Suthep, Jatuporn unwelcome in this dialogue

Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Prompan is reportedly keen to take on yellow-shirt-aligned firebrand Suthep Thaugsuban in a pre-referendum debate on the draft constitution. As controversial as the document is, it’s far too important to be subjected to public debate by such divisive political figures. 

Contrary to what they might personally believe, they do not represent the real stakeholders in this dialogue. Their bias regarding the highest law of the land is so extreme, their vision so blurred by vested interests, that they cannot possibly contribute anything worthwhile to the discussion.

Suthep and Jatuporn (when the military junta allows him) are of course welcome to express their personal views on the draft, but in no way should their views be considered representative of wider public opinion. We as a nation are already too polarised for a high-profile clash between these belligerent men to be anything other than harmful to the process leading up to next month’s referendum. 

The referendum will decide the future of a draft document that has split opinion on key ideological points. There are several grey areas, such as whether senators hand-picked by a select few people are better able to provide the essential checks and balances on government than are senators elected by public vote but under the control of their parties. 

In such issues there is no absolute right or wrong, but Jatuporn and Suthep, with their vociferous rhetoric, are capable of misleading people into believing the choice is clear, a simple matter of black or white. And misdirection like this could be dangerous, instigating further conflict.

What happened to the 1997 charter, the nobly equitable “People’s Constitution”, demonstrates that even the sturdiest and most benevolent of guiding laws can be manipulated and exploited. While it perished in the 2006 coup against Thaksin Shinawatra’s elected government, its demise was also partly due to the elected politicians subverting it. A constitution cannot serve its purpose without the constant support and protection of the populace and their chosen representatives. And its application requires open minds, empathy, understanding and willingness to compromise – traits that neither Jatuporn nor Suthep display.

Thailand should not be heeding fierce ideologues whose advocacy borders on anarchy. Given credence at one extreme of the political spectrum, they breed more of the same at the other. These two outspoken men have had their time as opinion leaders, but what we need in their place now, as we decide whether the new draft offers dictatorship or an end to corruption, is cool and calm guidance. The speeches of Suthep and Jatuporn and Suthep are not conducive to this, and threaten in fact to foul the environment.

The referendum is becoming mired in crisis, with questions raised over the credibility of the draft’s critics and proponents alike, and the junta unwilling to tolerate any critical analysis. 

Jatuporn, as much as he might be admired for daring to be a rare voice of dissent, is burdened by dubious political baggage, his motivation resting more on allegiance to former premier Thaksin than it does from patriotism.

Suthep, the draft’s head cheerleader outside of government, has in the past, like Jatuporn, acted in ways that both displayed prejudice and spawned more of it. Now he’s plainly being allowed to speak freely in public where the red shirts and other critics are being gagged, which serves to ruin his credibility and adds to concerns about the referendum’s legitimacy as an exercise in democracy.

The road to the referendum is laden with landmines and the voters require guidance. Much of the process has been beyond our control, but we can now at least form our decisions on the draft constitution based on careful consideration, free from vested interests and alternative agendas.