Listen to this story |
(In response to this article Editorial: Thaksin Should Be Released)
We have only just passed January, and Thailand’s justice system is already not off to a great start this year. But releasing Thaksin on parole this month will only make it worse.
A Thai Enquirer editorial claims that “[r]eleasing Thaksin on parole is, therefore, a matter of upholding the rule of law and the principles of a fair judicial process. It is about asserting that in a democracy, even those who are politically inconvenient have rights that must be respected. It is a statement that the legal system should not be wielded as a weapon to settle political scores but should stand as an impartial arbiter of justice.”
This comes after an announcement by the Department of Corrections that Thaksin will soon be eligible for parole, and he qualifies due to his age and deteriorating health.
Releasing Thaksin on parole, unlike what the editorial claims, is not about upholding the rule of law. In fact, the message that Thaksin’s parole will give to the Thai people is precisely the opposite.
The rule of law is about all persons being equal under the law, and that no one is above the law. It entails principles of equality, fairness, and justice.
I fail to see how releasing Thaksin would uphold these principles. On the contrary, giving special consideration and fast-tracking his eligibility for parole due to his infamous status, while hundreds of prisoners are waiting in line, undermines equality under the law.
In its claim that denying Thaksin’s parole will be tantamount to “using the legal system as a tool for political retribution” and “a tacit endorsement of the politicization of justice … implying that our legal system can be manipulated by those in power to serve political ends,” the editorial neglects to consider that his parole is only possible in the first place due to apparent backroom dealings. It appears following a series of incidents after incidents whereupon his eight-year sentence was commuted to one year, a new regulation was announced last December that allows prisoners to serve their sentence outside of prison (the timing of which is in suspicious coincidence with his return to Thailand), and an extended hospital stay outside of prison was allowed for Thaksin beyond the 120-day limit stipulated in the Department of Corrections regulations.
In short, releasing him precisely implies that our legal system can be manipulated by those in power to serve political ends. The double standard is apparent, and the public knows.
Justice and the rule of law is not just about fairness; it is also about the appearance of fairness. In other words, as an English Lord once famously proclaimed, “justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.” In other jurisdictions, this is enshrined in the doctrine of the appearance of fairness.
Even if the causes of these incidents are discrete – say, for example, if the rationale of the regulation announced last December was truly to reduce prison overcrowding – it does not appear fair. The legitimacy of the justice system, like other parts of the government, also depends on people’s perception. Expediting Thaksin’s parole simply pulls another loose thread in the fabric of the Thai government’s social contract.
And it is clear that the people do not believe this is fair. The People’s Network for Thailand Reform, among other groups, has protested Thaksin’s extended stay in the hospital, and protesters have planned to petition the Supreme Court to set up a panel investigating Thaksin’s extended hospital stay, following the National Anti-Corruption Commission’s delay in doing so.
It is important to remind ourselves that, politically manipulated or not, there was a court verdict sentencing him to eight years in prison for serious charges of abuse of power and conflict of interest. These charges should not be taken lightly. If he seeks to be cleared, he should fight it in the justice system the right way. Thailand cannot speak about accountability, justice, or fairness when he is seen to be getting off scot-free for crimes he has been convicted of.
It looks even worse considering that, in the same month, the Thai judicial system has come under fire on several occasions on other politically sensitive cases: the members of the People’s Alliance for Democracy were cleared of charges of insurrection for shutting down Bangkok’s airports in 2008 – instead ordering a meager fine of 20,000 baht for violating the emergency decree and for trespassing; democracy activist Anon Nampha was convicted and sentenced to prison for lese-majeste; and most recently, the Move Forward Party was ordered to stop their proposals to amend the lese-majeste law by the Constitutional Court because it is considered an attempt to overthrow the monarchy.
When ill convicts have been left to die in prison without any reform for years before Thaksin’s return, when the authorities fail to clarify whether the regulations on parole would apply to all inmates, and when no details have been released on Thaksin’s health, one cannot by any stretch call releasing Thaksin a win for the rule of law.
I am not saying Thaksin should not be released at all. Rather, I am saying that his release should be considered in accordance with due process and not expedited due to external political influence. Releasing Thaksin on parole, on these terms, is an affront to a legal system that proclaims to be equal. It erodes the already-faltering public trust in the Thai judicial institutions, perpetuates the perception of corruption, and jeopardizes the rule of law in our country.
Yes, Thaksin has rights that must be respected even when it is politically inconvenient. But these rights do not take precedence over other people’s rights.
As the editorial rightly notes, the decision to release such a polarizing figure on parole indeed transcends Thaksin’s individual legacy. But the kind of democracy Thailand should aspire to be is not one where politicians are seen to escape accountability due to their power and influence. Thaksin’s case is a prime opportunity to show what justice really means in Thailand. And if we are to show that the rule of law will prevail, then the process to release him must be done right.