The new panel to drive reconciliation is mostly made up of security officers. It has drawn praise from some political leaders, but some peace advocates have voiced concern that the composition is dampening a process that could otherwise be friendly.

Prayut, at his weekly press briefing, revealed more details about the latest reconciliation move, ruling out an amnesty, which many had expected.

He said people would be invited to discuss the way forward without an amnesty at this point.

“It’s what we call a truthful social contract, under which you do what you say. For example: [with participants agreeing that] ‘We will not create conflicts anymore’, ‘We will not obstruct future elections’, and ‘We will accept the elected government’,” he said. Past conflicts were being dealt with by the courts.

Besides trying to get concerned parties to move forward together, Prayut said reconciliation would also be about long-term work for the public that political parties must help address. There would be 10 issues that they must help address, including complex land problems, wealth inequality, he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan stressed that any proposal that contravened the law or constitution would not be considered. He ruled out criminal cases under legal proceedings.

Prawit said the new panel, under the preparation committee he chairs, would be set up to drive reconciliation work.

The composition of the panel, headed by high-ranking military, including the Defence Ministry permanent secretary, has drawn mixed reactions from peace advocates and political leaders.

The panel – driving reconciliation in the final year before an election – will be chaired by Defence permanent secretary General Chaichan Changmongkol. It has 18 other members, mostly security officers.

They include heads of the four armed forces, plus the police chief, top defence officers, and permanent secretary of the Interior. Four sub-panels will also be set up to help the work, including heeding opinions, facilitating dialogue to boost reconciliation, implementation, and public relations, respectively.

General Chaichan called a meeting of his panel yesterday to discuss the master plan, as well as the timeframe of reconciliation schemes, appointment of subcommittees, and preparation of interview questions to ask participants.

General Ekachai Srivilas, a former member of the National Reform Council and a key person fostering previous reconciliation efforts, voiced concern on the lack of civilians on the committee.

He said he feared the domination of security officers on the panel might not foster a very good atmosphere to push for peace dialogue. Politicians and other players, such as leaders of political groups may find it uncomfortable and may not want to join.

Ekachai believed the panel could be adjusted to increase the ratio of civilians. Otherwise, bringing about reconciliation could prove difficult, he said.

Deputy Democrat Party leader Nipit Intrasombat said he did not view the make-up of the panel as a worry – as they carry out their duties properly. Nipit said reconciliation was vital for the country to move forward, so it must be achieved. A good thing about having the military leading things was that they had the sweeping power of Article 44, which could enforce the reconciliation results, the politician said.

Weng Tojirakarn, a leader of the red-shirt United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, also welcomed the officer-dominated panel. He said the previous enforcement of Order 66/23 by then Prime Minister Prem Tinsulanonda helped to successfully deal with a deep divide in society [in the 1980s].

Weng said the key factor was sincerity. If the junta was sincere and the scheme was not a pretence, it could yield good results.

Previously, the TPP was touted by the US as a means to revitalise its influence in Asia-Pacific and contain China’s rapid economic rise in the region.

However, the incoming US administration has a different policy: Trump’s election campaign was centred on the negative consequences of globalisation and free trade, which have impacted the livelihoods of many of his supporters over the past few decades.

Adoption of the TPP by the US and the 11 other signatories would place non-signatory Thailand at a disadvantage, luring away big foreign investors like the Japanese to new investment projects in neighbouring TPP member-countries.

Prior to the US election, Thailand was under pressure to start negotiating entry to the powerful grouping, which includes Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore and other Asia-Pacific countries.

Japanese companies, in particular, were worried Thailand would lose competitive advantages if it did not quickly sign up to the TPP and thereby secure Japanese investment.

With Trump’s surprise election victory, the outlook for Asean countries reversed in favour of the China-led alternative free-trade deal, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which excludes the US.

At this stage, Thailand will be more comfortable with the RCEP’s advancement while Malaysia and Vietnam will have to rethink, since their advantage as TPP members is no longer secure.

Regarding China, incoming President Trump looks set to pressure Beijing into negotiating new trade agreements by leveraging political issues such as Taiwan’s status.

If China refuses to play this game and the Trump administration goes ahead with threats to slap big import tariffs on Chinese goods, a trade war will loom as Beijing launches counter-measures.

The ensuing battle would have serious ramifications for Thailand, which ships components to China as part of the global supply chain for end-products exported to the US market.

Yet there is also a possible positive consequence, should Trump’s promises to invest substantially in infrastructure and job creation lead to higher US economic growth.

At this stage, it remains unclear how these crucial policies will be funded and implemented to achieve the aim of bringing jobs back to the US from abroad.

Still, a stronger US market would bode well for the global economy and lead to higher demand for imports, including those from Thailand. At present, the American market accounts for over 10 per cent of Thailand’s total exports, practically matching demand from China, which stands at about 10 per cent.

Assoc Prof Weerachai Phutdhawong, in his capacity as secretary-general of the Coordinating Centre for the Public Higher Education Staff, yesterday called on the DSI to investigate a website that had advertised surprisingly short courses for various degrees including doctorates.

Bogus website suspected

Weerachai said he suspected that the website had sold fake degrees and it seemed to have links to an institution known as World Peace University.

