Promoting fascists II

In this post, with the same headline as our last post, PPT looks at the widely reported court victory by former National Security Council secretary-general Thawil Pliensri. The Supreme Administrative Court has ruled that his removal from that post in 2011 by the incoming government led by Yingluck Shinawatra was unlawful.

Thawil, who was not dismissed from government but transferred, currently acts as a prime ministerial adviser. Readers will recall from yesterday’s post that this kind of transfer and even “promotion” can be a way of “saving face” but also of getting rid of a deadbeat or enemy.

Thawil (a Bangkok Post photo)

Thawil refused to go quietly and went to several courts, resulting in the order that he “must be reinstated to his former role within 45 days.” That said, Thawil is due to retire in six months, and he can probably be sidelined for that period. Thawil, however, claims a victory. He says he was fighting “for justice and transparency for all state officials. The patronage system reflected in his unlawful transfer has ‘completely destroyed’ the country’s bureaucratic system…”. He added: “If the patronage system stays strong, how can civil officials be counted on to do their jobs correctly?” The politics of his transfer were outlined by Bangkok Pundit.

Since his transfer, while still working for government, Thawil has actively campaigned against it. He has frequently appeared on anti-democrat stages. In the recent past he has campaigned against government policy, supported the lese majeste law, taken up and supported Suthep Thaugsuban’s warnings about an alleged anti-monarchy conspiracy and supported the infamous plot diagram, seemingly being one of those responsible for it, and babbled about no orders being given to gun down red shirts in 2010.

As the NSC boss and former secretary of the Abhisit Vejjajiva government’s notorious Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation, Thawil proved a hopeless liar when he declared: “There was never an order to shoot down red-shirt protesters in 2010…”. When he made that claim, we asked: How dimwitted is Thawil? Does he expect that his blatant lies are  going to be gobbled up as truth by a public that is now aware of events? It got worse when he said the Abhisit regime “did not use force to disperse red-shirt protesters on May 19, 2010. He said they had only asked the protesters to vacate the Ratchaprasong intersection in order to make way for traffic.”

It is clear why the Yingluck government needed to move him; if it hadn’t he would have worked to undermine the government. It is not surprising that the royalist courts support him.