The Democrats' solution is to move Japan away from a corporate-centric economic model to one that focuses on helping people.
Sunday's election results in Japan may seem like a clear mandate for change. But looks can be misleading.Japan's voters resoundingly kicked out the party that has governed their country for virtually all the past half century. The newly empowered Democratic Party of Japan's (DPJ) time to celebrate, though, could be shortlived.
They've made their promises, and now they have to deliver - a tall order for a party with a shaky mandate. The numbers may show a landslide, but most voters were seen as venting dissatisfaction with the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) more so than endorsing the policies of the opposition DPJ.
The beneficiary of the public's frustration is the Democratic Party, which has laid out a populist platform with promises to expand the country's social safety net. The media projected late Sunday night that the party would capture 300 of 480 lower house seats - more than enough to control the national agenda.
Many Democratic candidates, who have never experienced such sweet vic-tory, seemed stunned by the results,overcome with emotion by the historic nature of their win.
Savouring triumph now is probably a good idea. The political high is unlikely to last very long. As President Barack Obama is discovering now with healthcare reform, touting change is a lot easier than making it happen.
The Democrats' first task will be to convince a sceptical public that they can actually lead.
"I feel very insecure with the Democratic Party of Japan," said 65-year-old voter Shuji Ueki a few hours after the polls closed."They don't have a record."
Indeed, the Democrats are untested,made up of an inexperienced group of left-wing activists and LDP defectors.The party is just 11 years old, and only a handful have served in top government positions.
Their rise to power - and ability to enact change -comes at a critical crossroads for the world's second-largest economy.
Japan managed to climb out of a year-long recession in the second quarter,but its economy remains weak. Unemployment and anxiety over falling wages threatens to undermine any recovery.The jobless rate has risen to a record 5.7%. After a rapid succession of three administrations in three years, Japan is facing its worst crisis of confidence in decades.
In the long-term it faces a bleak outlook if it isn't able to figure out how to cope with a rapidly ageing and shrinking population. Government estimates predict the figure will drop to 115 million in 2030 and fall below 100 million by the middle of the century.
The Democrats' solution is to move Japan away from a corporate-centric economic model to one that focuses on helping people. They have proposed an expensive array of initiatives: cash handouts to families and farmers, toll-free highways, a higher minimum wage and tax cuts. The estimated bill comes to 16.8 trillion yen (US$179 billion) when fully implemented starting in the 2013 fiscal year.
The party has said it plans to cut "waste" and rely on untapped financial reserves to fund their programmes. But with Japan's public debt heading toward 200% of gross domestic product, the Democrats' plan has been criticised as a financial fantasy that would worsen Japan's precarious fiscal health.
The Democrats are also under scrutiny for their positions on national security and foreign policy.
Party leader Yukio Hatoyama, set to become Japan's next prime minister,has been vocal about distancing the country from Washington and forging closer ties with its Asian neighbours.
As opposition leader, he routinely criticised the pro-US Liberal Democrats for joining in refuelling operations in the Indian Ocean in support of American troops in Afghanistan - a mission he says he will halt - and the role of the 50,000 American troops deployed throughout Japan under a post-World War Two mutual security pact.
But the Democrats' most formidable roadblock will probably be Japan's massive bureaucracy, which for decades has had a cosy relationship with the LDP and effectively runs the government.The new ruling party has vowed to do what no one has managed to so far:limit the bureaucracy's power and hand more control over to elected officials.
Ichiro Ozawa, co-founder of the party,expressed quiet confidence:"We have no fear, and we will steadily achieve our campaign promises one by one."
Monday, August 31, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Furore over caning highlights rise of Islamic law
Malaysia would be better off if all citizens, including non-Muslims, were subject toIslamic law including 'hudud' penalties like stoning adulterers and chopping off thieves' hands.
HARUSSANI ZAKARIA, THE MUFTI FOR PERAK STATE.
The dramatic case of a Muslim model who faces caning for drinking beer in Malaysia has highlighted concerns that Islamic law is on the rise and that the nation's secular status is under threat.
Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno,32, was arrested at a hotel nightclub and sentenced to six strokes of the cane last month, in a rare prosecution of religious laws that ban alcohol for Malaysia's majority Muslim Malays.
Her insistence that she was ready to face her punishment and would not appeal threw government and religious authorities into a spin as they attempted to carry out the sentence against a woman for the first time.
As international headlines mounted,and foreign TV crews reported live from her family's home as the mother of two was detained ahead of the thrashing,she was abruptly released and the punishment is now on hold indefinitely.
"The overriding view was that the sentence meted out was too harsh and is not commensurate with the offence,"said Women's Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil.
She announced that the religious court would hold a review.
"We are equally concerned not only for Kartika Sari, but also for the fact that this one particular case could have damaged the image of Malaysia in its fair and just implementation of the sharia law," the minister said.
Despite the queasiness in meting out the sentence, in a jail not far from the glittering capital Kuala Lumpur, ethnic Muslim Malay politicians have long been competing to be seen as more pious than the other.
The dynamic of "political Islam",which has alarmed Malaysia's minority ethnic Chinese and Indians, has gone into overdrive since 2008 elections that humiliated the long-serving Barisan Nasional coalition. The United Malays National Organisation (Umno) which leads the coalition and needs Malays as its bedrock, is being challenged by the conservative Islamic party PAS, a member of the resurgent Pakatan Rakyat opposition.
"There is this whole business of outIslamising one another," said Azmi Sharom, an associate professor in the law faculty of Universiti Malaya.
"There has been persistent talk that Islam is under threat for the past year and a half, since the results of the last general election." Prof Azmi said that in their eagerness to display their religious credentials, politicians were failing to check the creeping authority of the sharia courts, which operate in a dual-track system with the civil courts.
Sharia courts can prosecute Muslims for certain offences including drinking alcohol and "proximity" or illicit contact with the opposite sex. While enforcement has been lax in the past, it is now becoming more aggressive, and the scope of the religious courts appears to be expanding.
Prof Azmi said the government, which is keen to preserve Malaysia's reputation as a progressive and moderate Muslim nation, was skirting the issue by urging Ms Kartika to appeal."The crux of the matter is, how can we have such medieval laws on our books at all?" the professor said."I have a feeling this problem is going to get worse and worse because none of the leadership is going to have the guts to say - hold on, this is a secular democracy, we have to put a stop to this."
Harussani Zakaria, the mufti for northern Perak state - an Islamic scholar empowered to give rulings on the Sharia - endorsed the push for stricter implementation of Islamic law.
"People will ask, you have this law,why don't you practice it? When we practice it, then the government interrupts the process," he complained, adding that Ms Kartika should be punished swiftly. The influential cleric said Malaysia would be better off if all citizens, including non-Muslims, were subject to Islamic law including hudud penalties like stoning adulterers and chopping off thieves'hands.
Zaid Ibrahim, a former cabinet minister in charge of legal affairs who quit last September and later switched to the opposition, said problems can arise if sharia pronouncements conflict with the constitution.
"But which Malay political leaders from either side of the political spectrum dare touch it?" he said.
"So the hardliners can and will always push and push and Malaysia will no longer be a liberal and moderate modern state," Mr Zaid said.
HARUSSANI ZAKARIA, THE MUFTI FOR PERAK STATE.
The dramatic case of a Muslim model who faces caning for drinking beer in Malaysia has highlighted concerns that Islamic law is on the rise and that the nation's secular status is under threat.
Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno,32, was arrested at a hotel nightclub and sentenced to six strokes of the cane last month, in a rare prosecution of religious laws that ban alcohol for Malaysia's majority Muslim Malays.
Her insistence that she was ready to face her punishment and would not appeal threw government and religious authorities into a spin as they attempted to carry out the sentence against a woman for the first time.
