A little blunder that explains the country's terrible bureaucracy

This isn’t one of the “quirky” news tit-bits on the inside pages of a newspaper. It’s a real-life “dark secret” for this villager of Prachinburi who has finally decided to go public with his unusual ID “phenomenon.” Buarai Paosaeng of House No 9, Village No 11 of Tambon Nonsri, Amphoe Kabinburi, in the eastern border province of Prachinburi has carried this ID card for over ten years, under a cloud of uncertainty and perhaps a deep-rooted sense of anxiety. What if people found out that he was born on “Feb 31, 1961”? And how does he explain to anyone who asks him when his ID will expire? It’s clearly printed on the card that the document will remain valid until “Feb 30, 2563” with the signature of the local authorized official, no less. Of course, the ID is an authentic one, issued by the Local Administration Department of the Interior Ministry. Buarai has no doubt that he could produce it anywhere and it would be taken seriously. In fact, he has had no problems so far using it for all practical purposes. But what if someone finds fault with his birth date? What if he decides one day to exercise a Thai citizen’s right to apply for a passport? What if the passport was issued accordingly showing him with his “official date of birth” and an immigration official in one of the foreign countries raises a storm about “falsification” of an official document of international significance? That could spark an international incident and will the Interior and Foreign Ministries of Thailand come to his rescue? Probably not. The last time a similar incident took place only a few weeks earlier, as assistant headman of Aranyaprathet District of Srakaew province, also in the eastern part of the country, some serious consequences fell upon the ID card owner, not the officials concerned with issuing the weird ID with a strange birth date. The misfortune came upon Sangwian Kooncharoen, one of the local assistant village headmen, who reported that his ID card showed him born on Feb 30. The burden of proof didn’t fall on the officials concerned. Instead, he was told to show documents to prove that he had not been born on Feb 30. And when the controversy was widely reported in the local press, Interior Minister Charupong Ruangsuwan was miffed – not at his own officials who had issued the card but at the card-holder himself for making such a fool of the people involved. “He deserves to die,” the minister told reporters. It was widely understood that the person the minister considered to be at fault was the person who made the issue public. The minister was simply trying to show the public that he was simply performing his duty to protect his subordinates to the best of his ability. The assistant headman, who officially was supposed to be under the minister’s jurisdiction as well, was left to defend for himself. He subsequently decided to do what a good, honest and responsible official was supposed to do: He quit. It’s not clear whether that would make it easier for him to get his ID card revised to confirm that he had not been born on a non-existent date on this planet. Now, Buarai of Prachinburi has a more serious problem. The birth date on his ID was even more challenging. Sangwian’s Feb 30 date was bad enough. But Feb 31 could prove to be even more “out of this world.” He just had to get the word out before people thought he was living in his own little surreal world. Buarai has a full history of his own to tell the world to prove that he hadn’t made up the information on his own ID card. He told reporters: “I am the son of Mr Ma and Mrs Kham. My birth certificate (a document to produce to get an ID) says I was born on a Wednesday, January 31, 2503 (1960). When I turned 17, I went to Kabinburi District to apply for my ID card. The card expired three times and has been renewed every time. When I turned 27, I was married and had our marriage registered with my wife at the same district office. That’s when I discovered that my birthday was Feb 31, 2504 (1961). I then went to the local officials to have the information on my ID and domicile document corrected. I was told to continue to use my ID and related document…until I heard that a similar case had taken place in Srakaew. That’s why I am making my case public as well so that I could probably get my real life back…” Buarai says he has never really been able to mark his birthday with the traditional “merit-making” ritual like most Thai Buddhists “because I don’t have a real birthday.” Perhaps, the national human rights movement could lend a helping hand. The consumer protect group should launch an investigation into this case before the next victim surfaces. To blame it on bureaucratic inefficiency would be blasé and counter-productive – and quite frankly, extremely boring. And to demand an explanation from the Interior Ministry and seek out the responsible parties would be tantamount to banging your head against a wall. You could get seriously injured and nothing will change

Harmony is in the air, at least publicly

Who says they don't like one another? Premier Yingluck Shinawatra was out in full force and outstanding fashion last night at the celebrations of the 421st anniversy of the Royal Thai Army. Here she is seen flanked by Privy Council President Gen Prem Tinsulanonda and Army Commander-in-Chief Gen Prayuth Chan-Ocha. Everyone was all smiles -- and if you still have any doubt about the harmony between the government and the army and the privy council president, you are a real pessimist, albeit a cautious one.

