• 
• 

Published on July 18, 2007

It was no secret that during the time when Thaksin Shinawatra was in power, he looked up to politicians like Malaysia's Mahathir Mohamed and Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and tried to emulate them politically.

Visit Suthichai's blog to see and hear him comment on the issue

Now Thaksin's lost dream is being pushed ahead by the military junta which ousted him last September. The junta's attempt to establish the Internal Security Act (ISA) in Thailand will give near absolute power to the Army chief instead.

The bill will soon be considered by the junta-appointed National Legislative Assembly (NLA). If approved, it will become the Army's most significant move in usurping power from the people. It will, in fact, legalise the military's suppression of people's rights and legitimise its dictatorial power.

Powers under the proposed bill include granting the Internal Security Operation Command (Isoc), whose director is the Army commander in chief, the authority to override the word of the elected government by citing any form of "security threat".

This unjust law will enable the Army chief to suspend citizens' rights to peaceful assembly and protest. More importantly, anyone could be arrested or put under house arrest without charge for seven days, subject to indefinite renewal. Those affected will have no judicial recourse unless they can prove afterward that they had been negatively and wrongly affected.

The law will also empower the Isoc director to remove any civil servant by citing the security threat.

If and when the law comes into effect, any political dissenter could, at any time of the day, be picked up by the military, put in captivity and brutally interrogated. It wouldn't take long before some suspects would admit, under duress, to whatever the military interrogators wanted them to say.

Proponents of the draconian law say that neighbouring countries like Malaysia and Singapore have such laws. And they note that both countries are peaceful and orderly.

One must ask what kind of peace and order exists in both countries and at what cost. The kind of artificial peace and order achieved in both societies mentioned is based on suppression of citizens' political rights. Their democracies, especially Singapore's, are arguably a doubtful facsimile of the real thing.

According to the Penang-based Aliran monthly political magazine, one of the very few publications of political dissent in Malaysia - tolerated by the authorities because its audience is small and poses little or no threat to the powers that be - the Internal Security Act continues "to be applied and used as a threat" against Malaysia's own citizens.

"At least 80 men accused of membership of, or links to, Islamic extremist groups remained in detention at the end of the year. At least 20 detention orders were renewed, and the reasons were not made public," the latest issue of the journal stated on page 29.

"In May, 11 people were arrested under ISA ... In October [last year] 17 alleged members of Jemiah Islamiah and the Malaysia Militant Group were released but remained under orders restricting their freedom of movement."

To make sure enough people are paid by taxpayers to do the job, the Malaysian government even has a ministry called the Ministry of Internal Security.

And ask any politically-concerned Malaysians about Singapore's situation, and they will likely say that things south of KL are even worse in terms of political freedom.

Singapore may be generally regarded as a corruption-free society, but when those at the very pinnacle of political power reserve the right to suppress others' political views, it's worth asking again if that city state is really corruption free, or if what they have achieved is to legalise corruption - albeit at the very top level only.

Back to Thailand. Judging from the way the military junta has treated political dissent - such as the arrest of anti-coup activist Sombat Boonngam-anong last week in the North and his detention at a military camp for 23 hours without charge, the sending of soldiers to offer "security" to several television stations and the revelation that junta chief Gen Sonthi Boonyaratglin is interested in running for election - it doesn't take much imagination to predict what may happen in the near future if the ISA is established here.

Power without accountability in the hands of armed men not elected by the people is an open invitation to heap abuse upon abuse. The ISA, if realised, will legalise the military's abuse and its dictatorial control, and must be opposed at all cost.

Now, perhaps belatedly, even the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and a number of human rights NGOs, long supporters of the coup due to their hatred of Thaksin, have publicly criticised the bill.

Sonthi claimed he led the coup to restore democracy. Now with his coy admission of being interested in running in the next general election coupled with the Internal Security Bill and a 24 per cent increase in the military budget, it's much clearer as to what is being restored.

Serendipity may come to play a part in this affair, however, for if the Internal Security Act is realised, Thai citizens will sooner or later learn again that democracy cannot be granted by others - it must be fought for. People will end up fighting against this most lawless of laws. Many may be detained, more blood may be shed, but it looks more and more likely now.

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation