I’m delighted at Khun Kemadist Chiaracharuwat’s response to my letter that we should not discriminate among coups and focus on undoing only the effects of the last one. He says that just as if we inadvertently squeeze out too much toothpaste, we put the nearest part back into the tube first. So, he holds, we should start with the last coup first.
But are all coups alike? Is it “a coup is a coup is a coup?” If so, let’s do a random selection of which coup to start undoing first – which nobody has proposed.
I agree with him that “If Burin’s concern about discrimination results in him doing nothing about the coups, then we are cursed to seeing more coups because nobody would want to lift a finger.” I have never proposed doing nothing about coups – nor have I ever proposed trying to undo the effects of all coups simultaneously.
A friend suggested that I should propose a specific solution as a starting point for debate. So, surely the taking of human life unjustly is the worst crime possible, and a killing 10 years ago is a greater crime than a theft last year. Thus, instead of going coup by coup, let’s go crime category by crime category, starting with all coup-related killing from 1932 on which statutes of limitation haven’t expired, then moving to lesser crimes, e.g. torture (but not to death), and working our way towards lesser crimes, e.g. theft. Within each category, let’s begin with those cases whose statutes of limitation are closest to expiry – because our objective is not only to identify the perpetrator, but to make sure that he/she is held accountable in a court of law.
This approach would punish and deter the worst crimes first and grab the greatest number of guilty parties – and hence benefit the greatest number of people.
Dear reader, do you agree with starting with the worst crimes first, and seeking to bring the largest number of guilty parties to justice? If not, please propose something better. If you agree, is what I propose logical?
Burin Kantabutra
Bangkok