with the people you champion on screen.
Come out here and start a farm with the tribes you champion,
and show us how shiftless wandering people can do far better
than the tribes who are smart and work hard.
Reading here one could assume that all Northern Thailand hill tribes are exactly equal
except where they live and how they dress.
I read that the hard labor classes are severely taken advantage of.
They are separate tribes because they are fundamentally very different.
There is one very good reason
the Hmong, Lawa and Lisu
hire Karen, Akha and Shan to work,
never the other way.
Those who notice fundamental difference in people groups
are labeled racist…
but it doesn’t change the differences.
Yes, the Thailand government had headaches with the Hmong.
They came in and tore the mountains down in a very short time.
And how does one tear the hills to shreds with hand tools…by continual hard work.
The fact that they are a problem to the Forestry department,
is evidence in itself that they are set apart.
So their diligence is misguided,
they still are resourceful
while less fortunate tribes sit and starve,
except for when the Hmong hire them.
jim jones i can help you to contact prince vajiralongkorn if you read my message please tell me if you are interested in meeting him. i hope you reply soon
And as for you, the anonymous academic Ralph Kramden, why do you put links to academic papers that no one outside academia can read ?!
Ummm, the Ginsburg paper is available on SSRN, where it can be downloaded for free. You can try to find the Ginsburg & Chen book at a library. Or just browse through a copy at Kinokuniya. Of course, referring to serious scholarship and asking little people to read it is just too much to ask of them. It’s much easier to sway your audience by sticking to ad hominem attacks.
My, my jonfernquest, you do get obstreperous and contradict yourself endlessly. I can’t resist replying and putting it in the same personalized terms you have decided to use.
On contradicting yourself: On the one hand you have written for academic journals. If this is you (http://www.readbangkokpost.com/articles/biojonfernquest.html), you even refer people to your blog which proudly displays your academic articles. You even proudly announce all the universities where you have worked and all the big-name companies. Double standards?
On the other hand, you denigrate others for even referring to academic works. Presumably it is good when you write academic articles because you are giving back so much more to the people you claim to support. Is that the elite who do get all the chances to go to universities? Or the poor provincials you rabbit on about?
But seriously, why can’t you read the cited papers? if you can read a blog (as opposed to twittering) you could read these papers. If you can write for an academic journal, as you have, then you can read these papers, unless the lobotomy had a seriously negative impact. They are available via the internet at the site mentioned and snippets through Google Books. Just too lazy or just assuming they can’t be understood by your good self?
And, if you cared to look at what I wrote, there were also references to newspapers. Whoa! Maybe that’s even too much for you?
And why would there be links to academic papers in the first place? Well, as most sensible and reasonable people would know, and maybe you don’t fit that category, it is in those kinds of venues where debate is often carried out on legal and judicial issues. You may prefer bar room discussions, but why not listen to what professional and academic lawyers say about law, corruption and the judiciary? It may make your brain hurt, but worth a try some day.
Where on earth do you get the idea that I style myself as “the champion of: poor people without access to western universities”? Actually, I thought it was you who was the self-styled representative of these people when you taught in provincial university in Thailand and felt hard done by for having done so and were never given the recognition you think you deserve?
Now I don’t for a minute believe that you have even looked at these cited papers, because you just want to engage in name-calling.
Pundit, I know we are all in many ways reliant on rumours but we can take it too far.
First you give us it was Prem who pressured the EC to find Thaksin innocent of hiding his assets. Possible as the wasn’t much of a division between the Bangkok elite and Thaksin at the time, but not the most likely of explanations and certainly one that doesn’t disprove my pointing to this as a sign of corruption in the judiciary. Also even if your rumour was true we would have to consider it most likely that Thaksin was involved in the pressure. At the time most people, both pro and anti-Thaksin, and the press suspected he was making financial arrangements with some judges.
