Thailand’s political crisis deepened when the courts ruled that prime minister Samak must resign because he appears on TV as a chef, in a cooking programme.
I thought they’d rule that he must leave because of serious issues like “democratic legitimacy, murder in street fighting between the two opposing factions or trying to find a peaceful and democratic solution to the crisis”.
My Thai colleague said only this: “Guess who controls the courts? The big guy up there”.
And “the big guy up there” does not mean God, but wait, for Thais, he does sometimes become God.
Anyway, Samak’s resignation would amount to nothing, because his party can reappoint him.
The law was originally drafted to reduce the influence of big business on Thai governments, but it seems to be used now to control cooking programmes.
Thais are joking that this decision is meant to promote Thai cooking and restaurants. it’s democracy and justice that’s been ‘fried’.
According to a controversial Thai academic, “those who have illusions in Thailand’s Constitutional Monarch as a “powerful and stabilising figure” might legitimately wonder why he is not intervening in order to bring about a peaceful and democratic solution”.
“Others may already have an answer,” he noted, cynically.