As international headlines mounted,and foreign TV crews reported live from her family's home as the mother of two was detained ahead of the thrashing,she was abruptly released and the punishment is now on hold indefinitely.
"The overriding view was that the sentence meted out was too harsh and is not commensurate with the offence,"said Women's Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil.
She announced that the religious court would hold a review.
"We are equally concerned not only for Kartika Sari, but also for the fact that this one particular case could have damaged the image of Malaysia in its fair and just implementation of the sharia law," the minister said.
Despite the queasiness in meting out the sentence, in a jail not far from the glittering capital Kuala Lumpur, ethnic Muslim Malay politicians have long been competing to be seen as more pious than the other.
The dynamic of "political Islam",which has alarmed Malaysia's minority ethnic Chinese and Indians, has gone into overdrive since 2008 elections that humiliated the long-serving Barisan Nasional coalition. The United Malays National Organisation (Umno) which leads the coalition and needs Malays as its bedrock, is being challenged by the conservative Islamic party PAS, a member of the resurgent Pakatan Rakyat opposition.
"There is this whole business of outIslamising one another," said Azmi Sharom, an associate professor in the law faculty of Universiti Malaya.
"There has been persistent talk that Islam is under threat for the past year and a half, since the results of the last general election." Prof Azmi said that in their eagerness to display their religious credentials, politicians were failing to check the creeping authority of the sharia courts, which operate in a dual-track system with the civil courts.
Sharia courts can prosecute Muslims for certain offences including drinking alcohol and "proximity" or illicit contact with the opposite sex. While enforcement has been lax in the past, it is now becoming more aggressive, and the scope of the religious courts appears to be expanding.
Prof Azmi said the government, which is keen to preserve Malaysia's reputation as a progressive and moderate Muslim nation, was skirting the issue by urging Ms Kartika to appeal."The crux of the matter is, how can we have such medieval laws on our books at all?" the professor said."I have a feeling this problem is going to get worse and worse because none of the leadership is going to have the guts to say - hold on, this is a secular democracy, we have to put a stop to this."
Harussani Zakaria, the mufti for northern Perak state - an Islamic scholar empowered to give rulings on the Sharia - endorsed the push for stricter implementation of Islamic law.
"People will ask, you have this law,why don't you practice it? When we practice it, then the government interrupts the process," he complained, adding that Ms Kartika should be punished swiftly. The influential cleric said Malaysia would be better off if all citizens, including non-Muslims, were subject to Islamic law including hudud penalties like stoning adulterers and chopping off thieves'hands.
Zaid Ibrahim, a former cabinet minister in charge of legal affairs who quit last September and later switched to the opposition, said problems can arise if sharia pronouncements conflict with the constitution.
"But which Malay political leaders from either side of the political spectrum dare touch it?" he said.
"So the hardliners can and will always push and push and Malaysia will no longer be a liberal and moderate modern state," Mr Zaid said.
NEW US POLICY IMPORTANT FOR BURMA'S FUTURE HOPES
The visit by US Senator Jim Webb to Burma, in which he won the release of John William Yettaw, who was sentenced to 7 years' imprisonment with hard labour for swimming across Inya lake to the home of Burmese democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, draws scepticism from some stakeholders in Burmese politics.
Since the administration of President Obama stated that its Burma policy is under review, those in the camp who supported the previous US sanctions policy are concerned about the direction of the prospective new policy.
The major concern is that the policy shift would change the equation between the regime and its opponents by favouring Burma's ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), and would legitimise the regime and its controversial 2010 election. As of now the election is a critical battlefield on which the fight between the SPDC and the opposition groups will be played out.
It is a fact that both engagement policies advocated by Asean, Burma's neighbours and other Asian nations, and the sanctions and isolation policy held by the US and EU have equally failed to bring any positive change in Burma. Looking for an alternative becomes a natural reality.
Previous attempts by the US to use its power via the UN Security Council have never been realised due to vetoes from China and Russia. These two countries also intervened when the US, along with the UK and France, tried to practise "Responsibility to Protect" to save the victims of Cyclone Nargis that hit Burma in May 2008, leaving 135,000 dead and over two million homeless while the Burmese regime denied immediate humanitarian aid from outside. The US must find an alternative policy so that it can exercise its power to help 55 million Burmese people.
The US is the power the SPDC despises most, but at the same time, will listen to most if it has to. Some suggest that Senator Webb's success in meeting with Senior General Than Shwe and Aung San Suu Kyi is a result of mounting international pressure, which the regime wants to defuse following Aung San Suu Kyi's sentencing on August 11.
While the US needs to send a former president, Bill Clinton, to North Korea to secure the freedom of two Americans and to meet reclusive leader Kim Jong-il, it was politically cheaper for it to send only a senator to secure the freedom of Yettaw and meet Burma's reclusive leader. It indicates that the Burmese regime will listen to the US when it has to, even though unwillingly.
But the US cannot unilaterally exercise its power. Bringing more nations on board, along with a new policy, whilst remaining in the driving seat, would make a difference.
Some suggest the Obama administration is sending a mixed message to the regime, with the US president's recent renewal of Burma sanctions contradicting calls from some senior US officials for "affirmative engagement". Should we not see the renewal as a signal from the US that sanctions remain a possible punishment, whereas the doorway has been opened for engagement? Should it be understood as a "carrot and stick" policy which offers engagement in the first place and punishment later? This is not a new approach in dealing with Burma. Australia, for example, in the early 1990s advocated a similar concept using the name of "Benchmark Policy".
The division among the international players has allowed the regime's survival over the last two decades. Once the US develops a new policy, it must be able to bring more nations on board from both camps - those advocating engagement and those advocating sanctions and isolation.
The carrot and stick approach, offering engagement and sanctions, with proper use of both in a balanced manner, could be a bridge to bring both camps closer. It means that the new US policy must be multilateral, not unilateral.
Some Asian countries, including Asean members, India and China, may have prioritised their own interests when engaging with the regime. They are also major trading partners of the regime, and some supply weapons. A few may even wish that Burma never becomes a democracy. Some democracies, namely India and Japan, compromise universally-accepted values that are in practise in their countries, just for national interest - by giving in too much to the SPDC. This shows that countries in the engagement camp have less interest in changing Burma's status quo. Unlike these nations, the US is freer from any conflict of interest when it comes to Burma policy, whether using sanctions or engagement. It mainly sticks to the idea of sympathy for 55 million Burmese suffering under repressive military rulers for half a century.
Its democratic structure at home is unlikely to allow the US to compromise its values of human rights, freedom, justice, multi-party democracy and market economy when it comes to Burma policy. Planting such universally-accepted values in Burma can only be good.
Sympathy for the Burmese people, within the White House, State Department and both houses of Congress, as well as strong Burma advocacy groups in the country, could reduce the risk of a new US policy becoming another failed engagement.
The regime is not afraid to insult any international organisation, including Asean, the EU and UN. A recent example of how the regime blatantly fouled the international community was during UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's trip to Burma in early July. Most people assumed that pre-arrangements for his visit included securing the freedom of Aung San Suu Kyi, or at least meeting with her. The regime easily snubbed the secretary-general by denying him a meeting with Aung San Suu Kyi.
But the regime knows that it is difficult for it to insult the US the same way. Of course, it is up to the US to determine whether it will allow itself to be insulted.
Khin Maung Win is deputy executive director of the Democratic Voice of Burma, a Burmese radio and TV station based in Oslo. The views expressed in the article are his own.
Since the administration of President Obama stated that its Burma policy is under review, those in the camp who supported the previous US sanctions policy are concerned about the direction of the prospective new policy.
