The PM on Friday had said he had finalised the fourth Cabinet reshuffle of his government and that the list was in the process of seeking royal endorsement. The matter was expected to be settled by next month, he had said.

On Tuesday, he was quoted as saying at the Cabinet meeting that the ministerial reshuffle was “nothing personal”, but all about work efficiency. Government Spokesperson Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd quoted the PM as saying that the reshuffle was to enable utmost efficiency of his Cabinet’s performance.

The PM urged those losing out in the reshuffle not to feel any hurt because if that were the case, he would feel the most since he was the one who had to make the decisions on who should leave and who should stay, the spokesman added.

His ministers so far have no idea about the new list. Deputy PM Wissanu Krea-ngam said on Monday that he was not aware to what extent PM Prayut had reshuffled the Cabinet, adding that he wasn’t even aware if he would be in the new Cabinet.

Another deputy PM, General Prawit Wongsuwan, said yesterday that his decision to continue working in the Cabinet would be dependent on his health.

PM Prayut had said last Friday that his senior military senior classmates like Prawit and Interior Minister General Anupong Paochinda, as well as his close friend Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister General Chatchai Sarikulya, would remain in the Cabinet. He also said that the number of military officers exiting the Cabinet would be more than those being inducted.

The idea had been floated by the Justice Ministry after years of criticism of the military-led government and its approach to human rights issues, which some have claimed ran counter to those working in the human rights field, said Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd, the government spokesman.

The time frame for the new agenda has been set for two years – 2018 till 2019 – and surrounds 10 points, he said.

Four of them concern the creation of what is necessary to improve the human rights situation: boosting consciousness of the need to respect rights; building a system to track violations; building up a culture of rights; and creating a network to oversee the situation.

Another three points concern improvement, the first being to improve the database for rights-violation cases, the second to revise laws to meet changes, and the third to improve the attitude of government officials in understanding human rights.

Two others concern driving the plans to reality, and finding an organisation or provincial groups to be role models.

Last but not least is reducing the number of violations.

The spokesman said that all government agencies should come up with working plans to go with these principles.

They would be assessed every year by the number of the humans trafficked, he added.

They were told by Prayut to strictly enforce the new Computer Crime Bill, which punishes online dissemination of information “deemed controversial to national security”. The offence is punishable by fines of Bt 20,000–200,000 and/or up to 10 years’ imprisonment.

The bill also allows state officers to close websites deemed to have violated the law.

Prayut claimed that the decision relied on a report issued by King Prajadhipok’s Institute, which suggests that news headlines could mislead public understanding.

But the exact report was not presented when Prayut made his order to Cabinet during yesterday’s meeting.

“Sometimes, some bad guys need to be punished,” Prayut said at his weekly news briefing. “There are false facts and hate speech everywhere. We just want to keep society in order.”

Government Spokesperson Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd added that the premier had ordered all government agencies to pursue legal processes should they find any messages in social media that “infringe their rights”.

But they should focus on those attacking the government’s administration, not on political agendas, so not to politicise the monitoring agenda, Sansern added.

Prayut’s order came a few days after he criticised media speculation about his Cabinet reshuffle. “They should wait until an official announcement is made without guessing,” Prayut said, as quoted by Sansern.

Public attention has been paid to the list, with a focus on economy-related ministers and suggestions that there be a quota on the number of military generals in Prayut’s three-year-old junta government.

Since Prayut came in power in 2014, many people have been arrested for violating the Computer Crime Bill and either the defamation law or the harsh lese majeste law.

In 2015, a factory worker was arrested for breaking the law for sharing an infographic elaborating on an alleged government “network” related to the Rajbhakdi Royal Park corruption scandal.

In the same year, a Facebook page “We love Gen Prayut” was closed down with the page’s administration being legally pursued for content mocking the junta leader.

The cases are the first two to be considered by the high court under the new law on criminal lawsuits against political office holders.

In the cases, Thaksin is accused of abusing his authority as prime minister concerning a Krung Thai Bank loan fraud case and the conversion of satellite and mobile phone concession fees into excise tax that benefited his former company Shincorp.

Wanchat Santikunchorn, spokesman of the Office of the Attorney-General, said the decision to file the request was based on a suggestion from a working group appointed by the Attorney-General late last month to consider whether to ask for the reactivation of criminal cases involving Thaksin.

Krisanapong Phutrakul, an academic at Rangsit University, said the new criminal law allowing courts to try people in absentia should be enforced equally regardless of who the defendant was.

Strict and transparent enforcement of the law was crucial to serve as a warning, Krisanapong said, adding that anti-graft laws would become more effective in deterring politicians from wrongdoing.

Mana Nimitmongkol, secretary-general of an anti-corruption non-governmental organisation, said the law had to be applied to everyone accused of wrongdoing to avoid criticisms of political motivation in this kind of criminal case.

He said there should be more public explanation about the damage caused to the state by guilty political office holders in order to justify criminal actions against them.

In the two Thaksin-related matters, the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders has been asked to revoke a previous order to temporarily suspend the cases.

The Supreme Court suspended the cases because Thaksin fled the country and the previous law did not allow for trials in absentia.

But Article 28 of the new procedural act on criminal cases against politicians stipulates that the Supreme Court |can deliberate cases in absentia if |defendants fail to appear before the court.

Thaksin also faces another two pending corruption lawsuits concerning the alleged abuse of power in approving a multi-billion-baht Export-Import bank loan and a state lottery scheme.

Those cases were also previously suspended due to Thaksin’s absence but can now proceed.

