I would postulate that the people who believe that either of the two major political parties will be dissolved and its leaders banned from political activity for five years must be the same people who were gullible enough to believe Thaksin had the best interests of the Thai people in mind while he was in power.

I would also suggest a solution to the quandary that is being presented with concerns over dissolving one party but not the other or the possibility of new political instability caused by the judges' decision. This suggestion if enacted would be one that would actually serve the best interests of the common Thai citizen most succinctly. That would be to ban all elected officials in office at the time of the latest coup for a period of 10 years. Start with a completely fresh slate.

Career politicians breed corruption. Then again, everybody realises this is just be a pipe dream because the interests of the common man are the farthest thing away from a politician's mind, not just here in Thailand, but in most countries around the world. Greed is the stimulus that motivates career politicians.

Brian Granberg

Bangkok

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

His Majesty's advice to justice must be heeded

Again His Majesty the King shows us the way, this time advising Administrative Court judges - and, by extension, all judges - to be ready to criticise or be criticised in their capacity as learned men, for "if (they) did nothing, the country will fall". Coming on the eve of the poll-fraud verdicts, his advice is timely indeed.

His Majesty has previously told us, "If the country does not follow the rule of law, it will not survive". His words will give courage to the Constitution Tribunal justices to follow the rule of law, deciding without fear or favour on the poll-fraud cases - for their fellow justices will support them if they decide justly, and criticise if they do otherwise. We must not have a repeat of the debacle when Thaksin was on trial and a justice kept in mind that the defendant had won millions of votes when reaching a verdict.

All must do their duty: the judges must keep their vows to uphold the law. As a former Privy counsellor, of all people, Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont should follow our beloved His Majesty's advice in word and in spirit. Both major parties have said that they will peacefully accept the verdict, and must keep their followers within the law.

Let justice not only be done, but be seen to be done: heed His Majesty.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

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

Thailand playing by WTO rules in drug patent row

Re: "Govt squandering resources that could go to HIV drugs", Letters, May 25.

Kurt Heck brought out a good point concerning how the Thai government could afford footing the bills for HIV patients instead of having pharmaceutical companies bear the burden. He maintained that since the Thai government has been wasteful on some bloated projects, why don't they accept the "fair" prices from the drug houses. To use corruption and inefficiency as justifications is somewhat morbid. It's like saying that past expenses in the Iraq War could be used to help the homeless in the US. They are expenses that are no longer retrievable. Furthermore, the drug world is not as simple as that. The World Trade Organisation's (WTO) rules provide for a country to pursue fair pricing for some life-saving drugs through compulsory licensing. The process is, of course, subject to negotiation with the related drug house. The Thai government is pursuing this avenue under the umbrella of the WTO. The organisation recognises that pricing could be cheaper in middle-income countries because of the far lower per-capita income. The cost of a bowl of noodles in Bangkok and New York is a world apart. The message is clear that a lesser licensing fee should be sought from countries like Thailand or Brazil pursuant to the spirit of the game, which all members are obliged to follow. As the last straw, Thailand used the club's rules in order to ask the drug houses to come to the table for serious negotiations. Now, it seems to be succeeding.

So to the ex-employee of the drug house, I say to you that "Please have a heart and play by the world's rules".

Songdej Praditsmanont

Bangkok

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

Letters jumped the gun on date of Magna Carta's signing

How heart-warming to an Englishman to see that far beyond his native shores everyone knows the one magical date in English history, 1066 ("US and Japan offer Thailand models of durable charters written in turbulent times", Letters, May 24, "Regardless of how charter is worded, the spirit of the people will determine its value", Letters, May 25)! What a churlish quibble it would be for him to point out that it is the date of the Norman conquest and not that of Magna Carta!

Simon Johnstone

Bangkok

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

Best charter in the world won't survive a corrupt system

Re: "US and Japan offer Thailand models of durable charters written in turbulent times", Letters, May 24.

Whilst the idea has its merits, I am unsure whether the Japanese or the US models of the constitution (or any other models for that matter) is the panacea for Thailand's past and current political problems.

As I see it, it's not the constitutions that are the problem, but the people that the document governs. The country can, and perhaps it did, have the best constitution in the whole world, but if politicians (some of the current group having now survived several constitutions) continue in their old ways unchallenged nothing will change.

Apisake Monthienvichienchai

London

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

Sachs's proposals deny role of capitalism in bettering lives

Re: "China's approach to African nations a lesson for the World Bank", Opinion, May 25.

Again you give that ardent socialist, Jeffery Sachs, editorial space to promote communist China. This, after you did such a fine, brave, job in the editorial on China's hand in the Darfur genocide (Re: "Darfur exposes moral bankruptcy", Editorial, May 24), whilst its communist government tries to mask its tyranny, putting on a pretty face for the world while hosting the Olympics.

 Professor Sachs castigates the West, and the free market economies championed by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, as the way forward for poor African nations. Trillions of Western taxpayers' dollars have been poured into Africa, mainly to be squandered or stolen by state officials. The state is the problem.

Capitalism alone, as promulgated by the Austrian economist, Friedrich August von Hayek, has proven itself throughout history as the only engine out of poverty.

 Communism led to starvation and the near collapse of the first Massachusetts colony, only salvaged when its governor allocated settlers their own plot of land to farm for themselves. China repeated this message itself, in denouncing Mao and allowing its peasants to sell their goods on an open market. This fed China, and permitted its current rise, after state control, advocated by Sachs, was relaxed on farmers.

 Yet, here is Sachs clamouring for more statist intervention in Africa. Build more statist infrastructure, roads, bridges etc. Is Sachs totally ignorant of what the West has done for the last 40 odd years in Africa? I was sent out by the British government over 40 years ago to work with a group of Americans and Europeans to help develop agriculture, roads, markets etc. As soon as the roads and bridges went in, the young folk left the farms and never came back. As we built universities and educated them, they fled to the West. Africa's problems are many, but corruption exacerbated by the state ranks high up there as a brake on progress.

 Adding more layers of state interventions, as Sach advocates, just offers more roadblocks to the free market, which at the end of the day has raised mankind out of the trees and out of its caves, delivering the vast wealth that continues to be created to ease human suffering, and ironically, fund the ungrateful Professor Sachs's salary,

Wilfred Knight

Orange County, California

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

Domestic wine industry deserves public's attention

Thailand has a splendid opportunity to promote an industry that would create employment, income and be beneficial to the balance of trade: the wine-industry. Thai wines are starting to prove their quality and really can compete with foreign wines. The government should stimulate this industry instead of blocking the development of the wine industry. (World Trade Organisation rules allow a country to protect nascent industries.)

Forbidding wine advertising will cause domestic buyers to purchase foreign wines, as both Thai and foreigners mostly don't know that Thailand is producing excellent wines. Few shops sell Thai wines. Even when they are available the customer nearly always buys foreign wines, as Thai wines are unknown.

Strangely enough, Thai wines cannot compete on the basis of lower prices despite lower labour and transportation costs, and lower land costs compared with imported wines, which carry high import duties as well. Thai wines are still Bt100 more expensive than comparable imported wines. No wonder 90 per cent of wine consumed in Thailand is imported.

The government says the reason for forbidding wine advertising is due to health reasons? I beg your pardon? Isn't it absurd that I can buy a bottle of whiskey, 35 per cent alcohol, for Bt190, while a bottle of wine, with an alcohol content of 13 per cent, costs about Bt400? Taxing "lao khao" (rice wine) like wine would see the price far higher than Bt70 a bottle. One wonders what is really behind the government's tax policy.

Egon

Bangkok