The major concern is that the policy shift would change the equation between the regime and its opponents by favouring Burma's ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), and would legitimise the regime and its controversial 2010 election. As of now the election is a critical battlefield on which the fight between the SPDC and the opposition groups will be played out.
It is a fact that both engagement policies advocated by Asean, Burma's neighbours and other Asian nations, and the sanctions and isolation policy held by the US and EU have equally failed to bring any positive change in Burma. Looking for an alternative becomes a natural reality.
Previous attempts by the US to use its power via the UN Security Council have never been realised due to vetoes from China and Russia. These two countries also intervened when the US, along with the UK and France, tried to practise "Responsibility to Protect" to save the victims of Cyclone Nargis that hit Burma in May 2008, leaving 135,000 dead and over two million homeless while the Burmese regime denied immediate humanitarian aid from outside. The US must find an alternative policy so that it can exercise its power to help 55 million Burmese people.
The US is the power the SPDC despises most, but at the same time, will listen to most if it has to. Some suggest that Senator Webb's success in meeting with Senior General Than Shwe and Aung San Suu Kyi is a result of mounting international pressure, which the regime wants to defuse following Aung San Suu Kyi's sentencing on August 11.
While the US needs to send a former president, Bill Clinton, to North Korea to secure the freedom of two Americans and to meet reclusive leader Kim Jong-il, it was politically cheaper for it to send only a senator to secure the freedom of Yettaw and meet Burma's reclusive leader. It indicates that the Burmese regime will listen to the US when it has to, even though unwillingly.
But the US cannot unilaterally exercise its power. Bringing more nations on board, along with a new policy, whilst remaining in the driving seat, would make a difference.
Some suggest the Obama administration is sending a mixed message to the regime, with the US president's recent renewal of Burma sanctions contradicting calls from some senior US officials for "affirmative engagement". Should we not see the renewal as a signal from the US that sanctions remain a possible punishment, whereas the doorway has been opened for engagement? Should it be understood as a "carrot and stick" policy which offers engagement in the first place and punishment later? This is not a new approach in dealing with Burma. Australia, for example, in the early 1990s advocated a similar concept using the name of "Benchmark Policy".
The division among the international players has allowed the regime's survival over the last two decades. Once the US develops a new policy, it must be able to bring more nations on board from both camps - those advocating engagement and those advocating sanctions and isolation.
The carrot and stick approach, offering engagement and sanctions, with proper use of both in a balanced manner, could be a bridge to bring both camps closer. It means that the new US policy must be multilateral, not unilateral.
Some Asian countries, including Asean members, India and China, may have prioritised their own interests when engaging with the regime. They are also major trading partners of the regime, and some supply weapons. A few may even wish that Burma never becomes a democracy. Some democracies, namely India and Japan, compromise universally-accepted values that are in practise in their countries, just for national interest - by giving in too much to the SPDC. This shows that countries in the engagement camp have less interest in changing Burma's status quo. Unlike these nations, the US is freer from any conflict of interest when it comes to Burma policy, whether using sanctions or engagement. It mainly sticks to the idea of sympathy for 55 million Burmese suffering under repressive military rulers for half a century.
Its democratic structure at home is unlikely to allow the US to compromise its values of human rights, freedom, justice, multi-party democracy and market economy when it comes to Burma policy. Planting such universally-accepted values in Burma can only be good.
Sympathy for the Burmese people, within the White House, State Department and both houses of Congress, as well as strong Burma advocacy groups in the country, could reduce the risk of a new US policy becoming another failed engagement.
The regime is not afraid to insult any international organisation, including Asean, the EU and UN. A recent example of how the regime blatantly fouled the international community was during UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's trip to Burma in early July. Most people assumed that pre-arrangements for his visit included securing the freedom of Aung San Suu Kyi, or at least meeting with her. The regime easily snubbed the secretary-general by denying him a meeting with Aung San Suu Kyi.
But the regime knows that it is difficult for it to insult the US the same way. Of course, it is up to the US to determine whether it will allow itself to be insulted.
Khin Maung Win is deputy executive director of the Democratic Voice of Burma, a Burmese radio and TV station based in Oslo. The views expressed in the article are his own.
Top Iran cleric says West not behind rioting
Iran's supreme leader said on Wednesday he did not believe the leaders of opposition protests that erupted after the country's June presidential vote were agents of foreigners.
Iranian officials have previously portrayed the protests as a foreign-backed bid to topple the clerical establishment.
They have accused Western powers,particularly the United States and Britain, of fomenting the unrest, a charge denied by Washington and London.
"I do not accuse the leaders of recent events as being the agents of foreigners,including America and Britain, because it has not been proven to me," Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a meeting with university students."But there is no doubt that this movement, whether its leaders know or not, was planned in advance." Some hardliners have repeatedly called for the arrest of opposition leaders who say the vote was rigged to secure the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.Former president Mohammad Khatami said trial confessions by moderates accused of fomenting the unrest were made under "extraordinary conditions"and invalid, an Iranian news agency reported.
At Tuesday's trial, the fourth since the June polls, senior reformer and Khatami ally Saeed Hajjarian was reported as saying he had "made major mistakes during the election by presenting incorrect analyses".
"I apologise to the Iranian nation for those mistakes." A prosecutor demanded maximum punishment for Mr Hajjarian who is accused of acting against national security, a crime which can carry the death sentence.
"These confessions are invalid and have been obtained under extraordinary conditions, such claims are sheer lies and false," Mr Khatami, who backed the main moderate candidate in the election, was quoted as saying.
Also in the dock on Tuesday were several other moderate figures, including former deputy interior minister Mostafa Tajzadeh and former deputy foreign minister Mohsen Aminzadeh - both of whom held their positions under Mr Khatami.
All were charged with fomenting street protests. Some confessed to "mistakes". Iranian-American scholar Kian Tajbakhsh was also accused of acting against national security and espionage at Tuesday's trial.
Mr Tajbakhsh told the court Mr Khatami had met billionaire financier George Soros in New York, Iranian media reported, but Mr Khatami said this was also a "lie".
Analysts see the mass trials as an
attempt to uproot the moderate opposition and put an end to opposition protests.
Rights groups say hundreds of people, including senior pro-reform politicians,journalists and activists, have been detained since the election. Many are still in jail.
Moderate politicians and influential former president Akbar Rafsanjani, a rival of Mr Ahmadinejad, have called for the detainees' immediate release.
One of those in the dock in Tuesday's trial accused Mr Rafsanjani's son of encouraging moderates to allege that the poll was rigged.
In a TV debate before the election,Mr Ahmadinejad accused Mr Rafsanjani's family of corruption. The official Irna news agency said on Wednesday Mr Rafsanjani's family had issued a complaint to the judiciary against Mr Ahmadinejad, but it did not give details.
Mehdi Karoubi, one of the defeated candidates, has also angered hardliners by claiming some imprisoned protesters were raped and abused in jail,a charge officials have rejected as "baseless". But a parliamentary committee set up to investigate the cases of detainees said it would be ready to consider any evidence submitted by the proreform cleric.
Iranian officials have previously portrayed the protests as a foreign-backed bid to topple the clerical establishment.
They have accused Western powers,particularly the United States and Britain, of fomenting the unrest, a charge denied by Washington and London.
"I do not accuse the leaders of recent events as being the agents of foreigners,including America and Britain, because it has not been proven to me," Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a meeting with university students."But there is no doubt that this movement, whether its leaders know or not, was planned in advance." Some hardliners have repeatedly called for the arrest of opposition leaders who say the vote was rigged to secure the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.Former president Mohammad Khatami said trial confessions by moderates accused of fomenting the unrest were made under "extraordinary conditions"and invalid, an Iranian news agency reported.
