The report circulated after Somchai Kunpluem, an influential figure in Chon Buri province and whose son is head of the party, was discharged from prison prematurely.

Some critics have speculated that the early release was in exchange for the support of Somchai – often known as ‘Kamnan Poh’ – to back Prayut as the next PM following a general election. The prime minister said that this was not true, and that were in any case clear criteria as to whether part of a sentence could be suspended.

There was no way anyone would exploit that in a political negotiation, he added.

They were “like family”, Prayut said yesterday, adding that the ex-ministers had high credentials. More importantly, they had worked in the government so they understood the problems and the administration’s public-relations plans, he explained.

The PM said everyone was his family but stressed that this was about work, and not any special interest.

No one gets any benefit to be one of his ministers, he stressed.

FACED WITH mounting pressure from critics, Deputy Premier and Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan yesterday offered to resign if the anti-graft agency finds that he had committed any wrongdoing regarding the many luxury watches he has worn over recent years.

However, political observers have pointed out that the president of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) is Watcharapol Prasarnrajkit, who served briefly as Prawit’s secretary shortly after the junta came to power.

“Let the NACC look into the matter. If I am found to have done anything wrong, I will resign,” Prawit said.

He added that he did not think the NACC could be interfered with. “The NACC has their own procedures of implementation. We need to wait for them to complete their work. I already submitted my explanation to the NACC,” Prawit said.

He said that all of the watches that he had been spotted wearing all belonged to his friends. “I borrowed them from my friends and have already returned them all.” But he declined to be specific about how many wristwatches he had actually worn.

When asked if the matter was bothering him, the deputy prime minister, who is in charge of security affairs, responded: “I have no paranoia. There’s no problem with my mind.”

Critics, including supporters of the junta, have called on Prawit to step down or take a leave of absence as more details about luxury watches he has worn are appearing in social media.

Prawit is said to have worn more than 20 expensive watches since the junta came to power in May 2014, many of them valued at millions of baht.

Whistle-blower Srisuwan Janya, secretary-general of the Association for the Protection of the Thai Constitution, yesterday said Prawit did not have to wait until the NACC decides whether he committed any wrongdoing.

“General Prawit knows best about this matter. He can resign now, without having to wait for an NACC decision,” Srisuwan said.

“The public has made their decision: there’s something fishy about this issue. If he remains in office, he will continue to undermine the image of the government,” he said.

The whistle-blower said he was not convinced that Prawit had borrowed all the luxury watches from wealthy friends. “And I don’t think the NACC will believe him either,” he added.

Earlier, academics called on the NACC president to step aside in the investigation of his former boss, saying they had little faith that the anti-graft agency would seriously investigate Prawit given that its members were appointed by the junta.

Key government figures and Prawit’s allies in the junta yesterday declined to comment as to whether he should do anything to take responsibility over the matter.

Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha refused to make clear what actions would be taken against Prawit following the luxury watch controversy.

“Investigative mechanisms will do their jobs. Don’t just use discourse,” Prayut said. “He [Prawit] should answer this by himself, so don’t ask me.”

Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda yesterday declined to comment on the growing calls for Prawit to step down to take responsibility.

Anupong, who was Prawit’s successor as the Army commander-in-chief, simply sighed and shook his head, before walking away from reporters at Government House.

Prayut also said yesterday Prawit’s case should not be used for political advantage. He was responding to Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva’s call for Prawit to step down in order not to remain the government’s “weakest link”.

Anti-corruption activist Veera Somkwamkid warned yesterday that the wristwatch scandal was wearing down the public’s tolerance towards the ruling junta. He said the junta figures were not exempted from the law and they needed to report their assets with the NACC, as required by the law.

IN RESPONSE to the prime minister’s call for a Thai-styled democracy, political scientists have agreed that a system cannot be a democracy without bare minimum attributes such as respect for human rights and freedom.

General Prayut Chan-o-cha, the government head and junta chief, first mentioned the term “Thai Niyom”, which can be translated as “Thai-ism” or “the Thai way”, in his Children’s Day speech last Saturday. This led to a lot of speculation about the meaning of the phrase and his real intentions.

In trying to decode Prayut’s remarks, Attasit Pankaew, a political scientist from Thammasat University, said yesterday that Thai-style democracy is a term produced from the infusion of Thai-style ethics to politics.

“Thai-style democracy is about how politicians must hold some ethical value or be good to other people,” he explained. “But ethics is an intricate subject. In politics, the definition actually must be based on the public interest.”

However, Attasit said, in a zero-sum game such as politics, players come up with new definitions and this is where the “ethics” is dragged in.

