In the heart of Thailand's democratic process, a contentious debate is now unfolding, spearheaded by the Move Forward Party.

 

The party has called upon the people of Thailand to critically assess the relevance and necessity of the Senate amidst allegations of electoral misconduct that marred the recent senatorial elections.

 

Last month's elections, intended to fill 200 senatorial seats, have yet to be certified by the Election Commission amid numerous complaints and formal accusations of vote manipulation, particularly block-vote rigging.

 

These developments prompted Move Forward spokesperson and MP, Parit Wacharasindhu, to question the continued need for a two-chamber legislature in Thailand.

 

Parit's remarks reflect a broader concern about the transparency and integrity of Thailand’s legislative processes. The allegations speculate that certain "puppet" candidates, believed to be manipulated by undisclosed influential figures, were directly involved in undermining the electoral process.

 

The implications of these irregularities resonate beyond the election itself, touching on the fundamental structures of governance and public trust in political institutions.

 

Notably, Bhumjaithai, a significant player in the coalition government, finds itself at the center of these allegations, accused by competitors of facilitating the manipulation tactics that skewed the elections in favor of these "puppet" candidates.

 

This situation has resulted in a standstill, with the Election Commission delaying the ratification of elected senators in a bid to navigate the murky waters of these serious accusations.

 

Although Parit did not specify how the public could effectively voice their concerns or influence the outcome, the situation has placed significant pressure on the Election Commission.

 

Despite having a year to investigate and act on these claim, the path forward remains unclear, with the certification of the senators-designate hanging in limbo.

 

As Thailand grapples with the legality and morality of the elections, the central question poised by the Move Forward Party challenges the essence of democracy in the country: is the Senate, as it currently stands, serving the people, or has it become an obstacle to genuine democratic governance?

 

TOP: Move Forward spokesperson/MP Parit Wacharasindhu. Picture courtesy: Thai Rath

 

-- 2024-07-10

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

11 minutes ago, webfact said:

As Thailand grapples with the legality and morality

Outrageous! Never heard of!

Other than reduce democracy the Senate doesn't seem to do anything at all. I have read but don't know if it is true, that attendance is very poor. I would say ditch the whole Senate and it's extremely stupid elections.

1 hour ago, retarius said:

Other than reduce democracy the Senate doesn't seem to do anything at all. I have read but don't know if it is true, that attendance is very poor. I would say ditch the whole Senate and it's extremely stupid elections.

It is just a means to block votes that are against the government's wishes and that look like becoming law.

I think that it was created by a government after a military coup back when Noah was a lad.

2 hours ago, webfact said:

is the Senate, as it currently stands, serving the people, or has it become an obstacle to genuine democratic governance?

 

Yes yes and yes.

But the more mfp stir the sh11te pot the more the ec is gonna try to pull strings to get them dissolved. For me, this shows a lack of strategical depth to this party. They are just handing the rope their enemies will use to hang them

In most societies, the 2 system parliament works....in varying degrees of course.

In Thailand, the Senate is made mostly of "appointed" members....the senate elections are usually farcical..the elite always overseeing.

Given all that, IMO, the system here being flawed...disband the Senate!

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Parit's remarks reflect a broader concern about the transparency and integrity of Thailand’s legislative processes. The allegations speculate that certain "puppet" candidates, believed to be manipulated by undisclosed influential figures, were directly involved in undermining the electoral process.

Tell me it ain't true...

That is a good question, certainly during the 9 years of the extremely toxic rule of Prayuth, they were not necessary and they were harmful as they were ruled by quite a few super corrupt army appointed crony senators.

 

Now, it's debatable, do they actually do anything that's positive for the nation? That's debatable. Are they all bought and paid for? That's likely. 

2 hours ago, Pouatchee said:

They are just handing the rope their enemies will use to hang them

When the abyss of authoritarism lies beneath, a long rope is the only thing that keeps MVP alive.

4 hours ago, webfact said:

In the heart of Thailand's democratic process

Maybe more accurate to start with 'In the bowels of Thailand's democratic process'

 

Debate Ramps Up: Is the Thai Senate Still Necessary?

 

Wrong question. Was it ever necessary in the first place? Thailand isn't a federal republic. 

43 minutes ago, Caldera said:

Debate Ramps Up: Is the Thai Senate Still Necessary?

 

Wrong question. Was it ever necessary in the first place? Thailand isn't a federal republic. 

The UK has an upper house, and it's a constitutional monarchy like Thailand, although I hasten to add, that's where the similarity ends. No lèse majesté there. You can say whatever you want about the monarchy. And everybody does if they so care. There is a movement to disband the House of Lords. On the face of it it's even more corrupt than the Thai senate, being partially inherited seats and partially appointed by successive governments. But it somehow does it's job. It doesn't interfere with parliament but does have a say in legislation, in as much as all bills are passed to it for review. If they want the lords can send a bill back with recommendations for revision, but the Commons doesn't have to take any notice. There are many highly respected , highly knowledgeable members who are definitely not corrupt. I think that's what Thailand was aiming for. But, TIT, and it all went pear shaped. A great shame really. Probably 90% of Thailand's problems stem from the position of .... End of transmission. They're at the door.

