Thailand SituationSituation in Thailand
Background man: The current political situation in Thailand
In recent month Thailand has experienced one of the most difficult phases on its road to greater democratization. The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) ended its protest on May 19, 2010 and has significantly enhanced the overall situation and re-established normality and intactness. However, the Royal Thai Government and the Thai population generally recognize that much more needs to be done to bridge the divide and get the political and economical back on course, based on the current solid financial foundations and commitments to free democratic liberalism.
Mr President, the Royal Thai Government has always tried to find a solution to the problem peacefully and has been extremely reserved. Enormous effort was made to bargain with the opposition leadership, in particular by the Prime Minister, who had suggested a conciliation agenda and a provisional date for early election as a way out of the road.
Since it could not allow such illegal clashes to persist for an indefinite period, the government had to take measures to re-establish order, not by dispersing the demonstrators but by blocking the external borders of the protested area in order to force the demonstrators to end their own clashes, taking into account the need to minimize the loss.
While this was problematic in the face of the assaults by gunmen penetrating the demonstrators with deadly force, it is important to point out that the police have followed clear operational regulations in accordance with internationally accepted norms in the performance of their missions. Royal Thai Government deplores the loss incurred.
At the same time, Thailand's National Human Rights Commission and the National Anti-Corruption Commission, which are autonomous constituent organs, and the government itself are conducting a number of joint inquiries with which the government is prepared to work. In the meantime, the government has taken both immediate and longer-term action to restore, bring reconciliation and develop the state.
Aid has been provided to the casualties of violence and to the individuals and companies in Thailand and abroad affected by the ongoing rallies and events triggered by extremists following the end of the uprising. With a view to the future, the government has given the realization of the conciliation plans top priorities.
As well as an impartial investigation of the situation, an effort has been made to launch an inclusive country wide overhaul to systematically and sustainably tackle people's ills, in particular the long-standing levels of ethnic, cultural and ethnic inequality in Thai societies. To this end, a nationwide poll will be carried out in tandem with meetings attended by all groups of persons to assess people's needs, prioritize and collect opinions on how to solve these issues.
Civic organizations are driving this forward and all areas of the community and human networking at all tiers are being invited to participate, while the authorities will give their full backing. Opinions collected through these avenues will be collected by the end of September or early October and used as inputs for the preparation of a draft proposal for domestic reforms by the end of 2010.
A further group headed by Professor Dr. Yubol Benjarongkit, Dean of the Faculty of Communication at Chulalongkorn University, will work with a number of different organizations to guarantee free and fair communication while at the same time empowering the mass communication industry to work in a constructive manner and help to heal social division and hostilities. - For more than seventy years, since it became a democratic country with a constituent empire, Thailand has been going through the transition to full democratic rule.
Thailand's social system has also tried to get away from the impact of monetary policy and abuse of powers by politicians, as one could see during the Thaksin Shinawatra administrators. - Against this background, on 12 March 2010 protesters from the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), which supports former Premier Thaksin Shinawatra, began organising demonstrations in Bangkok and demanded the disbandment of the House of Representatives and the organisation of parliamentary ballots.
- Firstly, there were those with legitimately complaining, which included issues related to issues of insecurity, deprivation, unfairness, or financial and societal inequalities, who wanted to resolve them. The current government, like its predecessor, has worked to tackle these shortcomings, inter alia by implementing various charity and community-building programmes. - Secondly, there were those who wanted to overthrow the current government to retrieve former Premier Thaksin Shinawatra without serving the sentences that the court convicted them of the alleged crimes of interest.
- There were also reinforced arms with arms of arms that invaded the people. - At the same a number of connections existed to various networking bodies, such as the web and other means of communication, which carried out actions and spread embassies or information that bordered differently on the undermining of the monarchic institutions of the Thai nation and called for a transformation of Thailand's current state.
- Against the background of these motions, it was former Premier Thaksin who secretly and openly supported them time and again by moving them out of the sea, not least through videos, telephone conversations or other means of electronics, which persuade the masses to continue their illegal demonstrations and to subvert a lawful state by force.
To this end, on 25 May 2010, after examining evidences and testimonies from both the Thai Government and former Thaksin, the Criminal Court found that there is enough proof to authorise an arrestment order against the former PM, as demanded by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) for a terrorism-related indictment under the Thai Criminal Code.
