Are the red shirts afraid of going to court?
At first glance, it seemed astonishing that red-shirt leaders would be brave enough to announce that they will not seek amnesty for themselves in the terrorism case which is before the court and which carries the maximum penalty of a death sentence.
Red-shirt leaders have even challenged former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his then deputy Suthep Thaugsuban to prove each side’s innocence regarding the 2010 political violence.
Abhisit and Suthep face murder conspiracy charges following the deaths of red-shirt protesters in the 2010 crackdowns.
The red-shirt leaders have openly boasted that they have an advantage because they have clear evidence proving that their rallies were peaceful and that they had no hand in the resulting violence.
They cited recent rulings of the Civil Court to back their claims. The Civil Court ruled that the CentralWord shopping mall was burned down in a riot, and had not been set ablaze in an act of terrorism.
Abhisit and Suthep could be disadvantaged because inquests by the Criminal Court have concluded that many deaths in the May 2010 violence were caused by troops.
Red-shirt supporters seem to be buoyed with confidence that the two government leaders face punishment. Plus, the red-shirt leaders appear so confident of their pending victory that they declared they would not seek amnesty.
However, the latest move of the red-shirt movement contradicted the show of the leaders’ confidence when, Weng Tojirakarn, filed a complaint with the Department of Special Investigation, calling for the terrorism case to be dropped.
The DSI concluded it had no authority to withdraw the case which is already before the court, so it asked the justice minister to consider instructing public prosecutors to file a petition before the Criminal Court to consider dropping the case.
The move was also backed by a campaign on red-shirt TV channel, Asia Update. Several red-shirt leaders went on Asia Update to try and convince red-shirt supporters that the charges should be dropped because the red-shirts should not face a terrorism case, which is a political one.
So, it turned out that the red-shirts and their leaders agreed that they should not be tried in court, while the other side should.
This leads one to wonder whether the red-shirt movement had been planning this move from the very beginning. Did it always aim to have the case dropped after its side won power? Have red-shirt leaders planned from the beginning to claim they did not want to seek amnesty for themselves and wanted only ordinary demonstrators to be absolved?
It is not yet certain if the court will allow the case to be dropped. But it is expected the Justice Ministry, which is controlled by the government, will be able to manipulate evidence to convince the court to do so.
It is believed if the case is dropped, another round of violence will erupt because there are other groups that disagree with the red-shirt movement.
Although several people support the red-shirt movement to some extent, they still have questions regarding the violence in 2010.
They suspect the red-shirt leaders may have planned the violence that led to the tragedies with the goal to topple the government. These people would like both sides to prove their truth in court instead of abruptly allowing one side to escape trial. This would definitely lead to allegations of abuse of authority to benefit the government’s side.
Nobody should forget the abuse of power to benefit his side, without caring about judicial process, once caused former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra to be politically cornered. Would something similar happen again?
The best way out is for the red-shirt leaders to defend themselves in court. Or are they afraid of the truth that could be revealed in court?
