Chaos has been caused by the latest pronouncement by the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES) (Legislative Branch) banning the ‘possession or distribution of any goods, clothing, or other materials which bear pictures, illustrations or anything that will instigate unrest or cause disunity among the public.’

The apparent architect of this new non-parliamentary law, Army Chief Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, was unmoved by critics who said the vague wording left citizens in doubt about what was permitted and what would earn them 2 years inside, a fine of 40,000 baht, or both. Gen Prayuth said it was up to the police to decide what was permitted or not.

Now under most systems of government, what is legal or not is determined by the courts, not the police, and giving this power to the Thai police has tempted them away from their core competencies (blowing whistles at traffic and taking backhanders) and into activities that have run into perhaps foreseeable problems.

Not known for their ability or even willingness to go out and investigate crimes, many police officers have chosen to top up their arrest tally by sitting at their desks and issuing arrest warrants based on a careful reading of the morning newspaper.

This explains why the managing director of a leading Bangkok property developer finds himself in Lumpini lock-up on the strength of his company’s adverts for their latest up-market hi-rise. The charge sheet cites the following copy:

‘Be amongst the privileged few.’

This, according to the arresting officer, is an act designed to cause disunity, since by definition not all Thais can be ‘the privileged few’. The luxury condominium will therefore create disunity between them and the underprivileged many. His commanding officer agrees. ‘This is exactly what the red shirts were complaining about and we all know how much disunity that led to.’

Sharing the same cell is a European four-star chef whose gourmet Thanksgiving menu was advertised as ‘for the discerning palate’. A quick check in the dictionary revealed that ‘discerning’ means ‘discriminating’. The officer concerned thereupon decided that discrimination is tantamount to disunity and the ad implies that while some people had discerning palates (to say nothing of the 15,000 baht a plate price tag), other people did not, and would have reason to feel offended at being excluded.

The organizing restaurant pleaded in mitigation that the event was a charity dinner with the proceeds going to support an emergency home for single mothers. This fell on deaf ears. The police pointed out that this was in effect denying support to married mothers, or women, single or married, who were not mothers, or even men. Such favouritism would only cause further disunity, according to the police.

A whole range of specialty suppliers have found themselves in similar problems and their staff are currently languishing in police cells across the city. These include the proprietor of a shop selling outsize fashions (causing disunity with normal-sized people), a number of vegetarian food-sellers (discriminating against meat-eaters), and the driver and krapao from a ‘free bus for the poor’ (causing disunity between rich people and their passengers, according to the arresting officer).

Faced with growing chaos as the cells bulged with purported fomenters of disunity (one police station arrested itself for having separate, disunited bathrooms for males any females), the CRES decided to take matters into their own hands and suspend the arrest powers of the police and transfer them to a new Executive Branch under the CRES.

The next problem was that in the few cases so far to come to court, the judges were giving judgements that the military found unsatisfactory. One flip-flop vendor brought before the bench for selling sandals with the army chief’s face on them was found not guilty and released when he showed that he also had stock with Thaksin’s face, Sondhi Lim’s face, Abhisit’s face, and so on. His offer to show his devotion to national unity by making a pair with the judge’s face on them was declined.

The CRES therefore decided that in addition to its legislative and executive functions, it also needed judicial powers and created a Judiciary Branch to take over from the normal courts.

Its first case is likely to be an interesting one. Appearing as defendant will be Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, who stands accused of instigating disunity by commenting unfavourably on the original CRES decree. ‘He can’t just go round criticizing the military,’ said a CRES insider. ‘Any questioning of the army’s authority is bound to be considered an act of disunity.’

Asked if it was an open and shut case, a CRES spokesman said that all cases were open and shut. Otherwise they might cause disunity.