- In order to advance his case, the former PM recently recruited an internat-onal lawyer to carry out a worldwide PR effort on his name and disseminate biased information against the government. Rather than accept the judicial system that he himself still applies against others, he decided to move abroad to prevent his two-year imprisonment after fleeing Thailand in October 2008, just two month before being found culpable of the conflicts of interest under the country's anti-corruption legislation by the criminal department established under the 1997 constitution for persons holding political positions.
Furthermore, in February 2010, the Tribunal found that during his term of Office the former PM had taken actions which unduly benefitted a firm in which he was indeed the principal stockholder through various nominations and shell corporations. - As well as lawsuits, there have been many accusations of violations of human rights against former Premier Thaksin in the context of his policies to wage a drug-killing war, which has led to the allegation of several thousand extrajudicial murders, and the situation in the southern border provinces, which has compounded the difficulties there.
As part of the exercising of the peoples right to a non-violent gathering, the government had permitted them to proceed by viewing this as a trial through which individuals could take part in the countrys policy. Simultaneously, the government had to refer to the Internal Security Act (ISA), which - as can be seen from earlier cases - did not impair the right to a non-violent meeting in order to take steps to avoid and curb the escalation.
That was confirmed by the Civil Court on 5 April 2010, which, on the basis of the government' s appeal and appeal and other proof and facts about the situation, established that the UDD demonstration was illegal and that the government has the power to solve, avoid and re-establish the situation.
- In carrying out their tasks, safety officials - the army, policemen and civilians - have been given clear operational processes that only provide for the necessary and appropriate action. 3 ] Their action has also been inspired by the pertinent judgments of the Administrative Court and the Civil Court, which do not ban the dissemination of the demonstration, but state that all action to be taken must be as necessary and appropriate as possible and in accordance with interna -tional norms.
- On 10 April 2010, the police tried to impose the bill by asking protesters to return the territories they occupy around the Phan Fah Bridge, but they encountered heavy opposition from protesters in various ways, involving the use of deadly weapons by gunmen among them, resulting in over 20 dead and several hundred wounded both among the police and protesters and among the innocent spectators.
- The government deplores the loss incurred. It also deplores the underestimation at the meeting of the willingness of gunmen among the protesters to use deadly weapons to hurt other Thais - sometimes at random against protesters, spectators and police forces - to exacerbate the situation and encourage further acts of force.
- On the basis of evidences and videos recorded by the regional and global press, it is clear that these armoured forces among the protesters used indiscriminately destructive acts of terrorism and arms of war that led to deaths and injury on both sides. Photos and videos show that M 67 grenaders, M 79 mortars, AK 47 machineguns and spontaneous firearms were used against those who were not fitted with these firearms.
- As for the April 22, 2010 event, while a group of individuals - consisting of Silom Region inhabitants and those called "multicolored shirts" by the press - assembled on Silom Road at Saladang Intersection to show their resistance to the UDD, M 79 mortars were used by unidentified individuals to shoot into the former group, resulting in one deaths and several other injuries.
On 29 April 2010, a group of protestors were blocked beyond all expectation and entered the Chulalongkorn Clinic, located next to the demonstration site, making it necessary for the clinic to move the patient to other facilities or clinics. - Following the failure of the negotiating and compromising effort - particularly with the refusal of the five-point conciliation plans suggested by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on 3 May 2010 and in view of the increasing negative effects of the continuing proclamations on Thai society and the Thai industry - the government on 13 May 2010 resolved to close off the area around Ratchaprasong Intersection in order to put the protestors under duress to end their democrators.
Activities included the establishment of checkpoints on the outskirts of the site to avoid participation in the demonstrations and the suspension of local utility and transport facilities. - However, the forces sent to build and guard the checkpoints on the site were assaulted - not only by slingshots and home-made nukes, but also by fierce munitions and military weaponry, especially handguns and M 79 shells.
More than a hundred M 79 shells were fired against the police from 13 to 19 May 2010. Everyone affected in the areas and forced the officials to protect themselves, as well as countless innocent spectators, as well as representatives of the press and ambulance staff working in the areas.
