Exclusive interview

Q : How did you get the job of being Thaksin's spokesman?

P: He approached me after his return to Thailand. When he was abroad, Noppadon Pattama acted as his spokesman. But now that Noppadon has assumed political office [serving as the foreign minister], Thaksin gave me and Sansanee Nakpong, another former TRT executive, the job of being his spokespersons. Even though Thaksin has a lot of people who could work for him, many of them now have political jobs. It would be inconvenient for them to have different roles. Sansanee and I are both citizens who have been stripped of electoral rights and we have no other roles that could cause a conflict of interest. In addition, Sansanee and I have worked for Thaksin since we were all in the Palang Dharma Party.

Thaksin needs people to speak for him because he doesn't want to be in the news too often, but he still needs to react to issues involving him. So there must be someone to speak in his name.

Q : What about the remuneration for the job?

P : I have never charged for my assistance to other people. I also don't get paid for being Thaksin's spokesman. He hasn't offered to pay me because he knows I don't want it. I have worked with him for so long. If he offers to pay me, I will reject it.

Q : It was unclear how much Noppadon was paid for being Thaksin's spokesman, and then he got the ministerial job. Other people close to Thaksin also got seats in the Cabinet, which is viewed as some kind of reward.

P : I don't know how much Noppadon got paid. I have known him since he was a trainee lawyer at a law office I worked for. He is efficient and is now a key figure in the People Power Party. Among the Cabinet members, Noppadon plays a very important role. Politicians from the old Thai Rak Thai used to work for Thaksin because he was the party leader. Noppadon must have won the trust of his party colleagues to get the ministerial job.

Q : You are not paid for your service. But is there any special condition that you may benefit after your political ban ends?

P : Since I joined Thaksin when he first founded the Thai Rak Thai Party, I have never asked him what I would get in return for working in his party.

I know that every politician, just like any person, has good and bad points. Nobody is 100 per cent perfect. And I dare to say that Thaksin has good intentions to the country. He is a person who makes Thailand better. I have worked with him long enough to know about his ideas and his way of thinking. Compared to other past Thai leaders, Thaksin has played the most active role.

Q : But many people view Thaksin as a cause to the ongoing political conflict

P : He did not cause Thai society to become as it is now. Some people dislike him and they are just a small part of the country. Other people also have their share of haters.

In any democratic country, there must be two competing sides in politics. And one side will gain the majority support while the other will become the minority. When you lose, you must wait for four years for the next election. Or will you stir up trouble to prevent the winners from running the country too easily? If that's the case, it's the whole country that will suffer.

Q : Social rifts appeared when Thaksin's sale of his family shares in Shin Corp, which led people to mistrust in him.

P : The share sale was not the cause for social division. People who disliked Thaksin began their campaign to force him out of office even before he sold his shares. They used the share sale to convince others to believe their accusations against him. If it's not prevented by law, it's unfair to blame the person who does it. The accusations involved violations of law and acts that don't violate the law but were improper. The people have the final say. That's the universal rule. The majority is the deciding voice.

Q : Thaksin says he will stay out of politics but many people are not convinced.

P : I don't think people who are treated the way Thaksin was will return to politics even though they may be useful to the country. There are past Thai leaders who did not contribute as much as Thaksin did or cause as much damage to the country. People who get treated like Thaksin was will prefer to stay away. At least their wives and children will ask them not to return.

Q : That's one group. Another group will seek revenge.

P : I think he believes in the value of forgiveness. There are similar examples, like [former South Africa president] Nelson Mandela, who was put in jail for years and got various kinds of punishment. But he didn't resort to revenge. Thaksin knows well that it's wasteful to do so.

Q : Thaksin has recently made news, such as his pilgrimage tour of 99 temples throughout the country. It appears the timing of his activities corresponds with political developments.

P : He wanted his activities to go unreported. But some reporters asked to join him on his trip. As for the timing, there are political developments almost daily so it's difficult to avoid a day with nothing happening in politics.

Q : Are you worried about the social division?

P : If you don't respect the rules, problems are inevitable for the country. In the past election, the rules were written by a committee appointed the CNS [coup makers] and it was overseen by the Election Commission, which was also appointed by the CNS. They [the PPP] won the election, and you [detractors] have to respect the rules.

Q : After winning the election and gaining power, the government is now seeking to amend the Constitution. They are viewed as changing the rules for self-interest.

P : It's common for the legislative branch to issue laws. The government has problems running the country so they try to rewrite the relevant law to improve efficiency. Any government will do the same thing. The question is who will benefit, and the answer is the country and the people. For legal problems and obstacles, it's the country and the people who will be affected. In a democracy, the people will decide. If they see that this government amends the law for their own benefit, people will vote for the opposite camp so that the law will be rewritten back to its original form. If the people agree to the law changes, they will keep voting for that government, and the opposite camp will go on being in the [parliamentary] opposition. The power is with the people and politicians can't do whatever they wish as people will scrutinise politicians.