Lese majeste debate is completely justified

PM Yingluck and DPM Chalerm Yubamrung seek to protect the monarchy by preserving our lese-majeste laws as they are.

But they confuse the goal (to protect our highest institution) with the means of reaching that goal (to preserve our law unchanged). PM Yingluck says not reforming our lese-majeste law is the best way to protect the monarchy, and DPM Chalerm says, "Some people express their wishes to amend Section 112. What right do they have to change it? What power? They can only talk. I will oppose anyone who proposes that it be changed."

Well, ma'am and sir, I present you with one who said, "The king is a human being and as such should be subject to criticism. Charges against those accused of lese-majeste should be dropped, and those held in jail for lese-majeste should be released. The use of the lese-majeste law ultimately damages the monarchy."

You are right, DPM Chalerm, that person has no power, and can only talk - as he reigns but does not rule. Is that why you and your boss oppose him so vehemently, just like the Democrats before you? Why don't you obey His Majesty when, to me, he makes such exquisite sense?

Seriously, though, laws, like the societies that they are inseparable from, are living institutions, and must adapt with the times. As Earl Warren said, "It is the spirit and not the form of the law that keeps justice alive."

Preserving the spirit of protecting our highest and beloved institution might - or might not - mean amending our laws, and that is a legitimate topic for free, open and learned discussion - not for seeking to shut people up.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok