For an arrogant few, being above the law is the new normal

If the politically privileged few do not like any law or government, no problem – mobs are available at their disposal and willing to step in. Many of the high crimes committed in the last few years violated the laws to the extent that, if duly prosecuted, the perpetrators would end up with the death penalty. But those criminals are still walking tall, shrugging off any demand that they must face up to their own actions. Still, there are people who worship the ground they walk on.

If the politically privileged few do not like a court for its stand – by the written legal script, or its decision – no problem. The gangs are ready for deployment. We, as a nation, are a living proof that might is always right. 

If the politically privileged few do not like any government personnel, such persons can be ousted with no cause, and without recourse. These few also have the power to install their cronies in high places without meritorious qualifications, or our approval. No problem there, either. 

The way things are going, we should not even bother coming up with a fresh Constitution, either a brand new draft, or any series of amendments that will change the entire face and bona fide purpose of the highest law of the land. 

The whole effort is not unlike that of the Thai boy who had sixteen plastic surgeries, and his new face bore no resemblance to his original one. We the people do not wish to squander further what’s left of our tax money from the wholesale public corruption, on constitutional plastic surgeries.

Corruption is a national infestation in a dire need of potent pest-control measures before our house crumbles after being ransacked by vermin whose teeth are more deadly than those of termites. The extent of the felonious exercise of corruption in our nation has reached a level that renders the words “shame” and “unscrupulous” totally obsolete. The word “screwed” is being tattooed on our foreheads. And we have no other resort, but to suffer this highway robbery in silence. 

Life goes on regardless. As for the fate of future generations? A deep sigh. 

Transparency International has defined corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. It hurts everyone whose life, livelihood or happiness depends on the integrity of people in positions of authority. If we ask ourselves how long ago it has been since we had a decent number of people in power, with such integrity, we may begin to weep uncontrollably. If we ask ourselves when we will see an effective corruption fighter who can bring about acute public awareness and intolerance of this insidious plague, we may have to accept the fact that Samuel Beckett’s Vladimir and Estragon will meet up with the person they have been waiting for, long before we ever see that corruption fighter.

All things considered, Thailand’s leadership may want to ruminate on the promulgation of an unwritten constitution whose tenet perpetually favours whoever controls the mobs. That way, our tax money will not be further wasted on make-believe referenda and, eventually, a new constitution that does not make our nation more respectful of the rule of law. 

To date, we have already had 18 constitutions; we do not need to lie to to ourselves by going on to 19 and expect things to change for the better. The legal age of consent in Thailand is 18; we should take that number as the final number of written constitutions in Thailand. With an unwritten constitution, there is nothing to tear up after a coup, or be rewritten over and over by a government in power in order to legitimise its whims.

French political philosopher Charles de Secondat Montesquieu (1689-1755) said: “We are free because we live under civil laws.”  Here the emphasis is on the word “under”, and the “we” means everybody.

According to the Roman tradition of the rule of law – which has become the principle of liberal democracy today – the core of the “rule of law” is an autonomous legal order and the fact that it does not depend so much on the law’s instrumental capabilities as its degree of autonomy. The rule of law has three basic meanings and functions. 

First, the rule of law is a regulator of government power. It limits government arbitrariness and abuse of power. At the core of the Anglo-Saxon version of the rule of law is the idea that the discretionary power of the government should be limited, for it may infringe on the freedom of its subjects. Here, a distinction between the “rule of law” and “rule by law” should also be drawn. Under the “rule of law”, no one is above the law, not even the government.  Under “rule by law”, the law is an instrument of the government, and the government is above law. The opposite of the rule of law is rule that comprises the “rule of a few persons”, which often leads to tyranny or oligarchy, and the “rule of the many persons”, whose ethos is “what pleases the ruler(s) is law”.

Next, the rule of law entails equality before the law. This means that every man, whatever his rank or condition, is subject to the ordinary law of the land and to the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals.

Lastly, the rule of law means procedural and formal justice. Max Weber, the German sociologist and philosopher (1864-1920) points out that procedural justice results in consistency, predictability and calculability, which are desirable aspects of economic and social life. Without such consistency, justice is adrift.

Now we can see for ourselves where we as a nation fits into, or rather falls out of, this universal framework of a society with respect for the rule of law.

Once there are some people who are above law, we the people will never be free.