Domestic and foreign ultra-royalism

21 08 2020

Whenever political attention turns to the monarchy, the ultra-royalists get rolling.

A pattern has emerged since the mid-2000s.  Emphasizing that the current wave of anti-monarchism is not new, in the past, the ultras respond to rising anti-royalism with ragtag and aged ultra-royalists and ultra-nationalists holding small rallies. As the broader establishment lumbers into action, these royalists tend to sprout like weeds and the military and other security agencies tend to choose the most viable for support. Ultras usually seed acts of violence, often with support from these agencies. Before that sharp response, however, there is usually a media blitz of ultras and other rightists and conservatives promoting royalism and “Thainess.” Often that includes trusted foreign commentators who are mobilized to “explain” royalism to a foreign, mainly Western, audience. Of course, the extremist version is peddled by other contractors.

Warong

In recent days, these initial moves have been in evidence. The Bangkok Post recently reported that some “200 Thai right-wingers launched a group on Wednesday to counter student-led protests…”. The so-called Thai Pakdee (Loyal Thai) group of mostly middle-aged wealthy ultras was predictably launched at a Bangkok hotel. Its proclaimed leader is ultra-royalist and “prominent right-wing politician Warong Dechgitvigrom, who said His Majesty the King’s monarchy was under attack.”

Warong is a former member of the Democrat Party, People’s Democratic Reform Committee member and now runs with Suthep Thaugsuban’s pro-military/pro-junta micro-party Action Coalition for Thailand,

He reckons the “father of the country is being harassed…”. Well, maybe, but it is an absentee father. The king lives in Germany and is being harassed there. In Thailand, the call is for reform.  But he then makes the usual call for rightist support: “How can Thai people stand by?” Despite his claims to the contrary, Warong is effectively encouraging violence.

Young

Speaking for his “new” group – all who seem to have a pedigree in PDRC and the broader yellow shirts, Warong made three demands: “No dissolution of parliament, maximum legal action against anyone who seeks to topple the monarchy, no change to the constitution except via the proper channel.”

On the token foreigner wheeled out to support the ultras and the status quo, it is again Stephen B Young, recycling his old and tired lines about “Thainess.” Previously a favorite at The Nation, this time it is the Bangkok Post that carries his babbling. As we have commented previously on Young and the things he recycles now, we’ll just link to those earlier posts.

 





Crumbling under the post-junta regime

11 07 2020

It may seem somewhat surprising that all major political parties appear to be in some turmoil.

Recent articles tell of the governing Palang Pracharath Party in turmoil with the consolidation of power by the army wing of the ruling party, with the exodus of four “technocratic officials sidelined by the party that is increasingly dominated by members with military ties.”

Then there are repeated reports of rifts in the hopeless Democrat Party and that it is losing electoral credibility in the south and has several breakaway parties led by former disgruntled senior members, all of whom strike us as hopeless and merely trying to ride the small party wagon to collect the dregs of the junta’s party system.

And, there are reports of the decline of the Puea Thai Party is in deep trouble, with all of its main leaders left out of parliament thanks to the junta’s constitution and the Election Commission, acting for the regime. Of course, Gen Prawit Wongsuwan keeps trying to entice Puea Thai MPs across to the dark side.

We may also recall that opposition Future Forward was gutted by the Constitutional Court, acting for the regime and that the remaining MPs remain rudderless.

In our view, with the military types consolidating its grip, Palang Pracharath looks more like a party of factions that are kept under control with money, cabinet positions and constant shepherding. This doesn’t necessarily make it stronger, but if the opposition is crumbling and unable to capitalize on these schisms, rifts and associated corruption, then unelected dolts like the current generals are likely to be able to hold together their rule.

As an aside, this “technocrats” versus green men is a narrative seen in several stories and we’d say it is an odd claim. A technocrat is usually defined as a person “appointed on the basis of their expertise in a given area of responsibility, particularly with regard to scientific or technical knowledge.” When we look at the “technocrats” leaving government, this definition applies only vaguely to one of them. Kobsak Pootrakool has a PhD in Economics from MIT and worked at the Bank of Thailand and the Stock Exchange of Thailand before becoming a banker. But the other three are political hacks rather than technocrats. Sontirat Sontijirawong with an MBA, has worked in packaging for business and for most of his career has spent his time as an “adviser” or committee member in relatively minor posts. Uttama Savanayana was trained as an engineer and also has a PhD in management but has spent the last 20-25 years administering and advising. Suvit Maesincee also has a PhD in management, having trained as a pharmacist, and has spent most his career sitting on boards.

In other words, journalists and commentators might want to look more carefully at the reasons why such men are referred to as “technocrats.” Does it have something to do with the regime having so few technically qualified persons in a cabinet dominated by army figures, politically-acceptable royalists, local mafioso and a convicted heroin smuggler?





Updated: Appalling Abhisit

18 05 2020

Like the military, the appalling Abhisit Vejjajiva and the (Anti)Democrat Party have been spooked into responding to the illuminations of sites in Bangkok that remembered and questioned the military’s crackdown on red shirts in 2010.

As we previously posted and is widely known, the crackdowns were ordered by then Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his deputy Suthep Thaugsuban. The murderous military assaults, including the use of snipers, was led by Gen Anupong Paojinda and Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, among others, many of who were a part of the junta regime after the 2014 military coup and remain part of the current regime.

In a Bangkok Post report, Abhisit reportedly claimed:

he thinks the country has yet to recover from the decade-old wounds despite several legal cases connected to the red-shirt mass protest having been settled in court and an independent panel shedding light on what happened.

Like his “book,” called The Simple Truth – a travesty of untruth – Abhisit’s observation here is misleading. The “independent” panel was, in fact, appointed by his regime and almost none of the cases that matter have been “settled in court.” In fact, as Khaosod reports, despite courts finding that the military murdered red shirts and bystanders, “[t]en years after a military crackdown that left about 90 people dead, no army personnel has ever stood trial over the killings…”.

Abhisit and Suthep have never been held accountable. When they were charged they defended themselves with spurious accounts and by claiming the police could not investigate them. They claimed that the charges were a subterfuge by political opponents, insisted that most of the deaths were the work of terrorists – men in black – and that the use of weapons and lethal force was justified by terrorist attacks on the military. Supporting them, the military leadership repeatedly claimed that it did not kill any protesters. Then Deputy Army Commander General Prayuth stated: “My subordinates did not kill anyone, but they were shot at…”.

The good old days at the Army Club

The charges failed because the lapdog of military and royalist regimes, the NACC rejected malfeasance allegations against Abhisit, Suthep and Anupong. Following the defendant’s script, he NACC considered the red shirt protests were not peaceful with armed militants among the demonstrators. Because of this, the NACC agreed that regime had acted legally in authorizing armed personnel to reclaim the demonstration sites and that they had to protect themselves and did so in accord with “international standards.” All allegations and charges against Abhisit, Suthep and Anupong were dismissed.

No one seriously expects justice in royalist Thailand.

This year, Abhisit continues to blame Thaksin Shinawatra and his parties.

Let’s have that coup!

Startlingly, Abhisit now says: “We all should look ahead and work together with an open mind to prevent the preconditions for military coups…”. He apparently thinks all Thais are morons and have short memories. Arguably, Abhisit ranks second behind Suthep in the stridency of calls for a military coup. In allowing his Democrat Party to repeatedly sabotage parliamentary politics and in taking to the streets several times to hasten a coup, Abhisit would be better advised to shut his mouth and avoid the buffalo manure drivel that emanates from that aperture.

He’s supported in his avoidance of justice when the Democrat Party avers:

“The allegation [against Abhisit] has been already disproved by contests in the justice system, whether a court of justice or an inquiry by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which already proved that the crackdown was in accordance with the law…”.

“The allegations [against Abhisit] are distortions to defame him.”

The Democrat Party now supports a regime that came to power via the 2014 coup. The credibility of the justice system has been destroyed by the military and its puppet regimes and associated parties.

Abhisit then attacked the illuminations: “The movement’s search was launched with rhetoric that was bent on pointing fingers, which is not the way to attain the truth.” If there’s one thing the appalling Abhisit has shown that he can avoid, it is the truth. And, he reckons Thailand can’t handle the truth (unless it is his truth).

Update: The renewed attention to the murderous events of April and May 2010 have pricked the military-supporting Democrat Party. According to Khaosod, the anti-democratic party “will take legal action against anyone who accuses its former leader of illegitimately ordering a military crackdown on Redshirt protesters that left about 90 people dead 10 years ago.” The unpopular party claims that such “accusations” are libelous. In Thailand, the libel and defamation laws and threats to use it is often used by criminals, liars and the powerful to silence whistleblowers and critics. Truth is often suppressed by such actions.





