Cracks widen as govt goes to S44 extremes

When Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha invoked Section 44 of the interim charter which gives him absolute power over the legislative, executive and judicial branch in late 2014, he promised to use it “constructively”.

In a period of slightly over two years, the premier, in his capacity as head of the National Council of Peace and Order (NCPO) has issued over 130 orders based on Section 44, about one a week.

The commands cover a wide range of large and small issues, from amending the law on qualifications of security guards to appointing the Bangkok governor and designating areas around the controversial Wat Phra Dhammakaya as a special control zone to allow the search for a fugitive former abbot wanted on money laundering and other charges.

Tension continues to rise as authorities led by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) face off with the temple’s monks and followers in a game of brinkmanship. And Gen Prayut has insisted he will not be the one to blink first. Even though one man committed suicide apparently to protest against the use of Section 44 against the temple, Gen Prayut said he will not lift the order until the elusive former abbot Phra Dhammajayo turns himself in.

While it’s uncertain whether the PM will find the former abbot, the latest raid of Wat Phra Dhammakaya is likely to be considered among the most controversial and debatable uses of Section 44.

The government may insist that it had no choice but to resort to absolute power in search of one monk because the temple failed to cooperate with its requests. NCPO spokesman Piyapong Klinpan also said the temple tried to rally its followers to obstruct the authorities from carrying out their search.

But the question remains whether the current attempt to arrest Phra Dhammajayo is selective treatment. Does the government make the same effort with every fugitive, or just those viewed as being a threat to its power?

One problem is the government seems to have confused the need to apprehend Phra Dhammajayo for his alleged connections with the embezzlement case at Klongchan Credit Union, which provides the basis for the DSI’s search at the moment, and a desire to “do something” about the temple’s allegedly unorthodox teaching of Buddhism, aggressive proselytising and commercialism.

The military regime may have thought that whether or not the former abbot can be found, its latest, large-scale operation should give the temple a shock-and-awe experience and prompt it to at least learn to respect certain boundaries and stay under control.

One thing the regime may have overlooked is that the Dhammakaya issue is a very complex one involving both people’s changing faiths, the decline of main-stream Theravada Buddhism and the inefficiency of Buddhist organisations themselves.

Its rather simplistic attempt to deal with the complex and delicate issue using the absolute and unaccountable power of Section 44 risks backfiring. The raid has provoked such fundamental questions as what “true Buddhism” is if Wat Phra Dhammakaya is accused of having strayed from the religious canon or whether the temple is the only commercial or superstitious one in the country. If these questions continue to flourish, it will be increasingly difficult for the regime to justify its use of dictatorial power to deal with Wat Phra Dhammakaya as it will be viewed as applying a double-standard.

While the government definitely should get to the bottom of the money laundering and embezzlement charges against the former abbot, it has to face up to the fact that the existence of Wat Phra Dhammakaya and its massive influence, no matter how problematic, is evidence that the days of monolithic belief and culture are gone.

Diversity, whether in culture, politics, religious faith or personal identity, has become an integral part of modern life. The regime’s attempt to move Thailand back toward absolutism as seen through its increasing dependence on Section 44 to govern the country and exertion of monopolistic control in a wide range of issues will never be able to hold increasingly diverse interests together.

Some ruptures have emerged. The regime’s fixation on a coal for power has run into stiff resistance from environmentalists and activists who have vowed to protest again unless the government revokes environment and health impact studies for the Krabi power plant.

As more Section 44 orders and authoritarian power are used, more and larger cracks will be in store.