Thailand’s New Constitution

 

It has become virtually an article of faith these days: Improve a developing country’s economy, and its political system is bound to become more open.

In Southeast Asia, however, the opposite has occurred. Political reform was actually spurred on by economic collapse, and now that economies are recovering, some of those reforms are in danger of slipping away.

            The severe financial meltdown that gripped the region has brought with it heavy political fallout. South Korean voters ditched the country’s long-ruling party and elected the reformer Kim Dae Jung. Indonesia, hardest hit by the financial crisis, also saw the most political turmoil, bringing an end to the long reign of President Suharto and the first free and fair elections in the country’s history. Malaysia’s economy, meanwhile, managed to stay on a more even keel, and its prime minister Mahathir Mohamed has remained in firm control, despite a burgeoning reform movement.

            The experience of Thailand – which sparked the region-wide crisis when it floated its currency on July 2, 1997 – has received less attention, but political developments there have been equally notable.

            Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, prime minister at the time of the baht’s devaluation and widely blamed for bringing on the crisis, was turfed out in favor of Chuan Leekpai and his Democrat Party. More importantly, the crisis spurred Thailand into passing a new, more liberal constitution.

Admittedly, new Thai constitutions have come – and gone – before. The current one is the 16th enacted since a military putsch ended absolute monarchy in 1932.

            This constitution appears to be different, however. It has been called the People’s Constitution, because it is the first charter created with the active participation of the public, and is considered the last, best hope for providing Thailand with a framework for good governance.

            The best way to understand how Thailand’s political system works is to think back to the time when the US was undergoing industrialization. In America then, as in Thailand now, the politics of the machine rules. Local bosses help round up the votes for the provincial businessmen that run for office, and dispense favors in return.

            In many cases, the patronage is quite direct. Canvassers gain the loyalty of their constituents by handing out funds raised by would-be MPs. But even Boss Tweed would be impressed by some vote-buying tactics. In one reported case, villagers were given one shoe prior to an election, and told they would receive the other if the right candidate was elected. Meanwhile, any community leader brave enough to speak out against vested interests is likely to be shot.

Once elected, MPs tend to view the debts they have incurred to obtain office as an investment, to be recouped through kickbacks from dubious government projects and regulatory favors to well-heeled backers. But so long as the economy was booming, these political shortcomings were overlooked.

Inevitably, however, the corruption spread to Thailand’s previously well-regarded financial institutions. Capable technocrats were replaced by politicians’ yes-men who failed to make proper macro-economic decisions, helping to bring on the crisis.

            The IMF bailout, although galling to most Thais because of the loss of sovereignty it entailed, was therefore actually greeted with a measure of relief despite the austerity measures that had to be imposed.

            “Nowhere else in the world do you see the people actually welcoming the IMF coming in,” noted Anand Panyarachun, a highly respected former prime minister who served as a leading member of the Constitutional Drafting Assembly.  “This means the economic crisis is not the only problem. Everything starts and ends with politics.”

            The new constitution should help. It will establish new institutions to make officials more accountable and new rules to reform the electoral system. Voting will become compulsory. The country’s millions of migrants will be allowed to send in absentee ballots, instead of being forced to go all the way home to vote. Constituencies will be shrunk so they have only one MP, rather than two or three, reducing campaign costs. Votes will be counted in a central locale by an independent electoral commission.

            The only problem is, the provisions of the new Constitution have yet to be fully implemented. Defenders of the status quo fight at every turn to maintain their privileges, and the organic laws needed to reform the electoral system have yet to be passed.

            It is vital that Prime Minister Chuan set about passing these laws as soon as possible. Failure to do so would not only hurt Thailand’s political and economic stability, it would be a setback for democracy for the entire region.

1