Further updated: It’s still a military regime I

12 05 2020

Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha appears far more comfortable when ruling under an emergency decree. Parliament is not his thing and with it not meeting, its (limited) significance is reduced to invisibility. And, the virus crisis has (further) reduced the (limited) scrutiny he gets from the (tame) media; less than during the full-on military dictatorship.

The Dictator’s comfort zone – within the hard shell of the military – is showcased in a Khaosod report. In an odd move, Prime Minister Gen Prayuth “ordered a public survey to gather opinions on whether the emergency decree should be lifted, officials said Monday.”

It does seem strange that a “strongman” feels the need “survey” public opinion on a topic that has generally been considered a matter of science and public health. But we do know that the military junta used “surveys” to “assess” public mood. These surveys were usually conducted by the military and related bodies.

And so it is now:

National security official Gen. Somsak Rungsita said the survey will be conducted by the National Intelligence Agency and the Internal Security Operation Command. It will cover questions regarding the next phase of business reopenings and public opinion on emergency decree, he said.

Yes, the emergency decree. If those junta/military-backed agencies show that “people” are “happy” for the generals and their minions to bungle on under strict controls, then we might expect the emergency decree to be extended beyond the end of May.

Reassuringly, and suggesting that the “survey” is something of a smokescreen, Gen Somsak declared: “The decree has to be eventually revoked. It can’t stay forever…”. In the usual idiotic manner of generals, he added: “Please don’t link it to politics since the enactment of emergency decree is purely for the health of citizens.” Of course, it isn’t all about health.

Even the Democrat Party’s Ong-art Klampaiboon dared suggest that “the government” of which he is a part but in which his party has no influence, “should assign academics to conduct the questionnaire instead of intelligence agencies.” We’d ask why a competent government even needs a survey unless it is to justify more unaccountable (military) rule.

Update 1: The regime has now denied the above report despite it being clear that the earlier reports were accurate. National Security Council secretary-general Gen Somsak Roongsita has stated “Gen Prayut[h] … does not have a policy and has not issued an order” to carry out a survey on the issue…”. Ho hum.

Update 2: Ho hum indeed! Khaosod reports that Gen Prayuth has squashed talk about the emergency decree being lifted at the end of May. The report states:

National Security Council sec-gen Gen. Somsak Roongsita also told the media on Monday that it is “highly likely” that Thailand’s State of Emergency will end on May 31, citing surveys by two intelligence agencies.

“Both agencies were quite satisfied with the overall public health and safety situations,” Somsak said. “[They] believed that the general Thais have good understandings of the need for social distance at the time of the pandemic outbreak.”

Gen Prayuth seems to want the decree in place for longer, claiming health concerns. As usual, it is confusion erring on the side of repression.





Coup booster promoted

26 04 2020

Long-time readers will recall that the 2014 military coup required months of street-based royalist, rightist, anti-Thaksin/anti-Shinawatra activism. Led by the loud-mouthed former Democrat Party deputy leader Suthep Thaugsuban, the People’s Democratic Reform Committee publicly pleaded and privately plotted with Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha throw out the elected government.

Suthep had several deputies, some of whom now working with the regime and having well-paid sinecures, with others having been appointed to various bodies by the coup masters.

Chitpas opposing lese majeste reform (a Bangkok Post photo)

One of his deputies was the Boonrawd Brewery family heiress Chitpas Bhirombhakdi, who later changed adopted a royal family name, Kridakorn. A Khaosod report says she is “the eldest daughter of Singha executive vice-president Chutinant Bhirombhakdi. She currently serves as a deputy secretary of the Democrat Party and a party-list MP.” It reports that she’s back on the junta/post-junta payroll. But, first, some more background.