Next we have you saying that 2 million Baht ($60,000+) was too small to influence the judges and was just to bribe a court clerk to give the names of the judges. Excuse me but you obviously know these circles better than me that this amount is just to get a favour from the clerk. OK it doesn’t stack up against the Bangkok bus contract but it’s a bit more than most of us seen in one lump. I see you are calling it a snack box on your blog, but it must have been one big snack. Also I didn’t hear that many cries of innocence from Thaksin’s lawyers which tends to suggest that an out of court deal has been reached. Also, and I’m saying this without any legal knowledge, I suspect in most Western countries the judges reaction would be charge the lawyers with contempt. I’m sure Judge John Deed of TV fame would.
Now lastly the status of the EC. I have lumped it in with the judiciary. I’m sure RN England would say it’s part of his “network monarchy”. Certainly like the judiciary it is meant to be independent from the people it’s ruling on. I really don’t know the background of the members but I think most people would class it as such.
Overall I’m afraid I’m left feeling that you are clutching at straws to promote a political point. I again apologise to Michael Montesanto for starting a thread on what was only a small part of his study. I was trying to link what I had heard a number of years ago about people in the Justice Ministry to what we are seeing today as they have moved up the ladder.
Nick, thanks for once again superbly documenting an historical event that has been largely ignored by mainstream media. The photos will go into many an archive, telling the story,as they do, in a direct & truthful way. Several are classics.
I sincerely hope that the Golden Eagle shits in your direction soon, & you start getting the fat royalty cheques you deserve from ‘Red vs Yellow.’ Wonderful on-the-ground photos of both sides, and straight-forward eye-witness accounts. Valuable stuff!
The independence it has shown in recent years must be a plus compared to say 2001 when money flooded into the court to allow a ruling in Thaksin’s favour over hiding assets in his family, driver and maid’s names.
This is Prasong and more recently Sondhi’s theory. McCargo suggests it was Prem – see excerpt here.
Who can forget Thaksin’s lawyers being locked up for the lunchbox full of money passed across the bench?
This is not the best example to cite for confidence in the judicial system and the judges not accepting money. They were jailed for contempt where one has no rights and can present no defence. The judges rule in secret and one has no right to appeal, but the criminal charges have been dropped. Didn’t even make it to trial. See here and here.
It was also given to court officials. The money is too small to buy a verdict and was more likely for information (ie which judges would be hearing the case).
Signs of the present independence of judiciary from the politicians are the courts going against both the Samak and Somchai governments and even the ruling against Democrat MPs holding shares in media companies.
It was the EC who ruled against the Democrat MPs holding shares. The case hasn’t been to court yet.
Three cheers to Les Abbey for having enough guts to dare to challenge the unhealthy and rarely questioned academic consensus in Southeast Asian studies.
And as for you, the anonymous academic Ralph Kramden, why do you put links to academic papers that no one outside academia can read ?!
You are just a symptom of people who study Southeast Asia and do very little in return to help the very people you style yourself the champion of: poor people without access to western universities.
Keep up the great work, Nick. I wouldn’t pay too much mind to someone who thinks the red shirts are waiing the “porcine sacrifice” rather than the Buddha statue behind it. How about that for short-sightedness?
RN you may have an argument although I guess I am just more optimistic about the judiciary than you. Those I met just a couple of years ago gave me much hope.
I think your last sentence defies logic though.
“…even including some of the stooges of absolutism there, is consistent with this.”
Why is it consistent with this? Why would the “networked monarchy’s” judiciary find against their own stooges.
Forget that PAD follower. You have done very very good job.
Whenever the Red Shirt take action, Thai people (real Thai) are not so worried about their movement. On the other hand, whenever the Yellow Shirt take some action, there are likely to be some violence on street. Like a crazy driver of big truck that no one can stop, it hit everything in front.
Another observation I want you to observe, that is, most of the Yellow Shirt followers are weird and lack of critical thinking. You can prove this by talking to them. Their perspective toward things around them is…I think, weird.
Some of them are good man but talking about politics, they are weird and freaky.
Keep doing your work, Nick. At least, I’m sure Thai people will stand by you.
