Thai opposition under fire for election boycott

[webfact]

Focus

Thai opposition under fire for election boycott
by Daniel ROOK

BANGKOK, February 1, 2014 (AFP) - After two decades of election defeats, Thailand's oldest political party stands accused of turning its back on democracy by refusing to contest controversial elections to be held on Sunday.

The elite-backed opposition Democrat Party has joined forces with anti-government supporters who are threatening to disrupt the polls and want Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to step down to make way for an unelected "people's council".

"The party is turning away from democracy," said Pavin Chachavalpongpun, associate professor at the Centre for Southeast Asian Studies at Japan's Kyoto University.

The Democrats are "trying to find a short cut" to power, he added, noting that on the several occasions in the past two decades when they did take office it was with the support of the military.

The opposition accuses Yingluck's Puea Thai party of corruption and buying votes, and says she is a puppet for her elder brother, fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra -- accusations she denies.

The Democrats, who are popular in Bangkok and parts of southern Thailand, argue that elections will not end a cycle of political violence in the kingdom stretching back to around the time of a military coup in 2006 that ousted Thaksin from power.

"For the country, the elections could not solve the problems and conflicts that we are facing," Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva told AFP.

"A reform process needs to be initiated so that people can be confident that come election time, and after the elections, an elected government does not abuse power in the way that it has done over the last couple of years," he said.

Helped by support among rural voters who benefited from their policies, pro-Thaksin parties have won every election in more than a decade, most recently in 2011 with 265 seats against 159 for the Democrats.

Critics say the Democrat Party missed a golden opportunity to increase its support base owing to public anger over corruption allegations and a failed amnesty bill that could have allowed Thaksin to return without going to jail.

"No democratic system works without a talented and committed opposition," said Thailand-based author and scholar David Streckfuss.

"They failed in their role of seizing on the moment when they could have really gained in votes."

The Democrats also boycotted an election in 2006, contributing to the political uncertainty that precipitated the coup that toppled Thaksin.

They last came to power in 2008 by parliamentary vote after a court stripped Thaksin's allies of power, angering his "Red Shirts" supporters who launched street protests in 2010 that sparked clashes and a military crackdown that left dozens dead.

Abhisit, who was prime minister at the time, faces a murder charge in connection with those deaths.

'Not in the spirit of democracy'

In December of last year, Democrat lawmakers resigned en masse from parliament to join the protests against Yingluck.

After the premier called snap elections in the hope of defusing the crisis, the Democrats announced they would not be taking part.

"In my opinion, it is a mistake in terms of the spirit of democracy -- it was the wrong decision," said Gothom Arya, an associate professor at Bangkok's Mahidol University.

"They should fight on the parliamentary stage."

Abhisit, the British-born scion of an influential family, denied that his party was giving democracy the cold shoulder.

"We have participated in the democratic process throughout our history," said the Oxford-educated career politician, whose name means "privilege".

"But we have been faced with the situation where we now have an elected majority that does not respect the law, wants to put itself above the law, refuses to accept the verdicts of the courts, is engaged in abuses of power and intimidation of political opponents," he said.

The Democrats pushed Yingluck to stand down to make way for an interim government. When that failed, they signalled they would be ready to participate in a delayed election, but the premier pushed ahead with Sunday's polls.

Now Democrat MPs face a dilemma: under election rules if they do not vote themselves Sunday they could lose their entitlement to run in future polls. Voting would defy their own boycott, however.

Abhisit himself said that the polls were "unconstitutional" and pledged not to cast his ballot in an announcement on his Facebook page on the eve of the election.

"It's a very tricky situation that the Democrats find themselves in," said Streckfuss. "I think they really thought the election date would be changed. And they didn't have a plan B."


-- (c) Copyright AFP 2014-02-01

[webfact]

RT @RichardBarrow: Abhisit just posted on Facebook that he will NOT vote tomorrow - RT @TNAMCOT: http://t.co/xiQhBTiAMQ #Thailand

[Tywais]

That confuses me as that means he can not run for political office again for 5 years. Also applies to the other democrats which makes this virtually a one party system.

[tx22cb]

3 possibilities:

a ) Either Abhisit caved in to the pressure from the Leader,

b ) or it's a diversion and he's going to go in disguise ...

c ) or, he's been tipped off that the somebody will take care of "things" afterwards, such that he will not lose his MP eligibility

[Costas2008]

Tywais, on 01 Feb 2014 - 10:57, said:

That confuses me as that means he can not run for political office again for 5 years. Also applies to the other democrats which makes this virtually a one party system.

Rules can be changed.

Don't forget.......this is Thailand.