In a post in 2013, we had this:

The first story at Reuters is regarding “prominent Thais” who have joined the protests. First mentioned is the selfie-photogenic Chitpas Bhirombhakdi who at 27 and with nearly 2,000 Instagram photos of herself posted, is not just a self-indulgent and self-important upper class youngster, but is also “heiress to a $2.6 billion family fortune and, according to high-society magazine Thailand Tatler, one of Bangkok’s ‘most eligible young ladies‘.” The report notes:

Chitpas, whose family owns the Boon Rawd Brewery that makes Singha Beer, had dismounted the machine [a bulldozer that was to bust police barricades] long before police pelted it with rubber bullets and gas canisters. But her gung-ho act showed how members of Thailand’s most celebrated families are discarding all past pretence [sic.] of neutrality to hit the streets in the hope of toppling Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

We understand that several tubes of expensive moisturizer helped after the bulldozer scamming for headlines. Chitpas may be young for Thai politics, but her interests are with the old men who want to keep their hands on the political tiller. She supports harsher lese majeste laws – her family’s beer interests were initially co-invested with the then king back in the early 1930s.

Our most recent post (that we recall) on Chitpas had more:

Chutzpah, egotism, smugness, vanity, audacity, cheek, conceitedness, contemptuousness, disdainfulness, gall, high-handedness, imperiousness, pomposity, self-importance, self-love, superciliousness, overbearance and scornfulness are just some of the words that come up as possible synonyms for arrogance.

Whatever it is described as, Singha beer heiress Chitpas Kridakorn aka Boonrawd has it in bulldozer loads.

In a Ripley’s style story, she is reported to be “seeking assistance from a Justice Ministry fund to help defendants meet court bail has been given until June 21 to submit a list of her assets and verify she is a low-income earner registered with the government.”

She’s heir to a fortune that currently stacks up to some $2.4 billion.

Despite this pile of cash, shares, houses, cars, planes and more, Chitpas “filed a request on May 28 that the Justice Fund place money as bail surety in legal cases against her arising from the street protests against the Yingluck Shinawatra government.”

It seems that her legal troubles she has been “appointed to the House Committee on police affairs on Thursday.” She’s gone from leading protesters to vandalize Police HQ, to trying to “join” the police, to now overseeing the police.





Party of the pathetic

30 03 2020

About three weeks ago we posted on the new Kla Party that seems to be a party for some disgruntled Democrat Party members who want to promote the nothingness that is Korn Chatikavanij. To be honest, we wouldn’t be commenting on this party for dolts and creeps if it wasn’t for the Bangkok Post campaigning for Korn and the nothing party.

In its most recent fawning posterior polish, the Post describes Kla as having “been compared to the now-dissolved Future Forward Party…”. We can’t fathom how such a comparison could be made. After all, this is a self-defined boring party that has no political position and no policy that amounts to anything other than a weak slogan and a pathetic appeal to support from business.

Its “strategy” is to win 20 seats at the next election. Yep, it is best to aim low when you have nothing to offer.

Has the new party said anything on the big issues of the day? Nope. This is because it styles itself as “pragmatic.” Perhaps “pathetic” is a better style.

We can’t understand the Post’s fascination. Maybe it is about the rich boys playing together.





A dull party for the dolts of nothingness

10 03 2020

It seems the Bangkok Post’s board of the hugely wealthy has decided that one of their own – Korn Chatikavanij – offers a chance of the non-military elite having one of their own as a future premier. They keep promoting him, this time with an interview.

Elite chums

Korn is so boring. So boring that not even a nifty party name like Kla (Dare) can save him from the dullness of nothingness.

The boring rich man left the Democrat Party – at least he has that going for him – even if it is because his “leadership qualities” were apparently not as valued as much as he wanted.

Korn was, for a time, a minister under his school chum Abhisit Vejjajiva. He seemed to enjoy that spotlight and wants it again.

But read the interview. What policies does Kla have? None that he mentions. He seems not to have had any real thoughts or insights for years but displays the ruling class’s instinct for supporting royalist and reactionary causes. The interview is all marketing talk for a party that’s a vehicle for self promotion. But like the lazy rich, even self-promotion is tiring and he needs friends to push him to work.

Korn and Kla are hopeless rather than offering any hope for anyone, not even his ruling class buddies.





With two updates: Can the king’s fake emergency be questioned?

17 10 2019

Not that long ago, the king, approved by The Dictator, Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, issued a decree that transferred the 1st and 11th Infantry Regiments to the palace for the king’s personal use.

As we said at the time, in neo-feudal Thailand, this is perhaps no longer remarkable. However, the proclamation’s claim to constitutionality by citing Section 172 of the junta’s constitution was a surprise. That section states:

For the purpose of maintaining national or public safety or national economic security, or averting public calamity, the King may issue an Emergency Decree which shall have force as an Act.

