Proxy wars rage as political rifts widen

A proxy war appears to be raging between the Pheu Thai Party and its former coalition partner, the Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP).
Two prominent figures are key in this war of attrition. One is Teerayut Suwankesorn, a soft spoken independent lawyer who won fame for his instrumental role in the Constitutional Court’s order to disband the Move Forward Party, ban its executive committee members from politics for 10 years and remove Pita Limjaroenrat as party leader.
The other is Prompong Nopparit, a former spokesman of Pheu Thai who recently exposed PPRP leader Gen Prawit Wongsuwon’s poor parliamentary attendance record.
Paiboon Nititawan, secretary-general of the PPRP, recently made a doomsday prediction, saying something ominous would take place on Oct 10 that will herald Pheu Thai’s fall from grace. His prediction made quite a few reporters wonder what he had hidden under his sleeve that would be let out on that day.
In fact, there was no bombshell of any description on Oct 10. Everything went on as normal, with the exception of Mr Teerayut and his assistant’s appearance at the court, where they were seen pushing a trolley loaded with thick files of documents.
This sighting, however, did not cause a ripple, neither in real life nor social media, unlike the sensation caused by “Moo Deng”.
Mr Teerayut told the media that he had come to petition the court to order former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and Pheu Thai to cease all activities that could be construed as upending the Thai democratic system, with the King as the head of state.
The activist-cum-lawyer listed six events which he claimed showed their attempts to overturn Thai democracy.
One concerns the VVIP privilege accorded to Thaksin when he was supposed to be behind bars for abuse of power.
Instead, the former PM spent six months at Police General Hospital, citing life-threatening conditions, which meant he didn’t serve a single day of his one-year prison term, which was ultimately halved by a royal pardon.
The other concerns Thaksin’s influence over Pheu Thai, which Mr Teerayut said is a violation of the Political Parties Act, as reflected by his dominant role in discussions concerning the formation of the government, led by his daughter, Paetongtarn.
He claimed Thaksin was behind the decision to exclude the PPRP from the alliance, and the former PM coerced the party to adopt his vision for the country as its official policy.
The court has yet to decide if it will take up the petition for consideration. However, if and when it does, it could order an inquiry into the allegations.
For instance, the court could order a probe into Thaksin’s supposed “life-threatening conditions”, which allowed him to serve his sentence at the hospital instead of in prison.
The court could ask for Thaksin’s medical records or even CCTV footage from the hospital ward where Thaksin was supposedly staying for further examination.
Once the court launches an investigation, doctors who had used doctor-patient confidentiality as an excuse not to provide such information will have to comply, as not doing so could be considered contempt of court.
Any doctor who helped Thaksin will have to face the music, as no one with common sense bought the tall tale that the former prime minister was actually very sick while he was staying at the hospital.
Thaksin’s domination of the Pheu Thai party is obvious. There is no doubt about that, as the whole party, including its executive committee and MPs, submit to his whims.
It won’t be difficult for Mr Teerayut to prove these allegations. One obvious example is the meeting of key members of the coalition parties at Ban Chan Song La, Thaksin’s residence, on Aug 14 to discuss who would succeed then-Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, who was about to be stripped of his post for appointing a convict, Pichit Chuenban, as a PM’s office minister.
In retaliation, Mr Prompong fired a shot at PPRP’s weakest link, Gen Prawit, accusing him of lavish spending while travelling abroad with his entourage on chartered flights.
He asked the National Anti-Corruption Commission to investigate the matter, noting an MP is not supposed to receive gifts or other benefits worth more than 3,000 baht.
It is still too soon to predict the outcome of Mr Teerayut’s petition. It needs to be noted the petitioner is not seeking the dissolution of Pheu Thai, or a ban from politics for Thaksin. However, that could well be the next step.
Amid the raging political rivalry, an attempt at reconciliation between two rivals, Newin Chidchob, de facto leader of the Bhumjaithai Party, and Thaksin, the de facto leader of Pheu Thai, took place last week at Thaksin’s residence with Anutin Charnvirakul, Bhumjaithai leader, as a mediator.
It is widely understood this attempt was intended to forge an alliance that would help prevent the People’s Party from winning the next election.
This move might appear to be premature unless both parties believe the government may not last long.
In the meantime, the tit-for-tat between Pheu Thai and PPRP through their proxies will drag on for a while until one or both of them ends up being the loser.
Veera Prateepchaikul is former editor, Bangkok Post.