Giants clash at Lumpini Park

Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva runs with his deputy, Korn Chatikavajij, and other supporters run to catch up with M.R. Sukhumbhand Baripatra, former Bangkok governor, who is running for his second term. They were at Lumpini Park yeserday -- where their rival, Police Gen Pongsapat Pongcharoen, was also campaigning. Premier Yingluck Shinawatra and Khunying Sudarat Kaeyurapan, were out in full force to seek votes from local residents who were doing their daily exercise at Bangkok's biggest park. Sukhumbandh is running under the slogan of an opposition candidate balancing the power of the ruling party. Pongpasat is campaign with the theme of "seamless" coordination with the government if he was elected as the next governor. The Democrats, with a strong base in the capital, can't afford to lose while Pheu Thai has to make a dent in Bangkok's middle-class. Both sides have huge stakes in the outcome of the March 3 Bangkok governor election.

Show us the money!

Noppadol Pattama, adviser to Thaksin Shinawatra, held a press conference yesterday with a difference -- he produced a stack of cash to declare that he would pay anyone who can produce evidence to prove him wrong two million baht! Noppadol hit back at the opposition Democrats for having accused him of having signed an MoU with Cambodia that put Thailand at a disadvantage when he was foreign minister. He said anyone who could come up with evidence to prove the Democrats' claim will be paid one million baht. "Any if that person can do that within 24 hours, I will hand out another million baht instantly!" The Democrats must now show that they can earn two million baht from their arch-enemies. I am not sure whose cash it was. But it certainly underscores the fact that Thaksin and Noppapol are ready to put money where their mouths are.

Abhisit tells Thaksin: Let's give Thailand a chance

Opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has come up with the latest salvo against former premier Thaksin Shinawatra by publicly asking him: "Please, give Thailand a chance." In an interview published by Thai Rath this morning, the Democrat leader said the country had suffered long enough and that Thaksin should let the country return to the right track. "I believe Khun Thaksin doesn't have any financial problems anymore.I believe if Khun Thaksin admits to his wrongdoings and accept the Thai laws. He can come back under the law and Thai society will forgive him," Abhisit said. He didn't say what "forgive" here means in specific terms. Abhisit added that he and his team are under the same conditions that they are asking from Thaksin "since Khun Thaksin is sparing no efforts against us anyway. Let me say that we aren't thinking about ourselves. We must give the country a chance," he said. Thai Rath's headline suggested that Abhisit was slightly opening the "door of reconciliation" to break through the country's longstanding stalemate.

Soldiers' protest against paper raises questions

A group of soldiers gathered in front of the office of ASTV Manager Daily for the second time today, prompting the Reporters Association of Thailand to issue a statement condemning the move as an intimidation against press freedom. The soldiers were demanding an apology from the newspaper's editors for what they claimed to be the paper's "unfair and biased" criticism against their boss, Army Chief Gen Prayuth Chan-Ocha. The army chief had earlier criticized the paper for having published articles critical of his work. The paper subsequently ran a page-one article hitting back at the army commander-in-chief. A group of about 50 soldiers in full uniform gathering in front of the paper's office on Friday. The paper published more critical articles against the army chief. Today, the soldiers came back for the second time to repeat their demand. Army Chief Gen Prayuth defended the soldiers' action, arguing that they had not violated the army's regulations. "They were defending the army's dignity, not mine," he declared. Sondhi Limthongkul, the paper's owner, was quoted by Manager Online as stating that he would not apologize to the army chief. "Soldiers should protect the people's interests and not any individual's," Sondhi was quoted as saying. Things will get hotter before they cool down.

