Accused monks’ followers should pray, not protest

It is common enough to see lay supporters marshal behind monks who are implicated in legal offences. Such support is not wrong, but often it goes too far. Too many times we have seen demonstrations in defence of accused monks turn into attempts to disrupt the legal process. This is bad for politics, the faith and society as a whole.
The bottom line is that not even the men in saffron robes are above secular law and, when accused of criminal offences, are not entitled to special privileges. For their followers to be overprotective runs counter to the aims and ambitions of a lawful society and hurts the monks as well. The chief example is Dhammachayo, the former abbot of Dhammakaya Temple, who remains on the run from justice thanks in no small part to his disciples and lay followers, who 
resisted the authorities’ every effort to take him into custody. Dhammachayo is still loved and revered by many, but his reputation will be sullied unless and until he reappears and can successfully defend himself in court. That, unfortunately, seems unlikely to happen anytime soon.
Since the Dhammachayo controversy reached a climax last year, the unhealthy trend has continued. The authorities are now lamenting that lay support for senior monks who are implicated in an embezzlement scheme is hampering the judicial process. The scandal, which involves a growing number of senior monks and temples all over the country, has to do with money, from which all monks are supposed to abjure.
In fact, most of Thailand’s past religious scandals have involved money and greed for it. The current worsening situation can be blamed on many factors, including poor regulation over donations, which amplifies temptation, ecclesiastic laws in need of reform, the tendency to shield one’s peers and, again, overly enthusiastic disciples.
Not only have lay people in such cases donated massive amounts of money to temples and to monks they esteem, they have often formed a protective phalanx around the accused in the belief they are being unfairly persecuted. This despite the fact that most scandals involving donations feature easily traced money trails and guilt should be clear enough to all.
When evidence is ignored and personal image takes precedence over all other considerations, an ethical slippery slope materialises, threatening everyone who’s involved. The authorities become overly elaborate in building their cases. The faithful cling to double standards, forgiving monks where they would chastise fellow lay people. The monks feel immune and become emboldened. Thus, legal action against popular monks is always painfully slow, stymied by illogical resistance. 
Two decades ago there was the immensely popular monk Yantra Amarobhiku, accused of duping and engaging in sex with disciples. The evidence, highly credible, continued to mount, but he was so well 
defended by his flock that the authorities were reluctant to take action. Add to such already delicate situations the dangerous component of divisive politics. Last year’s tensions amid the hunt for Dhammachayo were extremely unnerving. 
It is understandable that followers of respected and revered monks are protective of them. Yet what begins as an act done in good faith often amounts to blind faith, and that benefits no one, including the monks. Buddhism is strong enough to withstand scandals. Its adherents should let evidence of wrongdoing be heard and let justice take its course.