• 
• 

Published on November 26, 2007

Scrap Flag Act

amendment

Call to require pedestrians and motorists to stop for anthem is both impractical and impossible to enforce

A group of National Legislative Assembly (NLA) members led by an Army general has initiated an amendment to the National Flag Act purportedly to promote public displays of patriotism. However, the idea is fraught with impractical requirements and a lack of hard and fast rules based on measurable, accurate scientific facts.

The proposed amendment covers anyone within sight of the hoisting and lowering of the national flag or within earshot of the national anthem that accompanies the ceremony at 8am and 6pm on weekdays.

The proposal, put forward by General Preecha Rojanasen, chairman of the NLA committee on education, religion and culture, and other assemblymen, would require all pedestrians, including those in open spaces, as well as people in public areas inside buildings, to stand at attention during the ceremony. The proposed amendment would require people to stand at attention even if they are not present at a flag-raising ceremony, as long as they are within earshot of the national anthem being played or sung.

The same rule would apply to motorists on public roads. They too would have to come to a standstill whenever they encounter the flag ceremony or hear the national anthem.

It is assumed that the proposed rule would also apply to drivers and passengers on public buses. This would mean that drivers would have to stop their vehicles, while passengers, whether standing or seated, would have to remain as they are in silence for the duration of the anthem.

It is also safe to assume that pedestrians crossing the street would be encouraged to exercise their common sense and not stop in front of traffic upon hearing the national anthem.

However, motorists on expressways, along with drivers and passengers travelling by rail, air and the country's waterways, would be exempted from the obligation to observe the flag raising and airing of the national anthem.

The national flag ceremonies are performed at all government offices, schools, universities and hospitals throughout the country. The ceremonies last only as long as it takes for the national anthem to be aired, which is just under one minute.

The proposed amendment poses several practical problems that need to be considered.

Eyesight and hearing tend to differ from one person to the next. For example, a person with perfect 20/20 eyesight can see an object at a distance more clearly than a short-sighted person. And the level of visual ability among short-sighted people varies greatly as well. The same can be said about hearing.

Who would determine whether a person had actually seen a flag ceremony or heard the national anthem? Should motorists stop only when they can clearly hear the national anthem, or should they come to a halt upon being able to even barely discern the patriotic tune? What would happen if motorists with acute sense of hearing stop, while others, unable to hear the anthem because they have their car windows rolled up and are listening to music, do not?

In Bangkok alone there are hundreds of government offices, schools and hospitals where the ceremony is performed twice a day. At each location, individual motorists who happen to be in the vicinity of one of these locations would have to react individually based on their own interpretation of the circumstances and even their personal beliefs.

Let's face it, many people - even those who consider themselves patriotic - do not think that mandating such overt displays of patriotism is a good idea. Indeed, many find it more than a little tacky. This is not to mention how impractical the idea is in terms of the chaos it could cause on the streets, which could potentially contribute to a dramatic increase in the number of road accidents and exacerbate the already sticky traffic jams during those peak morning and evening hours.

The NLA passed the proposed amendment in its first reading and has now set up a subcommittee to vet it, as many members expressed concerns about its impracticality and how difficult the change would be to enforce. But the NLA should do more than this. It should reject the proposed amendment in its entirety. Public displays of patriotism should be encouraged, but such gestures should be limited to a few, special occasions in order to make them truly meaningful.