This will be the year of living precariously

The year 2013 will prove to be highly eventful for Thailand – with the proposed constitutional amendments topping the list of “potentially explosive issues” followed closely by economic “time-bombs” in the form of the Bt300/day minimum wage and the costly and controversial rice pledging scheme. Somewhere on top of the list of “hot topics” is the ruling by the International Court of Justice over the Preah Vihear temple. Popping up all over the place in the political minefield is the widespread corrupt practices tied to the government’s various populist schemes which could blow up anytime in the course of the ongoing investigations by various social pressure groups. And just under the surface of the political vulnerable landscape lies the “reconciliation bill” which has become a taboo of sorts. No sooner had the draft law been submitted to the House when huge and strong protest from both within the legislative body and independent groups virtually sent the proposal to the backburner, waiting to be revived at another, unpredictable time. This will be the year when Premier Yingluck Shinawatra will have to prove that she is more than just her elder brother’s sister. She will have to decide whether to make it in politics or to go down into history as a seat-warmer who could charm one side of the severely divided society but remains an enigma for the rest of the country. The charter amendment issue could be her undoing if Yingluck doesn’t handle it in such a way that she could really fulfil the pledge to make the change a “democratic one” that will really involve all sectors of the population. Thaksin’s public push for the referendum clashes with some red-shirt leaders’ call for a dash toward the third and final reading of the charter change bill that will entail the rewriting of the whole constitution through an elected assembly for this purpose. Yingluck has so far appeared to be sitting on the defence, either because she isn’t sure what’s the fuss all about or that she is working to patch up the differences between various groups, both within the Pheu Thai Party and the red-shirt movement. Political instability that could rock her government comes from both the charter issue and the upcoming verdict of the ICJ over the Phreah Vihear case. Foreign Minister Surapong Tovijakchaikul kicked off a controversy at the beginning of the year by suggesting that the Thai people should be resigned to the fact that Thailand won’t win the case. “For us, the expected ruling is either status quo or a defeat,” he said, prompting strong criticisms that he was throwing in the towel even before the fight begins. Thai and Cambodian officials and lawyers are to testify on the case in the middle of April, this year. Surapong first said he won’t be at the hearings and the Thai delegation will be headed by Thai Ambassador to the Hague Virachai Plasai while his Cambodian counterpart Hor Namhong will be making a visible presence there. The Thai foreign minister changed his mind a few days later and announced that he would be personally heading the Thai delegation. Depending on how the government handles the verdict, things could get fluid. Attempts will intensify from the government’s critics to whip up public nationalistic sentiments that could turn ugly. The combination of domestic conflict and cross-border tension could become a combustible mix. Negative reactions from various business segments over the enforcement (beginning Jan 1, this year) of the Bt300/day minimum age in most parts of the country will get louder as more medium and small-sized firms feel the pinch of the additional financial burden. The rising cost of living plus sporadic reports of labour lay-offs in certain industries to add to the grim political stirrings. Any one of these potentially explosive issues could force a confrontation between those for and against the government on the streets, especially if the move to get Thaksin home without facing judicial punishment is renewed again. That would be tantamount to igniting a real political conflagration. Of course, Premier Yingluck is aware of all the potentially calamitous scenarios. How she defused all those time-bombs by keeping a proper distance from her own brother and all the various contentious factions within our party and affiliated groupings will decide how much she could really be her real self

Time for the PM to address "sensitive" questions

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra chooses her exposure to the press very carefully. She rarely gives “exclusive” interviews to the media and when she does, it could be quite revealing, especially on the sensitive issues about her elder brother Thaksin. It’s important that when she does speak to a newspaper on an exclusive basis, she must be certain that probing, follow-up questions would not be posed. She could then make statements that don’t necessarily answer the questions. The absence of such pressure from the interviewer is probably the main reason behind this kind of “scoops.” The “Thaksin question” was duly asked, of course. And the queries were “duly” responded to. You don’t get clear answers, though. You get the typical Yingluck’s responses that may or may not satisfy your curiosity. But those are the kind of answers that has, strangely enough, become the acceptable norm, at least for some reporters covering the PM’s beat. A Thai daily published an exclusive interview with the Premier on Dec 28. At least four questions were directly related to Thaksin. Q: The government is still attached to the name of Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister. How would the government “cross over” Thaksin? PM Yingluck: I must say it’s a part of the political problem. It stemmed from a conflict that must be called people are on opposite sides. It is not possible to make people with different opinions to see things the same way in one day. It takes time to adjust the tune. That means mutual sympathy. They must talk to one another. His Majesty the King’s advice on Dec 5, 2012 is what we would like everyone to adhere to… Q: (On the proposed constitutional amendments) Police Lt Col Thaksin Shinawatra has already phoned in (to tell the party and government) what to do in the new year. PM Yingluck: Police Lt Col Thaksin is just one voice, just like the rest of the peple. Today, the red-shirt peple have their own position. The opposition has its own stand. Political parties have their own positions.Then there are the people.There are also academic groups. What I would like to say is that whatever is called representing the most people should be proposed. Q: The name of Thaksin seems to be the crux of the problem. How do you overcome or reduce the pressure from the friction? PM Yingluck: Here, we should talk to one another to clarify the issues. We should clearly specify the people’s interests then we will see the government’s clear intention to make a move that benefits the majority of the people. As I have always said, the movie hasn’t even started to run, we can’t possibly say how it will end. So, let the middle part of the movie be screened first so that the people can watch the movie from the beginning. Then, we can say how it will end. As to the view that the (movie) director hasn’t replaced the characters, the viewers’ feeling remains the same. I only believe in the facts and perhaps the director may be more sympathetic… Q: Are you concerned about the “invisible hand” that had once created trouble for the Thaksin government? PM Yingluck: Today, there are only two hands. Today, we have duties to perform. I believe the people can see that. I am not concerned about anything, be it politics or economics. We believe we have duties to perform; we must do our best. As to the corruption issue, we will have to move ahead vigorously. We will get down to details to block gaps at various levels, by using IT and computer systems to check on them to reduce duplications and to close the corruption gap as much as possible. Anyhow, we are ready to come under inspection. The interviewer let the PM go at that. There were no follow-up questions. Neither was there any attempt to get clarifications on the ambiguous statements. She then gave a television channel another “exclusive.” The questions weren’t all that tough and her answers were slightly clearer. But it was at a year-end press conference that the premier actually said something more specific. She was asked more or less the same question: How would she react to criticism that her government was only serving one person: her brother Thaksin. She probably knew that in the presence of an army of reporters, she probably couldn’t just swing it with the stereotyped statement again. So, she said: “If I did that, then the people wouldn’t vote me back in the next time.” That, at least, was more like it. The standard response to the most sensitive question for the premier has now been upgraded to a new level. Of course, we will need reporters to follow up with further questioning to that reply. The PM has perhaps “graduated” from denying to confront the difficult questions to facing all the sensitive ones. She might have along the way found her own answers to those previously “unanswerable” queries. It’s time for her to be her real self and face up to the challenge.