“Network Monarchy” is essentially the courtiers, who exercise power in the name of the King. They are thus unaccountable for their power in Thailand because they are protected by the lèse majesté laws. They are not all bad, but it is in the nature of unaccountability (absolutism) that the good is eventually displaced by the bad. Outside Thailand, the King has become accountable for their abuses, and his reputation is diminished every day. Being an exhausted old man he no longer has (nor could he be expected to have) the power to keep his courtiers from dragging his name through the mud. It can be argued that he has always been near the centre of abuses because of the numerous compacts with the devil (the men with guns) that have allowed him to keep his throne. Ordering judges in no uncertain terms to annul the people’s judgement in 2005 was certainly an abuse against democracy, and the reputation of Thai justice in the outside world has since gone down from an already low level. The deep involvement of the Thai Constitutional Court in the armed aggression against Cambodia over Preah Vihear, and the clearly implied contempt of that court for the Preah Vihear judgement of International Court of Justice possibly made the King wince. It can be argued that the Thai courts have moved from a position of venal independence (giving judgements in favour of the highest bidder) to being an agency of absolutism/militarism/fascism in its struggle against democracy. Harassment of members of parliament, even including some of the stooges of absolutism there, is consistent with this.
I must also give my apologies to Michael Montesano for hijacking this thread. The paper is well worth reading and my main disagreement was over the judiciary.
You complain that i have so far not presented photographic proof of PAD guards having taken part in the Songkran riots, therefore implying that i may have invented it (i haven’t – i have very good sources after now nearly 4 years following this closely).
But then, when i have shown photographic proof that PAD guards have attacked vehicles with Red Shirts at the end of the petition day – the only comment you have is that you express the wish that they “next time…will direct a carefully aimed volley of slingshots at” me.
Is there something that escapes me, or do you have a slight problem with logic and reason? One the one hand you seem to deny the fact that the PAD has very violent elements, obviously at least tolerated by the upper echelons as in this instance as it happened directly in front of the head office of ASTV. Yet when shown proof – you even go so far to advocate using violence against a journalist that does present you with the evidence of what you seem to deny.
Furthermore, in your angry tirade you even have to mock Thai tradition and religion – in your words: “In one picture a red shirt is seen waiing the head and trotters of an luckless porcine sacrifice”.
This is part of a Brahman ritual. You can easily observe similar, from weddings to pledges to spirits up to court ceremonies, in Thailand and in most other parts of Asia (even Christians in the developed west celebrate the mystic transformation of bread and wine into the flesh and blood of the founder of their religion during their rituals). I very much doubt that you would mock the same if in connection to the aforementioned.
Yet i wonder what you make out of last year’s, even for a Thai context, bizarre PAD ritual in which sanitary napkins of menstruating female followers of the PAD were placed around a royal statue, under the guidance of Sondhi Limthongkul in trance, to prevent the return of malevolent spirits supposedly placed there by Newin Chidchob during a Khmer black magic ritual?
I find it more than comical that you accuse me of bias in my reporting… 😉
My apologies Ralph as I thought you were taking a “Thaksin was not corrupt” position. Of course I am not in a position to supply evidence of corruption. Even if I had personal experience of it I would probably not want to publicize that. Proving corruption is almost impossible unless one of the parties wishes to talk about it.
Also I don’t have the ability to give you an academic explanation along with references because that is not the business I am in. So for that please forgive me. As to whether up until recently, even as you say until pre-1997, the courts were corrupted by money and political influence, you seem to hint that you also feel this. I could speak about common knowledge, but again that isn’t proof. The closest we have come to proof was the lunchbox full of money which is far more recent.
Now the hard bit. In any other country we would be happy to see the judiciary ruling against the government and politicians and see it as a sign of independence. We can look at Pakistan as an example. Here we start looking for palace involvement straight away. The present constitution may well be unfair to politicians and political parties but the surprise wasn’t so much in the anti-corruption rules, but in that they were enforced.
Is there a split between the old Bangkok elite and some of the provincial influential families? Of course, and many judges would come from those Bangkok families. Does this equal corruption? I’m not sure as we would have to then say then that the UK has a corrupt judiciary as most of its members come from the upper middle class or aristocratic families. Now many people I know might say that is true, but the other option would be electing judges at a time we are struggling to get elected MPs to follow the rules.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
JustWannaKnow: “How can a judiciary that was appointed by coup leaders and persons with vested interests be fair?”
