The Election Commission's roller-coaster life has started climbing a new hill. Once a highly commended independent body, its reputation hit the lowest of lows when three commissioners were recently convicted by the Criminal Court of malfeasance. The commissioners became the latest high-profile casualties in the ongoing political crisis. While politics was largely to blame, the three commissioners also had it coming. They allowed themselves to get too much involved those same politics. The new commission, therefore, must undertake an unenviable and somewhat paradoxical task: it has to lead the rehabilitation of Thai politics while de-politicising itself.

It seemslike a long time ago when the commission was a source of great hope. In fact, it was only just in 2000 when the EC and two other independent bodies - the National Counter Corruption Commission and the Constitution Court - combined as a mighty force against Thailand's political ailments. They fired their first heroic salvo in March that year when the country voted for the first elected Senate. After that, the EC produced an historic "list of shame" that included many big-name candidates who were subsequently disqualified from politics. That act of courage was totally unexpected, and many members of the old guard were sent reeling. The EC and NCCC of those good old days won much praise, not just because they dared catch the big fish, but also because they didn't need a smoking gun or massive scandal to do so. The NCCC indicted the then-Democrat secretary-general Sanan Kachornprasart for a relatively minor political crime - he was charged with faking debts in his asset report to the agency in order to hide his increased wealth. The Constitution Court found him guilty and Sanan was banned from politics for five years.

We were so full of hope. The EC, NCCC and the Constitution Court promised a new era of politics. With graft eating into the country's every bone, Thais were made to believe that these few shoots of bravery would usher in greater transparency and accountability. The light was at the end of the tunnel, and people believed that no matter how cunning politicians were in covering up evidence of their crimes, one minor slip-up could be enough to bring about justice. We thought we saw a perfect blend of formidable and impregnable independent bodies working in a united front to supplement the parliamentary system of checks and balances.

Then came Thaksin Shinawatra and his stunning election landslide victory. This tested the nation's character and belief in true democratic values. We caved in. The year 2001 started with the Constitution Court issuing the murkiest of rulings, acquitting the prime minister on charges of asset concealment that the NCCC had put together. The country frowned, but the unprecedented election triumph blurred everything. Thaksin was let off the hook and allowed to become the new prime minister. The rest is history. New commissioners, allegedly elected through a great lobbying effort, replaced those with integrity at the EC and NCCC and the beautiful dream of 2000 became an absolute nightmare as far as Thailand's checks and balances were concerned. If the uprising against Thaksin that led to the current political impasse was not a belated show of panic, then it was an attempt to pick up the pieces of shattered hope.

The still-unproven new EC cannot do the job of repairing our democracy on its own. Unfortunately, both the NCCC and Constitution Court remain suspect. The system of checks and balances remains fragile and vulnerable, not to mention the fact that a great political divide has complicated the task of rebuilding our democracy. But if there's anything to be learned from the developments that brought Thailand to this point, it is the principle that independent bodies in any democracy must in fact be independent.