Some people are not prepared to hear the truth

For instance, politicians in power complicate the investigations into political violence by issuing comments that could be seen as leading statements, even though the investigations are not finalised yet. None of them should come out with premature verdicts for public consumption. This will only confuse the process of investigation.

It is fair to invite all parties to interview to find out what happened in April and May 2010. But definitive statements should not be made until the investigations are complete and the “truth” comes out. Over the past week, we have seen people from the government, military and Department of Special Investigation (DSI) exchange emotional words, leading to concern that none of these people are performing their duty without bias. This is unfortunate for a country desperately waiting for political reconciliation. The political violence in April and May 2010 saw 91 people killed and about 2,000 others injured. A number of properties were damaged by arsonists. The disruption caused by the political violence almost completely paralysed the capital and affected the entire nation.

Over the past few weeks, investigations that should be proceeding in earnest have been marred by interference from politicians and people in power. Their comments are not conducive to establishing a record of truth because they are still critical attempts to point the finger of blame at political opponents. In fact, leaders and members of groups on both sides of the political divide should be questioned and asked to give accounts about what happened two years ago. This includes military officers, police officers, red-shirt leaders, politicians of all relevant parties and government leaders at the time – to attempt to find out who should be held responsible for the disruption in Bangkok and the reasons that led to the security forces’ dispersal of the protesters.

The issue is highly sensitive and the public is desperately polarised, so the investigations must be handled with sensitivity. But some political and government officials still see fit to act otherwise. Instead of creating an environment that encourages all sides to give truthful accounts, they disrupt the process by giving speculative statements.

All Thais are stakeholders in this issue. The Pheu Thai Party promised during the last election campaign that it would bring justice once it became the government of red-shirt supporters. But they are not alone in wanting to see the truth. Or so they say. People from all political factions have a role to play, and they have to be accounted for in the violence. 

Several agencies are investigating the 2010 incidents to find out who ordered shootings and who the “men in black” were amid the red-shirt lines. They are investigating who fired M79 grenades at authorities and who ordered the arson. The agencies include the DSI, the Royal Thai Police, the Truth for Reconciliation Commission and the National Human Rights Commission. The DSI, police and Office of the Attorney-General are the agencies in direct charge of criminal cases. Some of the cases have already been wrapped up in the Criminal Court.

So better let these agencies work independently to bring the truth out. But what is happening now suggests that no one is ready for a full disclosure of the circumstances that led to the tragic incidents.

People in Thailand like to refer to the peace process in South Africa, which was facilitated by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in that country. The choice of words is telling. First, the truth will require a full accounting. Only then can we move on to reconciliation. 

Unfortunately, people at the top are not prepared for the truth. Thus, reconciliation is unlikely. Eventually, reconciliation will continue to be just a convenient catchphase. Our culture of impunity and a lack of accountability will prevent political development and reconciliation.