At Tuesday's trial, the fourth since the June polls, senior reformer and Khatami ally Saeed Hajjarian was reported as saying he had "made major mistakes during the election by presenting incorrect analyses".
"I apologise to the Iranian nation for those mistakes." A prosecutor demanded maximum punishment for Mr Hajjarian who is accused of acting against national security, a crime which can carry the death sentence.
"These confessions are invalid and have been obtained under extraordinary conditions, such claims are sheer lies and false," Mr Khatami, who backed the main moderate candidate in the election, was quoted as saying.
Also in the dock on Tuesday were several other moderate figures, including former deputy interior minister Mostafa Tajzadeh and former deputy foreign minister Mohsen Aminzadeh - both of whom held their positions under Mr Khatami.
All were charged with fomenting street protests. Some confessed to "mistakes". Iranian-American scholar Kian Tajbakhsh was also accused of acting against national security and espionage at Tuesday's trial.
Mr Tajbakhsh told the court Mr Khatami had met billionaire financier George Soros in New York, Iranian media reported, but Mr Khatami said this was also a "lie".
Analysts see the mass trials as an
attempt to uproot the moderate opposition and put an end to opposition protests.
Rights groups say hundreds of people, including senior pro-reform politicians,journalists and activists, have been detained since the election. Many are still in jail.
Moderate politicians and influential former president Akbar Rafsanjani, a rival of Mr Ahmadinejad, have called for the detainees' immediate release.
One of those in the dock in Tuesday's trial accused Mr Rafsanjani's son of encouraging moderates to allege that the poll was rigged.
In a TV debate before the election,Mr Ahmadinejad accused Mr Rafsanjani's family of corruption. The official Irna news agency said on Wednesday Mr Rafsanjani's family had issued a complaint to the judiciary against Mr Ahmadinejad, but it did not give details.
Mehdi Karoubi, one of the defeated candidates, has also angered hardliners by claiming some imprisoned protesters were raped and abused in jail,a charge officials have rejected as "baseless". But a parliamentary committee set up to investigate the cases of detainees said it would be ready to consider any evidence submitted by the proreform cleric.
HERE'S HOPING THAKSIN IS REALLY TIRED TOO
Peaceful one moment, threats of belligerence the next; there seems no end in sight to the political quagmire
Knowing Thaksin Shinawatra, his Wednesday message to his supporters could mean anything. In that phone-in, aired on Udon Thani community radio, the ousted prime minister voiced concern over this Sunday's planned rally by the red shirts at the Royal Plaza in Bangkok. It will be the first major gathering of the pro-Thaksin movement since the petition submission ceremony on August 17, and Thaksin told the radio host that he had voiced his anxiety with rally organiser Veera Musigapong.
The first theory is that he is sincere. Having seen the petition submitted to royal authorities in a massive but solemn demonstration of support, Thaksin, whose international image took a battering when his red supporters ran amok in April, must not want another untoward incident. If the pardon-Thaksin petition campaign has somewhat compensated for the Songkran infamy, why spoil it so suddenly?
The second theory has Thaksin hedging against the possibility of Sunday's rally going wrong. He could not escape responsibility for the April turmoil, which put Thailand on the verge of bloodshed, because it happened after his belligerent speeches were broadcast live to his followers day in and day out. This time, he has somewhat distanced himself from the red shirts' new move and the "concern" he has voiced will be another shield of immunity. The most important underlying message from Wednesday's phone-in was: "It's Veera and company who are planning this, and I can't do anything except express my worries."
The third theory has to do with the government's plan to impose the Internal Security Act in the Dusit area. He is either genuinely worried for his supporters or is taking advantage of the situation by pointing international watchers toward Thailand. Harsh laws were never really enforced when pro-Thaksin governments were in power, although, it has to be said, a bloody crackdown did take place against the People's Alliance for Democracy in October last year. Protesters were killed and several maimed in that incident.
The fourth theory is based on reported rifts among key red-shirt members. Thaksin naturally will not want a political rally to take place against this backdrop. If he wanted to show the world how well-loved he is among a large portion of the Thai population, that objective must have been fulfilled both prior to and after Songkran. If the movement is not fully ready for another big push, why push it?
As for the red shirts, whether they are doing it for him or whether it's his secret command, Sunday's rally will fly in the face of the relatively peaceful petition campaign. After all, it's one thing to seek "compassion" for Thaksin and then go home, but it's another to beg for forgiveness and then take up arms again, less than two weeks later.
The red shirts can argue that protesting against a "bad" government and seeking royal clemency for their "good" leader are two separate things. That may be true but the line is very thin indeed. And things will get further complicated considering the fact that it's the "bad" government they are protesting against that will decide whether the petition should be forwarded to His Majesty the King.
In other words, the red shirts, after accusing the government of trying to politicise their "sincere" petition campaign, are not making it any easier for the administration by planning such a major rally so soon. Democratically, they have the right. But if they think they are helping Thaksin, their choice of strategy is surprising.
Having claimed that the government had distorted an honest petition campaign and made it look like an act of intimidation, the last thing the red shirts should do is really act like an intimidator at this stage.
And in the end, it's the general Thai public who will have to hold their breath again, after the great anxiety on Thaksin's birthday last month and the petition submission this month. A brief glance at the calendar and one can't be too optimistic even if Sunday passes without an incident. The high-level police reshuffle has not been settled, while that for the military is coming up. The first anniversaries of the bloody crackdown on the PAD and the Suvarnabhumi Airport are approaching. And the trial to determine what to do with Thaksin's impounded, staggering assets cannot be delayed forever.
It has become part of our lives now to keep one eye on the political scene and its every detail because we can never know who will step on the next landmine, and when. Getting nervous has become an endless burden for Thai citizens and the time to pray keeps coming back with common regularity. The most optimistic analysis of Thaksin's Wednesday statement has him concerned and tired like all of us. The most cynical tells us that if someone like him is concerned, we should be doubly alarmed.
Knowing Thaksin Shinawatra, his Wednesday message to his supporters could mean anything. In that phone-in, aired on Udon Thani community radio, the ousted prime minister voiced concern over this Sunday's planned rally by the red shirts at the Royal Plaza in Bangkok. It will be the first major gathering of the pro-Thaksin movement since the petition submission ceremony on August 17, and Thaksin told the radio host that he had voiced his anxiety with rally organiser Veera Musigapong.
The first theory is that he is sincere. Having seen the petition submitted to royal authorities in a massive but solemn demonstration of support, Thaksin, whose international image took a battering when his red supporters ran amok in April, must not want another untoward incident. If the pardon-Thaksin petition campaign has somewhat compensated for the Songkran infamy, why spoil it so suddenly?
The second theory has Thaksin hedging against the possibility of Sunday's rally going wrong. He could not escape responsibility for the April turmoil, which put Thailand on the verge of bloodshed, because it happened after his belligerent speeches were broadcast live to his followers day in and day out. This time, he has somewhat distanced himself from the red shirts' new move and the "concern" he has voiced will be another shield of immunity. The most important underlying message from Wednesday's phone-in was: "It's Veera and company who are planning this, and I can't do anything except express my worries."
The third theory has to do with the government's plan to impose the Internal Security Act in the Dusit area. He is either genuinely worried for his supporters or is taking advantage of the situation by pointing international watchers toward Thailand. Harsh laws were never really enforced when pro-Thaksin governments were in power, although, it has to be said, a bloody crackdown did take place against the People's Alliance for Democracy in October last year. Protesters were killed and several maimed in that incident.
