Although Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra enjoys unprecedented power in Parliament, public rage against a clumsy state investigation into the finances of the premier's critics in the press has confirmed that this power is not absolute.

This feature of Thai politics was underscored Monday, when a government-appointed committee issued a report that said the country's anti-money laundering agency had violated its rules in trying to scrutinise the bank accounts of journalists critical of Thaksin.

The committee found and ''agreed unanimously'' that two ranking members of the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) ''must take responsibility'' for violating two articles of the agency, Cabinet secretary-general Wissanu Krea-ngam, who headed the committee, told reporters at a press conference.

One article calls on the officials at AMLO as members of the civil service to avoid causing damage to the country, and the other asserts that they respect and adhere to all of Thailand's laws.

Journalists like Thepchai Yong, group editor of the independent English-language daily The Nation , and one among those being investigated by the anti-money-laundering agency, credited the public outcry for this turn of events. It forced the government to appoint a panel of inquiry and then admit an error was committed, he says.

''Checks and balances worked this time,'' adds Thepchai. ''It has taught Thaksin a good lesson, that having strong support in Parliament is not a mandate to be above the law or abuse the rules and regulations of Thai democracy.''

According to Somchai Homlaor, who heads Forum Asia, a Bangkok-based human rights lobby, the barbs fired at the prime minister from beyond the walls of Parliament were hard to ignore.

''The government had to respond to this assertive role of Thai civil society,'' Somchai explains. ''By raising its voice, the public has assured us that it is prepared to play its part in challenging any attempt by the government to abuse power.''

Unprecedented solidarity

For his part, Thaksin was quoted as saying he knew nothing of a confidential probe into the financial affairs of the targeted journalists, which included those from the Naew Na newspaper and the Thai Post .

''I asked my officials, 'How could such a thing happen? Why did this happen?'' he said. ''I never want to curtail the freedom of the press.''

In recent weeks, those who railed against the government included activists in non-governmental organisations (NGOs), student groups and academics, in addition to incensed Thai journalists.

They began to exert pressure after stunning revelations in the independent press on March 7 that the AMLO was investigating the finances of Thai journalists noted for being Thaksin critics.

The local press described the show of force by the academics as ''unprecedented,'' since dons from all of Thailand's major universities endorsed a petition on Friday that faulted the government for eight violations of restricting press freedom.

''Over the past two months, there has been widespread concern about threats to media freedom and right of expression. The actions not only close the ears, eyes and mouths of the general public but also violate the people's basic rights and freedoms as guaranteed by the Constitution's articles 39, 40, 41 and 42,'' the academics' petition declares.

Article 39 of Thailand's 1997 constitution states, for instance, that the freedom of thought ''is guaranteed and official censorship of newspapers, radio or television is prohibited except in times of war or unless laws are enacted to preserve national security, individual privacy, maintaining public order or good public morals''.

Two other institutions created in 1997 by the country's reformist constitution also made it possible for political checks and balances to work in the current furore over press freedom. These are the national human rights commission and the administrative courts, which rule over disputes involving government agencies.

The most significant announcement came from the administrative court, which issued an injunction on March 13 temporarily suspending the AMLO's investigation of the editors at The Nation .

''This ruling ensures that political power can be checked in our country's young democracy,'' says Somchai. ''These institutions are equally important to control government's abusing power.''

''The pressure on AMLO is quite unprecedented,'' adds Panitan Wattanayagorn, a political scientist at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University. ''It reveals that people are sensitive to law issues. It is good for our current stage of political development.''

Parliamentary power base

The need for a more assertive culture of political checks and balances here can be understood in the face of Prime Minister Thaksin's power base in Parliament. In January 2001, Thaksin led his Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thais) party to a thumping victory, securing the largest victory margin in the country's history.

Thereafter, Thaksin, the country's wealthiest business tycoon, went ahead to build a political monopoly by attracting smaller parties in the legislative body to join his government. By the first week of March, he had built an alliance that assures him over two-thirds power in Parliament, enough to amend Thailand's five-year-old constitution.

Altogether, the ruling alliance holds 354 seats in the 500-set lower House of Representatives.

Against this backdrop, Thaksin, quite understandably, will not face censure in Parliament for the way he and his government have taken on those who question, criticise or expose faults in public policy since coming to power.

In August last year, the press accused the government of trying to manipulate the media through economic pressure, which ranged from a curb on government advertising in the critical media.

That was followed by Thaksin going after senior civil servants and academics who disagreed with his policies, like the president of the Thai bankers' association. This year, the prime minister has drawn fire for cracking down on the Hong Kong-based weekly magazine Far Eastern Economic Review , which ran an article critical of him, and for the manner the government intimidated a respected polling agency.

Thaksin said the case against the two Review journalists was done by the police and not by his government, adding that his government in fact arranged the reinstating of their work visas.

But Thaksin's record on press freedom explains why those like Veera Prateepchaikul of the Thai Journalists Association feel the Thai public and media need to be more vigilant of the prime minister's powers.

''The prime minister has still to clearly articulate where he stands on such fundamental democratic rights as the right to free expression,'' asserts Veera. ''Failure to do so will only add to those calling for Thaksin's impeachment.''