Democrat Party (Thailand)
The Democratic Party ( Thai: พรรค ประชาธิปัตย์, RTGS: Phak Prachathipat, pronunciation: [ p ʰ ʰ a ː ák pràʔt͡ɕ t ʰ íʔpàt ] ) is the oldest existing Party of Thailand. Their orientation is royalist and liberal to conservative. It belongs to the Liberal International. The core of their constituency forms the urban middle class. Their strongholds are in the greater Bangkok and southern Thailand.
The party was founded in 1946 by conservative royalists. In 1948 she presented after its election victory for a few months the government. After the seizure of power by the military at first she was in opposition. From 1958 to 1968, the Democrats, like all other parties of Thailand prohibited. Then the party again worked against military rule and adopted an increasingly liberal orientation. During a brief democratic period it recorded in 1975 and 1976 re- election successes and presented briefly the head of government. In the 1980s, she was involved as a junior partner in the government. From 1992 to 1995 and from 1997 to 2001, she again led the government itself, as well as between 2008 and 2011 under Abhisit Vejjajiva, who is chairman of the party since 2005. Since 2011, the Democrats are the main opposition force in parliament.
Voters and orientation
The Democratic Party finds its supporters mainly in southern Thailand and the urban middle class in the Greater Bangkok. It is traditionally considered royalist. Duncan McCargo explored, the Southeast Asian politics and published mainly to Thailand, the Democratic Party is one of the " network monarchy " designated by him. As described by McCargo loose and informal political association is made up of the palace related persons and groups in the Privy Council, politics, the military and administration.
The Democrats favor a liberal constitution, rule of law and incorruptible administration. The party presents itself as a cornerstone of democracy in Thailand and rejects a military rule of principle, their opposition to authoritarian governments, however, was more cautious. The specialized Thailand political scientist Michael K. Connors locates the Democratic Party as the representative of a " royal liberalism " that has provided reliable in its history from an elite position against authoritarian rule and for the preservation of private property. Because of their tacit approval of the military coup of 2006, she lost much of their acquired in previous decades reputation as an opponent of authoritarianism.
The Democrats have a market-based profile. They stand for a technocratic policy style and cautious economic reforms. The party is against redistribution in favor of the poor, instead they defend the social status quo. It advocates for an economic policy of self-restraint and economic independence as she applies the Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej. Populist spending programs and boosting consumption on credit rejects it. The party is more oriented to a long-term perspective rather than short-term and concrete achievements.
During and after the Asian crisis of 1997 /98 was perceived as pro-capitalist party, which sat completely on the implementation of the obligations imposed by the International Monetary Fund. In response to the success of Thaksin Shinawatra she sat from 2005 to a " populist " program, which emphasizes the advocacy of liberal democracy and civil society. Some social programs introduced by Thaksin she has taken in its policy approach.
In foreign policy, the Democrats are the close alliance with the United States. You have the autocratic system in Myanmar criticized regularly. In particular, during the reign of her party leader Chuan Leekpai in the 1990s, bilateral relations deteriorated markedly. The guided by the Democrats government supported democracy activists and rebellious ethnic minorities in the neighboring country. Also, the government of Abhisit Vejjajiva went after 2008 at a distance to the authorities and urged to democratic principles.
Organization
Since the 1970s, the party has provincial associations, since the eighties, it has a youth organization. Mid-nineties, they reported 300,000 members. The Democrats have a party headquarters and several branch offices with full-time employees. They have long had an active membership and functioning inner-party democracy. Thus, they differed a long time by the other parties in Thailand, who possessed hardly an organizational structure, " personal property " of an individual politician or a particular group were.
As the only party continued the Democratic not to the personal popularity or charisma of a leader. Therefore, they could also persist over several generations. While other parties disappeared from the political spectrum, if their respective top man retired from politics, new politicians could ascend to the top for the Democrats again and again. The party leader has a comparatively limited role. Unlike the other parties in Thailand, the Democratic Party has formalized rules for the election of the Chairman and the Bureau. Candidates of the Democratic Party are more likely than those of other parties because of their party affiliation and less chosen based on their personal reputation and popularity.