The fourth theory is based on reported rifts among key red-shirt members. Thaksin naturally will not want a political rally to take place against this backdrop. If he wanted to show the world how well-loved he is among a large portion of the Thai population, that objective must have been fulfilled both prior to and after Songkran. If the movement is not fully ready for another big push, why push it?
As for the red shirts, whether they are doing it for him or whether it's his secret command, Sunday's rally will fly in the face of the relatively peaceful petition campaign. After all, it's one thing to seek "compassion" for Thaksin and then go home, but it's another to beg for forgiveness and then take up arms again, less than two weeks later.
The red shirts can argue that protesting against a "bad" government and seeking royal clemency for their "good" leader are two separate things. That may be true but the line is very thin indeed. And things will get further complicated considering the fact that it's the "bad" government they are protesting against that will decide whether the petition should be forwarded to His Majesty the King.
In other words, the red shirts, after accusing the government of trying to politicise their "sincere" petition campaign, are not making it any easier for the administration by planning such a major rally so soon. Democratically, they have the right. But if they think they are helping Thaksin, their choice of strategy is surprising.
Having claimed that the government had distorted an honest petition campaign and made it look like an act of intimidation, the last thing the red shirts should do is really act like an intimidator at this stage.
And in the end, it's the general Thai public who will have to hold their breath again, after the great anxiety on Thaksin's birthday last month and the petition submission this month. A brief glance at the calendar and one can't be too optimistic even if Sunday passes without an incident. The high-level police reshuffle has not been settled, while that for the military is coming up. The first anniversaries of the bloody crackdown on the PAD and the Suvarnabhumi Airport are approaching. And the trial to determine what to do with Thaksin's impounded, staggering assets cannot be delayed forever.
It has become part of our lives now to keep one eye on the political scene and its every detail because we can never know who will step on the next landmine, and when. Getting nervous has become an endless burden for Thai citizens and the time to pray keeps coming back with common regularity. The most optimistic analysis of Thaksin's Wednesday statement has him concerned and tired like all of us. The most cynical tells us that if someone like him is concerned, we should be doubly alarmed.
Vietnam paper fires blogger
One of Vietnam's most popular and boldest bloggers has been fired by his newspaper after the ruling Communist Party complained to editors about his writings.
Huy Duc, who writes his blog under the pen name "Osin", was dismissed this week because his postings did not reflect the editorial positions of Saigon Tiep Thi , said Tran Cong Khanh, an editor at the newspaper.
Mr Khanh cited a recent Osin posting that praised the fall of the Berlin Wall and criticised the former Soviet Union's Communist leaders, saying their rule had led to years of misery for the people of Eastern Europe. Mr Duc referred to the wall as "the wall of shame".
"The attitude of his entry did not reflect that of our newspaper, and we can't use him anymore," Mr Khanh said.
Mr Khanh said the newspaper made the decision to dismiss Mr Duc on its own, without direct pressure from the government, which strictly monitors Vietnam's state-controlled media.
But he acknowledged the Propaganda and Education Commission, the Communist Party's media watchdog, had complained about roughly 100 of Mr Duc's blogs and newspaper stories.
Mr Duc's Osin blog has tested the limits of free expression in Vietnam, frequently featuring articles critical of government leaders and their policies.
He has chided leaders for chartering Vietnam Airlines planes to fly abroad,and criticised a controversial bauxite mining project in Vietnam's Central Highlands.
Huy Duc, who writes his blog under the pen name "Osin", was dismissed this week because his postings did not reflect the editorial positions of Saigon Tiep Thi , said Tran Cong Khanh, an editor at the newspaper.
Mr Khanh cited a recent Osin posting that praised the fall of the Berlin Wall and criticised the former Soviet Union's Communist leaders, saying their rule had led to years of misery for the people of Eastern Europe. Mr Duc referred to the wall as "the wall of shame".
"The attitude of his entry did not reflect that of our newspaper, and we can't use him anymore," Mr Khanh said.
Mr Khanh said the newspaper made the decision to dismiss Mr Duc on its own, without direct pressure from the government, which strictly monitors Vietnam's state-controlled media.
But he acknowledged the Propaganda and Education Commission, the Communist Party's media watchdog, had complained about roughly 100 of Mr Duc's blogs and newspaper stories.
Mr Duc's Osin blog has tested the limits of free expression in Vietnam, frequently featuring articles critical of government leaders and their policies.
He has chided leaders for chartering Vietnam Airlines planes to fly abroad,and criticised a controversial bauxite mining project in Vietnam's Central Highlands.
UN envoy slams racist policy
A UN envoy slammed Australia's military-led intervention in remote Aboriginal communities and said racism is "entrenched" in the country,in a damning assessment yesterday.
UN Special Rapporteur on Indigenous Rights James Anaya said the intervention policy, where thousands of troops and police were sent to help curb alcoholfuelled sexual abuse and domestic violence, was clearly discriminatory.
He urged the government to reinstate the Racial Discrimination Act in the Northern Territory, and called for compensation for the "stolen generations"of Aboriginal children, taken from their parents to promote racial integration.
"It undermines the right of indigenous peoples to control their own destinies,their right to self-determination," Mr Anaya, referring to the intervention, said."There is entrenched racism in Australia.These measures overtly discriminate against Aboriginal peoples."
Under the intervention, the conservative government of ex-prime minister John Howard slapped restrictions on welfare payments, alcohol and pornography in 73 desert townships and introduced measures to boost school attendance. The controversial move has met with fierce objections from Aborigines, with one group this week calling on the UN to declare them refugees in their own country, claiming the government action had left them powerless.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has refused to scrap the policy since taking office in late 2007, disappointing many Aboriginal leaders, despite issuing a historic apology for the wrongs suffered since white settlement in 1788. Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin said moves to reintroduce the Racial Discrimination Act, suspended in the Northern Territory when the crackdown started in June 2007, would come into parliament later this year.
"I think what's important is that we recognise we have a huge task in front of us to close the gap, to close the life expectancy gap, the employment gap,the gap in education," Ms Macklin said.
"We know how big the task is and we intend to keep getting on with it."
Mr Anaya's two-week visit to Australia is the first by a UN rapporteur on indigenous human rights, or roving representative for the international body.
He will report back to the UN Human Rights Council. His comments coincided with the outlining of a new representative body for the highly disadvantaged indigenous population, following the disbanding of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission in 2005.
Ms Macklin welcomed the proposal,which called for an independent body headed by elected representatives, but she promised only "modest and appropriate" funding.
Meanwhile, universities and other tertiary institutions in Australia yesterday urged the government to do more to protect international students after a spate of attacks against Indian students.
A coalition of six higher education groups presented a 10-point plan and called for a "student safe" campaign,while urging a crackdown on education agents and other private groups which target foreign students in study scams.
Australia's Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard will next week visit India in a bid to soothe tensions over the attacks and scams, which prompted both the prime minister and foreign minister to offer Delhi their personal assurances.
UN Special Rapporteur on Indigenous Rights James Anaya said the intervention policy, where thousands of troops and police were sent to help curb alcoholfuelled sexual abuse and domestic violence, was clearly discriminatory.
He urged the government to reinstate the Racial Discrimination Act in the Northern Territory, and called for compensation for the "stolen generations"of Aboriginal children, taken from their parents to promote racial integration.
"It undermines the right of indigenous peoples to control their own destinies,their right to self-determination," Mr Anaya, referring to the intervention, said."There is entrenched racism in Australia.These measures overtly discriminate against Aboriginal peoples."
