File Photo (1000 Words – Shutterstock)
After a period of relative calm, protesters can be seen in Bangkok again after 5 years. They want the election commission to resign because they mistrust the election results.
A group of activists calling themselves "People Who Want Elections" protested outside a McDonald's branch in the Ratchaprasong area. Some of the demonstrators wore red T-shirts. The group was led by anti-coup activists, including Anurak Jeantawanich, Sudsanguan Suthisorn and Ekachai Hongkangwan. The organization itself had mobilized 100 security personnel to maintain order.
According to Anurak, he had permission from Lumphini district police to hold a demonstration and also to use loudspeakers. He complained that the police did not keep this agreement and confiscated the sound equipment. According to him, demonstrations are allowed now that the National Council for Peace and Order has lifted the ban on gatherings of five people and more.
Anursak read out a statement saying that the March 24 elections were marred by fraud, vote buying and irregularities in vote counting.
Also on Sunday, a large group of protesters gathered at Victory Monument.
Well, what is allowed by law and what the authorities do are two very different things. The main question always remains whether it is the 'khon die' (good citizens) or the rest (scum that undermine the harmony of Thailand…).
Prayut is not happy: no disorder should be caused and one should just accept the story of the oh so neutral and good people of the Kiersraad.
If those people don't protest but slavishly follow the junta generals, then there shouldn't be any incidents such as setting a car on fire or treating someone with a piece of wood...
Keeping petitions is of course not desirable either. Then the police will come by to put a stop to it. When will those annoying democracy & transparency callers just learn to walk in line, peace and order! *cough cough*
Sources:
- http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2019/04/01/prayuth-pleads-for-order-as-distrust-of-election-commission-grows/
- http://www.khaosodenglish.com/news/crimecourtscalamity/2019/04/01/activists-car-burnt-down-another-physically-attacked/
- https://prachatai.com/english/node/8001
I do like the democratic principle of 'hearing both sides', especially in these times when the media play a very large role in the (manipulated or not) reporting of what really happened.
I believe the Electoral Council is investigating the irregularities in the elections (raised by many parties including these demonstrators) and their report, including the final results of the elections, has not yet been published.
Perhaps it is sensible and democratic to wait for that?
I believe in hearing both sides, acknowledging the source and transparency. For example, what is the formula to determine the number of seats. There are 2 formulas going around, both of which fall within the definition of the complex electoral law.
The people are concerned about, among other things, the lack of transparency (not to mention what the road to the elections was like or the democratic content of the electoral law and constitution). Perhaps it would be wise for the junta to be open as much as possible?
Instead of a sneer like Prayut and Apirat are making now:
According to Prayut, youth should not “think incorrectly” in response to social media messages (is critical thinking allowed?). And army commander General Apirat says that "some academics are trying to get far-left ideas into the minds of the youth" (and that is a danger to the country).
http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2019/04/02/prayuth-concerned-about-social-medias-incorrect-thinking/
You cannot be transparent about the content of a report that has yet to be written.
The Electoral Council is also not the same as the junta.
I was talking about overall transparency leading up to, during and now right after the elections. You're not going to deny that there are some things wrong with that (euphemism)? Between the lines, the Electoral Council mainly conveys the message 'don't be so troublesome, trust us, everything will be fine, don't ask difficult questions, deposit your comments in this mailbox and we will consider it until Sint Juttemis'.
The junta makes similar noises, and although they are not the same, they are like two things, the Electoral Council has been appointed by the junta. So I fear a 'butcher who inspects his own meat' scenario. And that is still rosy because we also hear from the highest level that the 'khon die' must remain in power. And we know who is and who is not. No wonder there are groups of Thais who are seriously concerned about the state of affairs.
When I read this, every government should stop appointing people to positions because they only listen to the government that appoints them. Are you really that naive?
Come on Chris, you also know that many 'independent' bodies (Electoral Council, judiciary etc) in Thailand have been accused of bias over the years with substantiation. Even under this military government. Consider, for example, whether or not to investigate or the results towards various parties and persons (Phalang, Anakot Mai, Prayut, Thanathorn, etc.). That came across in all kinds of media and also on this blog.
Am I saying that these agencies always follow the sitting government (or higher person) 1 on 1? No, but there are plenty of reasons to question their independence.
I am neither an ostrich nor a parrot. So I keep my eyes open for all kinds of things including goings on about government, elections and so on.
I also like sources (you can also give them more often with your claims in my opinion):
- https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/1617238/election-commission-must-assert-itself
- https://www.thephuketnews.com/electoral-commission-branded-biased-failure-in-independent-review-70632.php
– (our complaints from various parties were not about foreign influence, but we no longer hear those complaints from the EC) https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/1643252/
– simply read Bangkok Post, the Nation, Khaosod, Prachatai, various other media and books on the political history of Thailand written by various politicians.
I don't think there was much wrong with the transparency. All mistakes and misery were widely reported in the press: the high-quality voting box that broke during the press presentation (was unbreakable), the hassle about the numbering of the political parties on the election list, the layout of the voting form, whether or not to admit from foreign observers, the banning of a political party because of the proposed PM, the discussion about Prayut's public appearances as a PM or a proposed PM, the first results with a relatively low turnout, photos of ballots that were declared invalid or not, the box containing the ballots from New Zealand. All transparent, not to mention social media.
Then you are talking about things the press could observe, of course the press then writes about it (although the generals don't seem happy about it, it causes unrest, why don't we wait quietly?!). That is different from external communication by the bodies involved. It says nothing about the lack of transparency of what happened in the kitchen. For example, why the different list numbers, how and why the Electoral Council handled some investigations into violations smoothly and others not or not at all, the fuss surrounding TRC, a mountain of other political matters that influence the Statsn General such as Senate selection by the junta. Too many things happening behind closed doors.
No, Chris, the Electoral Council announced in a press conference that everything is fine and they reject all criticism. There is still some counting, addition and subtraction to be done before the official results are revealed on May 9, though. No problem. Thailand's leaders have already said that criticism should be avoided because it creates conflict, the threat of civil war and a new...
Now let's wait for their report and the final result. That can still raise all sorts of questions. This is not about criticism, but about clarification. Immediately after the provisional result, I already mentioned a few points that raise questions.
… and multiplied, and divided, sorry divided
It's high time again in Thailand for the very famous song by Pink Floyd from the 70s. Another brick in the wall.
Jan Beute.
It is not to be hoped that we will get those old violent situations again in Thailand, because that is certainly not what the decent citizen is waiting for. The democratic achievements are a great right, but they do not apply in most countries in the world. Thailand is certainly not at the level it needs to be. Actually, you can see trouble coming. Water must be added to the wine on both sides to avoid conflict. Kicking upwards will not help and will be punished. It is indeed no sinecure to govern this country in a democratic manner. As long as everyone thinks their own way of thinking is the right one, there will be distance and without compromise it won't work and we will continue to witness a repetitive show.
There have been demonstrations in France for 2 months now. You never see anything on Dutch TV. Referendum in the Netherlands killed by D66. So please let's not try and measure Thailand in terms of 'democracy'. And demonstrate, okay, but let's hope it doesn't turn into riots, as often happens in France, but there is a suspicion that so-called activists from the left are deliberately, even with the support of the government, spoiling things there to turn the protests into a to put in a bad light. Good luck Thailand, and it's something everywhere. Even in countries that have been democratic for a long time.
Here we go again. The masses take to the streets and shout this is not good and that is not good until the army gets fed up and there is a coup. Another few years of rest until elections are held again.