[rickirs]

"They should fight on the parliamentary stage." This was not an option when the Democrats had no interest in building any majority. Given Democrats' disinterest in working to gain support from PTP's voter base that would dilute its agenda for the wealthy, it had only one option. Work against the democratic process in hopes of a military coup putting them directly in power, and now, insurrection to shutdown the democratic process resulting in the abdication of the government to an unelected Suthep-led committee. The irony of the Suthep's "revolution" is that it will further consolidate PTP's voter base and may further degenerate Democrat's voter base to support other political parties or form another party that will not be tainted with Suthep's insurrection actions.

[Mackie]

That confuses me as that means he can not run for political office again for 5 years. Also applies to the other democrats which makes this virtually a one party system.

No, it doesn't mean. The election will almost certainly be declared null and void. Deservedly so. I can see why Democrats don't want to participate. They simply do not want to give any legitimacy to the current government in charge. They want Yingluck's government to take the full responsibility for rice-scheme scam, tablets scam etc...etc....

[kurtgruen]

3 possibilities:

a ) Either Abhisit caved in to the pressure from the Leader,

b ) or it's a diversion and he's going to go in disguise ...

c ) or, he's been tipped off that the somebody will take care of "things" afterwards, such that he will not lose his MP eligibility

or...which is the most likely...

d) that this election is already illegal, because there will not be enough MP's to make a quorum and spreading the vote over 20 more bi-elections will be deemed unconstitutional

e) or he is tired of the bullsh*t and just wants to have a nice life, somewhere away from all this insanity

I think it is "d"

[ManopY]

AFP again!

We all know the "AFP" is financially supported by Thaksin!

[Ulysses G.]

The yellows - or whatever they are calling themselves now - look bad to the international community. Rich people telling people not to vote - because they know that their side will lose - are not very sympathetic, no matter how bad the opposition is.

[Thailand]

RT @RichardBarrow: Abhisit just posted on Facebook that he will NOT vote tomorrow - RT @TNAMCOT: http://t.co/xiQhBTiAMQ #Thailand

Disgraceful!

[tx22cb]

3 possibilities:

a ) Either Abhisit caved in to the pressure from the Leader,

b ) or it's a diversion and he's going to go in disguise ...

c ) or, he's been tipped off that the somebody will take care of "things" afterwards, such that he will not lose his MP eligibility

or...which is the most likely...

d) that this election is already illegal, because there will not be enough MP's to make a quorum and spreading the vote over 20 more bi-elections will be deemed unconstitutional

e) or he is tired of the bullsh*t and just wants to have a nice life, somewhere away from all this insanity

I think it is "d"

If I were in Abhisit's shoes, I'd choose ( e ) .... retire from crazy politics, less stress on the family (poor wife & kids), and take cushy jobs on a few Boards of friendly corporations.

He's probably thinking "I'm a Celebrity, GMooH ......"

[SamMunich]

And there we go again, Danny the Rook(y) comes up with that old and nevertheless useless lore about the Dem's not winning any elections since God created the world...

Can somebody please, please tell him, that - except for two out of the last 20 elections - no party ever won the absolute majority? There have always been coalition governments in Thailand, that is the rule.

He should pay back his salary for writing such crap!

[casualbiker]

AFP again!

We all know the "AFP" is financially supported by Thaksin!

I don't know about that...BUT they are always very keen to show the poor people thaksin etc and the elite against each other.

predictable stuff

[casualbiker]

RT @RichardBarrow: Abhisit just posted on Facebook that he will NOT vote tomorrow - RT @TNAMCOT: http://t.co/xiQhBTiAMQ #Thailand

Disgraceful!

WHY? It's his choice. As it is for anyone in a democracy... NO?

[airconsult]

AFP again!

We all know the "AFP" is financially supported by Thaksin!

That's funny!

I haye to break it to you, but he's not Kaiser soyze... (is that how they spelt it in that movie?)

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Ozymandias]

And there we go again, Danny the Rook(y) comes up with that old and nevertheless useless lore about the Dem's not winning any elections since God created the world...

Can somebody please, please tell him, that - except for two out of the last 20 elections - no party ever won the absolute majority? There have always been coalition governments in Thailand, that is the rule.

He should pay back his salary for writing such crap!

When was the last absolute majority in the UK? You're missing the point here, which is that Thaksin-affiliated parties have rendered coalitions largley unnecessary.To be an effective opposition, the Dems have to stop being intellectually lazy and:

* take advantage of the growing disaffection of the rural poor with PTP and devise policies that promise them a better life (why haven't they already done this?)

* broaden their appeal in the above way and stop relying on the elites and southerners for support - Thailand is not only Bangkok & Hua Hin.

* stop relying on coups (military or judicial) to provide power and consistently use democratic channels to power (not just when convenient)

In this way, they can become emblematic of REAL meaningful democratic values - of course, reforms are necessary to achieve a fair system, reforms which prevent both PTP, Dems and others from abusing politics for thier own benefit (Not only Thaksin but Dems like Suthep have been doing this for years, feathering their own nests).