Under the intervention, the conservative government of ex-prime minister John Howard slapped restrictions on welfare payments, alcohol and pornography in 73 desert townships and introduced measures to boost school attendance. The controversial move has met with fierce objections from Aborigines, with one group this week calling on the UN to declare them refugees in their own country, claiming the government action had left them powerless.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has refused to scrap the policy since taking office in late 2007, disappointing many Aboriginal leaders, despite issuing a historic apology for the wrongs suffered since white settlement in 1788. Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin said moves to reintroduce the Racial Discrimination Act, suspended in the Northern Territory when the crackdown started in June 2007, would come into parliament later this year.
"I think what's important is that we recognise we have a huge task in front of us to close the gap, to close the life expectancy gap, the employment gap,the gap in education," Ms Macklin said.
"We know how big the task is and we intend to keep getting on with it."
Mr Anaya's two-week visit to Australia is the first by a UN rapporteur on indigenous human rights, or roving representative for the international body.
He will report back to the UN Human Rights Council. His comments coincided with the outlining of a new representative body for the highly disadvantaged indigenous population, following the disbanding of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission in 2005.
Ms Macklin welcomed the proposal,which called for an independent body headed by elected representatives, but she promised only "modest and appropriate" funding.
Meanwhile, universities and other tertiary institutions in Australia yesterday urged the government to do more to protect international students after a spate of attacks against Indian students.
A coalition of six higher education groups presented a 10-point plan and called for a "student safe" campaign,while urging a crackdown on education agents and other private groups which target foreign students in study scams.
Australia's Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard will next week visit India in a bid to soothe tensions over the attacks and scams, which prompted both the prime minister and foreign minister to offer Delhi their personal assurances.
Taiwan nod for invitation of Dalai Lama
Taiwan President Ma Yingjeou yesterday approved a proposed visit next week by the Dalai Lama to the typhoon-hit island, sparking strongly worded condemnation from Beijing.
"We have decided to allow the Dalai Lama's visit to pray for the souls of the deceased and seek blessings for the survivors ofthe typhoon," Mr Ma told reporters in central Nantou county.
The Dalai Lama,whom Beijing has accused of trying to split Tibet from China,confirmed his trip after the president's announcement.
The visit, scheduled for Aug 30 to Sept 4, was The Dalai Lama harshly criticised in Beijing, according to state media.
"The Dalai Lama is not a pure religious figure," an unnamed spokesman for the mainland's Taiwan Affairs Office was quoted saying by the Xinhua news agency, hours after Mr Ma approved the invitation.
"Under the pretext of religion, he has all along been engaged in separatist activities."
China said yesterday that it "resolutely opposes" a decision by Taiwan's president to allow the Dalai Lama to visit the island.
A spokesman for the State Council's Taiwan Affairs Office said the visit by the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader,"in whatever form and capacity", would be condemned by China, according to the official Xinhua news agency.
The spokesman, who was not named, said the invitation was "an attempt to sabotage the hard-earned good situation in cross-strait relations".
China reacts angrily to any country or territory hosting the Dalai Lama,but a trip to Taiwan is particularly sensitive because Beijing regards it part of its territory awaiting reunification - by force, if necessary.
Mr Ma's spokesman Wang Yu-chi attempted to play down the political significance of the trip, saying it was "based on humanitarian and religious considerations which should not hurt
cross-strait ties".
The Dalai Lama, who made a historic first visit to Taiwan in 1997 and went again in 2001, is expected to visit the south of the island, which was battered by a typhoon two weeks ago which left 543 people dead.
Mr Ma, as mayor of Taipei, met the Tibetan spiritual leader on his previous visits, although his office declined to comment if they would meet again this time.
Beijing similarly condemned the Dalai Lama's earlier visits and analysts warned that next week's trip and a possible meeting with Mr Ma could deal a severe blow to warming ties since the Taiwan president took office last year.
"Ma's government could minimise the damage to cross-strait ties if the visit focuses on religious activities,"said George Tsai, a China expert at the Taipei-based Chinese Culture University.
Some lawmakers of the ruling Kuomintang party share those concerns.
"We hope the Dalai Lama will help us seek blessings and ward off disasters.We don't wish to see him engage in political activities here," Parliament Speaker Wang Jin-pyng said.
"We have decided to allow the Dalai Lama's visit to pray for the souls of the deceased and seek blessings for the survivors ofthe typhoon," Mr Ma told reporters in central Nantou county.
The Dalai Lama,whom Beijing has accused of trying to split Tibet from China,confirmed his trip after the president's announcement.
The visit, scheduled for Aug 30 to Sept 4, was The Dalai Lama harshly criticised in Beijing, according to state media.
"The Dalai Lama is not a pure religious figure," an unnamed spokesman for the mainland's Taiwan Affairs Office was quoted saying by the Xinhua news agency, hours after Mr Ma approved the invitation.
"Under the pretext of religion, he has all along been engaged in separatist activities."
China said yesterday that it "resolutely opposes" a decision by Taiwan's president to allow the Dalai Lama to visit the island.
A spokesman for the State Council's Taiwan Affairs Office said the visit by the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader,"in whatever form and capacity", would be condemned by China, according to the official Xinhua news agency.
The spokesman, who was not named, said the invitation was "an attempt to sabotage the hard-earned good situation in cross-strait relations".
China reacts angrily to any country or territory hosting the Dalai Lama,but a trip to Taiwan is particularly sensitive because Beijing regards it part of its territory awaiting reunification - by force, if necessary.
Mr Ma's spokesman Wang Yu-chi attempted to play down the political significance of the trip, saying it was "based on humanitarian and religious considerations which should not hurt
cross-strait ties".
The Dalai Lama, who made a historic first visit to Taiwan in 1997 and went again in 2001, is expected to visit the south of the island, which was battered by a typhoon two weeks ago which left 543 people dead.
Mr Ma, as mayor of Taipei, met the Tibetan spiritual leader on his previous visits, although his office declined to comment if they would meet again this time.
Beijing similarly condemned the Dalai Lama's earlier visits and analysts warned that next week's trip and a possible meeting with Mr Ma could deal a severe blow to warming ties since the Taiwan president took office last year.
"Ma's government could minimise the damage to cross-strait ties if the visit focuses on religious activities,"said George Tsai, a China expert at the Taipei-based Chinese Culture University.
Some lawmakers of the ruling Kuomintang party share those concerns.
"We hope the Dalai Lama will help us seek blessings and ward off disasters.We don't wish to see him engage in political activities here," Parliament Speaker Wang Jin-pyng said.
Ministry drops plans to evict forest monks
The Natural Resources and Environment Ministry has scrapped its plan to evict temples encroaching on protected forests.
Minister Suwit Khunkitti yesterday told about 100 monks at a seminar on conservation their monasteries would not be removed from protected areas if the monks provided authorities with help to protect forest lands.
Earlier this month, the Forestry Department, which comes under Mr Suwit's supervision, announced it would begin closing temples which encroach on protected forests.
The policy is in line with the 1995 cabinet resolution instructing the department to remove monks living illegally in national parks, watershed areas and wildlife sanctuaries.
The department said there were 5,529 forest temples occupying 190,000 rai of forest land, most of them in reserves.Sixty-eight temples were initially earmarked for closure.
The eviction plans drew fierce opposition from monks across the country.
"We won't push [the monks] out of the forest, even if the temples were built before or after the declaration of protected forests," Mr Suwit said.
"Monks are the key players in forest protection."
The minister said forestry officials would work with temples to develop a better understanding of how to live in harmony in ecologically fragile areas.
But the ministry would introduce measures to prevent the establishment of new temples in forested areas, Mr Suwit said.
Yongyuth Chamnanrop, chief of Phupayol national park in the northeastern province ofMukdahan,applauded the new position.
"At the ground level, strict law enforcement is sometimes not the right answer," he said."We need compromise."
Phupayol national park recently filed charges against Phu Mai How forest monastery for forest encroachment and destroying a cave in the park.
