Arguably, the toughest thing the People’s Party has learned this week is that, without extreme patience, the only way to bring Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra down is through a “twisted” system it denounces.
She sailed through the parliamentary censure vote by a comfortable margin. That as many as 319 MPs supported her against just over 160 meant that the People’s Party would never be able to impeach her, and even the “conservative” Senate is irrelevant.
This leaves the National Anti-Corruption Commission and the Constitutional Court, the two agencies that the People’s Party decries. They are the agencies that caused the Shinawatra real problems, disbanded their parties and dissolved an earlier “medium” of the People’s Party as well.
In virtually all democracies, parliamentary punishment is impossible against the incumbent powers-that-be. America’s Congress only managed to turn on Donald Trump when he was not the president. In Southeast Asia, legal action is common against former national leaders, but only after they have lost power.
So, the People’s Party can wait for a landslide election victory that would allow it to take parliamentary action against Paetongtarn. Or it can turn a blind eye when the country uses what the party maligns _ the NACC and then the Constitutional Court _ as a shortcut.
And using the NACC and the Constitutional Court is not always easy. They left quite a bit more to be designed when it came to “plain as day” tax allegations against Thaksin Shinawatra. It took a coup d’état to remove him from power.
But toothless at the time or not, the two agencies may be the People’s Party’s only hope if it wants to seriously pursue tax charges that it raised against Paetongtarn during the censure.
The question is how the party can solicit help from a system it deplores.
And we haven’t talked about alleged offence of Paetongtarn’s father yet. What was said during the no-confidence debate about how he illegally influenced the government and was instrumental in a political deal that destroyed Thailand was good rhetoric but, speaking legally, the charges were also vague.
Which means that while the NACC and the Constitutional Court might be able to do something about Paetongtarn’s tax or alleged Alpine benefits, the agencies would require more solid evidence when it comes to Thaksin.
Little by little, the People’s Party is learning more and more about “prosecution” and “persecution”, about what Parliament can do and what it can’t, and about what the likes of the NACC and Constitutional Court can’t even do.
As for Pheu Thai, how it deals with the Entertainment Complex shows it has a game plan.
When the censure drum was resounding, the government took its foot off the gas, saying public opinions must be listened to. After Paetongtarn survived the vote, the government is not wasting any more time despite protests.
When the censure was about to happen, a steamrolling Entertainment Complex could have added a lot more fire to the debate. Slowing it down before the no-confidence debate was admittedly a good idea, but clever as it was, many people saw the strategy coming from miles away.
Conservative parties backing the Entertainment Complex bill is a political absurdity. But Thai politics has been a freak show all along, and a peculiar statement by Paetongtarn at one point of the censure didn’t help.
“Nobody wants to be an accused,” she said. “So, for the sake of new politics and political clarity, you (the People’s Party) should say once and for all whom you will work with and whom you will not. You have to make it clear today to ease (everyone’s) mind.”
Was that intended as a jab, Paetongtarn’s dismissible remark while she responded to the opposition’s attacks? Or was it meant to tell the People’s Party that the bridges have not been completely destroyed.
If it was the latter, Piyabutr Saengkanokkul apparently did not see it that way.
“Pheu Thai has virtually proclaimed it represents the old force which is ready to resist progressive changes,” he said on his Facebook. “Anyone who wants changes can no longer vote for the Pheu Thai Party. “The only hope is the People’s Party, which requires a landslide in the next election.”
And still, if Piyabutr is belligerent, the new generation of the People’s Party leadership is apparently not, when the curtain is drawn on the censure. Group photos showcasing beaming faces were all around Parliament.
Enemies mingled. It did not look like they had gone to war against one another.
Was it a traditional Thai politeness, the same thing as when boxers who have traded blows hug each other after the 12th round? Or was it, again, intended as reiteration that there were neither permanent foes nor forever friends in politics?
The censure yields puzzling clues, but that was somewhat expected. One lesson has to be learned, though. It involves complacency of politicians who take parliamentary numbers and warm smiles too seriously.
Thaksin was “legally” let off the hook in tax cases, but they played a big part in him having to go into exile. He also had many allies, who would later tell him “It’s over, sir.”
Paetongtarn has to simply remember it, if everything else is too confusing.