If the Dems actually did their job as an opposition party then they could deal with Thaksinite parties democratically and, over time, defeat them within the confines of the system of democracy. Thailand would then regain respect from the rest of the world and avoid switching roles with Myanmar.

[casualbiker]

ozzy.. are you sure about this statement? Which parties are you talking about?

"which is that Thaksin-affiliated parties have rendered coalitions largely unnecessary."

[angsta]

He'll vote. He is full of sh*t. Anyone fancy a wager?

[WhizBang]

3 possibilities:

a ) Either Abhisit caved in to the pressure from the Leader,

b ) or it's a diversion and he's going to go in disguise ...

c ) or, he's been tipped off that the somebody will take care of "things" afterwards, such that he will not lose his MP eligibility

or...which is the most likely...

d) that this election is already illegal, because there will not be enough MP's to make a quorum and spreading the vote over 20 more bi-elections will be deemed unconstitutional

e) or he is tired of the bullsh*t and just wants to have a nice life, somewhere away from all this insanity

I think it is "d"

Capital E for me personally.

[Ozymandias]

ozzy.. are you sure about this statement? Which parties are you talking about?

"which is that Thaksin-affiliated parties have rendered coalitions largely unnecessary."

In the 2011 election, the PTP DID get an absolute majority - 265 of 500 seats. This meant that the PTP did not need to form a coalition, of course.

Obviously, the popular vote (based on 75% turnout) did not return an absolute majority (48% of the vote - so almost) but it is SEATS that decide whether or not the majority is absolute, just as in the UK system.

There is no sign (as of yet) that the trend will be for PTP or whatever replaces it to gain a majority of seats - although for the sake of democracy, I hope that the trend does not continue personally.

[Scamper]

The premise of this article is based on much that is haphazard and inconsistent. The Democratic party is not a monolithic organization, nor do all think alike. The decision to boycott was indeed a unilateral decision, but the decision to vote or not vote is an individual choice. It was not a mistake for the Democrats to boycott this election. In fact it could be argued it was the boycott which set in motion the dilemma the Yingluck administration now finds itself in. There are many that believe - as clearly the writer of this article does - that the Democratic party resists the election because it knows it will lose. Doubtless, many in the party feel that way. But many - including Abhisit, and his statements have been quite consistent with this - does not. He has never advocated for a reform that puts his party - or himself, for that matter - in the driver's seat. He's enough of a pragmatist to realize that will not happen - now or in the foreseeable future. The realities of the electoral map are clear, and no amount of redistribution will change that. The focus has always been on Thaksin. Indeed, many Democrats would likely be far more at peace with a Pheu Thai administration that was absent of Thaksin's influence. Thaksin's influence is what is killing reform, as he has a path which is clearly intended towards the consolidation of his power. So that's the argument that's been lost in the mix. But it hasn't on the men and women on the streets. They are not talking about Abhisit - or Suthep, for that matter. They are talking about Thaksin, and their belief that the system should be free of him. Peace will be achieved in this country by two key sacrifices coming from both parties. If Pheu Thai can truly let go of Thaksin, and the Democratic party can accept the realities of the electoral map, we will have a road map for peace. But to get there is through reform. A reform that does does include amnesties for Thaksin, or consolidates his grip on power.

Edited February 1, 2014 by Scamper

[Mot Leei]

Forgive my ignorance of things Thailand ... I've only lived here 3 years so far .... so please help me understand ...

In Thailand there are clearly more rural poor than all the rich, middle class and fragmented students put together … soooo much more. Even with Yinglucks god awful rice scheme losing her considerable votes, there are still more rural poor creating Thailands clear majority. In any election where everyone gets an equal vote, then the way the scales will tip is clearly obvious … with or without reform, with or without vote buying, with or without corruption, with or without protests, with or without violence … there’s only one possible outcome … people will support whoever supports the poor.

This is why I really don’t understand why the mis-named democracy party doesn’t try to appeal to the poor with programs that will actually do something to improve their quality of life … and please don’t give me the American trickle down rhetoric … this is an election. Popular policies are what democracy is all about … the majority … if you have a problem with that then what you want is not democracy. Thaksin might be many things, but at least he was smart enough to know you had to appease the poor first … which at least makes him the first true democrat in Thailand (as begrudged as I am to say that).