How can a government headed by a ex-police colonel turned patron saint of an untransparent and uncontrollable police force be fair?
http://bit.ly/QuTRW
You have a very selective memory.
Anonymous pompous and intellectually autocratic Thai Studies academics never subject to adequate scrutiny or debate will eventually bring about the demise of their field!
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
Les Abbey, my last sentence in (9) was too brief, as I thought my post was getting too long. It referred to the fact that elected members of parliament in Thailand are oppressed by laws and judgements concocted in the barracks and in the palace. The fact that some parliamentarians who are agents of absolutism also suffer could be regarded by the palace/barracks alliance as collateral damage that is unavoidable in their struggle for power with the parliament.
Montesano is right to criticise the judges, because they have swung behind the absolutists, and I think that unfortunately, this was a consequence of the King’s 2005 speech to them.
In a democratic government, the laws are made by elected representatives in parliament/congress, not by these other people. If the morality of elected representatives offends the electorate, then it votes them out. The behaviour of Thai parliamentarians may offend the absolutists, but people corrupted by their own unaccountability are in no position to judge.
Countries that are more democratic, free, and open than Thailand have all been through the same power struggle, and in them, the parliaments have won. Many of the best of them retain their monarchs, who have surrendered their power to the people’s representatives in stable constitutions. Monarchs have disappeared from countries where the struggle for democracy was too bitterly fought.
17 August 2009: petition day
Fundamentally, there’s only two ways out of this crisis : either –
1) a genuine power-sharing, eg. a two-=party system, national unity government, etc.
OR :
2) “Thailand” – more properly called Siam – breaks up into at least two different states/ countries : eg. Issarn and Lanna, as a state/ country to Bangkok, The central plains, and Southern Thailand, minus Pattani. Both under a common monarchy.
The one hopeful sign is that the still immense reverence both sides hold for His Majesty The King – whose good works helping the poorest of the poor, and many, many others is still loved.
17 August 2009: petition day
Those who had experienced with Nick’s previous reports on both ‘the red’s movements’ and ‘the PAD’s movements’, will appreciate his straightforwardness in his reports( this one as well ). Nick always conveys the materials directly from his lens and notes in a ‘raw’ and ‘untouched’ fashion, which never fail to impress me. He never show any interest in adding his opinions or try to ‘interprete’ his reports(except a few responses to comments : ) )
Nick had set a benchmark(a very high one) for all the Thai reporters to follow suit.
Thanks Nick, keep up your good work.
Examining the “success” of a northern Thai Royal Project
There usually are two sides to a good story.
Well and good for exalted foreigners to come for a time,
get their thesis papers written
then when they are gone home,
make commentary on how it’s just not working in Thailand.
The people out there aren’t rich yet, and that’s bad.
And that’s the fault of the King of Thailand who took action to help.
You believe what you write?
The Royal Projects certainly do improve conditions,
and probably at enormous outlay of money to achieve it.
They invite people like you to study, that’s more generous than I am.
They impose organization and order…which does not come naturally.
The scourge of opium in the Golden Triangle is all but wiped out.
That alone counts as a worthy accomplishment,
even if their farms didn’t grow the finest most expensive produce in town.
I’m a foreigner here for a time and a season…
one day I will leave and never look back.
I farm with migrant Burma labor.
They are happy enough with B100 / day, working less than half their days.
They have no concept of conservation…if they have it they spend it.
They have no idea of diligence for an effect greater than their need today.
They will steal at night from the same farm they received a wage from in the day.
It’s not so much that they are poor in money,
but rather poor in any sense of preparing for tomorrow.
If you paid them B150 they’d still be as poor
because they’d spend it frivolously,
and you’d be able to complain they don’t make B200
I outright challenge you well meaning folk with snappy keyboards
to show concrete results with the people you champion on screen.
Come out here and start a farm with the tribes you champion,
and show us how shiftless wandering people can do far better
than the tribes who are smart and work hard.
Reading here one could assume that all Northern Thailand hill tribes are exactly equal
except where they live and how they dress.
I read that the hard labor classes are severely taken advantage of.
They are separate tribes because they are fundamentally very different.
