It is difficult to know why the Surayud Chulanont government has struggled so hard to pass a new internal security act when it has been rejected by legal experts, politicians, civil rights groups and the man in the street.

Yet after the military’s own hand-picked legislators gave still another thumbs-down to this ill-considered and unwanted law, there was Prime Minister Surayud spending some weekend time trying to convince the nation how badly it needs the law. The only reasonable explanation for this extraordinary stubbornness over the proposed law is that a tiny group of people close to the premier want this law for their own purposes. What a splendid argument this is for the opposition to continue to fight until this interim government either gives up or ends its term in office.

Gen Surayud’s insistence on having his way with the internal security bill is doubly puzzling. In the first place, the establishment of a powerful security apparatus is a serious matter that requires popular inspection and democratic debate. Since Gen Surayud is promising to hold elections and turn over the government to an elected regime by next January, there is no need for the bill for now. Three months hardly seems an unreasonable wait for a law that almost no one can justify anyhow.

Just as baffling is the premier’s doublespeak on his government’s priorities. As recently as his Saturday morning appearance on the weekly government information show, Gen Surayud said his remaining time in office he planned no new programmes. A new government, elected by popular vote, would be taking over by late January, he said, and there was neither time nor justification in trying to launch any new laws or projects. Hours later, after the government whips sent the internal security bill back to his desk for a second time, the prime minister spoke rather passionately about how necessary the law was. He indicated he will, indeed, try to push it back to the legislators once again.

The whips at the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) deserve credit for their reasoned stand. The legislature was the first body to take the initiative last July and reject an even more radical form of the internal security bill. NLA members noted, as had many members of the public, that the proposed law essentially made it legal for the army chief or head of the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) to take over the governing of the country on little more than a whim. Anyone he designated would automatically become non-accountable for any actions, no matter how violent or anti-democratic.

After the first rejection, Gen Surayud wisely chose to receive advice from the Council of State, which suggested toning down the worst excesses. The next rewrite put the prime minister in nominal charge of declaring a national emergency and dictatorial rule _ but infamously allowed the premier to delegate power to the Isoc or army chief, just as before. As a result, the NLA whips have properly sent it back.

New Deputy Prime Minister Sonthi Boonyaratkalin argued that the bill is necessary immediately. After all, he said, a national security emergency could pop up any day now. That sounded just a little too much for some people like a warning that the Dec 23 election to return the country to democracy might go all wrong. Because of that and other reasons, 14 non-governmental organisations dealing with civil rights decided on Sunday to join forces to fight to kill this bill.

The cabinet is to meet today as usual, and may take up the internal security bill yet again. Prime Minister Surayud appears determined to try to ram through a law that everyone can see is as unpopular and unwanted as it is unnecessary. For that reason, citizens’ groups and NLA members should continue to oppose the bill and force it off the agenda at the legislature.

If an internal security act is deemed essential, the new and elected government can take up the issue as a matter of priority early next year. Thailand has survived as a united nation for hundreds of years without this bill, and a few more months will not cause its collapse.

National Legislative Assembly member and former National Security Council chief Prasong Soonsiri yesterday pledged to oppose the National Security Bill if it were again submitted to the NLA for consideration.
Sqn Ldr Prasong said the serious flaw of the bill was a provision seeking to exempt state officials assigned to work under the bill from civil, criminal and disciplinary punishment. It was inappropriate to enact legislation which took the judicial system for granted. “If it is submitted to the NLA for debate, I will oppose it. We must follow the justice system,” he said. The bill also sought to suspend basic civil rights and liberties such as the right to protest and express opinions. As a former charter writer, he said, he must see to it than any draft law which was unconstitutional was not passed into law.