Higher booze prices
Re: "Scholar calls for booze law overhaul", & "Moonshine death toll up in capital", (BP, Aug 28).
Suthikorn Kingkaew, instructor at Thammasat University, recommends that alcoholic drinks be taxed according to their alcoholic content, which is the practice in most countries. In Thailand, rice whiskey bears a low tax, leading to high consumption compared to higher-taxed beers and wines. It's probably the main cause of alcoholism in Thailand.
So prima facie, making it more expensive seems a good idea. But in practice, the result could be to turn more customers away from the legitimate stuff to the even cheaper moonshine. Likely results: alcohol addiction not reduced, deaths and blindness rates from badly distilled moonshine increased.
To reduce consumption, a serious effort would have to be made to shut down the illegal distilleries. The fact that so many of these exist now when they are already illegal suggests that serious effort may not be forthcoming.
Pardon questioned
Re: "Shocking example", (PostBag, Aug 26).
I'm no fan of our judicial system, but I suggest that "Michael the Lawyer" erred when he said that "Thaksin was not forced into exile, he fled the judicial system."
Thaksin was granted a "pardon," which is a "use of executive power that exempts the individual to whom it was given from punishment. A pardon absolves the individual of guilt" (source: Cornell Law School). A newscaster I heard said the defendant had confessed guilt and expressed remorse, so His Majesty the King granted clemency.
Thus, Thaksin either (a) was guilty as charged and fled to escape punishment or was (b) innocent of corruption but was guilty of lying to the Crown (to get a pardon for a crime he didn't commit).
I suggest that Thaksin would not deliberately lie to the Crown, or would he?
Behind the scenes
Re: "Exit this way", (PostBag, Aug 26).
Without any doubt, the management guru, Peter Drucker, would have wholeheartedly agreed with Burin Kantabutra's contention that once a leader is appointed, one should exit the scene, leaving that leader to prove his or her worth.
However, since the stakes of a country with a population of 71 million are high, would one be happy with the leadership in the hands of someone who is new to public administration and currently in a wobbly political situation?
Of course, one could bite one's tongue and be prepared to take on any consequences.
Fortunately, the scenario is likely to be otherwise since her position was secured through the orchestration of her father, Thaksin, who may have already in mind a government headed by his daughter but under his shadow.
His intentions were reflected in Thaksin's "Vision for Thailand 2024", with ideas developed from 17 years of exile. It is against his nature to exit the scene now, leaving his daughter alone with seasoned Thai politicians.
The constitution requires the prime minister to be independent, and it is illegal for the country to be shadowy governed by another, even if he is her father.
It is not illegal to give guidance or advice when requested. So, the warning is clear: he must gingerly manage his shadowy role carefully to avoid another judicial coup.