BANGKOK: The Thai referendum that has just won public backing for a new constitution was, to put it mildly, very far from a model of its kind. The resulting charter enshrines in law the influence long exercised by the generals who took power in Bangkok in May 2014 in the 12th successful coup since 1932. Although the junta tolerated mild criticism of the proposals in the run-up to the poll, it detained dozens of activists who looked intent on more serious opposition. The provisional result of Sunday’s ballot — 61 per cent in favour on a 55 per cent turnout — is no vote of confidence, either in the army or the two main political parties whose leaders urged rejection of the plans.
The vote opens the way to elections next year and consolidates military control. It moves Thailand towards what is sometimes euphemistically called “guided democracy”, a model that allowed military commanders in regional countries such as Indonesia and Myanmar to loom large even under nominally civilian rule through privileges such as parliamentary seats or key ministries. Yet it has done so at a time when Myanmar’s system is in retreat and after Indonesia’s has been largely swept away.
Thailand’s new constitution — incredibly, its 20th in 84 years — is a variation on the guided democracy theme. Commanders hope it will obviate the need for coups that unnerve investors and draw unwelcome criticism from abroad. The generals have won permission to control indirectly appointments to the upper house of parliament and — in certain circumstances — have a say in choosing an unelected prime minister. Commanders will also be represented on a special body to oversee the first five years of the elected government.
What is still dangerously missing from the junta’s plans is any acknowledgment of the political divisions that have racked Thailand during a decade of sporadically violent crises. As the country prepares nervously for the succession to the 70-year reign of the ailing King Bhumibol Adulyadej, supporters of the military stress the need for stability. Yet far from bringing the reconciliation they pledged, the generals have stifled dissent and doubled down on an authoritarian ultraroyalist creed that favours the interests of the metropolitan bureaucratic and business elite.
That contrasts with voters’ backing in every election in the past 15 years for parties aligned with Thaksin Shinawatra, a deeply flawed plutocrat turned premier who won mass support by pumping money and public services into Thailand’s neglected rural heartlands.