The thing that scares me though … and I mean really scares me … are the very poorly defined changes that Khun Suthep wants. Here is a man who changes his demands and direction on a daily basis, calling himself democratic, but failing to actually put out for public scrutiny the changes he wants to see in Thailand. He has had a phenomenal opportunity given to him in this protest … he could have publicised a clear plan forward that would appeal to ALL Thai people (that he assumes he represents) and gone to the election with that … and if he really had the peoples support as he claims, then they would have given him the mandate to do as he wishes. But he’s done nothing but called civil disobedience (and I’m being kind when I say that), in any other country he’d be in jail or dead already (which unfortunately speaks more admirably of the caretaker govt). NEVER trust a man who wants you to follow him based only on his hatred of another person.

Thailand if you want a democracy, and I mean a real democracy where all people are considered equal, then voting is the ONLY way forward even if the current system is flawed. Democracy doesn’t happen over night; it’s something the takes time to grow and evolve. You have to play the game to change the rules. You have to learn how to appeal to the people and how to serve their interests rather than your own. The only way forward is to listen to the people and win their hearts. Democracy has NEVER been found in the hands of someone who stopped people from voting using fear, intimidation and violence … never. And I hope tomorrow that the people of Thailand are allowed the opportunity to peacefully choose for themselves what they want, instead of being scared off by people forcing them to do what a VERY small minority wants.

Peace.

[airconsult]

The premise of this article is based on much that is haphazard and inconsistent. The Democratic party is not a monolithic organization, nor do all think alike. The decision to boycott was indeed a unilateral decision, but the decision to vote or not vote is an individual choice. It was not a mistake for the Democrats to boycott this election. In fact it could be argued it was the boycott which set in motion the dilemma the Yingluck administration now finds itself in. There are many that believe - as clearly the writer of this article does - that the Democratic party resists the election because it knows it will lose. Doubtless, many in the party feel that way. But many - including Abhisit, and his statements have been quite consistent with this - does not. He has never advocated for a reform that puts his party - or himself, for that matter - in the driver's seat. He's enough of a pragmatist to realize that will not happen - now or in the foreseeable future. The realities of the electoral map are clear, and no amount of redistribution will change that. The focus has always been on Thaksin. Indeed, many Democrats would likely be far more at peace with a Pheu Thai administration that was absent of Thaksin's influence. Thaksin's influence is what is killing reform, as he has a path which is clearly intended towards the consolidation of his power. So that's the argument that's been lost in the mix. But it hasn't on the men and women on the streets. They are not talking about Abhisit - or Suthep, for that matter. They are talking about Thaksin, and their belief that the system should be free of him. Peace will be achieved in this country by two key sacrifices coming from both parties. If Pheu Thai can truly let go of Thaksin, and the Democratic party can accept the realities of the electoral map, we will have a road map for peace. But to get there is through reform. A reform that does does include amnesties for Thaksin, or consolidates his grip on power.

I like paragraphs....

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[millwall_fan]

So 'Mark' has personally turned his back on Democracy. Under orders from above.

[retsdon]

In a stable democracy, all parties and their supporters have an unswerving commitment to the electoral process which is stronger even than their thirst for power.The Democrats and their supporters do not. Despite their claims to being the mature, sensible party, they have become a party addicted to violence and the promotion of disorder with complete disregard to the rule of law to further their ambitions. In a mature democracy, they would be unelectable - as they're fast becoming in Thailand. In a stable democracy, when political parties become unelectable they change their leadership and their policies. Maybe it's time for rank and file democrats ( if there are any) to get on and stage a coup to change the face and approach of the party. If they don't, the DP is almost certainly on its way to political history.

[Robroona]

So 'Mark' has personally turned his back on Democracy. Under orders from above.

Dunno. But taking orders from above is how it is done in Yingluck's wonderland. Skype, wouldn't you know, plays a big part in it

[airconsult]

That confuses me as that means he can not run for political office again for 5 years. Also applies to the other democrats which makes this virtually a one party system.

I don't understand why the Dems don't use the election to show the level of support for political reform and put an end to this once and for all. At the last election they were only outvoted by a ratio of 4:3 and since then their stock has risen whilst PTs has fallen.

Unless Sooty knows something we don't.

He knows that the judges of the constitutional court were appointed by an only 50% elected senate.

When you already have 50% it's not hard to find one or two more to do your bidding.

I fully expect even though voting proceeds normally in 66 out of 78 provinces - the court will deny the will of the majority in favour of their masters.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Bkkbound]

Its pretty obvious whatever happens with this election, its going to be nullified in due course, abhist knows that so has no concern re his own future.

What the reds supporters have not grasped is the scale of the attack on Taksin, his control over thai politics. If they want to be seen as a credible political force get a credible leader, not a fugitive on the run with a family of unusual wealth.

Thai democracy is a sham and no matter how many international PR firms Taksin brings into play it does not change the facts. He has corrupted and abused the country and the people he claims to represent.

You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately... Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!

[pookiki]

Abhisit changed his mind! Ah, the power of Facebook in these turbulent times. No fate worse that not having any Facebook friends!