• 
• 

Published on October 8, 2007

Those who are saying that the People Power Party (PPP) must be stopped at all costs - even through a delay of the election tentatively scheduled for December 23 - are probably becoming what they have sworn to fight against. Of course, PPP leader Samak Sundaravej has not helped matters by unwittingly linking the new party's political activities to efforts to help Thaksin Shinawatra, but such a controversial agenda has to be dealt with in a democratic way. In other words, if Samak does believe he has legal evidence to rebut corruption charges against the ousted leader, let him try.

The self-proclaimed "nominee of Thaksin" is inviting trouble. However, while his provocative agenda borders on stupidity or political suicide, any effort to persecute the PPP or delay the election because of such remarks would cross the line. Political manoeuvrings intended to cripple the PPP simply because many of its high-profile members have been connected with Thaksin would be undemocratic and unpatriotic.

Anyone plotting to delay the election or launch a legal blockade against the PPP would be doing Thailand a great disservice. According to recent reports, some activists who led anti-Thaksin protests before last year's coup have been pondering such a move. They are allegedly being supported by some elements in the CNS. If they succeed, the alleged conspirators will have betrayed their own proclaimed objectives of merely wanting to get rid of Thaksin and corruption. It's simply not democratically right to blend fears of the PPP's possible election victory with lingering fears of Thaksin. 0nly in undemocratic societies are those fears combined. And only in barbarian cultures do they "uproot" everything connected to political enemies. Democracy is about pinpointing real threats to common values, not becoming those threats ourselves.

If the PPP is going to win the election, then so be it. Removing Thaksin from power is one thing, denying the guilt-free PPP political rights is another. Regardless of who wins the election, hopefully we will have a strong system of checks and balances in place and corruption on such a grand scale as that of the Thaksin regime will no longer be possible. Charges have been filed against Thaksin and his associates, large amounts of his assets have been frozen and executives of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai Party have been banned from politics. Therefore, no matter how "connected" it is to Thaksin, the PPP is a legal entity and should be treated no differently than the likes of the Democrats or the Chat Thai Party.

Political and moral lines have been blurred for too long. Yet, what constitutes the ultimate defeat for democracy? Some people think it's the "undemocratic" overthrow of a popular, democratically elected leader, no matter how corrupt and untouchable he had been. Yet there are those who think that getting rid of that leader was a necessary pain, but the next "line" should never be crossed. And that "line" involves the political activities of people who used to, or even still do, like the political ideas of that leader.

Populism, for all its questionable traits, is not a "threat" to democracy, as long as we have effective checks and balances to make sure that this easy way of winning popular support is not used as a shield for dishonest schemes. What went wrong during the Thaksin era was that popularity was abused at the expense of the rule of law, and what's threatening to go wrong in Thailand under the junta is, ironically, the opposite. As they try to restore the "rule of law", the junta and some of its allies could be abusing this agenda by going after the former prime minister's popular base.

The junta vowed to return Thailand to a fair and transparent political game, and it must not betray itself by making the coming election, which is supposed to mark a "return to democracy", a murky and unfair one.

Thaksin Shinawatra and the military junta have forced Thais on both sides of the great political divide to bend their rules, to condone what they think is the lesser evil. Debate on Thaksin's pros and cons and the merits and damage of the coup continues to this day. But if we are to move forward, one side needs to go back to basic principles. Since the anti-Thaksin camp is in power, it must take the initiative, and that initiative is simple: "release" democracy, come what may.