Thailand’s new election law: what consequences and for who

Debate has sparked over whether new regulations on political parties will make parties more responsive to voters, or whether they will kill off many of Thailand’s current parties. 

 

On 7 December 2016, the Constitution Drafting Committee published the first draft of the Organic Act on Elections, a reform of regulations on political parties that comes under the new junta-backed constitution.  

 

Senior officials, politicians and other vested players have revealed their opinions on the draft law’s ramifications through various public statements since its release. 

 

The installation of considerable start-up costs for new political parties means the Organic Act may advantage Thailand’s already established parties. Somchai Srisutthiyakorn from the Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) confirmed in a public interview that the CDC’s aims to make it harder for new political parties to form.

 

 

 

Under the draft, a party eligible for elections must have at least 500 initial members who must each contribute between 2000 baht–50,000 baht to start-up posts. A party needs to have 5,000 members within a year after establishment and 20,000 members within 4 years. Each party must have a branch in all regions.

 

Somchai predicts that 3-4 years after the Organic Act’s promulgation, only 10 or so parties will be operating in Thailand. In his eyes, a limited number of political parties will be a good thing, allowing voters to understand each party more deeply. To address the lack of choice in parties that may emerge, smaller parties may merge together.

 

But Meechai Ruchuphan, the Chairman of the CDC, has diverged in warning that Thailand’s political system should not be dominated by old parties. He has stated it would be a more positive development for new parties to emerge under the new constitution, in order to broaden the range of voters’ choices.

 

 

 

On top of concerns about new parties, others have raised worries that the Organic act gives no room for regional parties who have intense support in some parts of Thailand, but which do not aim for nation-wide appeal. 

 

“Parties whose supporters cluster won’t have an opportunity to operate, which will result in only 5-6 parties remaining,” predicts Nipit Intrasombat, a deputy head of the Democrat Party.

 

Still, Ongart Klampaiboon, another deputy of the Democrat Party, is confident his party has the members to meet the Organic Act’s eligibility criteria since the Party has had 2 million members since its inception.  

 

 

 

But Ongart points out there may be financial obstacles to coordinating all their members (should parties need to verify their membership lists), predicting it would take the party some 10 million baht to get in contact with all of its supporters. He is waiting to see how the CDC will tackle the issue of party coordination.

 

Some critics are concerned the membership fee requirements under the Organic Act will limit poorer voters from participating in political parties.

 

Nattawut Saikua, the Secretary-General of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, also known as the red shirts, has argued that party membership should be as open as possible, and that the new regulations may violate people’s political rights.

 

 

 

But Udom Ratammarit, a spokesperson for the CDC, has maintained that the Organic Act actually aims to return to ordinary voters real ownership of Thailand’s political parties.

 

One way the Organic Act aims to make political parties representative is by controlling the party committees that select MP candidates. No more than half of a party’s committee can come from the party’s executives, with the rest of the committee being drawn then from regional and provincial branches.

 

 

 

 

But Thaworn Senneam, the former Deputy Secretary General of the Democrat Party, has pointed out that the Democrat Party already exercises such measures voluntarily. He argues the Organic Act should concentrate on targeting malfeasant parties instead.

 

‘Whatever [the Organic Act’s] criteria, we can meet it because we are the people’s party. We have already democratised more [than other parties] already. Don’t educate us. You should take the time to crack down on corrupt parties instead,’ Thaworn stated.

 

 

 

The influence of money in elections: can it be controlled?

 

Another aim of the new election regulations is to prevent persons with financial influence, such as business tycoons, from controlling the activities political parties.  

 

Seri Suwanpanon, President of the junta’s National Reform Steering Committee, has announced that nepotism (specifically, cases where political positions are bought and sold) will be punished heavily under the new regulations. Punishments will range from five-year imprisonment sentences to the death penalty.

 

 

However, Thaworn is unsure how electoral regulations can limit the influence of tycoons residing outside of Thailand, where national laws do not extend. He cites the case of Thaksin Shinawatra, former leader of the Thai Rak Thai party that was precursor to the Pheu Thai Party, who exiled himself after being banned from participating in elections.  

 

‘In reality there are people living outside of the country who give money to support political parties. It’s because laws don’t extend to them, no matter how heavy the penalties. You could set the death penalty or the most harsh punishment, there will be no outcomes if the CDC can’t enforce the laws.’

 

Some critics of the draft law argue it is vague on whether public servants (including members of the military and police) can be members of political parties. Some fear that if members of the military establish political parties, the military may be manipulated to boost party membership.

 

Meechai has responded to these questions by pointing out that currently public servants are already member to many different political parties. The CDC, he says, has never banned public servants from participating in political life. However, legislation regarding public servants currently ban them from party executive committees. Public servants must resign before assuming such party leadership roles. 

 

The draft party regulations may still be amended by the CDC, and await acceptance by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA).