Politicians are the same the world over

The letter from the SE Asian Press Association makes the valid point that laws such as criminal defamation and the new security law restrict the operation of the media and hamper the development of democracy.

Where I differ from the SEAPA is when they gripe about the PM's treatment of journalists. They complain of his stonewalling when questioned, rude and abrasive answers and failure to treat journalists with respect. I doubt that there are many politicians anywhere in the democratic world who give straight answers, avoid stonewalling and eschew spin;if there are they tend to have short careers.

If Samak is rude and abrasive, why try to hide it? Show him for what he is and let the people decide if his behaviour is acceptable.

As to treating journalists with respect, I doubt that that idea has ever crossed the mind of any politician, most of whom view the media with contempt. The contempt is well hidden though because the other emotion the media conjure up in the heart of a politician is fear. That is the real problem for the Thai media, everybody knows that it is a toothless tiger.

Thai journalists should not worry about what Samak thinks of them, but they should be very worried that ordinary readers like myself view them with complete contempt.

Dom Dunn

Dublin.

Preserving democracy is not a spectator sport

Bangkok University's poll of Bangkok residents said that based on its three-month performance, if the Cabinet were a 36-member classroom, the entire student body would fail - with PM Samak placing second - from the bottom.

To you, the results are probably no surprise, since most of Bangkok voted for anybody but the People Power Party. But who's to blame for it being in power? Surprise, surprise - it's you, dear reader, to a large extent (though not entirely).

Do you, like ex-PM Surayud Chulanont, believe that elections are the beginning and the end of democracy, so all that you have to do to ensure that our nation's best interests are taken care of is to vote? I suggest that, as Kay Maxwell said: "Democracy is not a spectator sport," and we cannot trust our politicians. So, you must join with others to pressure our candidates, seeking out their hidden agendas, pitting them against others to select which wolves we will trust our henhouse to. I haven't seen that done during any Thai election in recent memory, nor sufficient public pressure for governments to be clean and accountable.

Yes, mea culpa, for I should have more vocally supported those who wanted to have the Department of Special Investigations do in-depth probes of winning candidates before they took office, or subjected ministers-designate to grilling and approval by the Senate committee overseeing their area of responsibility. I should have protested more vehemently in a multitude of corruption cases, or when the PPP even now seeks to avoid accountability if it committed electoral fraud - by changing the Constitution.

You and I, sir and madam, are Thailand's intelligentsia, its elite. We supposedly have education, not just degrees, and see beyond our immediate family's interests. If we sit on our hands, who can blame the rural folk for being misled? Cleansing our beloved country, and ensuring that our democracy is vigorous, will take decades. If we plant the seeds, it will be our children, not us, who enjoy the shade. But are you even planting the seeds?

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

Defending the indefensible over Burma

In lambasting your May 1 editorial: "Human rights issue on Samak's agenda" as more driven by personal bias against Burma than objective reasoning - the government's Press Division director has revealed and justified its chummy engagement with the Burmese military junta as necessary and beneficial to her people: "Burmese people benefit from Thai government," Letters, May 5). 

The letter could have been written by the spokesperson of the Burmese military junta. It was so hollow in facts and in reasoning. In terms of facts, history has shown us that a hard-line approach towards a repressive regime robbing her people of basic human rights has always been effective though time-consuming.

Nelson Mandela of South Africa succeeded in his fight because of international sanctions. In this modern day, when a regime is blind to the needs of the people and repressive to an extreme, the world should not stand by and do nothing. Not to mention that, it should never be seen as a supporter of the regime.

In our case, not only did we engage with the regime on many economic and social developments but declared to the world through that letter, that in not sanctioning the junta and engaging in joint developments, we have given the Burmese people the chance to attain human rights. This was done in the belief that the junta would "naturally" pass on the engagement benefits to their people, which would offer a chance to unseat the junta.

Wow! What a letter! For Thailand's sake, I wish that letter was never written and never published.

Songdej Praditsmanont

Bangkok

     send us your views in an instant!

E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in

the subject box, to:

letters@nationgroup.com