The Democratic Party requires its members when joining 20 THB 20 THB and more annually membership fee. It differs from the other Thai parties who raise traditional topics. From its board members, ministers and parliamentarians they expected to donate 5% ( constituency MPs) and 10% ( list MPs, ministers and board members ) of their salary to the party. In 2003, the party in relation to the Electoral Commission to have 3.82 million members. However, the Authority found that 1.37 million of which were members of another party at the same time. Such multiple memberships are common among all parties in Thailand. Party memberships are often used as a quick way to privileges and say little about actual political loyalty. End of 2008, the party recorded 2.87 million members. Again, this figure is questionable, given the tendency of Thai parties to the hype. Based on the number of voters of the party, however, it is compared with other Thai parties still low. The former Thai Rak Thai Party announced about 2006, a number of members with which was almost as high as that of their constituents.
The Democratic Party is one of the Liberal International in 1993 and is a founding member of the Council of Asian Liberals regional organization and Democrats ( CALD ). She is a partner of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation, from which it receives support of strategic planning, seminars and training candidates.
Symbols
The logo of the party shows the Buddhist earth goddess Thorani that wrings water from her hair. The party used it since its inception in 1946. The image is inspired by the Thorani statue at Sanam Luang in Bangkok, which was commissioned by Queen Saovabha in order. The theme of the party is the Pali verse saccaṃ ve Amata Vaca ( " Immortal, verily, is the truth word. "). [NB 1] Logo and motto of the importance of soil and water for Thailand and the importance of truthfulness. You are supposed to symbolize the values of the party. The party color is light blue.
History
Founding and early years (1946-1958)
A forerunner of the Democratic Party was the Progress Party was founded, short-lived 1945, the noble brothers Seni and Kukrit Pramoj. The Democratic Party itself was founded in 1946 and thus has the greatest continuity in the Thai political landscape. Their goal was initially to act as a counterweight to the left of liberalism Phanomyong Pridi, who was the most influential politicians during the brief democratic parliamentary phase after the overthrow of Field Marshal Phibunsongkhram. In the Democratic Party itself MPs joined forces who supported the Prime Minister Khuang Aphaiwong after the Pridi related parliamentary majority had expressed his mistrust. Your program was conservative and pro- monarchist. First Chairman of the Democratic Party was Khuang, who had been in 1932 a member of the People's Party and supporters of the " Siamese Revolution", had in the meantime but estranged from his erstwhile allies.
Seni Pramoj, the first Secretary General of the party, explained the basic idea of the royalist Democrats that the constitutional monarchy was guarantor of democracy. As long as a constitutional monarch above the state, no politician could aspire to the total power and become a dictator. This conviction was a lesson from the authoritarian and militaristic rule Phibunsongkhrams. The party occurred in mainly aristocrats, royals and landowners. But you could at first not establish a solid fan base or even a mass base.
The Democrats attacked the government led by the Pridi massive. They threw her against the rising cost of living, the rice shortage and the raging inflation. In addition, they assumed Pridi of being responsible for the death of the young King Ananda Mahidol. Politician of the Democrats supported unofficially the military coup in November 1947 that ousted its rival Pridi Phanomyong from power. Then put the coup group Khuang one as prime minister, as they so promised, international acceptance of its rule. After the success of the Democrats in the elections in January 1948, he remained in office.
However, two months later he had to resign again to make the military under Field Marshal Phibunsongkhram Square, proved to be more assertive. Subsequently, the Democrats were the main opposition party. However, important representatives of the party, especially the Pramoj brothers, and royalist lawyers seemed even more influential in the drafting of the strongly -characterized monarchical constitution of 1949. Only when the military in 1951 the Constitution of 1932 continued in force again, which weakened the roles of king and Parliament and no parties allowed, its influence was off.
After the re-registration of political parties in 1955, the Democrats were among the most vocal critics of the Government of Phibunsongkhram. They accused her lack of respect for the monarchy and after the rigged election of 1957 electoral fraud. Especially Kukrit Pramoj violently attacked the Premier in his newspaper Siam Rath. So the Democrats welcomed the disempowerment Phibunsongkhrams by the coup in 1957 by Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat. After the success of the Democrats in by-election in March 1958 Sarit banned but again all parties and the Democratic Party presented its activity to a 1968.
