• 
• 

Published on February 8, 2008

Thailand has officially reverted back to democracy after more than 16 months of military rule now that Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej and his 35-member Cabinet have been officially sworn in. The government's first priority is to rebuild democracy and restore confidence in political stability and the country's economy - both in the eyes of the domestic public and the international community. The People Power Party, with the help of political allies, was able to turn its victory in the December 23 general election - generally recognised as free and fair - into political power. The transition of power from the military-appointed Surayud administration has been smooth, and the due process was an early indication that democracy has been resuscitated.

The big question is what kind of democracy has been restored: a genuine or a bogus one? A genuine democracy is based on the supremacy of the rule of law, honest government, a functioning checks and balances mechanism, public accountability and respect for civil liberties. A bogus one only takes the form, but not substance, of a true democracy.

By his own admission, Samak described his Cabinet as "ugly", in the sense that some of its members are either not recognisable for their personal integrity or professional track record, or both. But Samak says he has done his best to either handpick or personally screen candidates submitted by his own PPP and the five other coalition parties. If that was the best Samak could manage - despite his insistence that he intends to exercise strong leadership and chart his own political destiny independent of his political master, former PM Thaksin Shinawatra - then he has not got off to a good start.

Former close associates of Thaksin and key Thai Rak Thai executives barred from political activity after the party was dissolved by the Constitution Tribunal, were given prominent Cabinet positions. The fact that no high-calibre outsiders with proven achievements wanted to be part of Samak's Cabinet speaks volumes about public perception of its credibility. It remains to be seen whether Samak and his Cabinet will be able to overcome their credibility problem.

Already Samak's attempt to improve the public image of his government is apparent. Speculation about a rift with Thaksin has been played up in recent days based on accounts from the PPP, the military and Samak's own public statements. But such rumours must be taken with a pinch of salt.

When Samak was first appointed to head the PPP, he admitted to being Thaksin's political nominee. Now he has changed tack, and even members of the military top brass who were part of the Council for National Security that staged the September 2006 coup to topple Thaksin have said they trust Samak as a good politician and capable defence minister. It must be pointed out that Samak, the PPP and military could all be motivated by a possible gain in political capital. Samak naturally wants to improve his credibility. The humbled military wants to stay on good terms with the new government.

Thaksin suffers virtually nothing as the result of Samak's supposed declaration of independence; he can continue to pull strings from behind the scenes. The deposed prime minister - who cannot expect an early amnesty anyway, given the fact he is wanted by the courts to stand trial on corruption charges - can at least gain some more public sympathy. Such speculation seems designed to cater to the wishful thinking of people who want to see Thaksin suffer. But if lessons can be learned from past experience, people must remember that spin-doctoring and manipulation of people's expectations have always been Thaksin's strong suit.

It was brave of Samak to tell the public that he intends to give amnesty to the 111 Thai Rak Thai executives, including Thaksin. This would allow them to become active players in politics again, possibly in two years' time.

Civil society, including academics, non-government organisations and the mass media, must remain vigilant, while the opposition must do a good job of monitoring and scrutinising the government's every move. They must keep a close watch on Samak's new-found populist streak - reminiscent of Thaksin's own - and insist all government spending be based on fiscal discipline and long-term benefits to the greatest number of people. 

The Nation