Dangerous pitfalls in the coming election [Editorial]

[webfact]

Dangerous pitfalls in the coming election

By The Nation

 

 

As the thin ice gets thinner, the company Pheu Thai keeps could bring it disaster
 

No one expects next year’s election to bring about political reconciliation, but by the same token, no one knows if conditions will improve or worsen. There has been a regular flow of worrying signs, one of the latest being a warning from the Election Commission: Political parties that split into “nominee parties” could face serious charges over electoral-law violations and could be dissolved.

 

Pheu Thai – the largest party before the 2014 coup – is already facing potential trouble for its connection with Thaksin Shinawatra, a fugitive and thus an “outsider” who legally is not supposed to have any influence over the party. The sole fact that his meetings with Pheu Thai figures have been widely reported raised the risk of the party being dissolved, but that danger is compounded by the emergence of new parties apparently related to Pheu Thai.

 

Analysts see the Pheu Tham and Pheu Chart parties as Pheu Thai “back-ups” – established as a safeguard should Pheu Thai be dissolved – and in place to boost its seat count under the new proportional representation system, in which even votes for losing candidates at the constituency level can generate MPs.

 

EC chief Jaroongwit Phumma warned last week that no party should be regarded as another’s “nominee”, forced to heed directives from people outside its own membership. In other words, if it can be established that a party is functioning for an outsider, legal trouble could ensue. 

 

Efforts to subvert electoral rules have caused serious problems for Thailand in the past. Thaksin’s original Thai Rak Thai Party was dissolved in 2007 for bribery in an attempt to fulfil minimum-turnout rules following the Democrats’ 

 

boycott of a snap election. This came amid a juxtaposition of wrongdoing and overheated politicking in which many people shared the blame. The debate tracked political lines. The Democrats were criticised for their boycott, but the snap election was derided as an attempt to fix individual politicians’ problems and was therefore seen as unconstitutional.

 

This time, the major parties have to worry about the proportional system, in which each voter has one ballot and the choice of candidate doubles as a vote for the party the candidate represents. The sum of votes will dictate the proportion of seats allotted each party. If Party A is owed 100 seats but has already won 95 constituency seats, it gets just five more seats. Lesser parties that lose in every constituency can still have MPs in the House if their candidates garner a substantial number of votes despite losing.

 

This rationing method is somewhat democratic, ensuring that every vote counts, and it can prevent any party from a sweep of seats despite winning only narrowly in some constituencies. But critics have good reason to believe the authors of the new rule simply wanted to contain Pheu Thai because of its association with Thaksin.

 

Whether the approach is truly democratic or contains a hidden agenda will remain a moot argument, for now at least. One side of the coin is that Pheu Thai’s dissolution because of Thaksin or the Pheu Tham and Pheu Chart parties would make national reconciliation that much more remote. It’s tough to point the finger at anyone or any group for this looming risk, but the thin ice has become thinner all the same.  

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30356897

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-10-22

[Samui Bodoh]

"...This rationing method is somewhat democratic, ensuring that every vote counts, and it can prevent any party from a sweep of seats despite winning only narrowly in some constituencies. But critics have good reason to believe the authors of the new rule simply wanted to contain Pheu Thai because of its association with Thaksin..."

 

"Critics have good reason to believe"? Hey Nation, you have written editorials decrying the Junta's cheating, but you seem to hesitate to say what is obvious. Were your editorials a lie? Did you mean them or not? Well?

 

Of course the constitution was written to screw over the PT; does anyone doubt that? Anyone? Anyone?

 

By the way,

 

"...In other words, if it can be established that a party is functioning for an outsider, legal trouble could ensue..."

 

Does this apply to Prayut? There are several "parties" that are already set up and running for his benefit, yet he "isn't a candidate". Where is the law for him?

 

Wait! Don't tell me, that is "different".

 

Thailand, your election will make you an international laughingstock and pariah.

 

[ukrules]

I have no doubt that there will be a lot of trouble coming second quarter, 2019.

[Thailand]

I don't think the current unelected could allow the "elections" to be free and fair in any way shape or form, they simply would not win even with the 200 plus guaranteed military seats.

Simply eliminate, dissolve or do whatever to the opposition to prevent any challenge at all.

[Esso49]

1 hour ago, Thailand said:

I don't think the current unelected could allow the "elections" to be free and fair in any way shape or form, they simply would not win even with the 200 plus guaranteed military seats.

Simply eliminate, dissolve or do whatever to the opposition to prevent any challenge at all.

Elimination of course is not an unknown process in Thailand

[Lupatria]

During the “Shutdown Bangkok” protests I interviewed a dozen of my neighbors wearing ‘democracy’ T-shirts asking: what is the meaning of democracy? The unique answer was: Thaksin out! Mission accomplished. According to that, they must now be very happy with the kind of democracy they got.

[Eric Loh]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

But critics have good reason to believe the authors of the new rule simply wanted to contain Pheu Thai because of its association with Thaksin.

The not so well kept secret exposed. That over-used slogan 'get rid of Thaksin regime' in last decade may have something to so with that.

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

This rationing method is somewhat democratic

As this Thainess electoral system (MMA) isn't used by any democratic nation in the world, I don't see how anyone can find it even somewhat democratic. On what basis other than by proclamation is it democratic?

[yellowboat]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

The sole fact that his meetings with Pheu Thai figures have been widely reported raised the risk of the party being dissolved, but that danger is compounded by the emergence of new parties apparently related to Pheu Thai.

The PTP faces dissolution for not have the right size paper clips.  The double  standard at play is also laughable.  "Civil servant" points his gun at unarmed civilians for frivolous reasons, and what does the government organ say: it does not reflect  on his job performance, or the army generals meeting with pro junta political parties .  The junta's fear of Thaksin only shows they are weak and wish to cling to power by any means possible.  

[zzaa09]

11 hours ago, Thailand said:

I don't think the current unelected could allow the "elections" to be free and fair in any way shape or form, they simply would not win even with the 200 plus guaranteed military seats.

Simply eliminate, dissolve or do whatever to the opposition to prevent any challenge at all.

Sure. That's to be expected. The same old cycles repeat themselves. 

No change will ever come about in Thailand until particular influential forces are removed or greatly adjusted.

 

....and the continued critical theoretical analysis, rhetorical debates and discussions among the well meaning punditry becomes fodder for kids play - most of which stays remains at the surface, never exploring the realms of the true and historic cause and effect. 

[zzaa09]

4 hours ago, yellowboat said:

The PTP faces dissolution for not have the right size paper clips.  The double  standard at play is also laughable.  "Civil servant" points his gun at unarmed civilians for frivolous reasons, and what does the government organ say: it does not reflect  on his job performance, or the army generals meeting with pro junta political parties .  The junta's fear of Thaksin only shows they are weak and wish to cling to power by any means possible.  

Indeed.

Yet, their general fears appear to be the usual ten fold. 

Has much less to do with the Shinawatras than it does understanding that perhaps their era is possibly waning. 

 

....which all is becoming quite clear to them.

Naturally, they will do whatever that is required to fortify the tradition.