Prime minister needs to focus on his duties and responsibilities

Congratulations to Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej for his ability each Sunday morning to dream up stories to support his government's justification to amend the Constitution. This time round it was the People's Alliance for Democracy's trepidation that Article 63 of the basic law would be amended so it would be impossible for the group to demonstrate freely - hence its strong opposition to the amendment.

Whatever the truth, PM Samak should be reminded that it his duty is to solve the country's weighty problems - not to change the charter that has been promulgated for just a year, to provide for his and his friends' satisfaction. Furthermore, the Constitution has been voted for as acceptable by the majority in last year's referendum. So, any attempt by lawmakers to change it would be seen by democratic-minded Thais as self-serving and against the will of the majority.

I hereby call on PM Samak to rescind his government's plan to do any harmful thing to the Constitution and focus his attention solely on his assigned job as a mere prime minister of this country. He has no rights or duty beyond that.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

----------

Exile in England may not be a good choice for Thaksin

Re: "Courts might soon send Thaksin packing for England", August 2.

In his article, Avudh Panananda suggested that Thaksin Shinawatra might be preparing to relocate his family to England to avoid legal troubles he and his wife currently face in Thailand. Avudh wrote that it would not be imperative to apply for political asylum and that Thaksin could keep himself busy running Manchester City Football Club.

Personally I think that is something of an underestimation of the English legal system. Admittedly extradition from the UK would be a complicated process under the antiquated UK-Siam Extradition Treaty of 1911. The charges Thaksin faces in the Supreme Court's Division for Political Office Holders are not explicitly cited in the treaty and probably have no direct equivalents under English law, which would be the other criterion for extradition.

On the other hand, the tax offences of which Thaksin's wife, Pojaman, has just been convicted by the Criminal Court have very direct equivalents under English law and there are recent precedents where English courts have extradited British nationals to the US to face tax fraud charges. Even if the Thai government were to launch extradition proceedings in England that ultimately failed, this could lead to years of court proceedings during which time the defendants would have to report weekly to a police station and would not be permitted to leave the UK. The alternative of applying for political asylum could well be rejected by the British government now that Thailand has an elected government and that Pojaman has been convicted in a straightforward criminal case.

If Thaksin were convicted by the Supreme Court in absentia as a fugitive from justice, he would no longer be able to pass the Premier League's Fit and Proper Person Test, which would result in his forced resignation as chairman of Manchester City and forced divestiture of his shares. If Avudh's theory is correct, England would be a poor choice.

George Morgan

--------

Let our language evolve freely

While I always enjoy Pridiyathorn Devakul's thought-provoking and intelligent columns, I beg to disagree about his latest pet peeve - the increasingly incorrect use, and trendifying [yes, sic] of the Thai language.

Language evolves. Look back at Chaucer, Shakespeare and later incarnations and evolutions of the English language; look at how the English language has absorbed phrases, words, spellings and such from all over the world. Unlike some world languages, the English language has flourished because it has not attempted to constrict itself and retain its purity. This is why it is the lingua franca for most of the people in the world. The Thai language cannot be confined and defined. For instance, I find it so tedious to write official Thai as it has no bearing on our current use of the language.

We too must grow, absorb and evolve. I agree with the author and must also admit that I get quite irritated when I hear young singers singing Thai songs with a pretentious foreign accent, and myself have made incorrect and direct translations from English, such as when I once asked my cousin to "kep ta bon krapow" (keep his eye on my bag) at the airport, but that is what makes language fun. Let Thai people define their language and do not impose restrictions on our language's growth. Wouldn't it be more interesting and exciting to see it develop, rather than keep it boringly enshrined?

Pim Kemasingki

Chiang Mai

------