And unless Thai society sees an immediate and ultimate show of responsibility from the highest commander at the Armed Forces Academies Preparatory School, this bad public perception may be worsened beyond repair.

There has rightly been a social and media outcry over the death of a 16-year-old, second-year AFAPS student, Karun Orachon, who was allegedly forced by senior students to drink 20 litres of water as an initiation "punishment".

The military is now scrambling to repair the damage.

Phone calls were made to newspapers and other media and the story of how the boy died is beginning to sound more like an unfortunate occurrence. The tale of cruelty conveyed by the victim's father, himself a high-ranking police officer, was countered by a softer version in which caring seniors were well aware of Karun's condition and tried their best to get fast medical help for him.

The father's side of the story is heartbreaking. His son had called to inform him that he was about to receive physical "punishment". The boy must have been scared, and the father rushed to the campus, only to find that Karun had already been sent to hospital, where he was pronounced dead. The alleged six-hour "punishment" was too much even for the young taekwondo athlete.

No accounts from the campus' side can belie the fact that Karun's lungs were full of fluid after the young man was forced to drink copious amounts of water after he had allegedly committed a disciplinary breach. This fact carries some most-disturbing aspects. Why aren't 18-year-old cadet students aware that forcing someone to drink 20 litres of water - let alone making him do push-ups and assaulting him in the process - is inhuman? Is this kind of life-threatening "punishment" widespread in the campus? Does it take place under the noses of the AFAPS administrators? Are the senior students simply following a well-accepted "tradition", or, worse, exploiting it to pick on someone they don't like?

These are some of the questions the military will have to come clean on. The AFAPS head, meanwhile, has to undergo serious soul-searching. A young boy has died on his watch. Was it an "accident" caused by a group of senior students getting too carried away? Or did he die simply because this institution has condoned such barbaric punishment, or even endorsed it, in the past? It's not about the image of the military institution now; it's about taking responsibility like a man, or a soldier, is supposed to.

When it comes to military disciplinary matters and questionable initiation practices, outsiders are dismissed as interfering busybodies; insiders are frowned upon as rocking the boat. It's obedience, order and authority that hold the entire Army together, they say. And to achieve efficient discipline, there is a price to pay; you shall not challenge the way freedom, security and sovereignty are guaranteed.

We all know that. But what we are not sure about is whether the young men at AFAPS realise that what Karun had to go through in his final hours was inhuman and dangerous. If they don't realise this, we want to know what has been taught to them in the classrooms. We want to know how other AFAPS students have reacted to Karun's death. Do they simply think the boy was unlucky, or are they starting to wonder if something has gone badly wrong at the campus? That we are always thankful for living a peaceful, sovereign life under the guard of the military does not mean we have no right to ask these questions.

We have the right to demand that our "guardians" be men of honour, for their own good. Believe it or not, this single incident is being used to explain, rightly or wrongly, why the Thai military was involved in three major political bloodbaths. And like it or not, this kind of incident only reinforces the impression that soldiers cannot solve national problems in a civilised way.

The Karun tragedy has disgraced many, but it's important that it doesn't deteriorate into an infamous injustice. Those responsible must be brought to book and there should be no cover-up. Karun's death must not be in vain, and it must at least serve the institution he wanted to serve. And his death can serve the institution he loved only if all cadets from now on are made to learn that such a tragedy is unacceptable. 

Tulsathit Taptim