There is one very good reason
the Hmong, Lawa and Lisu
hire Karen, Akha and Shan to work,
never the other way.
Those who notice fundamental difference in people groups
are labeled racist…
but it doesn’t change the differences.
Yes, the Thailand government had headaches with the Hmong.
They came in and tore the mountains down in a very short time.
And how does one tear the hills to shreds with hand tools…by continual hard work.
The fact that they are a problem to the Forestry department,
is evidence in itself that they are set apart.
So their diligence is misguided,
they still are resourceful
while less fortunate tribes sit and starve,
except for when the Hmong hire them.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
How can a judiciary that was appointed by coup leaders and persons with vested interests be fair?
It is obvious that the color of your shirt has more influence in the outcome of a high profile cases than precedence and facts.
Thailand’s crown prince
jim jones i can help you to contact prince vajiralongkorn if you read my message please tell me if you are interested in meeting him. i hope you reply soon
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
jonfernquest says –
And as for you, the anonymous academic Ralph Kramden, why do you put links to academic papers that no one outside academia can read ?!
Ummm, the Ginsburg paper is available on SSRN, where it can be downloaded for free. You can try to find the Ginsburg & Chen book at a library. Or just browse through a copy at Kinokuniya. Of course, referring to serious scholarship and asking little people to read it is just too much to ask of them. It’s much easier to sway your audience by sticking to ad hominem attacks.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
My, my jonfernquest, you do get obstreperous and contradict yourself endlessly. I can’t resist replying and putting it in the same personalized terms you have decided to use.
On contradicting yourself: On the one hand you have written for academic journals. If this is you (http://www.readbangkokpost.com/articles/biojonfernquest.html), you even refer people to your blog which proudly displays your academic articles. You even proudly announce all the universities where you have worked and all the big-name companies. Double standards?
On the other hand, you denigrate others for even referring to academic works. Presumably it is good when you write academic articles because you are giving back so much more to the people you claim to support. Is that the elite who do get all the chances to go to universities? Or the poor provincials you rabbit on about?
But seriously, why can’t you read the cited papers? if you can read a blog (as opposed to twittering) you could read these papers. If you can write for an academic journal, as you have, then you can read these papers, unless the lobotomy had a seriously negative impact. They are available via the internet at the site mentioned and snippets through Google Books. Just too lazy or just assuming they can’t be understood by your good self?
And, if you cared to look at what I wrote, there were also references to newspapers. Whoa! Maybe that’s even too much for you?
And why would there be links to academic papers in the first place? Well, as most sensible and reasonable people would know, and maybe you don’t fit that category, it is in those kinds of venues where debate is often carried out on legal and judicial issues. You may prefer bar room discussions, but why not listen to what professional and academic lawyers say about law, corruption and the judiciary? It may make your brain hurt, but worth a try some day.
Where on earth do you get the idea that I style myself as “the champion of: poor people without access to western universities”? Actually, I thought it was you who was the self-styled representative of these people when you taught in provincial university in Thailand and felt hard done by for having done so and were never given the recognition you think you deserve?
Now I don’t for a minute believe that you have even looked at these cited papers, because you just want to engage in name-calling.
My, that was fun.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
Pundit, I know we are all in many ways reliant on rumours but we can take it too far.
First you give us it was Prem who pressured the EC to find Thaksin innocent of hiding his assets. Possible as the wasn’t much of a division between the Bangkok elite and Thaksin at the time, but not the most likely of explanations and certainly one that doesn’t disprove my pointing to this as a sign of corruption in the judiciary. Also even if your rumour was true we would have to consider it most likely that Thaksin was involved in the pressure. At the time most people, both pro and anti-Thaksin, and the press suspected he was making financial arrangements with some judges.
Next we have you saying that 2 million Baht ($60,000+) was too small to influence the judges and was just to bribe a court clerk to give the names of the judges. Excuse me but you obviously know these circles better than me that this amount is just to get a favour from the clerk. OK it doesn’t stack up against the Bangkok bus contract but it’s a bit more than most of us seen in one lump. I see you are calling it a snack box on your blog, but it must have been one big snack. Also I didn’t hear that many cries of innocence from Thaksin’s lawyers which tends to suggest that an out of court deal has been reached. Also, and I’m saying this without any legal knowledge, I suspect in most Western countries the judges reaction would be charge the lawyers with contempt. I’m sure Judge John Deed of TV fame would.
