Thailand's constitutional court cannot be legally faulted for ordering the dissolution of Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat's government. The three main parties of the ruling coalition were found guilty of vote-buying in last December's election, a decision that has gone unchallenged. As court president Chat Chalavorn rightly said, the move was necessary to 'set a political standard and an example'. Only by upholding the rule of law and keeping politics honest can the country's democracy flourish.
The same reasoning has to be taken with the court's dismissal three months ago of Mr Somchai's predecessor, Samak Sundaravej, who hosted a television cooking show while in office. Judges ruled that holding both positions at the same time was unconstitutional. This may seem trivial, but Thailand's laws are clear on the matter. Nor, given the evidence, should we question the guilty verdict for corruption against ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who fled Thailand to avoid facing charges and is Mr Somchai's brother-in-law and a supporter of his now-defunct People Power Party.
Legally, these are the kind of decisions that will keep the country's politics above board. From a political standpoint, though, the position is not so clear. All rulings were against Thaksin and governments that had his support. They came amid a highly charged political atmosphere created by the anti-Thaksin People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) - the group that shut down Bangkok's main airports and prevented the government from functioning. Protests by the alliance in 2006 led to the coup against Thaksin. Coup leaders appointed judges friendly to their cause and threw out the constitution, replacing it with a considerably less democratic one. The new document was approved by a referendum last year and among the articles included are ones used to bring down the last two administrations.
Yesterday's ruling may help resolve one immediate problem facing Thailand. Within hours of yesterday's decision, protesters began leaving Bangkok's airports. Hopefully, they will soon be functioning again. Politicians have 30 days to form a new government. But the political storm is far from over. The protests and violence that accompanied them have deeply divided Thai society. The PAD's leaders contend that Thais are too poorly educated and politically immature to vote. Instead, it wants a half-appointed parliament. For the sake of its beliefs, it has selfishly held the nation hostage and in the process damaged Thailand's reputation, the tourism industry, the economy and stability.
The institutions that Thais count on have let them down. Police revealed their weakness in preventing protesters from overrunning crucial public buildings. The military refused to support the government. Demonstrators who broke laws have gone uncharged. Thailand's ruling coalition must also take some responsibility for the crisis. It has failed to maintain control or take steps to ease divisions. Now its leading members have been found guilty of vote-buying.
Democracy is not without its flaws, but Thailand's experience has shown there is no better way for development and prosperity. Given the political chasm, it would seem unlikely that a solution to Thailand's problems will be quickly found. But, like the coup which ousted Thaksin, the crisis has benefited no one. The agitators, with their short-sighted agenda, should see reason. And the new government, when formed, must reach out to its opponents in a bid to bring this damaging crisis to an end.
