What is the difference between a chief justice who refused to show his driving licence to a policeman claiming he was a friend of the officer's boss and a prime minister who justifies refuses to discuss how the 250 senators were selected by saying people should treat him with respect?
Not much. Both are examples of the power culture and deep cronyism endemic to Thailand. One difference is that while one was asked to explain himself, the other is likely to sail through to a second term.
It's ironic that even abuse of power has no standards in a society full of double standards. But as people are led to believe that those in power are above everyone else, even though we supposedly operate as a democratic society, hypocrisy inevitably becomes the norm.
The same is true with shamelessness.
Earlier this month, a video clip went viral which showed a driver becoming irritated as he tried to dismiss a police officer's request to see his licence. He eventually brushed the policeman off by saying he was a friend of the province's police chief.
The incident occurred at a checkpoint run by Thung Yai police station in Nakhon Si Thammarat.
The driver was later identified as Krairat Veerapattanasuwan, chief justice of the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases for Region 8, which includes Nakhon Si Thammarat.
In refusing to comply, the judge said that he was a "friend of Choke", apparently the nickname of Thung Yai police station chief Pol Col Chokedee Rakwattapong. The policeman insisted it was a standard procedure but another officer intervened and let the judge go.
A day later, the policeman Pol Lance Corporal Ekkapol Juisongkaew was transferred from patrol to a desk job so he could learn to be "more respectful when performing his duties'', according to Pol Col Chokedee.
The incident caused an uproar and the "Friend of Choke" catchphrase became widely ridiculed online with memes, stickers and songs released to condemn the judge's behaviour.
Upon learning about the controversy, Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha intervened and ordered the lance corporal's reinstatement.
National police chief Pol Gen Chakthip Chaijinda ordered a "fair investigation" into the case while Sarawut Benjakul, secretary-general of the Courts of Justice, also asked the judge involved in the incident for an explanation of his actions.
No doubt the "Friend of Choke" incident has gained immediate notoriety because it is the kind of behaviour that most Thais know only too well. "Do you know who my father is?" has become something of a national refrain as it epitomises how some people can get away with more than others, how all of us are not always equal under the same law and how the "system" is bendable based on who you know.
Society in general may not approve of people who abuse their authority. But if the abuser is senior enough and insists that people "don't judge my judgement" it is a cue for others to lower their heads and keep their mouths shut.
PM Gen Prayut must have seen a measure of injustice in the "Friend of Choke" case to have ordered the lance corporal's reinstatement. But when reporters asked him late last week about the selection of the 250 senators -- who sat on the selection panel and what criteria were used in the process that cost taxpayers 1.3 billion baht -- the PM brushed aside the question.
The Senate has become a controversial topic after it was found that about 40% of its members are from the military while many others are relatives of members of the government and other bigwigs in organisations set up by the military regime.
Since the Senate will join the vote to select the next PM, a contest in which the regime's chief, Gen Prayut, is in the running, will it cause conflicts of interest? According to the constitution, the Senate should consist of people from various backgrounds to function as a counterbalance to the House. Why is the chamber dominated by military men? Besides, it is not even clear how the senators were selected and how 1.3 billion baht was spent in the process.
Instead of answering the questions, Gen Prayut evaded them. He said reporters knew who chaired the selection panel. He also told them to treat him with respect.
What is the difference between "Treat me with respect'' and "I am a friend of your boss" or "Do you know who my father is?" There really is no difference.
They are all attempts to float above everyone else, to avoid scrutiny and to use power to silence other people.
Why do we scoff at one but let others stand tall?
Atiya Achakulwisut is a columnist, Bangkok Post.
