Without conscience or the ability to accept blame

If during her two years in power so far, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra had been sincere in seeking out the truth surrounding the political violence of the last few years, and thus ensured a timely and transparent investigation by the Department of Special Investigation, we would now be in a position to have a real discussion about amnesty and reconciliation.

It is not that the idea of amnesty is completely off the agenda; but amnesty must lead to peace and stability. What it cannot do is lead to more division and hatred between Thailand’s opposing sides, which in turn will lead to more violence.

The truth is that not one of the country’s political factions is opposed to the idea of amnesty in itself; but the conditions and current political situation – whereby there has been no attempt to seek the truth, to accept respective blame, or to set in motion internationally accepted procedures of justice – do not allow us to pursue amnesty. For the wronged, the wrongdoers, the accused, the accusers and the masterminds behind it all, there must be acknowledgment of, and atonement for, the crimes committed: this is the most essential prerequisite for reconciliation. Denial and the refusal to take responsibility renders amnesty impossible.

All of these matters should, without a doubt, be under the direct purview and responsibility of the prime minister. It is not acceptable for Yingluck to simply wash her hands of the issue and leave the process to play out through parliamentary channels.

Before boarding the plane for one of her all-too-frequent trips abroad, Prime Minister Yingluck gave an interview in which she stated, “We all want to see reconciliation happen, therefore we have to open our hearts to and take care of those who are suffering and still seek justice. We must support the parliamentary process because it is the rightful place for representatives of the people to discuss and decide on such things.”

She speaks of reconciliation often, but how does the prime minister actually feel about the amnesty bill now being deliberated in Parliament? We have never heard her views on it. We don’t even know if she agrees or disagrees with the proposed bill. The fact of the matter is that the prime minister is the one person with the executive power and government apparatus at her command who can bring about true reconciliation.  

Before the current proposed amnesty, there had already been numerous proposals from Thailand’s government-appointed Truth for Reconciliation Commission on the steps needed to bring about reconciliation. But the prime minister chooses to ignore them all, instead pursuing an avenue so divisive at a time when the country is already fragile with even the possibility of civil war mentioned by some.

So I would like to ask the prime minister herself to open her heart and give the country justice, as she once asked of its citizens – by thinking of those on the other side of the divide who have also suffered and who are also awaiting justice.

I also ask her to protect the future of our people by assuring them of the right to live free from fear of harm, a fundamental right enshrined in our Constitution. The duty of the prime minister is to all citizens, regardless of whether they are a minority or well-represented in parliament. The most basic premise of democracy is not to adhere simply to the wishes of the majority but at the same time to act in accordance with the rule of law.

Today, those who support the amnesty bill all say that if it is passed into law, everything will improve and the country will move forward. But no one has clarified exactly how things will improve, who will benefit from amnesty, or how amnesty will lead to the two opposing sides reconciling and forgiving each other.

Let’s suppose that tomorrow the amnesty bill receives parliamentary approval. Would it be that the following day Thai citizens suddenly be nice to one another, tolerate and love one another?

I don’t know how others will react, but I for one – the widow of one of the soldiers targeted by so-called “black shirts” during the protests – cannot accept it and will never forgive. Forgiveness cannot be forced upon us. Those in power do not own the lives of those who have been killed: this way of thinking is a worrying reflection of the fact that the government does not value any of the lives lost on either side. It does not respect the rights of the living who have committed no crimes.

During 2010, 91 lives were lost, from whichever side. This should be a lesson on the damage done to society. Such a great loss must prevent us from following the same path and falling victim to similar folly and crimes in the future.

I am certain that the majority of those who venture out to oppose the amnesty bill have no intention to seek power. Our duty is simply to uphold the conscience of society, the only way to properly function as a whole, and for future generations to live with morality and righteousness. This is the crux of the matter.

To enact the amnesty bill without conditions and without recognition of right and wrong, or of the guilt of those who have committed crimes, can only harm society in the long run. Those who support the proposed amnesty, when questioned, have not been able to justify it.

The following issues will be of great detriment to us all, namely: the destruction of the rule of law; the weakening of morality; the negation of our social contract; the destruction of judicial sovereignty and independence; the infringement on basic rights to life, safety and property; the wrong message to youths, thus damaging the country’s future; the example set to society to opt for violence as a means to solve problems; the harming of foreign investor confidence; the division of society as a whole; future unrest and the use of violence; and all of the above leading to a failed state

Is there anyone who will come out to ensure that the above will not occur? If it comes to this, who will be responsible, and how will they be held accountable? For us, our children and generations to come, there will never be a way to atone for the wrongs done. Does no one feel the obligation to take responsibility for the future of our motherland?