Now lastly the status of the EC. I have lumped it in with the judiciary. I’m sure RN England would say it’s part of his “network monarchy”. Certainly like the judiciary it is meant to be independent from the people it’s ruling on. I really don’t know the background of the members but I think most people would class it as such.
Overall I’m afraid I’m left feeling that you are clutching at straws to promote a political point. I again apologise to Michael Montesanto for starting a thread on what was only a small part of his study. I was trying to link what I had heard a number of years ago about people in the Justice Ministry to what we are seeing today as they have moved up the ladder.
17 August 2009: petition day
Nick, thanks for once again superbly documenting an historical event that has been largely ignored by mainstream media. The photos will go into many an archive, telling the story,as they do, in a direct & truthful way. Several are classics.
I sincerely hope that the Golden Eagle shits in your direction soon, & you start getting the fat royalty cheques you deserve from ‘Red vs Yellow.’ Wonderful on-the-ground photos of both sides, and straight-forward eye-witness accounts. Valuable stuff!
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
The independence it has shown in recent years must be a plus compared to say 2001 when money flooded into the court to allow a ruling in Thaksin’s favour over hiding assets in his family, driver and maid’s names.
This is Prasong and more recently Sondhi’s theory. McCargo suggests it was Prem – see excerpt here.
Who can forget Thaksin’s lawyers being locked up for the lunchbox full of money passed across the bench?
This is not the best example to cite for confidence in the judicial system and the judges not accepting money. They were jailed for contempt where one has no rights and can present no defence. The judges rule in secret and one has no right to appeal, but the criminal charges have been dropped. Didn’t even make it to trial. See here and here.
It was also given to court officials. The money is too small to buy a verdict and was more likely for information (ie which judges would be hearing the case).
Signs of the present independence of judiciary from the politicians are the courts going against both the Samak and Somchai governments and even the ruling against Democrat MPs holding shares in media companies.
It was the EC who ruled against the Democrat MPs holding shares. The case hasn’t been to court yet.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
Three cheers to Les Abbey for having enough guts to dare to challenge the unhealthy and rarely questioned academic consensus in Southeast Asian studies.
And as for you, the anonymous academic Ralph Kramden, why do you put links to academic papers that no one outside academia can read ?!
You are just a symptom of people who study Southeast Asia and do very little in return to help the very people you style yourself the champion of: poor people without access to western universities.
17 August 2009: petition day
Keep up the great work, Nick. I wouldn’t pay too much mind to someone who thinks the red shirts are waiing the “porcine sacrifice” rather than the Buddha statue behind it. How about that for short-sightedness?
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
RN you may have an argument although I guess I am just more optimistic about the judiciary than you. Those I met just a couple of years ago gave me much hope.
I think your last sentence defies logic though.
“…even including some of the stooges of absolutism there, is consistent with this.”
Why is it consistent with this? Why would the “networked monarchy’s” judiciary find against their own stooges.
17 August 2009: petition day
Cheer up Nick!
Forget that PAD follower. You have done very very good job.
Whenever the Red Shirt take action, Thai people (real Thai) are not so worried about their movement. On the other hand, whenever the Yellow Shirt take some action, there are likely to be some violence on street. Like a crazy driver of big truck that no one can stop, it hit everything in front.
Another observation I want you to observe, that is, most of the Yellow Shirt followers are weird and lack of critical thinking. You can prove this by talking to them. Their perspective toward things around them is…I think, weird.
Some of them are good man but talking about politics, they are weird and freaky.
