The National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) subcommittee on reconciliation research has floated the idea since its very first meeting. Yet, it was snubbed by key government figures including Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and his deputy Prawit Wongsuwan, who saw the idea as outdated.

The suggestion is included in a report on a research study conducted by the sub-panel, which is part of the NRSA’s political reform committee.

However, the sub-panel’s secretary and adviser General Ekachai Srivilas reiterated to The Nation yesterday that the idea of adopting a political policy to settle conflicts, despite different contexts, could be applied now.

The junta has a stance opposing amnesty as a part of reconciliation building, but Ekachai said that term was not mentioned in the subpanel’s report. “But we did raise that opponents against any government should be given chances to rebuild democracy altogether,” he said.

Order 66/23 was issued in 1980 by the government of General Prem Tinsulanonda to counter the spread of communist influence in Thailand. It involved amnesty given to defecting students, sympathisers and communist militants.

The idea of adopting a policy like Order 66/23 was backed by Gen Sonthi Boonyaratglin, a coup-maker-turned-politician who conducted a research on reconciliation in 2012, Ekachai said.

Other noteworthy points in the report included a suggestion to draw up a proper law on compensation measures for political victims.

Compensation cases should be considered by the Justice Ministry and also other related agencies, it said, such as the Social Development and Human Security Ministry, who may have databases listing the victims.

Any future mechanism to oversee conflict solving should also work under a “fluid” agency such as the PM’s Office rather than a ministry to ensure that issues do not turn into routine work for minister staff, but solved uniquely in each case.

The report also included monthly and yearly action plans on reconciliation building.

Apart from Sonthi, Ekachai said, the subpanel also reached out to eight other groups and political blocs such as Pheu Thai Party, the Democrat Party and the red shirts, to consider what should be done.

But the political blocs, who were also approached by the government’s separate committee on reconciliation building, said they had already given opinions to the government and did not have any further comments to the subpanel, Ekachai said.

The subpanel’s report would be forwarded to the NRSA political reform committee today, when further details should be concluded, he said.

Meanwhile, the US hopes Thailand will engage the public in achieving its “road map to democracy” and in reconciliation efforts, US Ambassador Glyn Davies told Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan yesterday.

During an hour-long meeting at the Defence Ministry, the ambassador also discussed issues such as the Cobra Gold military exercise, public health, law enforcement, and people-to-people relations between the two countries. Davies said after the meeting that the talks had been “in depth”, but did not reveal details.

Prawit said ongoing talks for measures to bring about reconciliation had gone smoothly and all political parties had greed to join the discussions.

“The overall situation is good and I expect progress to continue,” he said.

Meanwhile, key Pheu Thai Party figure Watana Muangsook said that he would not join the government’s reconciliation attempts despite his party’s consensus to do so.

Watana said that his participation would only “ruin the atmosphere”.

“Reconciliation means settling conflicts with a social contract. However, since we are going to have the coming charter draft as a social contract, I don’t think that conflicts will truly be solved,” said Watana, a frequent critic who was detained last year for speaking against the charter draft.

“If public participation was allowed in drafting the charter, it would have been more acceptable,” he said.

He also believed that the junta government, positioning itself as middleman in reconciliation efforts, did not really understand reconciliation. “All sides really need to engage in the talks, including the military,” he said.