The Bangkok Post editorializes here about a bill to limit military justice that is among those on hold now that Parliament has been sent home. Excerpt:
Military courts are not designed to protect the public. They protect the institution. Their judges are officers, many without legal expertise. Civilians cannot appoint their own lawyers. Evidence is filtered through military prosecutors. Court buildings sit inside restricted military compounds. And the verdicts repeatedly favour the accused when the accused wears a uniform.
No justice system can survive when one arm of the state is allowed to police itself.
The effort to send soldiers accused of corruption or crimes against civilians to be tried in civilian courts was meant to fix exactly that. It was simple: treat soldiers like any other public official.
But just before Parliament was dissolved, a majority of a House committee led by Pheu Thai politicians made a U-turn to keep these cases in military courts as before. The timing was no accident. It came as the armed forces were reasserting influence during a border conflict with Cambodia, knowing full well that public sympathy tends to drift their way during wartime.
No matter how much the public sympathises with the armed forces, the country needs the military to reform. The push to preserve military court jurisdiction cuts against this public demand. It signals that some folk still believe soldiers deserve special treatment. Worse, it tells victims that their pain ranks below the institution's reputation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are subject to moderation and must be submitted under your real name. Anonymous comments will not be posted (even though the form seems to permit them).