I also note, however, that the 2006 and 2007 figures are now in:
http://www.transparency-thailand.org/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=1

and they show a sharp decline in Thailand’s ratings (back down to 3.3), which must be laid at least partly at the door of the coup government who have held power all of this year.

I do not see any need for me to spend my time repeating the various criticisms of the coup and the assertions of palace involvement – there are ample commentators doing that, here at New Mandala, and elsewhere.

I prefer to spend my time pointing out the somnamna aspects of certain actions, in the hope that some academics here might take that on board.

I repeat my question – why should we turn a blind eye to the current manipulation of politics by the palace-royalist military? If nganadeeleg thinks that this manipulation is likely to lay the groundwork so that coups don’t happen again, then nganadeeleg is, IMO, doing no more than supporting the institution of a political system that is likely to lead to further corruption and elite control. Look at the dinosaurs lining up for their turn at the national buffet.

As for the 111 TRT board members: Who should have been punished is a mute question, because the Political Party Law only allowed for dissolution and collective punishment (this was not a criminal case). Still, the decision was unlawful. Not because it retroactively applied a coup group announcement, but because the circumstances of the case could never be subsumed under the articles of the law (destruction of democracy, endangering of national security).

The dissolution decision was the fourth instance of using the law as a political tool (1: Thaksin’s acquittal in 2001); 2) nullification of the election of April 2006; 3) getting rid of the old ECT and appointing a new ECT).

I’m no fan of Sondhi L, or the Thai military, police or aristocracy, however I still think that all this blame on the Bangkok elite, media and certain academics for laying the ground for a coup misses the point – if Thaksin had modified his behavior, been less manipulative, shown some humility and paid fair taxes, then there is no way a coup would have been possible, because Thailand had moved on since the early 1990’s.
Even if the old guard wanted a coup, there is no way it would have been acceptable had Thaksin been straight instead of manipulating the institutions in his favor.

Dickie: I’m not so concerned about appointed senators, because many good people refuse to play the political game for fear of being dragged down into the dirt (and unfortunately many who have something to offer are virtually unelectable unless they have the right connections &/or money)

As long as the media & public scrutinize the senate appointments, and call out any ill qualified appointees, then I actually think there is more chance of getting better senators under the appointment method than by direct election.

Societal formations and its components, here the polity, normally move very slowly. There had not been any coups since 1991, there had been a new constitution and a number of elections. Political communications in rural areas have increased tremendously due to the decentralization process, which is, however, far from perfect. I am not impressed by the political parties, and neither by the politicians. But, then, I am also not impressed by Thai journalists, businessmen, bureaucrats, teachers, and university academics. Their good luck is that they don’t have to pass through election processes for getting their jobs, that they will normally keep them even if they work lousily and are corrupt, and that they are not under constant observation by the public and the mass media.

Part of development is generational, meaning that people who look at politics through their experiences of the past 40 to 60 years will by and by be replaced by new generations whose socio-political starting points will be considerably different in many respects. Simply speaking, Kamnan Pho’s kids are foreign-educated, etc.

Maybe, I am too jai yen.

I’ll answer that question (if you don’t mind).

Nope. Nein. Nyet. Nahin. Iya. Mai.

I wish I knew more languages to say no in.. though I’m more interested to learn how to say ‘yea baby yea’ Austin power style in many languages.

At least until Thai Democracy can give equal representation in parliament (be it an upper house) wherein each province gets 1 or 2 elected representatives, I think not.

I was kinda happy (at first) upon reading that there will be 1 senator per province. But I hate the idea that the remainders will be ’selected’. Absolutely disgusting concept. Either way, i hope the next government will amend that and maybe compromise at somehere between 20-22 ‘appointed’ senators only. That way we can have a 100 seat senate, and reduce by more than half the damn selected senators. Then hopefully down the road somewhere, we can rid of them fully.

I have a question for you ngadeleeg: Do you support giving amnesty to the 111 executives provided they recognize and apologize their wrongdoing?

cheers.

Do you think the democratic process has moved along at all in the last 15 years?