Reform ideas need air to breathe

Everyone, not least Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, knows Thailand's reform is going to be highly sensitive. Not everyone, not even him, knows how to comment properly on it. Always in the spotlight for his bold, controversial public comments for obvious reasons, Prayut has put his “thinking” under scrutiny again by asking members of the National Reform Council to stop making public statements on reform and talk less. Critics, as usual, rubbed their hands, but this time even his supporters were concerned.

To be fair to Prayut, his “directives” to the NRC must be viewed in a full context. He asked NRC members to stop talking, but what many people missed was the reason why he wants them to be quiet at the moment. He said the NRC has not even got down to work yet, but NRC members were making public remarks left, right and centre, causing “disputes”, “confusion” and a “mess”. His rationale might still be questionable, but it could also make his “directives” more understandable.

Regardless, as far as the reform process goes, how Prayut thinks is more important than what critics think. Those craving real reform and still willing to give him a break can only hope he was not hinting about things to come. Reform needs debate, and when ideas are formally suggested, they have to face total scrutiny. It's understandable if he doesn't want the people at the forefront of the reform agenda to talk publicly now, but it will be unacceptable if they are gagged in the future.

Prayut has been pleading for understanding and patience. But he also needs to understand that, if the NRC works out reform plans in virtual secrecy, Thailand's problems that he vowed to fix will remain and probably worsen. The reform process currently is undermined by two key allegations. The first is that the final “product” could be lopsided in favour of one side more than the other. The second charge is that the National Council for Peace and Order’s pre-selection of candidates for NRC seats could influence NRC decisions on key issues.

Prayut is walking a tightrope. His international efforts to prove his “sincerity” and deny that Thailand is sinking further into dictatorship have been upset by local developments. His “directives” – whether they were sincere or not – have been used as proof that he “controls” the NRC. That might be true, because it was he who staged the coup in May to begin with, but his reasons for the coup and his pleas for patience and understanding mean that the line must be drawn somewhere.

It's up to Prayut to prove the doubters wrong. Reform ideas will be hotly debated, but it's best to let the whole of Thailand take care of that. There are complicated and highly delicate issues like decentralisation of power, electoral systems, the relevance, the origin and structure of the Senate, and the powers and origins of the checks-and-balances mechanisms. 

It will not be easy to settle these matters, but the pros and cons of each idea must be thoroughly and democratically discussed.

Various events and actions can reopen old wounds or rekindle the national divide, but this is an opportunity to end a prolonged conflict now that some unfavourable influences have been taken off the table. Mainstream politicians who could have dictated events in accord with their vested interests will be less influential in the process.  

Prayut can either make the best out of that, or amplify charges that the reform was anything but democratic.