Republicanism is gradually gaining ground in Thailand, according to Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a Fellow at Singapore’s  Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, but the authorities are determined to criminalize the opposition as a security threat.

Even an overdue debate on the monarchy would likely breach the current ill-defined lèse-majesté law. http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2846&Itemid=185

A deal signed days before Myanmar’s general election early this month could signal sweeping changes to both the country and the wider region. It should also point towards how business may take place under the new military-dominated “civilian” regime.

Support for the project was given a boost by the five members of the Ayeyawady-Chao Phraya-Mekong Economic Cooperation Strategy (ACMECS) which met for their fourth summit here in Phnom Penh on November 17.

The new port connects with the three economic corridors of the Asian Development Bank’s Greater Mekong Sub-Region Development Project, which aims to create links between the economies of mainland Southeast Asia and China and offer a shortcut between Europe and the Middle East and Asia as cargo unloaded at Dawei will avoid the necessity of transiting the Malacca Strait, cutting several thousand kilometres and up to 10 days from transit times, thereby lowering transportation costs.

The Dawei Development Project is agreement between Myanmar and Italian-Thai Development, Thailand’s largest construction company, to survey and build a road linking Dawei with the central Thai city of Kanchanaburi. The project consists of three phases: the construction of a transportation corridor to Thailand as well as roads linking the public utilities and facilities in the industrial zone; the port; and the industrial estate. The total project is expected to be completed in 2020.

Thailand remains as Myanmar’s top investor as of mid-2010 with some $10.3 billion in projects. Contributing reasons for developing the port appear to be cheap labour and the lax or non-existent environmental laws in Myanmar.

In exchange for developing the project, the Myanmar government has granted Italian-Thai import duty exemptions, a 75-year concession to build and operate the heavy industrial portion of the project plus a 40-year concession for the light industry part. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/LK30Ae01.html

John Garnaut of Melbourne’s The Age continues his coverage of the ongoing defenestration of Australian citizen Matthew Ng by the Chinese authorities.

“This is an old story in contemporary China. A locally connected party to a dispute using its political relationships to call in the police on its side in order to improve its negotiating position”" according to Professor Jerome Cohen, an authority on the criminal detention of foreign nationals in China.

Shareholders of Ng’s company, Et-china, claim the detentions have been orchestrated by a “local warlord” who runs the Chinese partner company, Lingnan, and wants to acquire the assets on the cheap. http://www.theage.com.au/business/another-falls-foul-of-chinas-system-20101129-18dwe.html

In a ruling on Monday that really failed to surprise anyone, Thailand’s Constitutional Court dismissed a charge that the ruling Democrat Party misused an election fund – one that could have seen it dissolved and a new government formed.

The Thai Constitutional Court is meant to have independent jurisdiction over the constitutionality of parliamentary acts, as well as the appointment and removal of public officials, and issues regarding the eligibility of political parties to participate in the electoral process.

The case against the Democrats, Thailand’s oldest political party,  had been bought by the country’s Election Commission, which accused the party of spending 29 million ($US907,000) baht from the Election Commission’s Political Development Fund without proper authorisation during the 2005 election campaign. There were also allegations of an illegal US$8 million donation to the Democrats channelled in a highly convoluted manner from the third largest Thai cement maker by the great spoiler of Thai politics and Thaksin foe, Prachai Leophairatana, who controls the company.

Constitutional Court Justice Udomsak Nitimontree said the prosecution’s case against the Democrat Party was flawed and that the Election Commission that brought the case to court didn’t follow correct legal procedures.

In other words, the judges threw the case out on a legal technicality.

The party could have been disbanded if it had been found guilty by the court and about 40 of its executives — including PM Abhisit Vejjajiva — banned from politics for five years. Abhisit served as the party’s deputy leader when the alleged incident took place.

While this decision may lift a cloud of uncertainty from over the country’s immediate future, it could equally further inflame opposition red shirts who claim Thailand’s judicial and political processes are stacked in favor of the traditional elites and their supporters, such as the Democrats.

In the lead-up to the court ruling, the court itself became the subject of controversy from a series of leaked videos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3hSbZlnEo0). In one of these, a Democrat Party parliamentarian appears to be lobbying the secretary to the court president, Chat Cholaworn, to go easy on the party.

In other videos, swiftly blocked in Thailand by court order, senior judges appear to discuss how to cover-up an apparent leak of exam papers to relatives applying for jobs at the court.

Rather than recusing themselves or addressing the evidence, the court responded by claiming it was all a conspiracy by “ill-intentioned people” out to discredit it. The Democrats meanwhile accused their opponents of leaking the videos so the court would dissolve the party, since to do otherwise would be to imply that it had bowed to political pressure.

The tumbrels have been stilled for now – but for now long?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8NlgeWH9PM

In a country where many people have little confidence in official pronouncements, rumours now abound that the tragedy a week ago on the pedestrian bridge to Koh Pich Island was somehow orchestrated and the authorities had advanced warning that something was afoot.

It is alleged that government workers and officials had been warned to stay away from the island because “something bad” was about to happen. Conspiracy theorists claimed as evidence that the larger bridge to the island had been deliberately closed to pedestrian traffic in order to funnel people onto the much smaller bridge where the tragedy took place.

The reason for this, according to the rumour mill, was because limits had apparently been placed on the size and scope of construction that could take place on the island.

Much as we love a good conspiracy theory along with everyone else, these fantastic claims seem highly unlikely.

Why would the owners and developers dream of organizing anything that would so obviously rebound on them? Clearly this calamity will impact values and future development of the island for years to come. With the property market already tight, there is no clear commercial advantage. Surely no-one would shoot themselves in the foot this way?

As for the larger bridge being open to vehicular traffic only, this would seem to put pay to the idea that nobody of consequence was at the festival concerts on the island. Why else would they want a clear and ready exit for their fleets of Lexus when it became time to leave?