We also have visible proof that these weapons use guilty humans, even kids, as shelters. We should point out that all these events took place far outside the immediate area of the protests and that the guards held their positions without attempting to infiltrate. - On May 19, 2010 at 05:45 a.m.
Therefore, the government has started to strengthen the barrier in order to ensure the fencing of the protests area and thus improve general openness in these areas. It also aimed to protect the area around Lumpini Park, which was used by gunmen to stockpile their arms and start assaults on police officers.
Despite strong opposition from the gunmen, the area around Lumpini Park was closed in the mornings. after which the guards were instructed to shut down their businesses. For other demonstrators, their safety home has been made easier by the government. - However, some demonstrators, especially the tough key issues, have kept causing unrest and unrest in some areas of the town, demolishing land and burning down houses, particularly to representatives of the press, who they felt were accountable for stories that were not in their favor.
There have also been efforts to prevent and prevent the military forces from softening up. - In order to allow police forces to pass the bill, re-establish order and safeguard the general population, the government had to apply the emergency decree in another 16 provinces and declare a ban on going out during the time from 19 to 28 May 2010.
- A few leagues after the end of the protest, the situation has improved further and life has slowly returned to normality. Yet the government cannot allow itself to be smug. As an instrument to guarantee security and to involve the offenders in the courts, the emergency ordinance is still necessary, although the rules and procedures have been progressively softened.
- The current Thai authorities have taken up their duties by ordinary parliamentarian means under a system of democracy. In spite of the protests' attempts to present the current Thai authorities as "illegitimate", the fact persists that Mr Abhisit Vejjajiva - a seven-time member of this House - was elected by a House of Representatives in exactly the same way and by exactly the same house as his two forerunners, to whom Mr Abhisit had previously won the competitions to form the Thai authorities and who had consequently been dismissed for violating the Law.
It is not uncommon in a multiparty democracies that the House can choose to appoint a single governing body to a different one from the one that has won the most votes but does not have a clear majority, nor that it is possible for politicians to change supporting each other.
- The Royal Thai Government's overall goal in dealing with the present policy situation is not only to restore normality in the areas affected by the outbreaks. It has always stressed the need to find both policy and policy responses and to address ills. It is important that no resolution should lead to the creation of a policy standard that allows the use of terrorism, acts of brutality, harassment or threat to enforce or oust a legitimate regime and reach policy objectives, as this is linked to the democratic process.
- Firstly, as regards protesters' complaints on matters such as inequality, unfairness and inequality, the current government acknowledges its obligation to combat them, as the subsequent Thailand authorities have tried to do. In fact, since taking up its mandate, it has put in place a number of policies, inter alia through guarantees of farmer incomes, free healthcare, free education, livelihood assistance for the aged and policies to deal with informally charged debts that cannot be solved in a timely manner.
The government, for its part, has not denied these calls and has always shown its willingness to enter into dialog with the opposition leadership. Prime Minister himself had two meetings with them and agreed to close the House of Representatives within nine month.
Firstly, various problematical constitutional clauses should be changed and submitted to the electorate by means of a popular vote, so that both sides have voting rights which they can accept. Thirdly, the government wants to push through the adoption of the government plan in order to guarantee the continuation of the country's economy and the current fiscal programs.
- In an attempt to tackle the complaints and worries not only of demonstrators but also of the Thai population in other parts of Thai societies, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva presented a five-point conciliation programme to the Thai community to re-establish harmony and normality in Thai societies. These plans, which have been drawn up on the basis of the opinions and complaints of all groups of human beings, be they demonstrators, university graduates, civic organisations or commoners, include the need:
1 ) to prevent the monarch - which is a uniting power among the Thais - from getting involved in the Palestinian peoples policy conflicts; 2) to solve basic issues of societal equity in a systematic and inclusive way; 3) to make sure that the masses are free and constructive and are not abused to generate conflicts or hate; 4) to identify facts about violence by establishing an impartial committee to examine all violence and death that took place in order to find out the facts and guarantee equity for all parties;
5 ) establishing mutually agreeable policy frameworks by addressing questions, in particular some of the Constitution's or unjust legislation, and establishing a mechanisms to seek opinions from all sides to create fairness for those engaged in the policy debate, so that these questions would no longer result in the refusal of the policy making and the dispute in the years to come.
