Sovereignty edges back to the Thai people
Plans by the elected government in Thailand to rewrite the constitution are causing a commotion: supporters and opponents have scuffled, and ministers and generals are trying to scotch talk of a coup.
Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, who leads the People Power Party which dominates the ruling coalition, promised before last December's election, which ended military rule, to revise the junta's controversial constitution.
A year ago, the military's pride over drafting a new constitution was hurt by a chorus of criticism. Some questioned its right to foist a constitution on the country. There were concerns about another coup. Politicians bridled at clauses curtailing their roles and responsibilities.
To silence critics, the generals sought legitimacy for the constitution through a referendum last August. Although 56 per cent of those who voted supported the constitution, such was the turnout that, effectively, approval was given only by a minority of the electorate.
Now Mr Samak is turning to the public: he plans to hold a referendum on the revised constitution. That is a curious move, given his strong majority in parliament and a handsome victory at the polls for People Power.
Taken together, the referendums indicate the balance of power between those who rule and their opponents is less lopsided than in the past. In both cases, citizens have the final say. After all, in a political game that aspires to democracy, whose word can be more final than that of the people?
Of course, whether the public is well informed, cares or is induced to vote raises questions over the validity of referendums. But the precedent, set during consultations for the 1997 constitution, is for rulers to seek legitimacy from the public. Sovereignty is slowly moving to where it should be in a democracy: with the people.
Indeed, voters are becoming increasingly powerful. Where once their vote was bought with cash and a few promises from local politicians, today parties need policies, and to act on them, to be certain of votes. That is the legacy of the Thai Rak Thai administrations between 2001 and 2005.
Arguments continue to rage over whether those policies were good or bad, executed in the national or personal interest. It matters not. The public believed they were in their interest. They indicated that by backing Thai Rak Thai in two elections and, again, with a strong turnout for People Power - because of its roots in Thai Rak Thai, which the military disbanded a year ago.
Such was Thai Rak Thai's success that, during the last election, every party more or less copied its ideas. It didn't do them much good. Voters preferred the real thing.
Voters are learning that they have power to influence policy at the ballot box. Politicians are having to change their tune to match the emerging reality, and are having to learn to respect voters. This is not to say that Thailand is becoming a stronger democracy, but it is moving steadily in that direction.
David Fullbrook is an independent researcher and writer on Asian affairs