38 minutes ago, bradiston said:

The UK has an upper house, and it's a constitutional monarchy like Thailand, although I hasten to add, that's where the similarity ends. No lèse majesté there. You can say whatever you want about the monarchy. And everybody does if they so care. There is a movement to disband the House of Lords. On the face of it it's even more corrupt than the Thai senate, being partially inherited seats and partially appointed by successive governments. But it somehow does it's job. It doesn't interfere with parliament but does have a say in legislation, in as much as all bills are passed to it for review. If they want the lords can send a bill back with recommendations for revision, but the Commons doesn't have to take any notice. There are many highly respected , highly knowledgeable members who are definitely not corrupt. I think that's what Thailand was aiming for. But, TIT, and it all went pear shaped. A great shame really. Probably 90% of Thailand's problems stem from the position of .... End of transmission. They're at the door.

Agree.  Thailand:

"Feudal Patronage Society Masquerading as a Constitutional Monarchy".

5 hours ago, Pouatchee said:

 

Yes yes and yes.

But the more mfp stir the sh11te pot the more the ec is gonna try to pull strings to get them dissolved. For me, this shows a lack of strategical depth to this party. They are just handing the rope their enemies will use to hang them

I disagree. MF know dissolution is very much on the cards and possible life time bans for the 40 plus MPs who backed the proposed changes to the 112 law. 

But they have a back up party, to be led by Parit ( Abhisit's nephew if I recall right.).

So, imo, they are telling the public, these are our proposals, this is what we stand for, reform of Thailand. If you, the public feel the same way, vote for us the next time.

Just now, bannork said:

So, imo, they are telling the public, these are our proposals, this is what we stand for, reform of Thailand. If you, the public feel the same way, vote for us the next time.

 

in my post on the topic i might have been misleading to my actual thought by how i wrote. i am 100% in agreement that mfp do this. i just wonder about the timing. just like the 112 thing, they should have waited to clinch the premiership before going public. i know it was a campaign promise but sometimes it is better not to show all your cards.

 

if they join the other party, i hope the jackarse ec doesnt do what they do best... collude with whoever is willing to team up with them to destroy any opposition. in this case tony taxin.

the ec is a corrupt bunch of arses so is the senate... politics was born in greece... or sumeria... who know for sure, but it certainly did not evolve here it rather devolved

A senate elected by the people in a national election is what's needed. Not a selection of individuals. The Senate has it's place in democracies to keep the House of Reps in check.

On 7/10/2024 at 9:51 AM, retarius said:

Other than reduce democracy the Senate doesn't seem to do anything at all. I have read but don't know if it is true, that attendance is very poor. I would say ditch the whole Senate and it's extremely stupid elections.

Is this Senate anything to do with soldiers? If so the answer is obvious.

19 hours ago, Caldera said:

Debate Ramps Up: Is the Thai Senate Still Necessary?

 

Wrong question. Was it ever necessary in the first place? Thailand isn't a federal republic. 

No Thailand is a Banana Republic, that's why they need 200 odd monkeys they call a Senate.

On 7/11/2024 at 10:20 AM, NoshowJones said:

No Thailand is a Banana Republic, that's why they need 200 odd monkeys they call a Senate.

That's pretty insulting to all Thai people. It's also totally untrue.

3 hours ago, bradiston said:

That's pretty insulting to all Thai people. It's also totally untrue.

 

3 hours ago, bradiston said:

That's pretty insulting to all Thai people. It's also totally untrue.

If I am wrong I stand to be corrected, but are the senate not unelected generals who stopped the guy Pita from being PM on technicalities as he had the most votes in the last general election?

16 minutes ago, NoshowJones said:

If I am wrong I stand to be corrected, but are the senate not unelected generals who stopped the guy Pita from being PM on technicalities as he had the most votes in the last general election?

That is what it essentially boils down to, yes.

32 minutes ago, NoshowJones said:

If I am wrong I stand to be corrected, but are the senate not unelected generals who stopped the guy Pita from being PM on technicalities as he had the most votes in the last general election?

The last one, consisting of 250 appointed senators, was. Their term is almost over with the newly "elected" Senate of 200 senators about to be installed, if they get past the various complaints lodged with the EC. We have yet to see if they will be an improvement. They won't have a say in the appointment of a new PM.

15 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

That is what it essentially boils down to, yes.

Wrong. Their time is up.

There are a number of other factors in play. Traditional politics in Thailand was, for many years dominated by a number of political clans, each wielding immense influence, and each working to advance it's own influence, the access to the states coffers and the powers of patronage and wealth distribution that brought with it. Each clan had it's supporters within the military. Neither the politicians nor the military were remotely interested in serving the country or it's people.

That rather changed with Pheu Thai, which formed a movement which had pretensions to represent a relatively broad front of political views. That movement was changed into a more traditional "clan", partly by the intervention of the military (at no doubt the bidding of political influence), and partly by the hubris of it's leaders. MFP is another, more popular such movement.

The thing about these movements is that whilst their parties can be banned and dissolved, the movements themselves do not go away.

The Senate is an attempt to re-establish the primacy of these clans, a chamber where influence and peddling of loyalties can continue as before, ultimately calling the shots in government.