Minister Suwit Khunkitti yesterday told about 100 monks at a seminar on conservation their monasteries would not be removed from protected areas if the monks provided authorities with help to protect forest lands.
Earlier this month, the Forestry Department, which comes under Mr Suwit's supervision, announced it would begin closing temples which encroach on protected forests.
The policy is in line with the 1995 cabinet resolution instructing the department to remove monks living illegally in national parks, watershed areas and wildlife sanctuaries.
The department said there were 5,529 forest temples occupying 190,000 rai of forest land, most of them in reserves.Sixty-eight temples were initially earmarked for closure.
The eviction plans drew fierce opposition from monks across the country.
"We won't push [the monks] out of the forest, even if the temples were built before or after the declaration of protected forests," Mr Suwit said.
"Monks are the key players in forest protection."
The minister said forestry officials would work with temples to develop a better understanding of how to live in harmony in ecologically fragile areas.
But the ministry would introduce measures to prevent the establishment of new temples in forested areas, Mr Suwit said.
Yongyuth Chamnanrop, chief of Phupayol national park in the northeastern province ofMukdahan,applauded the new position.
"At the ground level, strict law enforcement is sometimes not the right answer," he said."We need compromise."
Phupayol national park recently filed charges against Phu Mai How forest monastery for forest encroachment and destroying a cave in the park.
Puea Thai fails to halt budget debate
House Speaker Chai Chidchob has refused to accept an application by Puea Thai Party lawmakers to delay the deliberation of the annual budget bill proposed by the government.
Puea Thai MP for Chaiyaphum Charoen Chankomol yesterday asked the speaker to postpone debate on the budget bill because a special House committee did not present details of changes it had made, in which the 2010 budget was to be cut by 22 billion baht to 1.7 trillion baht.
Mr Charoen said the House could not scrutinise the changes without the details.
He also questioned the transparency of the changes which the committee had made.
But the speaker argued that a report on the changes might not be necessary because the special House committee was made up of MPs from both government and opposition parties.
Yesterday the Puea Thai Party also threatened to seek a Constitution Court ruling on the constitutionality of holding the debate.
MP Surapong Towijakchaikul said the committee's failure to present details of its changes could be in violation of Article 167 of the constitution.
Mr Surapong said the opposition would seek a ruling from the court.
Two days have been set aside for the 2010 budget bill debate, which started yesterday.
The vote on the bill was set for today but delays have forced the vote to be postponed until next week.
Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said he was sure the government would have the bill passed.He brushed aside reports that six ministers from the coalition Bhumjaithai Party would abstain from voting.
The ministers claim they feared their votes could be ruled unconstitutional because they might have a conflict o f interest.
Mr Suthep said even if they did not vote, the government would still have enough votes to have the bill passed.
Puea Thai MP for Chaiyaphum Charoen Chankomol yesterday asked the speaker to postpone debate on the budget bill because a special House committee did not present details of changes it had made, in which the 2010 budget was to be cut by 22 billion baht to 1.7 trillion baht.
Mr Charoen said the House could not scrutinise the changes without the details.
He also questioned the transparency of the changes which the committee had made.
But the speaker argued that a report on the changes might not be necessary because the special House committee was made up of MPs from both government and opposition parties.
Yesterday the Puea Thai Party also threatened to seek a Constitution Court ruling on the constitutionality of holding the debate.
MP Surapong Towijakchaikul said the committee's failure to present details of its changes could be in violation of Article 167 of the constitution.
Mr Surapong said the opposition would seek a ruling from the court.
Two days have been set aside for the 2010 budget bill debate, which started yesterday.
The vote on the bill was set for today but delays have forced the vote to be postponed until next week.
Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said he was sure the government would have the bill passed.He brushed aside reports that six ministers from the coalition Bhumjaithai Party would abstain from voting.
The ministers claim they feared their votes could be ruled unconstitutional because they might have a conflict o f interest.
Mr Suthep said even if they did not vote, the government would still have enough votes to have the bill passed.
PM slams "dirty tricks" clip
Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has slammed an audio clip in which he allegedly orders the use of force against red shirt demonstrators over Songkran.
Mr Abhisit said the clip was a "dirty trick" intended to provoke unrest.
On the audio clip posted on the internet, the prime minister is allegedly heard instructing security forces to use violence to quell protests led by the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship from April 12-15.
The clip has been released against the backdrop of a planned major rally by the UDD on Sunday.
Mr Abhisit said he had listened to the sound clip and it was obvious it had been doctored.
"Admittedly, that's my voice," the prime minister said."But the clip is bits of many of my different remarks put together. I have never said such things.
"I can't believe such a dirty trick has been used. It could trigger unrest and violence. As far as I know, those responsible for spreading the clip are linked to a certain political party and linked to a network run by a former prime minister."
Mr Abhisit said he would track down and take legal action against those who had distributed the clip.
Mr Abhisit said posting the clip on the internet was a violation of the Computer Act.
He also warned the red shirts against playing the clip at their rally as this would break the law.
Mr Abhisit said those who produced the clip must harbour ill will to want to provoke violence and hatred and damage the country.
Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said the clip must have been edited and it was meant to discredit the government by certain elements intent on stirring up unrest.
UDD leader and Puea Thai Party MP Jatuporn Prompan distanced the opposition party from the clip,saying Puea Thai would not use dirty tactics to unseat the government.
But he called on the prime minister and the cabinet to resign if the clip was shown to be real.
Mr Abhisit said the clip was a "dirty trick" intended to provoke unrest.
On the audio clip posted on the internet, the prime minister is allegedly heard instructing security forces to use violence to quell protests led by the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship from April 12-15.
The clip has been released against the backdrop of a planned major rally by the UDD on Sunday.
Mr Abhisit said he had listened to the sound clip and it was obvious it had been doctored.
"Admittedly, that's my voice," the prime minister said."But the clip is bits of many of my different remarks put together. I have never said such things.
"I can't believe such a dirty trick has been used. It could trigger unrest and violence. As far as I know, those responsible for spreading the clip are linked to a certain political party and linked to a network run by a former prime minister."
Mr Abhisit said he would track down and take legal action against those who had distributed the clip.
Mr Abhisit said posting the clip on the internet was a violation of the Computer Act.
He also warned the red shirts against playing the clip at their rally as this would break the law.
Mr Abhisit said those who produced the clip must harbour ill will to want to provoke violence and hatred and damage the country.
Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said the clip must have been edited and it was meant to discredit the government by certain elements intent on stirring up unrest.
UDD leader and Puea Thai Party MP Jatuporn Prompan distanced the opposition party from the clip,saying Puea Thai would not use dirty tactics to unseat the government.
But he called on the prime minister and the cabinet to resign if the clip was shown to be real.
City goes into lockdown
Dusit Palace, Government House and parliament are being placed under security lockdown and kept clear of street protests when red shirts hold their mass rally on Sunday, a military source says.
No gatherings would be allowed in the three locations where about 3,500 troops and 1,950 police would be deployed to maintain law and order, the source said.
The measures, which were discussed yesterday at the meeting of the Defence Council, would be proposed at today's meeting of the Internal Security Operations Command .
The council called the meeting to prepare for Sunday's rally by the proThaksin United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship and make security preparations after the government decided to invoke the Internal Security Act in Dusit district from tomorrow until Tuesday to handle the protest.
The Isoc meeting, chaired by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, was expected to propose a number of security measures to deal with the red shirt rally.
The invoking of the security act was to allow security authorities to take necessary steps to prevent violence.
"The law is there to facilitate the authorities' work," Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon said.
"It is not to bully anyone. It is to tell the red shirt protesters that we have a law to keep the rally under control."