The issuance of an Emergency Decree under paragraph one shall be made only when the Council of Ministers is of the opinion that it is an emergency of necessity and urgency which is unavoidable.

In the subsequent sitting of the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers shall submit the Emergency Decree to the National Assembly for its consideration without delay….

Of course, the declaration is fake. There was and is no emergency. Perhaps that’s why Gen Apirat Kongsompong decided to make a furious and deranged speech that pretended a threat existed. Indeed, a threat to the monarchy from the parliamentary opposition! To be sure, that is buffalo manure, but the Army boss seems to have had an (invented) “emergency” in mind.

In a self-censored story, Khaosod reports that the “emergency” decree is due to go to parliament today. It is the Prayuth government that has “to defend its emergency decree…” in parliament.

The report states that the parliamentary session “will focus mostly on whether the government’s decision to enact the law unilaterally without going through the usual parliamentary channel was appropriate, and not the merits of the transfer itself.”

In neo-feudal Thailand, questioning the grasping and gorging by the king is off limits. This is not because of law, but because of fear of the king’s vindictiveness and the enormous power he already wields.

The report mentions brave democracy activist Arnon Nampha who:

urged the opposition to vote down the decree because there was no real emergency that warrants its bypassing of parliament. He also said severing the army’s chain of command over the two units would lead to legal complications.

He added:

Members of the Parliament must have the courage to stand up and prevent the risks of expanding royal power, in order to protect the principle of democracy with the King as head of state.

It seems highly unlikely that opposition parliamentarians will show the same strength of spine:

But there are signs that the opposition will not put up much of a fight due to the sensitive nature of the Royal Decree. Major parties are expected to pose no challenge….

The only sensitive thing is that it involves the king. In neo-feudal Thailand, questioning the king is no longer possible and is potentially dangerous. The king’s fake emergency cannot be questioned.

Update 1: In the end, it was only the majority of the Future Forward Party that showed that it supports constitutionalism – yes, even the junta’s flawed constitution – and the notion of a proper and lawful constitutional monarchy. The rest of the parliament fell into support of absolutism or were spineless. But even FFP could not take a stand against a grasping and ever more powerful neo-feudal monarch, arguing “that use of an executive decree for a “non-urgent” matter showed a problem of the cabinet misusing its power in violation of the constitution.” In fact, this is about the king and his demands of the military-backed regime.

Piyabutr Saengkanokkul is correct that “the executive decree violated Section 172 of the constitution, which says executive decrees should be used for urgent issues. He said the executive decree did not reflect any urgency.” The regime and the palace are now likely to seek to destroy him.

The monarchist jellybacks like Deputy Defence Minister Gen Chaichan Changmongkol and Democrat MP Pirapan Salirathavibhaga declared “that passage of the executive decree was important and urgent.” They couldn’t say why. As reported, “The government insisted there was an unspecified “emergency” that required the bill to be passed immediately.”

Other opposition parties, including the Puea Thai Party – now a pretty hopeless bunch – joined the jellybacks.

The erratic king was perhaps expressing his anger at his divine will being questioned by “postponing” his royal boating display scheduled for next week.

Update 2: Reuters has more on the “Democrat” Party’s Pirapan. In defending the indefensible, Pirapan began with the usual mad monarchist trope: “Thailand is a unique kingdom…”. THe point of this banality is to assert that Thailand’s monarchy is somehow allowed to do anything it wants and that its crimes and misdemeanors cannot be criticized and the monarch, no matter how mad, stupid or infirm, cannot be questioned. He then stated: “The monarchy is a representation of national security so in the Kingdom of Thailand, we could not separate national security from the monarchy…”. Of course, this statement reflects all kinds of laws established by military juntas and their puppets, but is entirely beside the point. The point is about the constitutional monarchy, the constitution and the false “emergency.” Of course, the Democrat Party has a long history of supporting the restoration of powers lost by the absolute monarchy decades ago. Indeed, that’s been its reason for existing.





Rabid royalists battle “liberalism”

7 09 2019

This Reuters report has been widely distributed, but deserves attention.

It notes the rise of a rightist ultra-nationalism as those who are insufficiently royalist are attacked as “chung chart” which “translates roughly as ‘nation-hater.’ Here, nation equals monarchy and support for the military and its current political regime.

Opposing that regime, the military or being considered insufficiently royalist means being seen by royalist-rightists “as a threat in a kingdom…”.