He said that while he was always willing to work hard, whether or not he could continue his work was really down to his health.

Prawit also rejected current speculation concerning tea money among his aides, stressing that anyone close to him found to be involved in such a practice would be punished.

He urged the media not to report on speculation, and insisted that his close aides were not involved with tea money.

Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha said at Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting that the ministerial reshuffle was “nothing personal”, but all about work efficiency, Government Spokesperson Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd said during the weekly press briefing at Government House.

If it is necessary to reshuffle the pack, he has to do so for the sake of the utmost efficiency of his Cabinet, Sansern reported the PM as saying.

The PM urged those losing out in the reshuffle not to feel any hurt because if that was the case, it was he who would feel it the most because he would be the one who had to make the decisions – on who should leave, who should stay – the spokesman added.

However, he said a law would normally take two to three months to complete.

These matters were currently being reviewed by the NLA’s local administration committee, he said. But, he added, it is up to deputy prime minister Wissanu Krea-ngam as to when the bills will be submitted to the NLA.

Saying that the speed at which the six laws progressed was up to the government, Pornpetch added that the NLA would then have to decide how to deal with them.

The assembly would have to see whether it could handle all six at once or whether some of them might need extra deliberation, he said.

Pornpetch said he had not seen any detail, but he believed the laws might not need too much revision. The process should not take too much time if there were no contentious points, he said.

As to whether this process would delay the general election, Pornpetch said he was not certain of the timeline. But to his knowledge, the government wanted the local elections to go first as an experiment.

The NLA did not know which local elections would be held, or when, as it was still waiting to hear from the government.

On Monday, Wissanu said that the six pieces of legislation essential for the local elections had already been revised. Currently, they were in the process of public opinion gathering. After that, they would be submitted to the Cabinet and the NLA respectively, the deputy prime minister said.

Meechai Ruchupan, head of the Constitution Drafting Commission, said on Tuesday that the revision of the six bills concerned only the election process.

As to when the local elections could take place – before or after the general election – it would be the government’s role to discuss this with the Election Commission, he said.

The six bills concerning local elections have to align with the new Constitution.

They were brought into the spotlight when the junta government said it would have to lift the ban on political activities if local elections were to occur.

Politicians and political activists are looking forward to the lifting of the ban, which was imposed three years ago and has highly restricted their activities.

The committee met with the national strategy committee’s panels on security and environmental friendly development today to shares ideas about reforms to be integrated into the national strategy.

Theerapat Prayurasiddhi, the committee vice chair, said the committee considers security in food, water and energy as part of the country’s long-term security. As such, these issues should be addressed in the national strategy.

The strategy is being developed by the national strategy committee, which has six panels to help in its task. They will coordinate with 13 national reform committees on putting the national strategy and the reform plans as required by the national strategy law and national reform law.

The reform committees are required to submit their reform plans by next month. These will then be considered by the government and the national strategy committee, to ensure that they are in line with the long-term strategy.

The committee has also finished the second hearing on its reform plan draft in the South. The event was held recently in Nakhon Si Thammarat province. Hearings will be held in the North and Central regions before the committee submits its plan to the government.

Panthep Klanarongran, who now chairs the anti-corruption reform committee, said the time frames under the new law were useful as cases would no longer pile up.

If anti-corruption commissioners cannot complete cases in time, they can ask for extension periods, he added.

Vicha Mahakun, another ex-commissioner and now a member of the National Legislative Assembly’s vetting committee on the anti-corruption law, agreed, saying that anti-graft commissioners from now on would have specified work time frames to follow, so they would know when they had to wrap up cases.

In addition, anti-corruption officials will be upgraded and able to initiate probes just like investigators, without waiting for a resolution from the investigation sub-panel, which usually takes some time to consider before reaching a decision on each case, he said.

More than 60 per cent of corruption cases are minor and can be proceeded with by an individual official, he said, stressing that what was needed was the courage to pursue cases by anti-corruption officials.

Both officials and commissioners, he added, should also be more proactive, and not wait for somebody to file a complaint to them.

Random probes in local organisations, for instance, could help prevent corruption from taking place, Vicha said.

The committee is among the 13 panels appointed under the national reform law, which requires them to come up with plans to pave the way for major reform of the country.

Panthep Klanarongran, who chairs the anti-corruption reform committee, said most participants in the final public hearing had agreed on wider public participation in suppressing and preventing corruption.

New networks should be encouraged to help state officials fulfil corruption prevention and suppression work, they said.

Participants also called for more transparency and access to information concerning corruption cases or assets scrutiny.

Moreover, they agreed that concerned agencies should integrate their work, while more accountable work procedures were developed and put in place to reduce the current emphasis on the judgment of individual officials, Panthep added.

In the two cases, Thasksin is accused of having abused his authority as prime minister concerning an allegedly fraudulent Krung Thai Bank loan and in regards to the conversion of a satellite and mobile telephone concession into excise taxes that benefited his former firm Shincorp.

Wanchat Santikunchorn, spokesman of the Office of the Attorney-General, said on Tuesday that his office decided to file the request at the suggestion of an internal working group appointed late last month to consider the reactivation of criminal cases involving Thaksin.

The panel proposed the Attorney-General to submit the request to the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders, asking it to revoke a previous order to temporary suspend the two cases, and to start a trial in absentia.

The Supreme Court previously suspended the cases because he had fled the country and a previous law had not allowed the trial in absentia.

But Article 28 of the new procedural act on criminal cases against politicians stipulates that the Supreme Court can deliberate cases in absentia if defendants fail to appear before the court.