Opposition to the military rule and democratic interlude (1968-1976)
With the re- registration of political parties by the Constitution of 1968, the Democratic Party founded again. Seni Pramoj became its chairman. In the parliamentary elections in 1969, she became the second strongest force behind the United People's Party ( Saha Prachathai ), who founded the incumbent military rulers. In the capital, Bangkok, the Democrats won even all constituencies, what was perceived as a disgrace for the People's Party. The Democratic Party came into this time with many young intellectuals, businessmen and lawyers who ensured an increasingly liberal direction of the party. During the seventies there were several times to ideological conflicts between older and younger conservatives liberals in the party.
From within the opposition, the Democratic Party democratic popular uprising in October 1973 prepared the ground that led to the end of military rule. Then reigned for a short period until 1976 party pluralism. The Democratic Party was at that time in the middle of the political spectrum and tried to compensate. She was itself split into a conservative and a moderate left wing. In the campaign for the first election after the end of military dictatorship in January 1975, the party campaigned with the concept of a " mild socialism " and was perceived as a progressive force. It was clearly the strongest force among the great number of new parties. The multi-party coalition then formed under Seni Pramoj broke but after a few weeks. The Democrats found themselves after the formation of a new coalition under Senis brother Kukrit Pramoj, who now headed the Social Action Party, in opposition again. Individual politicians the Democrats were accused by the military and right-wing politicians alleged close to communism. In the aggressive anti-communist sentiment before the early elections in 1976, the Conservatives were able to gain strength in the party and she waved slightly to the right. In the election, the Democrats increased their number of seats significantly. Seni formed a coalition government, which held this time five months. The internal conflicts increased and after the massacre at Thammasat University in October Seni was ousted by a military coup.
Renewed military rule and "semi- democracy " (1976-1992)
1978, the right wing of the Democrats split off under Samak Sundaravej and formed the Thai Citizens Party. As a result, the choice made in 1979 only weak results for the Democrats. They lost in the former stronghold of Bangkok all but one of their seats. Due to the withdrawal of the Conservatives, the Liberal forces now dominate the party. 1980, the non-partisan General Prem Tinsulanonda became Prime Minister. Prem was considered a " man in the middle ", which was recognized by the military and civilian politicians alike. He referred the Democrats in his administration and democratized the country back gradually. As Prem were the Democrats " clean " as moderate and. The election in 1986 won the Democratic Party. However, they claimed the post of prime minister not for its chairman Bhichai Rattakul, but continued to underpin Prem. Then she fell into factional infighting over personnel issues. Due to the disagreement and unreliability of the Democratic Party Prem had to start in 1988 elections, in which Democrats lost more than half its seats. They were the junior partner in the coalition cabinet of Chatichai Choonhavan. In 1991, Chuan Leekpai took over the party chairmanship of Bhichai. As a result, the popularity of the party resumed significantly, especially in Chuan's home region of southern Thailand.
The government of Chatichai was ousted in 1991 by a military coup. In March 1992, the rebels could hold elections that won the company that they Samakkhi - Tham party. The Democrats went into opposition against the military- backed government of General Suchinda Kraprayoon. Therefore, the Thai press described it as one of the " angels Parties" (as opposed to the pro- military " devil Parties"). Party leader Chuan Leekpai complained at that time about death threats. However, the Democrats are not involved in the street protests that ausuferten in May in bloody clashes and Suchinda forced to resign. In September 1992, new elections were held in which Chuan campaigned with the slogan "I believe in the parliamentary system ." The Democratic Party was able to double its earnings and almost Chuan formed a government of "Angel Parties".
