Clear and present danger! Why the endgame is so ugly
I sympathise with and understand the nature of the work of law enforcers. However, when the Prime Minister in his capacity as chairman of the Royal Thai Police, along with senior leaders of the police and some frontline political figures, gave interviews on the violent clashes at Siam BTS on February 11, I was both shocked and stunned by their messages.
Of course, no one wants to see an outrageous incident like the one committed by activist Tantawan “Tawan” Tuatulanon in allegedly attempting to interrupt a royal motorcade, but when one happens, there is surely no need to exacerbate the situation by allowing a follow-up incident linked to this delicate matter to occur just metres away from The Royal Thai Police Headquarters.
That's why it's important to pinpoint the measures asserted by the police chief. If, as indicated, some aspects of royal protection are secret, then there is no need to disclose them.
However, once it has been ascertained that there was no negligence or defects in the procedures, and an arrest is necessary, it should be made right at the outset. That way, problems of harming either people or property may not follow.
I have had the opportunity to attend seminars conducted by both the UK military and the UK police academies in responding to major incidents. They require decisiveness in preventing danger to guard important people and the public without hesitation. No compromise is allowed.
While talking and negotiating is always possible, there is always a risk that taking action will be witnessed by passersby, some of whom will record pictures or videos on their cell phones. This could be a shield for those who honestly carry out their duties.
There shouldn't be any excuse for letting time take its course in resolving the problem, a practice that always receives widespread criticism much as the Corrections Department is facing right now.
Former Patriarch Somdej Phra Yannasangwon always preached that we must do good things with no hesitation in our short lives. If you are a government official performing your duties to maintain or uphold the honour of the King and the Royal Family, then protection must always be offered with unshakable stability.
No one can deny that it is important to adhere to legal niceties as a law enforcer or risk facing problems if duties are performed incorrectly.
But the February 4 event that saw two activists and a person affiliated with i-Law hit the news headlines, made it clear that the intention was indeed to interfere with the motorcade of our beloved princess.
This caused anger and stirred up violence in society. Law enforcers regularly face incidents by activists aimed at benefitting their propaganda on the lese majesty law. Rather than spending time collecting evidence, they should be uncompromising and make arrests.
In short, when the behaviour is aggressive and malicious, arresting and detaining the perpetrators will prevent the problem from escalating.
What is interesting and reflects the funds that are available to those who oppose and use violence against the monarchy is the presence of security units that are always equipped to deal with clashes.
Unless an individual is a famous person like a singer, actor, or politician who needs private bodyguards, the expense for such security must be considerable.
Even Srisuwan Chanya, president of the Constitutional Protection Association. who was recently arrested for demanding a large amount of money from the director-general of the Rice Department and was subsequently attacked, has no one to protect him, despite owning a big house and several luxury cars. This is not to belittle the activist’s status.
As for the students behind the motorcade incident, they claimed that they were in a rush to get to classes, though there was no evidence of their enrolment at the universities they referred to.
After the incident, the Move Forward Party including many party leaders and its followers expressed their opinions in defence of the three.
They again demanded amnesty and that space be given to express bias against the revered institution, despite being told by the Constitutional Court to stop actions that are “an exercise of rights and freedom to overthrow the government, according to Section 49, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, B.E. 2017”.
Such behaviour and the comments that appeared on social media and various websites reflect the ideas of the Move Forward Party, If they continue to drive forward legislation, they are threatening to create a misunderstanding about the separation of state and sovereignty that could see people's rights and liberties blocked or distorted and cause the judiciary to intervene.
As an academic, I can see that Thailand's principles of law and government are not like that. There is no need to push a campaign to demand amnesty, which may include crimes under Section 112.
Going against the decision of the Constitutional Court reflects rejection and determination to change the beliefs and attitudes of those who were originally supportive and others who don’t understand the consequences.
Doing this could be harmful to the stability and security of the Kingdom and directly affect the people's respect and faith in the King and the royal family as a whole.
If you don't restrain yourself, you could see a day when they realise their endgame and abolish our monarch and democratic rule.
Amorn Wanichwiwatana
Amorn Wanichwiwatana, DPhil (Oxon), is a former member of the Constitution Drafting Commission and is currently a professor at the Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University.