Gen Prawit said the Isoc would decide today which locations would be declared security restricted and off limits to protesters.
Defence spokesman Thanatip Sawangsaeng said the enforcement of the internal security law would not infringe on the rights of the public,which are protected by Article 63 of the constitution.
He said the Isoc would also explain to the public the need to enforce the security law.
"There is a need to prevent 'a third hand' from exploiting the situation,"Col Thanatip said."Strict enforcement of related laws, especially on carrying weapons, can be expected."
Mr Abhisit yesterday sought to assure businessmen at a forum that the use of the internal security law would not damage the investment atmosphere or tourism.
He said the law was to ensure there would be no repetition of the Songkran mayhem. The legislation's effectiveness was proved at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations meeting in Phuket last month.
Metropolitan police chief Worapong Chiwpreecha yesterday warned that some UDD leaders had been released on bail and had commitments to comply with.
"The bail conditions still exist and are legally binding," he said, referring to the charges pressed against UDD leaders in connection with the Songkran violence.
The Metropolitan Police Bureau estimates Sunday's rally to draw about 30,000 people and end about midnight.
National police chief Patcharawat Wongsuwon has been asked by the prime minister to hold talks with UDD leaders to ensure the protest was peaceful and orderly.
"We have to be positive about the talks," Pol Gen Patcharawat said.
"I do not believe Thai people want to see untoward incidents."
PM's Office Minister Sathit Wongnongtoey yesterday invited the broadcast media to a briefing ahead of the red shirt rally.
The minister said he would not ban the media from covering the rally but urged them to be careful with their reports and double-check the facts.
"Some [radio] programmes have phone-in sessions, so I ask them to be discreet," Mr Sathit said.
"Some people may call and claim there has been a shooting."
No gatherings would be allowed in the three locations where about 3,500 troops and 1,950 police would be deployed to maintain law and order, the source said.
The measures, which were discussed yesterday at the meeting of the Defence Council, would be proposed at today's meeting of the Internal Security Operations Command .
The council called the meeting to prepare for Sunday's rally by the proThaksin United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship and make security preparations after the government decided to invoke the Internal Security Act in Dusit district from tomorrow until Tuesday to handle the protest.
The Isoc meeting, chaired by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, was expected to propose a number of security measures to deal with the red shirt rally.
The invoking of the security act was to allow security authorities to take necessary steps to prevent violence.
"The law is there to facilitate the authorities' work," Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon said.
"It is not to bully anyone. It is to tell the red shirt protesters that we have a law to keep the rally under control."
Gen Prawit said the Isoc would decide today which locations would be declared security restricted and off limits to protesters.
Defence spokesman Thanatip Sawangsaeng said the enforcement of the internal security law would not infringe on the rights of the public,which are protected by Article 63 of the constitution.
He said the Isoc would also explain to the public the need to enforce the security law.
"There is a need to prevent 'a third hand' from exploiting the situation,"Col Thanatip said."Strict enforcement of related laws, especially on carrying weapons, can be expected."
Mr Abhisit yesterday sought to assure businessmen at a forum that the use of the internal security law would not damage the investment atmosphere or tourism.
He said the law was to ensure there would be no repetition of the Songkran mayhem. The legislation's effectiveness was proved at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations meeting in Phuket last month.
Metropolitan police chief Worapong Chiwpreecha yesterday warned that some UDD leaders had been released on bail and had commitments to comply with.
"The bail conditions still exist and are legally binding," he said, referring to the charges pressed against UDD leaders in connection with the Songkran violence.
The Metropolitan Police Bureau estimates Sunday's rally to draw about 30,000 people and end about midnight.
National police chief Patcharawat Wongsuwon has been asked by the prime minister to hold talks with UDD leaders to ensure the protest was peaceful and orderly.
"We have to be positive about the talks," Pol Gen Patcharawat said.
"I do not believe Thai people want to see untoward incidents."
PM's Office Minister Sathit Wongnongtoey yesterday invited the broadcast media to a briefing ahead of the red shirt rally.
The minister said he would not ban the media from covering the rally but urged them to be careful with their reports and double-check the facts.
"Some [radio] programmes have phone-in sessions, so I ask them to be discreet," Mr Sathit said.
"Some people may call and claim there has been a shooting."
SPLIT EMERGES AMONG RED-SHIRT LEADERSHIP
Cracks have worsened within the leadership of the red shirts, as one faction is called communist leaning and its accuser an "inexperienced novice". Jatuporn Promphan, a red-shirt co-leader, said yesterday the red shirts did not agree with the communist-like strategy adopted by fugitive suspect Jakrapob Penkair.
Jatuporn, who is also an MP from the opposition Pheu Thai Party, confirmed the red shirts had severed ties with the Jakrapob-led splinter group.
"We want democracy under the King as head of state, therefore our activities are limited to attacking Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda or lower figures to prevent an escalating fight transgressing the constitutional monarchy," he said.
Jatuporn said Jakrapob's ally Surachai Danwattananusorn was an ex-communist prone to violent struggle.
Jakrapob and Surachai had formed the splinter group called Red Siam, detaching themselves from the mainstream red-shirt movement.
Surachai said yesterday most people in the country were aware he had been a communist for more than 30 years, and he considered Jatuporn an inexperienced novice. Surachai also noted there were other former communists among the red-shirt leadership, including Weng Tojirakarn, Jaran Dittha-apichai, and Vipoothalaeng Pattanaphumthai.
Speaking from his home province of Nakhon Si Thammarat, Surachai defended Jakrapob's leaving the country during the April crackdown on the red-shirt protesters. He said certain red-shirt leaders should consider Thaksin Shinawatra when they mentioned Jakrapob's 'fleeing the country' negatively, as 'the big boss' was also a self-imposed exile overseas.
"He is not a coward. He escaped so that he could fight back. He does not give up," said Surachai.
He expressed doubt about the strategy of filing a petition seeking a royal pardon for Thaksin. He said the chance was zero for the Privy Council to endorse the petition, given that the red shirts had severely attacked the council's president, General Prem Tinsulanonda. He said the petition move did not sit well with the red shirts' campaign against "elitist polity".
Jatuporn, who is also an MP from the opposition Pheu Thai Party, confirmed the red shirts had severed ties with the Jakrapob-led splinter group.
"We want democracy under the King as head of state, therefore our activities are limited to attacking Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda or lower figures to prevent an escalating fight transgressing the constitutional monarchy," he said.
Jatuporn said Jakrapob's ally Surachai Danwattananusorn was an ex-communist prone to violent struggle.
Jakrapob and Surachai had formed the splinter group called Red Siam, detaching themselves from the mainstream red-shirt movement.
Surachai said yesterday most people in the country were aware he had been a communist for more than 30 years, and he considered Jatuporn an inexperienced novice. Surachai also noted there were other former communists among the red-shirt leadership, including Weng Tojirakarn, Jaran Dittha-apichai, and Vipoothalaeng Pattanaphumthai.
Speaking from his home province of Nakhon Si Thammarat, Surachai defended Jakrapob's leaving the country during the April crackdown on the red-shirt protesters. He said certain red-shirt leaders should consider Thaksin Shinawatra when they mentioned Jakrapob's 'fleeing the country' negatively, as 'the big boss' was also a self-imposed exile overseas.
"He is not a coward. He escaped so that he could fight back. He does not give up," said Surachai.
He expressed doubt about the strategy of filing a petition seeking a royal pardon for Thaksin. He said the chance was zero for the Privy Council to endorse the petition, given that the red shirts had severely attacked the council's president, General Prem Tinsulanonda. He said the petition move did not sit well with the red shirts' campaign against "elitist polity".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)