Time for the PM to address "sensitive" questions

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra chooses her exposure to the press very carefully. She rarely gives “exclusive” interviews to the media and when she does, it could be quite revealing, especially on the sensitive issues about her elder brother Thaksin. It’s important that when she does speak to a newspaper on an exclusive basis, she must be certain that probing, follow-up questions would not be posed. She could then make statements that don’t necessarily answer the questions. The absence of such pressure from the interviewer is probably the main reason behind this kind of “scoops.” The “Thaksin question” was duly asked, of course. And the queries were “duly” responded to. You don’t get clear answers, though. You get the typical Yingluck’s responses that may or may not satisfy your curiosity. But those are the kind of answers that has, strangely enough, become the acceptable norm, at least for some reporters covering the PM’s beat. A Thai daily published an exclusive interview with the Premier on Dec 28. At least four questions were directly related to Thaksin. Q: The government is still attached to the name of Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister. How would the government “cross over” Thaksin? PM Yingluck: I must say it’s a part of the political problem. It stemmed from a conflict that must be called people are on opposite sides. It is not possible to make people with different opinions to see things the same way in one day. It takes time to adjust the tune. That means mutual sympathy. They must talk to one another. His Majesty the King’s advice on Dec 5, 2012 is what we would like everyone to adhere to… Q: (On the proposed constitutional amendments) Police Lt Col Thaksin Shinawatra has already phoned in (to tell the party and government) what to do in the new year. PM Yingluck: Police Lt Col Thaksin is just one voice, just like the rest of the peple. Today, the red-shirt peple have their own position. The opposition has its own stand. Political parties have their own positions.Then there are the people.There are also academic groups. What I would like to say is that whatever is called representing the most people should be proposed. Q: The name of Thaksin seems to be the crux of the problem. How do you overcome or reduce the pressure from the friction? PM Yingluck: Here, we should talk to one another to clarify the issues. We should clearly specify the people’s interests then we will see the government’s clear intention to make a move that benefits the majority of the people. As I have always said, the movie hasn’t even started to run, we can’t possibly say how it will end. So, let the middle part of the movie be screened first so that the people can watch the movie from the beginning. Then, we can say how it will end. As to the view that the (movie) director hasn’t replaced the characters, the viewers’ feeling remains the same. I only believe in the facts and perhaps the director may be more sympathetic… Q: Are you concerned about the “invisible hand” that had once created trouble for the Thaksin government? PM Yingluck: Today, there are only two hands. Today, we have duties to perform. I believe the people can see that. I am not concerned about anything, be it politics or economics. We believe we have duties to perform; we must do our best. As to the corruption issue, we will have to move ahead vigorously. We will get down to details to block gaps at various levels, by using IT and computer systems to check on them to reduce duplications and to close the corruption gap as much as possible. Anyhow, we are ready to come under inspection. The interviewer let the PM go at that. There were no follow-up questions. Neither was there any attempt to get clarifications on the ambiguous statements. She then gave a television channel another “exclusive.” The questions weren’t all that tough and her answers were slightly clearer. But it was at a year-end press conference that the premier actually said something more specific. She was asked more or less the same question: How would she react to criticism that her government was only serving one person: her brother Thaksin. She probably knew that in the presence of an army of reporters, she probably couldn’t just swing it with the stereotyped statement again. So, she said: “If I did that, then the people wouldn’t vote me back in the next time.” That, at least, was more like it. The standard response to the most sensitive question for the premier has now been upgraded to a new level. Of course, we will need reporters to follow up with further questioning to that reply. The PM has perhaps “graduated” from denying to confront the difficult questions to facing all the sensitive ones. She might have along the way found her own answers to those previously “unanswerable” queries. It’s time for her to be her real self and face up to the challenge.

Princess Sirindhorn's Year of the Snake humour

Princess Somdej Prathep Sirindhorn has just issued her own New Year's Greeting Card for the Thai people -- with a touch of humour. 2013 is the Year of the Snake. The princess urges the people not to know anything "snake, snake, fish, fish" -- Thai slang for "half-baked knowledge" or gaining only superficial knowledge about anything.

She asks the people to gain "real knowledge" and avoid only touching the surface of things.