Anand : We must fight absolute control

During a fund-raising event related to the 1992 pro-democracy uprising at the Montien Riverside Hotel, Anand said the spirit of democracy must be backed up by true understanding of how it works. He cited Adolf Hitler as an example of how one man can use “democracy” to work his way to absolute control.

Anand’s comments on Thai democracy coincide with an increasingly heated debate over a controversial call for all the legal consequences of the 2006 military coup to be nullified.

Anand said Thai society could not work out its problems because it was going around in circles, trying to solve the problems by focusing on political mechanisms such as amending the Constitution, elections, politicians and political parties. He said these factors are just mechanisms and not the essence that will lead to development or a good future. Besides, he said, Thais do not possess a public mind; they only get together as a group to oppose something and not to proactively call for something.

“A pro-democracy movement is not just about protests against election fraud or corruption. It must be a fight against a consolidation of the powers without using force or the military,’’ Anand said.

The country’s justice system has yet to develop, especially in terms of the law, law enforcement and personnel, including educational institutions on justice procedures, he said. 

The Council of State should be abolished because the country should not be administered by mainly depending on laws. Members of the Council of State are 70-80 years old, which is too old for the job, he added.

At the same forum, Kanit Na Nakorn, chairman of the Truth for Reconciliation Commission, said Thailand’s problems were caused by law enforcement or justice being dictated by individuals’ clout. He cited Thaksin Shinawatra’s share-concealment case, which was treated differently from other similar cases.

Kanit said the problem is escalating to the point that there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Furthermore, there has been abuse of power because the legislative, judicial and executive branches are not kept distinct and checks and balances were not effective to hold authorities accountable, he said.

“We need a check system that holds these officials responsible and accountable,” he said.

The country is in dire need of justice reform. The Department of Special Investigation (DSI), courts and police must be accountable, he said.

“We have investigators in many agencies such as the police, prosecutors, DSI and National Anti-Corruption Commission, and they do not work together, but sometimes quarrel. There are behaviours in the justice system that I found offensive – taking the easy way out, not doing the fieldwork, and flattering,” he said.

Meanwhile critics of the Nitirat group accused the seven embattled academics of failing to address the problems of corrupt politicians and interference in justice that were rampant before the September 19 coup.

A group of 23 academics calling themselves “Law Lecturers” from several universities issued a statement attacking the Nitirat group, which earlier presented a controversial academic proposal that the September 19, 2006 coup and its subsequent actions including court orders be expunged.

The Law Lecturers questioned why the Nitirat group, which comprises seven Thammasat University lecturers, did not want to nullify the consequences of every coup since the country changed the ruling system in 1932. The fact that the Nitirat group singled out the 2006 coup has led to suspicion that its motive for the proposal was to favour a particular political group.

The Law Lecturers said academics who present their scholarly views to the public must conform to the professional code of conduct and possess ethical awareness, integrity and morals. Their views proposed to the public must be in the public interest and carry no discrimination that distorts academic principles. Academics must not focus only on one particular wrongful conduct and ignore other offences, they said.

They went on to say that academics must use the rule of law to protect the public against corrupt authorities.