• 
• 

Published on March 14, 2008

Bangkokian believes that politicians in other countries don't face this question as often as Thai politicians do.

Just the hint of scandal can prompt South Korean or Japanese politicians to leave office immediately. But this is a rare scenario here in Thailand. When allegations erupt, most Thai politicians ask the public to be patient: "Let's wait until the final decision by the court," so they say.

In fact, the Thai journalist is not usually a cruel creature, and doesn't enjoy the sight of politicians being unfairly forced to leave office.

But a good politician should have a good sense of timing, especially on when to quit. Politicians are supposed to uphold higher standards of morality than us mere mortals. They are supposed to have thinner skins. Well, some may not. But some politicians should step aside to let investigations into alleged misconduct proceed without political pressure.

Some, however, choose to hold on to their chair, no matter what, in the desperate hope that, some day, the public will forget the mistake.

To quit or not to quit is the burning question for politicians. Let's take a look at whether the following politicians have a good sense of timing.

Earlier in the week, a trio in Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej's Cabinet - Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee, Labour Minister Uraiwan Thienthong and Deputy Minister Anurak Jureemas - decided not to leave office in spite of lawsuits over the lottery graft cases.

The trio's decision was backed by Samak, who argued that they should keep their jobs because they are not in a position to tamper with the legal cases. In short, the trio is likely to stay put until the court interprets the laws about whether they have to be suspended while the trial is pending.

Besides, the three ministers have also assessed the situation and believe that they will still be able to enjoy time in office, as there's no strong pressure for them to quit. Besides, the issue they are accused of is not considered a big crime.

Go back in time a bit. The very same question, "Will you quit?" was frequently put to deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra over the tax scandal when he sold his Shin Corp empire to Temasek Holdings of Singapore. Thaksin's refusal to correctly address the problem led to his downfall.

Former prime minister Surayud Chulanont, installed by the military, was not spared this question either. He faced the same interrogation over his ownership of a property in Khao Yai Tieng national park.

Across the Pacific Ocean, New York Governor Eliot Spitzer has announced his resignation less than a week after revelations of his involvement with prostitutes. Spitzer's disgraceful exit conjured up images of former deputy interior minister Sombat Uthaisang, who was forced to quit a few months after he was accused of involvement in a sex scandal.

The allegations may seem trivial, but these guys should uphold higher standards because they hold public office. That's why the court sent former senator Chalerm Phromlert to jail for 36 years, citing the fact that he was a well-known person who should have realised the consequences of his actions.

But court rulings that punish politicians do not always come on time. Some people holding public office are able to delay cases until the statute of limitation expires. Such bad examples inspire other politicians to drag cases on as long as possible. As they do so, they argue that they have not been ruled guilty. So, they just sit back and relax in their offices.

The Nation