Keep doing your work, Nick. At least, I’m sure Thai people will stand by you.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
“Network Monarchy” is essentially the courtiers, who exercise power in the name of the King. They are thus unaccountable for their power in Thailand because they are protected by the lèse majesté laws. They are not all bad, but it is in the nature of unaccountability (absolutism) that the good is eventually displaced by the bad. Outside Thailand, the King has become accountable for their abuses, and his reputation is diminished every day. Being an exhausted old man he no longer has (nor could he be expected to have) the power to keep his courtiers from dragging his name through the mud. It can be argued that he has always been near the centre of abuses because of the numerous compacts with the devil (the men with guns) that have allowed him to keep his throne. Ordering judges in no uncertain terms to annul the people’s judgement in 2005 was certainly an abuse against democracy, and the reputation of Thai justice in the outside world has since gone down from an already low level. The deep involvement of the Thai Constitutional Court in the armed aggression against Cambodia over Preah Vihear, and the clearly implied contempt of that court for the Preah Vihear judgement of International Court of Justice possibly made the King wince. It can be argued that the Thai courts have moved from a position of venal independence (giving judgements in favour of the highest bidder) to being an agency of absolutism/militarism/fascism in its struggle against democracy. Harassment of members of parliament, even including some of the stooges of absolutism there, is consistent with this.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
I must also give my apologies to Michael Montesano for hijacking this thread. The paper is well worth reading and my main disagreement was over the judiciary.
17 August 2009: petition day
“Porman”
You complain that i have so far not presented photographic proof of PAD guards having taken part in the Songkran riots, therefore implying that i may have invented it (i haven’t – i have very good sources after now nearly 4 years following this closely).
But then, when i have shown photographic proof that PAD guards have attacked vehicles with Red Shirts at the end of the petition day – the only comment you have is that you express the wish that they “next time…will direct a carefully aimed volley of slingshots at” me.
Is there something that escapes me, or do you have a slight problem with logic and reason? One the one hand you seem to deny the fact that the PAD has very violent elements, obviously at least tolerated by the upper echelons as in this instance as it happened directly in front of the head office of ASTV. Yet when shown proof – you even go so far to advocate using violence against a journalist that does present you with the evidence of what you seem to deny.
Furthermore, in your angry tirade you even have to mock Thai tradition and religion – in your words: “In one picture a red shirt is seen waiing the head and trotters of an luckless porcine sacrifice”.
This is part of a Brahman ritual. You can easily observe similar, from weddings to pledges to spirits up to court ceremonies, in Thailand and in most other parts of Asia (even Christians in the developed west celebrate the mystic transformation of bread and wine into the flesh and blood of the founder of their religion during their rituals). I very much doubt that you would mock the same if in connection to the aforementioned.
Yet i wonder what you make out of last year’s, even for a Thai context, bizarre PAD ritual in which sanitary napkins of menstruating female followers of the PAD were placed around a royal statue, under the guidance of Sondhi Limthongkul in trance, to prevent the return of malevolent spirits supposedly placed there by Newin Chidchob during a Khmer black magic ritual?
I find it more than comical that you accuse me of bias in my reporting… 😉
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
My apologies Ralph as I thought you were taking a “Thaksin was not corrupt” position. Of course I am not in a position to supply evidence of corruption. Even if I had personal experience of it I would probably not want to publicize that. Proving corruption is almost impossible unless one of the parties wishes to talk about it.
Also I don’t have the ability to give you an academic explanation along with references because that is not the business I am in. So for that please forgive me. As to whether up until recently, even as you say until pre-1997, the courts were corrupted by money and political influence, you seem to hint that you also feel this. I could speak about common knowledge, but again that isn’t proof. The closest we have come to proof was the lunchbox full of money which is far more recent.
Now the hard bit. In any other country we would be happy to see the judiciary ruling against the government and politicians and see it as a sign of independence. We can look at Pakistan as an example. Here we start looking for palace involvement straight away. The present constitution may well be unfair to politicians and political parties but the surprise wasn’t so much in the anti-corruption rules, but in that they were enforced.
Is there a split between the old Bangkok elite and some of the provincial influential families? Of course, and many judges would come from those Bangkok families. Does this equal corruption? I’m not sure as we would have to then say then that the UK has a corrupt judiciary as most of its members come from the upper middle class or aristocratic families. Now many people I know might say that is true, but the other option would be electing judges at a time we are struggling to get elected MPs to follow the rules.