The Prime Minister also suggested at the meeting that if his conciliation plans were mutually agreeable, he would be able to hold an election on 14 November 2010. - It has been welcome by individuals in various areas of Thai civilisation, as well as the main protagonists of the opposing parties, as it offers a way not only to end the demonstration and restore normality, but also to solve some of the basic issues facing Thai civilisation in the longer term.
UDD chiefs had also agreed in theory, but after long discussions with the government, they refused, among other things, to end their protest in order to join the conciliator. In rejecting the UDD, the Prime Minister had to abandon his suggestion on polling day, which was to be fixed later as soon as the situation became favourable.
In the meantime, the government has pursued cooperation with civic and other stakeholders, in particular the press, to advance the five aspects of the conciliation work. - The government saw an urgent challenge on the issues of the violation of justice, as well as the safeguarding and safeguarding of the general population, especially with regard to violent crimes that can be seen as "terrorist acts" under Thai legislation, and the use of arms in these cases, and there was no other option than for the government to impose the legislation in accordance with the rules of justice and observance of fundamental freedoms.
- Despite calls on the government to take stronger action to dispel the demonstrators and keep order and order, the government had all the time shown extreme reticence and prevented violence. And, in cases where violence was used, the officer was not the first to use it.
In the face of demonstrators' attempt to divulge biased and concise information, some of which has also been taken up and disseminated by the ordinary press, some of which are even internationally, the public services have tried to divulge facts so that the public understands. - The Prime Minister has noted that among the protesters there are various groups of persons, some with a warrant, some with violence and others with heresy.
Most of the demonstrators have come home in this context, while the gunmen or incitators of unrest are being detained. - The rallies, which began on 12 March 2010 and ended on 19 May 2010, killed 87 persons and wounded 1,406.
Out of these, 11 were killed and 411 were wounded. - He reiterated that the government is open to control and willing to submit to court proceedings in accordance with the Act. Everyone, even himself, is under the Act and no one, not even former Premier Thaksin Shinawatra, should be excluded from the trial.
- In this context, research is being carried out into the violence and loss during the UDD protest and other events related to the use of military weaponry, intermittent shell strikes and the launch of an aerial vehicle onto an emergency fuel cap. In addition, a commission of inquiry chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Office of the Prime Minister has been set up.
It has been mandated by the government to take account of all sides, as well as those who sympathise with the demonstrators, so that it can achieve results that are fair and agreeable to all parties and help the conciliation proces. It is also prepared to work with other parliamentary endeavours and those of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), which has initiated its own investigation, and the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
During the House of Representatives' distrust of the government on 31 May and 1 June 2010, which concentrated on the events and fatalities during the protest, the Prime Minister had also provided information that contributed to dispelling the rumors and creating muddle. - The government has tried to help the people affected by the unhappy events - both on the part of the police and the protesters - and to take action in support of companies that were forced to shut down as a result of the ongoing protest and which were subsequently destroyed by the riots.
Under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister's Secretary-General, Korbsak Sabhavasu, a commission has been established to monitor these matters in collaboration with various bodies involved and the civil part. On 13 and 16 May 2010, the Cabinet authorised the application of the Decree in other counties, bringing the overall number of counties in an emergencies situation to 22.
The aim is to put officials - policemen, soldiers and civilians - in a position to maintain order and avoid possible disruption in these areas. 2 ] The safety officers' operational regulations provide for seven gradual stages in dealing with the mass situation, namely:
1 ) Demonstrating violence by deploying guards who hold insurrection screens and truncheons; 2) notifying and alerting demonstrators that they are about to use violence; 3) using screens; 4) using powerful boosters or cannons; 5) using lachrymal gases; 6) using truncheons; and 7) using gum shells.
Following the events of 10 April 2010, in which the use of arms by gunmen among the protestors took the life not only of gunmen but also of a number of law enforcement officials, this Ratchaprasong area cordoning off operation in May was reworked to allow the use of living rounds in another case, namely: retaliation against clearly identifiable, weapons-armed people.
In addition, scatterguns can be used against combatants and terrorists who approach approaches safety groups to avoid harming others, and in this case the police would only target below the knees.
It is also allowed to use lacrimal thrower to keep the gap between the officer and the gunmen. Basically, safety forces would not use deadly weaponry against nonarmed protestors and under no circumstance against wives and warriors.