Royalist-rightists are identified as “waging an increasing battle against the opposition on social media and in the courts, illustrating the deepening political divide in the southeast Asian nation.”

Sound familiar? It should. Nothing much has changed in this royalist-rightist agitation since recently-released Sondhi Limthongkul and the People’s Alliance for Democracy signed up with the monarchy for ousting Thaksin Shinawatra in 2005. He and PAD were followed by royalist-rightist groups such as the Dhamma Army and Santi Asoke (since 2005), No Colors/Multi Colors (from about 2010), Green Politics Group (since 2007), Thai Patriot Network (since 2008), Siam Samakkhi (since 2011), Network of Citizen Volunteers to Protect the Land (2012), Pitak Siam (2012), Sayam Prachapiwat (2012), the White Mask group, People’s Army Against the Thaksin Regime (2013), the so-called Rubbish Collection Organization (2014), and the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (2013-14).

This is just a selection of ultra-rightists, many associated with the military’s Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC). All have been anti-Thaksin. The current lot say:

they are acting in the name of the palace and the army also say they get no direct support from those institutions. Government spokeswoman Narumon Pinyosinwat declined comment on the issue and said Thailand is a free country.

We are sure that there are ultra-rightists who act independently in the cause of promoting the world’s wealthiest monarch, a grasping playboy as a symbol of “the nation,” but we doubt that the military and ISOC are uninterested. After all, they’ve manipulated or arranged most of these groups over five decades.

Claims by by Defense Ministry spokesman Kongcheep Tantravanich that the “military is not behind any groups…. The military does not support anyone engaged in activism outside parliament” are false.

The report claims that “chung chart” was made popular by The Democrat Party’s Warong Dechgitvigrom, who says:

I see this as liberalism that destroys traditions and the monarchy by claiming to be democratic…. We need to fight them through ideology. The New Right is a political ideology.

Akechai. Clipped from TLHR

The ideological fight usually leads to legal actions and violence. Indeed, there was plenty of political violence in the last days of the junta. Think of the repeated attacks on Sirawith Seritiwat and Akechai Hongkangwarn, among others.

As the report notes, “army chief Apirat Kongsompong … has described Thailand as being in a ‘hybrid war’ against enemies of tradition” and the rightist-royalists are working in support of his “war.”

The current targets of rightist-royalist angst and wrath include the Future Forward Party – who Warong considers false democrats and nasty “liberals.” That party also worries Gen Apirat as they are too popular; the military fears popularity that translates into votes.

The report cites former PADista and Democrat Party minister Kasit Primya as saying: “The two sides are becoming more entrenched…”. There might be more than two “sides,” but as far as we can tell, the “sides” have been deeply entrenched since PAD.

So it is that Future Forward and its supporters are painted by ultra-nationalist rightist-royalists as “want[ing] to destroy the Thai system [monarchy] and change it to the Marxist-Socialist system…”.

On social media, hatred of identified opponents is fanned. Such hatred has long proved useful of the military when it mobilizes violence to support military-backed regimes or to destabilize elected governments.





Loans, Prawit and ISOC

1 07 2019

A few days ago PPT posted on Gen Prawit Wongsuwan’s backslapping regarding title deeds allegedly returned to debtors following the intervention of ISOC, Army police and administrative officials who claim to have magically convinced “loan sharks” to return land title deeds to the owners who had hocked them.

What amused us about the report was the data, which we questioned.

Interestingly, while not questioning the data, the Bangkok Post has questioned the program in an editorial. It notes that it was “deputy Democrat Party leader Nipit Intarasombat [who] floated an allegation that the return of land title deeds to debtors … was fake…”. He claimed that after the ceremonies fronted by Gen Prawit, “returning” the title deeds, “the documents were given back to the creditors…”.

Gen Prawit has denied this, but the allegations come from a man at the top of a “coalition partner,” which makes the whole idea of the junta’s ongoing “government” all the more fragile.

More significantly, the Bangkok Post recounts that:

… at another ceremony to hand back title deeds on Thursday, a group of 30 debtors of loan sharks from several provinces in the Northeast showed up uninvited to file a petition to Gen Prawit…. They said they were given back title deeds at previous ceremonies but when they went back home the police seized back the documents from them. They were then forced to repay debts or sign new borrowing contracts to get back the title deeds.

Will these villager be denied? Will they be harassed or arrested?