Attasit said he thought Prayut may have the impression that Thai voters lack political sophistication or are too easily persuaded, “hence, it was necessary that leaders be highly ethical [and] devoted”.

He said Prayut could be suggesting that for democracy to work under such conditions, it had to deviate from international norms.

However, if the localisation of democracy to match Thai culture meant a transformation to authoritarian rule, Attasit viewed that this was not illegitimate.

“It is not unusual for countries to have their own version of democracy. But core values such as free and fair elections, human rights and accountability are still indispensable,” Attasit said.

Meanwhile, anti-coup political scientist Sirote Klampaiboon and political science student Parit Chiwarak, said they do not believe Prayut knows exactly what he’s talking about.

“When he said the term Thai-styled democracy, I don’t think it meant anything special,” Sirote told The Nation. “General Prayut perhaps was merely unconsciously reproducing the same old discourse used by his predecessors, Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn and General Suchinda Kraprayoon.

“These people were all the same when it comes to addressing democracy – it must be Thai-styled.”

Prayut may have invented the relatively new term of ‘Thai-ism’, but the political scientist said it had the same basis as other coup leaders before him. They were trying to justify their rule as democratic although it had nothing resembling the western concept of democracy, Sirote said.

“There are no elections. No rights and freedom. No political parties. But this is their democracy,” Sirote said. “The heart of these notions is not about democracy or Thai-ism, it’s about claiming that what they’re doing is democratic.

“By using the term ‘Thai-style democracy’, Prayut is saying that what he has been doing in the past four years is good,” he said. The implication, Sirote added, was that this should continue into the future.

Parit, an activist and freshman political science student at Thammasat University, also said he thought Prayut did not really mean anything when he used the term.

“There’s no such thing as Thai-style democracy. It’s either democracy or it’s not,” he said. “I think he is just trying to distract us or make us feel that we’re not ready to go fully democratic. But we are.”

Parit said that Prayut was trying to tell young people what a democracy should be. But, as a young person, Parit said adults should not do that when they know very little about democracy themselves.

He stressed that democracy at the bare minimum should be based on equality.

“Everyone must decide together how democracy should be,” he said. “It should not be just one person to tell us what it is. It’s everyone’s business.”

Prayut said yesterday that he wanted Thai people to have a good understanding of democracy and to do good things for the benefit of the country.

He explained that was why he chose the term “Thai Niyom” to describe the country’s democracy.

“How much do Thai people take part in national development? How deeply do Thai people understand democracy? We don’t need to follow developed countries. Thailand may be different,” Prayut said.

“But basically, we need to play by the world’s rules – whether it is democracy or anything else. We must not forget the principles of democracy,” he added.

“This means we should elect governments with transparency and good governance,” he explained.

“We have to make democracy that is acceptable to everyone and doesn’t neglect the universal democratic principles,” he said.

The prime minister was speaking while presiding over an event to mark National Teachers’ Day at the Teachers’ Council of Thailand Auditorium.

“For me, the Thai way of democracy is about how to make Thai people have a good understanding about democracy, and how to make Thai people do good things for good results for the country,” he said.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) bill, recently endorsed by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA), allows all current NACC commissioners to remain in office, although some of them appeared to be disqualified under the charter. Prayut said he would consider the issue when the bill is submitted to him, but at the moment the NLA itself was still considering whether to petition the Constitutional Court to rule on the matter.

“It has not reached me yet as it is in the NLA’s process. They can proceed with the case,” said Prayut.

Somchai Sawangkan, the NLA whip secretary, said some NLA members had started gathering signatures to petition the court.

At least 55 members voted against the bill or abstained from voting on the issue, which was more than enough to petition the court, as it requires at least 25 NLA members to support the petition, Somchai said.

Chaturon Chaisang, a key figure in Pheu Thai Party, has warned the ruling junta of a “total collapse” if the NACC members are allowed to continue working.

He suggested on Monday that the bill should be amended to reflect the relevant constitutional clauses involving the qualifications of NACC members. Meanwhile, chief charter drafter Meechai Ruchupan said yesterday that the Constitutional Court should be asked to make a ruling regarding some members of the NACC who allegedly should be disqualified under the new charter. Meechai said the Constitution Drafting Commission was concerned about the issue, taking the view that waiving prohibitions on qualifications for the NACC was equivalent to waiving the Constitution, he said.

If the court did not rule on the issue, issues are likely to arise in the future if people who are charged by the NACC challenge the commissioners’ qualifications, Meechai said.

