First, the election was a true barometer of voter sentiment. It was not an election between political parties, although some 15 "decorative parties" participated. Rather, this election was about the people versus Thai Rak Thai.

The caretaker prime minister can no longer claim legitimacy for his present or future government if he does not achieve more than 50 per cent of all votes cast, which is very likely. And he cannot go back on his word, that he would not seek the premiership if this turns out to be the case. Remember General Suchinda Kraprayoon?

Second, although the opposition parties opted for a boycott, it is clear from the initial results of the election that Thai Rak Thai's support is slipping.

In hindsight, however, had they participated, the election would have been much closer, and the three opposition parties could have given That Rak Thai a run for their money, judging from the results of the "No Vote" option.

Third, the election has also shown that Thais are capable of making democracy a permanent process in Thailand. I have to agree with caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin on this. Even though voter turnout may have been lower than in February 2005, and while countless irregularities may have been reported, the election was generally peaceful, and people's awareness of the political situation was at its height.

While some might have chosen to stay at home, it does not mean they will stay away from politics. Some may have thought their action would not contribute to anything, but they were wrong, because it is not apathy we are talking about. Basically because of the controversies that have been raging, people generally stay within the system, or the elections would not have been held in the first place.

A society in which a large proportion of the population is outside of the political arena is potentially more explosive than one in which most citizens are regularly involved and which gives them some sense of participation in decisions that affect their lives, even if they do not go out to vote. And for that, we have the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), the opposition parties and even Thai Rak Thai to be thankful for.

My only regret is that the PAD and the opposition parties did not do enough to solidify their common efforts and goals before the elections when there was still time. If that had happened, we could have had a more strengthened political system that would better serve the people's interests.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

-------------------------------------------

TRT astonishment shows party remains out of touch

Re: "'No Vote" stuns PM", News, April 3.

The maturity shown particularly by Bangkokians and southerners in exercising their democratic rights, first through peaceful protest, then second through the ballot box, displays a fundamental understanding of democracy that seems to have escaped the Thai Rak Thai Party. How could senior Thai Rak Thai officials claim to be shocked and surprised by the massive "No Vote"?

Clearly, the Thai Rak Thai Party has completely lost contact with those they claim to represent and with that, any legitimacy to govern.

The caretaker was nowhere to be seen at Thai Rak Thai Party headquarters on Sunday night, performing his now famous disappearing act after realising minutes before a planned press conference he wouldn't be making a victory speech. Thaksin, if you run away and turn your back on the people of Bangkok, is it any wonder when the people turn their backs on you? Som nam na!

Thai Rak Thai executives claim they need time to analyse and understand the result. Here's a hint: find a short little guy with a square face who likes spending time around buffaloes. Rumour has it he can explain the whole election fiasco and much more.

Sibeymai

Bangkok

-------------------------------------------

Journalists must conduct themselves ethically

Re: "If Thaksin feels persecuted, perhaps he should think long and hard why that might be", Letters, April 1.

David Prescott's letter surprisingly justifies the, I would call, "unjournalistic retaliation" of some newspaper writers and columnists to the mounting pressure laid upon them by the Thaksin government. To me, this is akin to media exploitation for self-preservation at the expense of sworn professional conduct. This is no different from Thaksin clinging to anything to maintain governance of the country.

While it is my humble understanding that it is the obligation of all journalists to seek the truth, defend democracy and exercise and protect freedom of expression every day of their professional lives, it is also their duty and conviction always to put the country and its citizens' welfare to the utmost importance by providing balanced, complete and unadulterated news and ignoring pressure from anybody. They should always take into consideration that credibility with the readers is also worth fighting for.

Moreover, they should always remember that people deserve to be served substantial information without sacrificing one's privacy or promoting anyone's interests.

I am not insisting on written codes, I am just looking for and expecting a reflection from our esteemed journalists of safeguarding the credibility of the print media by doing the right thing amid difficulties, for the betterment of the profession the satisfaction of their clients - the readers, especially.

Bong and Pla

Bangkok

-------------------------------------------

Govt resources are for use by any PM, not only current one

Re: "Democracy wars", Opinion, April 3.

Chang Noi writes that Thaksin and his Thai Rak Thai are popular because, "They have reached out to a rural mass base in a way that their rivals cannot match."

Arrogant nonsense! Thaksin is not funding the health schemes, village loans and debt relief from his own pocket; he is using government revenues, which are available to any government.

The reason that Chang Noi and the rest of the smug, self-interested middle class did not reach out to the masses was not because they lacked the means; it was because they didn't want to get their hands dirty.

The middle class were the ones who drafted a Constitution that denied citizens not rich enough to obtain a bachelor's degree a chance to represent themselves in Parliament, thus creating the opportunity for someone like Thaksin to step in and represent their interests.

The People's Alliance for Democracy claims Thaksin is corrupt. So were the governments that preceded his, but have any of their members been brought to justice? Of course not. They are all members of the elite, and they look after one another.

I, too, believe that Thaksin is unfit to be PM and should be replaced. But not by Chang Noi and his cronies.

Dom Dunn

Bangkok

-------------------------------------------

Sleeping with the enemy forfeits rights to complain

Just a reminder to all would-be anti-Thaksin protesters: please check your phone bill. If you see the initials "AIS" anywhere on your bill, you don't deserve any anti-Thaksin voice.

Bryan Blair

Bangkok

-------------------------------------------

Phuket was not by any measure the worst hit

Re: "Superb tsunami record wasted", Property & Housing, March 27.

I was compelled to write this letter as a regular visitor to Phuket and Khao Lak.

Having spent the best part of 18 months helping families and friends in the tsunami-recovery effort at Khao Lak, I object to your reference: "Within months, with renewed confidence the money poured in, not only to Phuket, the centre of the disaster, but to other parts of the Kingdom."

The cold hard fact is that Phuket was not the centre of the disaster, although Phuket received the bulk of financial support and international exposure, as well as sympathy.

The "other parts of the Kingdom", in my opinion, received very little renewed confidence, and money certainly did not "pour in".

Such misleading statements caused even the aid organisations to base themselves in Phuket, when in reality they should have been based at the real centres of the disaster, which were Khao Lak and Phang Nga, where thousands of people needed immediate help and support.

Why were the non-governmental organisations, including the International Red Cross, based in Phuket and not at Khao Lak or Takua Pa, where constant help was needed?

Why is it that the Thai media were fully aware of the magnitude of the tsunami and how badly affected the above areas were devastated compared with Phuket, yet still reported that Phuket was the centre of the disaster?

These misleading media need to be corrected for the benefit of the regions that still require much assistance and support, particularly to encourage the return of tourists.

Phuket tourist desks, including at the airport, do nothing to direct tourists to Khao Lak, which really is the jewel in the crown of southern Thailand. Khao Lak is a place that all of Thailand should be proud of. When asked about accommodation in Khao Lak, tourist desks in Phuket brazenly state, "There is nothing in Khao Lak."

When will the media do a full update and highlight the huge effort in the recovery of Khao Lak?

G Anderson

Melbourne, Australia

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com