The Australian National University’s National Thai Studies Centre is hosting a seminar later this week that will be of interest to many New Mandala readers. The details are:
Post Coup Politics in Thailand: The Return of Bureaucratic Governance?
Venue: Coombs extension lecture theatre 1.04, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies
Date: Thursday 7 June, 2007 12:30-2.00
Politics in Thailand has been going through a protracted period of political crisis, exacerbated by the coup on 19 September 2006. Debate over ways of avoiding pitfalls of the Thaksin period have focused on proposals for strengthening the democratic provisions of the 1997 constitution, against opponents who look to a return of more traditional bureaucratic-dominated processes. A new constitution is currently being debated to facilitate Thailand’s return to democratic rule. Who is gaining the upper hand in this debate? What impact will the recent court decision to ban Thaksin and his popular Thai Rak Thai party from political activities have?
Dr Surin Maisrikrod is a senior lecturer in political science from James Cook University, and one of the country’s foremost commentators on Thai politics. He is well placed to analyse these developments and comment on all aspects of Thailand’s current political debate.
All are welcome.
The National Thai Studies Centre is grateful to the Australia-Thailand
Institute for assistance in funding Dr Surin’s participation.
Hopefully New Mandala will be in a position to provide an account of this seminar for interested readers who live far from Acton.
7 responses so far ↓
1 Republican // Jun 6, 2007 at 2:18 am
A couple of comments:
“…Debate over ways of avoiding pitfalls of the Thaksin period have [has?] focused on proposals for strengthening the democratic provisions of the 1997 constitution …”
If Dr. Surin is to discuss this “debate” (?) about avoiding the “pitfalls of the Thaksin period” one hopes that he also discusses how to avoid the “yawning chasm” of the post-September 19 period.
One should also bear in mind that this so-called “debate” has taken place under conditions of near total censorship, when the opposing side has been unable to present its side of the argument. So really the term “debate” is a misnomer. “Regime propaganda” would be a more appropriate term to use.
“…Strengthening the democratic provisions of the 1997 Constitution…” really? The new draft’s proposal for an appointed Senate (manipulated by you-know-who) is going to be more democratic than the elected one of the 1997 Constitution???!
“… A new constitution is currently being debated to facilitate Thailand’s return to democratic rule…”. One would have to be rather naive to believe that this Consitution is being designed (certainly not “debated”) to facilitate a return to “democratic” rule. Democratic rule is precisely the problem for the ratchakan state and those who feed off it, so the new Constitution will be drafted to do everything possible to reduce as much as possible the influence of elected politicians, ie. the true representatives of the people. It will then be called “democratic”.
Rule #2 of Thai politics: the name and the thing are never the same. (Those who frequent this blog already know my Rule #1).
2 Jon Fernquest // Jun 6, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Sad, but I can’t find anything written by Dr Surin Maisrikrod in either Chulalongkorn’s or Thammasat’s online library catalogs despite the extensive bibliography on his webpage. Often at the TIC (Thai Information Center) they put copies of articles by scholars in their collection. Does anyone know how you make recomendations? I sure would like to read his dissertation on IP rights.
3 Srithanonchai // Jun 6, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Perhaps, Dr Surin can also give us his take on the latest trend in Thai totalitarianism, i.e. Minister Paiboon Wattanasiritham’s attempt to make everybody comply with the aim of national unity under a state-defined moral code of conduct. It would also be interesting to know what he thinks about the trend of establishing para-military groups in rural areas.
4 Susan // Jun 6, 2007 at 11:56 pm
It would be really helpful if anyone who went to the seminar at ANU could post a commentary of today’s events and summarise what Dr Surin talked about…for us too far away to attend…it’s a shame the UK dosen’t have more of these types of seminars
5 Oberver // Jun 7, 2007 at 3:09 pm
Srithanonchai,
Perhaps you could let us in on what you are talking about. Khun Paiboon’s main thrust at this point seems to be empowering local communities to peal back a slight amount of power fropm the Interior Ministry.
6 Srithanonchai // Jun 7, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Observer,
There are two draft laws, one on the local community assembly and another on national virtues and ethics assemblies. My remark refered to the latter.
The first act is not so much aimed against the MoI as it is against politics more generally, especially local politics and local government organizations. Sanitsuda Ekachai expresed this mindset in her column in today’s Bangkok Post:
” What to do when your political representatives are only interested in fattening their bank accounts while your community is torn apart by divisive money politics and bleeding from top-down policies that suck local resources to feed big business? What to do when your village heads and kamnans have become mere sidekicks of the district chiefs and governors, if not the canvassers of political parties?
For the 70,000 villages across the country, the answer cannot be found in the artificial political decentralisation through the Tambon Administration Organisations (TAOs).
Apart from being under tight state control regarding policy, administration and budgeting, the TAO elections are also dominated by fierce vote-buying, which is why the winners are intent on making money to recover their investment.”
Paiboon wants to create a non-political parallel and competing structure of state (Codi-)led “people’s organizations,” quite similar, it seems, to what the MoI’s community development department had been doing for decades, but with less political zeal. And since the number of local people who can participate in such groups is limited, CDD and Codi groups (and a host of other “volunteers” created by all sorts of state authorities) are often the same people.
A civil-society oriented approach would not establish such new structures but rather limit itself to encouraging people to organize themselves and provide the possibility for them to register as juristic persons. Moreover, if this exercise was only to make local authorities more accountable, there are other means available that won’t create new formal structures. And Paiboon and his assistents have even succeeded to put “local communities” (CDD’s community groups) into the draft constitution…
7 New Mandala » Erasing Thaksin’s “anomalies” // Jun 7, 2007 at 8:23 pm
[...] today’s ANU presentation by political scientist Surin Maisrikrod post-coup politics in Thailand was explored in terms of [...]
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.