First, Thaksin announced he would take a break from politics on April 4 and a politician is bound to keep his word.

Second, Thaksin called on other parties to take one step back and they had done as Thaksin asked. The following events also signalled that Thaksin understood that he was the cause of the political turmoil, because after his announcement political tension eased.

Third, a country's leader should prioritise his duties and responsibility to the country over his personal rights - rights which have to be legitimately backed.

Fourth, Thaksin no longer has the credibility needed to rule the country, because he was the cause behind the public division and he failed to secure a reconciliation. And a good percentage of society are still unhappy about the way he used his power to help his relatives during his five year tenure.

In addition, the subsequent election crisis was also caused by Thaksin's abuse of power, due to his interference in the independent agencies and dissolution of the House. If any court nullifies the election and organises a new round of elections and Thaksin is allowed to join the race, this problem would persist.

Fifth, a new round of political reform would be overshadowed by Thaksin if he is given a political post. The new political reform, which is on the national agenda, would continue to raise suspicions and would therefore be unlikely to succeed.

Sixth, if the party still presented Thaksin as its leader it would show that the Thai Rak Thai Party had either made no attempts to, or been unable to find someone suitable to replace him.

Meanwhile, Banyin Tangpakorn, Thai Rak Thai's Nakhon Sawan MP-elect, said if Thaksin is forced to take a political break in the next election, other parties' leaders should also be banned from running.

"We should all have to play by the same rules," he said.