Invoking Article 44 THROWS DOUBT on junta's competence

To some observers, the lifting of martial law on Wednesday might have seemed like a relaxation of draconian security measures. But the international community responded with alarm over its replacement with Article 44, which hands absolute authority to the NCPO chief, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha.

The invoking of this measure does nothing to lift the blocks on freedom of expression and other basic rights, which are a prerequisite for the national reconciliation and democratic reform for which the junta claims to be working.

The new 14-point NCPO order issued in accordance with Article 44 contains almost every measure previously used under martial law to authorise the junta chief’s control over society. In this regard, rather than a lifting of military law, we seem to have military law Mark II.

The new junta order issued shortly after the lifting of martial law on Wednesday gives security officials arbitrary power to summon, arrest and detain persons, as well as search any premises and confiscate any assets. Restrictions on freedom of movement and assembly remain in place, as does the threat that media outlets can be shut down for defying junta authority. Article 44 also hands security officials immunity from prosecution for their actions.

The core reason for invoking the article is to maintain security. To be more precise, the purpose is to control and suppress groups or individuals whose political views differ from those of the junta. The new order mentions nothing about matters beyond security.

However, Premier Prayut has made assurances he will exercise the absolute 

 power constructively to solve other problems, such as exploitation of natural resources, income inequality, aviation safety and even overpriced lottery tickets.

It seems the prime minister has taken desperate measures as the country lurches towards an economic depression. Avoiding questions about his own competence as head of government, Prayut has sought to place the blame for failure in his administration elsewhere. But the junta is mistaken in the belief that its own members and its government have the power to “dictate” an end to the country’s many and chronic problems. The authorities are also mistaken in thinking that those Thai citizens who seek the basic right to speak and gather to express their desires are obstructing the junta’s moves for national reform.

Despite what the junta and its chief seem to believe, wielding absolute power cannot solve the political crisis. 

In legal terms, Article 44 has existed since the junta-sponsored charter came into force last July, giving Prayut the power to do anything he deems necessary to meet the government’s goals. In other words, Prayut has enjoyed absolute power – executive, judicial and legislative – since he ousted an elected government last May. 

Thailand’s problems persist despite that power arrangement, yet the premier and his colleagues in the junta and the Cabinet seem never to have considered the possibility that it is not lack of power but their own lack of ability that might be the problem. Nearly a year on from taking power, the junta has arrested, detained, raided, searched, censored and curbed freedoms, but Thailand has gone nowhere. Nearly all junta’s enemies have been prosecuted or otherwise suppressed. But the same chronic problems still loom large, while the economy is slowing down and people are having to struggle harder to get by.

It is time to face the possibility that what this junta lacks is not power, but the basic ability to govern.