Thailand: The state of liberal democracy (original) (raw)
Related papers
Thailand's Democracy: The Long Vacation
1992
a military junta calling itself the National Peace-Keeping Council (NPKC) ousted the civilian government of Thailand. The widespread corruption which had been a hallmark of Chatchai Choonavan's two-and-a-half year premiership was the keyjustiscation for the coup. Martial law was temporarily imposed, and a committee appointed to draft a replacement for the 1978 c o n s t i t u t i o n Key figures h m Chatchai's coalition cabinet were arraigned on uiminal charges, accused of having grown ' u n u s d y rich' during their spells in office. For a time, the junta appeared bent on a thorough overhaul of the political order. A well-respected civilian, former diplomat and businessman Anand Panyarachun, was appointed acting prime minister. Anand proceeded to assemble a Cabinet composed largely of prominent technocrats, along with a sprinkling of military officers. Although the junta failed to keep its original promise to hold a general election withjn six months, a new constitution was finally adopted on 7 December 1991. Following a March 1992 eledion, Thailand briefly returned to 'normal' parliamentary rule, one year and one month &r the coup.
Asia Maior, 2019
In May 2014 the Thai army seized power from the elected government led by Yingluck Shinawatra. The military coup promised to restore peace and harmony in the country and to allow political elections within one or two years. However, in 2018 Thailand was still under military rule and elections were expected only for early 2019. Before returning the power to a civilian government, the army tried to complete a compre- hensive reform of Thai politics and the economy, thus enforcing a new constitution, creating new parties and promoting a long-term economic strategy. These reforms had the objective of allowing pro-junta political forces to win elections or, in any case, to constrain the action of future governments. Two initiatives in the economic sphere were expected to create consensus for the junta-sponsored political party: the launch of the Eastern Economic Corridor, promoting infrastructural development in the na- tional key industrial area to increase FDI attraction; and the adhesion of Thailand to the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (the trade agreement that replaced the TPP after the US withdrawal).
The State of Democracy in Thailand
2015
Most scholars agree that consolidation of democracy requires mass approval in order to sustain this form of government. Even overwhelming support for democracy among peoples of developing nations, however, cannot guarantee democracy in the face of determined elites who have access to instruments of military power (Linz and Stepan, 2001). The military, after fifteen years of democracy, overturned a democratically-elected government in Thailand on September 19, 2006, as in 1991, on the pretext of “corruption in government. ” Whether “corruption ” warranted such a drastic remedy has yet to be determined, 1 but what is clear is that the Thai aristocracy is still willing to sacrifice democracy when they find control of government slipping from their grasp. The aristocracy was willing to tolerate a ban on all political activities, including meetings of political parties, assemblies of more than five people, and restrictions on the news media – specifically bans on criticism of the regime ...
Thailand's Election of July 3, 2011: An Overview
Bangkok: King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI)., 2012
Contents: Introduction (p. 6); 1) Legal changes ahead of the election (p. 8); 2) Expectations regarding the post-election situation (p. 17); 3) The situation of the Democrat Party ahead and after of the election (p. 28); 4) The situation of the Phuea Thai Party ahead of the election (p. 44); 5) The People’s Alliance for Democracy’s “No Vote” campaign (p. 71); 6) Other political parties (p. 92); 7) Electoral violence (p. 101); 8) The voters (p. 107); Conclusion (p. 120); Endnotes (p. 124); References (p. 133).
2015
In this paper, Dr. Prajak argues that the failed 2 February 2014 election produced critical and deep implications for the future of Thailand’s political development. The PDRC was the first social movement in Thailand that mobilized mass support against electoral process and institutions. Their animosity towards the election marked an unprecedented development in the country’s prolonged political conflict. The PDRC’s rejection of the election escalated the deep-seated political conflict to another level from which it will be difficult for the country to recover.
2005
The parliamentary election held in Thailand on February 6, 2005, was a critical conjuncture in that country's political evolution. The election marked the decisive entrenchment of the political hegemony of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and the ruling Thai Rak Thai (TRT) party that emerged after he was elected Prime Minister in a landslide vote in January 2001. While TRT gained seventy-five percent of the seats in the House of Representatives, the main opposition force, the Democratic Party (DP), suffered a crushing defeat. Though it is evident that Thaksin and TRT won a convincing victory, it is not clear what will follow. Although TRT formed the first single party government in the history of Thailand's democracy in March 2005, it remains uncertain whether the reelected government can deal effectively with the country's urgent problems.