Thai courts took on around 1.82 million cases for deliberation and ruling last year, Office of the Judiciary secretary-general Sarawut Benjakul said on Tuesday.

The Justice Court system completed 1.5 million cases out of the 1.74 million it accepted, while the Appeals Court finished 49,617 cases out of a total of 56,634.

The Supreme Court, meanwhile, finished some 10,000 cases out of the 17,202 it took on for deliberation and ruling.

At the same time, the Civil Court managed to get 296,405 of its 817,467 cases resolved by negotiations between the parties, he said.

Sarawut said the courts had applied new technology, including e-filing, to help manage cases while allowing citizens to access the justice process at a lower cost.

However, no conclusion has yet been reached on the idea to set up a Court Marshal.

The matter, he added, was currently with the courts’ administrative committee, and Cabinet approval and legal enactment would be required for the idea to be implemented.

In regard to court authority to file cases for contempt, he explained that the courts already had such authority, but refrained using it unless absolutely necessary.

As such matters were criminal cases, anyone learning about a contempt of court could file a complaint to the police for the courts to consider, the secretary-general said.

However, some political observers have pointed to the fact that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which is investigating the so-called “watchgate” affair, is being headed by Watcharapol Prasarnrajkit, who served briefly as Prawit’s secretary shortly after the junta came to power.

“Let the NACC look into the matter. If I am found to have done anything wrong, I will resign,” Prawit said.

He added that he did not think the NACC could be interfered with.

“The NACC has their own procedure of implementation. We need to wait for them to complete their work. I’ve already submitted my explanation to the NACC,” Prawit said.

Critics, including some supporters of the junta, have called on Prawit to step down, or take a long leave of absence, as more and more details about the luxury watches he has worn appear on social media.

Prawit is said to have worn more than 20 expensive watches after the junta came to power in May 2014, some of them valued in the millions of baht.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) bill recently endorsed by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) allows all current NACC commissioners to remain in office, even if they are not qualified to do so under the new charter.

Some current NACC commissioners have their qualifications prohibited under the charter.

Prayut said he would consider the issue when the bill is submitted to him, but at the moment the NLA itself is still considering whether to petition the Constitutional Court to rule on the matter.

“It has not reached me yet as it’s in the NLA’s process. They can proceed with the case,” said Prayut.

Somchai Sawangkan, the NLA’s whip secretary, said some NLA members have started gathering signatures to petition the Court.

At least 55 members voted against the bill or abstained from the voting on the issue. This is more than enough to petition the Court, as it requires at least 25 NLA members to sign up to support the petition, Somchai said. He added that, at this point, the NLA would set up a panel to review the law within 15 days before forwarding the law to the prime minister.

Prayut would then have a further five days to decide whether to petition the Court, or to forward the bill for royal endorsement.

Somchai said he supported the right of members to petition against the bill, but his personal view was that the bill did not contradict the constitution.

This is because the charter says that whether to allow independent body members to stay in, or leave, office is up to the provisions of the relevant organic laws.

The current NACC members, he said, have only been in office for about a year.

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) has recently endorsed a new bill that allows all the NACC commissioners to stay in office despite charter stipulations that would prohibit some of them from sitting. At least 55 NLA members voted against, or abstained from voting on, the bill, and Meechai said he has heard that they are gathering signatures to make a petition to the Court.

Meechai said the Constitution Drafting Commission was concerned about the issue, taking the view that waiving prohibitions on qualifications for the NACC was equivalent to waiving the constitution.

Thus, it would be good for the Court to make a ruling and settle the matter, he said.

If not, issues are likely to arise in the future if people who are charged by the NACC challenge the commissioners’ qualifications.

Meechai said the government should also pay heed to these concerns.

NACC president Pol General Watcharapol Prasarnrajkit is known to have a close relationship to Deputy PM Prawit Wongsuwan, as he used to serve in the Prime Minister’s Office as its deputy secretary-general attached to Prawit, who is now subject to an NACC probe.

The two were accused of attacking the group during a PDRC demonstration against then-prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra while passing the building.

They were charged with possessing weapons, carrying weapons in public areas, and attempted murder.

No-one was injured or killed in the incident.

The first court to hear the case ruled that former red-shirt guard Narongsak Plai-aram and Thanin Sinthusonthichart be sentenced to 43 years and four months each.

The Appeal Court later reduced the jail term for Narongsak to 35 years and four months, while overturning the verdict against Thanin due to insufficient evidence.

The Supreme Court in December upheld the Appeals Court’s ruling.

It was today read to the plaintiffs’ prosecutors again.