He said a lecturer at Kasetsart University absconded after a well-known British university had notified Kasetsart that the lecturer had never been a student, let alone a graduate.

The notification was sent after Kasetsart conducted background checks of its lecturers.

“We have not found a thesis the lecturer claimed he had written in the university’s online database either,” Weerachai said.

About 10 people have taught at universities for more than three years using fake degrees, he said.

DSI deputy spokesman Pol Lt-Colonel Worranan Srilum said his agency would look into the complaint

“I sold my decade-old Toyota pickup truck – licence plate number ‘Bor Khor 56 Sakhon Nakhon’ – to another person on the afternoon of March 11, 2005, before the crash occurred that night in the adjacent Nakhon Phanom province. Ten days later, this unexpected thing [being accused of a hit-and-run crash] happened to me and I was innocent,” the 54-year-old former teacher from Sakhon Nakhon’s Ban Moungkhai Pracharat-songkhro School said.

A week ahead of National Teachers’ Day yesterday, Thai society was shaken by her alleged “ordeal”, initially revealed by the Justice Ministry’s Legal Aid Centre for Debtors and Victims of Injustice, which had sought to help her.

Jomsap was jailed for three years and two months for reckless driving after being found guilty of killing an elderly man on a bicycle. But, on April 3, 2015, she was freed, as part of a royal pardon, after serving 18 months in prison.

There would be no further problem if she was in fact guilty, but “new evidence” that suggested she was innocent has led to a retrial. But fellow teachers and relatives who looked into the crash claim they found the “real culprit” and submitted new evidence to related agencies such as the Department of Special Investigation (DSI). This saw the case reopened.

The pickup-bicycle crash took place on a dimly lit two-lane road from That Noi to Na Nua in Nakhon Phanom’s Renu Nakhon district at 8pm on March 11, 2005. Cyclist Lua Phorbumrung suffered fatal injuries and subsequently died.

An eyewitness said she and four others were riding four motorcycles when a pickup truck passed them by going into the oncoming lane – and crashed into the victim’s bicycle.

The driver pulled over to see what happened and fled, the witness claims. But her group shone lights from 10 metres away and saw that it was a Toyota pickup truck with the licence plate number “Bor Khor 56”.

Jomsap said she was in Sakhon Nakhon on that day – selling her car to villager Prapat Saenmuangkhot for Bt130,000 and transferring truck ownership to him at the provincial land transport office. She also borrowed the truck from Prapat to stop by the Honda Sakhon Nakhon outlet to pay a deposit for a new sedan at 2pm, before going shopping and returning home at 7.30pm. Prapat was allegedly due to collect the truck the next day, so she parked it overnight at her house.

“Next morning, my husband cleaned the truck to please Prapat, but people assumed that it was to cover up a crime,” she said. The truck had some dents and scratches from the front left headlight to the back – allegedly from a crash into a village headman’s barbwire fence 23 years before. Family members say they had repaired the dent without repainting it at a local garage for Bt4,000, but Prapat didn’t mind, she claims.

After a police summons on March 29, Prapat testified that Jomsap borrowed his truck on the day, hence she was summoned. To back her claim of innocence, Jomsap told police she didn’t go to Nakhon Phanom that day, or years before. But the investigator had evidence saying otherwise so the case went to court. The primary court didn’t believe her and gave her a three-years and two-months in jail. Later, the Appeals Court acquitted her.

Then during a second appeal to the Supreme Court, Jomsap started seeking evidence to prove her “innocence” but the court upheld the initial jail term.

The incriminating evidence against Jomsap included an eyewitness who identified the truck’s licence plate number as ‘Bor Khor 56’, plus Prapat’s testimony that Jomsap borrowed his truck, and the green paint on the victim’s bicycle, which was the same shade as that on Jomsap’s unscratched licence plate frame.

Jomsap’s search for “truth” eventually led to a green pickup truck with the ‘Bor Khor 56 Mukdahan’ plate. And the car’s owner – according to his Mukdahan household registration details – looked to match those given to police by the eyewitness as “a 180cm-tall man who stepped out of driver’s side to look over the victim before fleeing”. However a lawyer told her that such information would not be admissible in an ongoing court trial, and thus, she was jailed.

This outcome ended her 31-year teaching career in disgrace, caused debts to her family and brought widespread condemnation from society, she said.

Jomsap’s friend Rojana Jantharat and relatives pursued her “discovery” and allegedly found the Mukdahan man, who thought they wanted to buy his truck and allegedly admitted that it was involved in a crash in Nakhon Phanom in 2005. The group allegedly told him of Jomsap’s ordeal and he reportedly admitted to be the culprit and didn’t know she had been jailed. The family then contacted related agencies such as the DSI and lawyers.

So, a retrial for Jomsap will start soon at Nakhon Phanom Provincial Court.

Pol Lt-Colonel Thongsak Phonong, who now works at a Mukdahan police station, insisted that he, as the case investigator, has gathered convincing evidence. He also says that he has not asked for a bribe. He said Jomsap had maintained innocence during the police investigation and asked to testify in court without citing any witness. This resulted in the trials and eventual rulings by three courts.