Key players still divided on takeover and the way forward.

“Regarding the May 22 incident, I looked at the atmosphere on that day and believe it was hard to go on. Then-Army chief General Prayut Chan-o-cha sought cooperation from many parties but did not receive it. I suggested to Prayut that the UDD [United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship] and PDRC [People’s Democratic Reform Committee] hold talks, in case there could be a way out. I suggested that the country has come this far, we had better join hands by setting up a government of the people and find a neutral person to become the PM. The UDD asked me who the neutral person was. I said General Prayut. If this were the case, the people would give cooperation and allow him to run the country, reform the country and write the charter and then hold an election. But the UDD had to wait for orders and could not accept my proposal. I came back to report … the talk had failed.

Do not jump to a conclusion that the two large parties walk separate ways over the democracy paths. If the two major parties walk separate ways, it is not dangerous. But if two major parties look at the same angles, this is dangerous. I hope that the two large parties will not team up to fight the military.

It is hard to speculate which party would win the next election but politicians must improve themselves to meet the desires of the people. We still have the chance to see political parties belong to the people and the people participate by selecting MP candidates. I still have hopes that politics will improve. I insist that I will not return to become neither a politician nor an MP of any party because today I am already in the people’s politics sector.”

 

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva

“I do not look at it as to whether the NCPO [National Council for Peace and Order] and political parties can get along. I understand that one: the country is in turmoil and politicians are to blame and must take responsibility; two: society cannot run away from political parties and politicians, as finally it has to face the roles played by parties and politicians. 

But society must differentiate between good and bad politicians and support old and new-generation politicians to be in the procedures that are useful to society. They should oppose behaviours that seek vested interests and destroy a [democratic] system.

The NCPO and political parties should understand one another more. The NCPO should understand what the roles of parties and politicians are in the short and long terms. Parties and politicians must realise why the country has to be in special circumstances and how they should take responsibility. Both sides must realise that the country must move forward to something better and how should each side play their roles.”

 

Justice Minister General Paiboon Koomchaya

“I said from the beginning, the term ‘seize power’ – actually we want to use the term to solve the problems. I believe we must do it because that day we saw that the government totally failed to function. It was faced with charter and legal obstacles. The major issue was society was in strife and [there was] no peace and order.

I insist that we were forced by the situation and we did not have a plan. We thought and asked ourselves all the time how the situation would turn out and would we have to take action. We did not have a detailed plan. Finally we were forced to jump into it. We may have thought out a plan in a short period that when the situation was stuck, we would do it, regardless of whatever happens. 

I told General Prayut, the situation could not go on. I believed no agency could solve the problems, if we did not untie the knots. Everything was untangled. I told Prayut that he was going to retire soon. If he did not untie the knots, things would be left this way. I told Prayut to make the decision.

I do not want to argue but we work hard. The PM set a timeframe for the new government to follow the road map. We had thought that what the government and the NCPO planned was good but now it is debatable. I do not want to argue but I foresee that we must move further for some time and this has nothing to do with holding on to power. 

Today people appreciate General Prem [Tinsulanonda] because he built and re-regulated the country for some time during which we had a perfect democracy that went in line with our country’s context. We hope that the NCPO would be able to follow in the footsteps of General Prem and continue his legacy. But many things disappear and change after we have a full-fledged democracy.

If the charter draft does not pass a public referendum, I will leave, and you shall find your ruler. If the people do not have faith in what I wrote for, why should I stay? I will not stay.”

 

Former justice minister Chaikasem Nitisiri

“I think there was no turning point on May 22, 2014. I believe the incident was well prepared. Suppose, the caretaker government resigned, who would carry out the government roles? Others who took the place of the government must resort to special power because there was no law indicating such an option. The only option was to seize power to have the sovereign power and set up a government.

The turning point could be that the military helped the government to complete the general election.

Looking at the charter draft provisions, the new elected government will have difficulties working, except if the government can get along with the people in power now. The issue about the five-year transitional period is about the request to extend the period of work.”

 

Pheu Thai caretaker secretary-general Phumtham Wechayachai

“If every sector upholds democratic rules and respects the people’s decision, everyone knows the atmosphere of the country and knows what are the problems that caused the country to stumble and cannot walk further [and] every sector must go to the polls. It is that simple. 

The national security sector can hold a general election as it has power and the support of the four forces [Air Forces, Navy, Army and police]. If it complies with the constitution and adheres to the constitution’s intentions, I believe the country can move forward. What happened was General Prayut seized all powers and chose the path that he wants. 

I still have one question in my mind because I am not sure that the coup that was staged was an accident or a necessity that the people in power believe it is the solution. 

If General Prayut thinks that a solution is to give the people the chance to decide, democracy can help move the country forward and there could be more options for solutions. 

Actually, the question should be posed to General Prayut. What is he thinking?

By letting the country be in this situation, it makes it hard to solve the country’s problems and the country’s future is doomed. 

The Pheu Thai Party has offered a lot of comments. 

General Prayut can put the atmosphere under control but he should possess a more open mind and allow every sector to express opinions within the frame. I believe lecturers, groups of professionals and political parties are ready to present their views with reasons so that society can make a judgement in making the decision.”

 

“That day when the UDD and the PDRC held talks, there was not a discussion about a neutral PM as Suthep has claimed – that he was going to present General Prayut [with the proposal] to accept to be the neutral PM.

A provisional chapter that allows some bodies to be in power for five years has been written. 

Suppose that the charter draft passes a public referendum, the country will have two charters because the interim charter is still enforced including the NCPO’s orders and announcements. 

So we have the coup group’s orders, the coup group’s interim charter, and the charter that passed the referendum. It is nothing short of three tiers. I want to brand this the double-tiers charter, which is the charter that has both conservative and military authoritarianism. 

The military still has full power and will be in power over a long period, which is guaranteed by the charter and provisional chapters. 

Besides, it will be in power through the 20-year strategies in the reform section [of the charter].’’