Multiparty Democracy (1992-2001)
Chuan's coalition government responded very hesitant at claims by democracy activists after profound reforms. These were disappointed by the Premier and the Democrats and accused them of breaking their promises. The traditional concept of a moderate Democrat, liberal royalism them did not go far enough. A strained by Chuan government land reform should ascribe this poor peasants who had occupied state-owned befindliches country legally. As one of the Democratic lawmakers who was responsible for the implementation of the reform in Phuket, their relatives not need their inheritance, it came 1995 on the scandal. The government is broke, and in the early general elections, the Democrats suffered significant losses. Chuan's reputation as a clean and self-sacrificing politicians was not diminished by this incident, but it was obvious that he did not have his party under control.
The party program of 1996 focused primarily on economic policy. The Democrats were in favor of measures to stabilize the currency and lowering inflation to stimulate the confidence of investors. They called for a balanced foreign trade balance by more exports and independence for the Thai central bank.
1997, at the height of the Asian crisis, Chuan was again Prime Minister. Previously, no new parliamentary elections took place, but a smaller coalition party left the government of Chavalit Yongchaiyudh and gave the Democrats a majority. To lead the economy out of the crisis in Thailand, Chuan government followed exactly to the specifications of the International Monetary Fund. She let companies go bankrupt, interest rates rise sharply and reduced social spending. The problems of rural areas neglected the Democratic Party. The promise of the previous government to compensate by dam projects resettled villagers, took them back. Subsequent protests as she leaned from attack on the rule of law. The new Thai Rak Thai Party (TRT ) of Thaksin Shinawatra took advantage of the unpopularity of these measures. The cooperation of the Democrats with international institutions continued TRT against a national approach, instead of austerity measures it promised development programs. In contrast to the technocratic style of governance of the professional politician Chuan promised the entrepreneur Thaksin, he would lead the country as the CEO of a business enterprise. Progressive groups and farmers' organizations in 2001 advised on the choice of the Democrats and called in support of the TRT. The party lost heavily in approval.
Opposition to Thaksin (2001-2006)
After the 2001 election, when the Democratic Party won only half as many seats as the Thai Rak Thai Party, she fell into a prolonged crisis. It failed to present a convincing alternative to the popular program of TRT.
In 2003 there was a vote to succeed Chuan Leekpais as party chairman. The experienced party leaders and MPs banyat Bantadtan ran against the 38 -year-old, who was born in England and educated at Oxford economist, Abhisit Vejjajiva. Abhisit was the favorite Chuan and was considered representative of the liberal wing. Banyat other hand, had the support of the very well-connected Secretary-General and skillful stripping puller Sanan Kachornprasart. The two candidates made nationwide real election campaign. Ultimately banyat could pull with Sanans help more responsible in the local associations to his side and won with a percentage point ahead.
2005 the Democratic Party tried to break the dominance of TRT by imitating their social programs. They courted the support of the rural population in the northeast, by promising free health care, lower tuition fees and debt relief for micro borrowers. At the same time it presented itself as a liberal party, which advocated a vibrant civil society. This can be summarized as programmatic development towards social liberalism. However, there were still votes with the Democrats, only with the lack of education of the rural population and is justified susceptibility to populism and expenditure justified the success of Thaksin affiliated promise. This metropolitan, elitist liberals were convinced that their party was successful only in the cities because there chose the more enlightened, politically mature citizens. After the disastrous defeat of the party ( they fell back to 96 seats, while TRT almost four-fifths of the Parliament controlled ) occurred banyat Bantadtan back as chairman. This time, Abhisit Vejjajiva was elected unopposed to succeed him.
The Democratic Party stood behind the mass protests of the People's Alliance for Democracy ( " Yellow Shirts " ) in the Prime Minister Thaksin, whom she accused of corruption and abuse of power. Together with the other main opposition parties boycotted the elections in April 2006 to protest against the ruling party TRT and Thaksin. So Parliament was subsequently provided by the TRT alone. Therefore, the latter called in July 2006 to dissolve the Democrats, as they were in breach with the call for a boycott, and their absence from the election against the Constitution. To further steps against the Democrats, it did not come because the TRT was overthrown by the military coup in September of the same year. The party leadership saw the coup initially as justified and approved it tacitly. She advocated the elaborated under the auspices of the military new constitution, which provides for a weakening of the influence of political parties and elected politicians and the appointment of some of the members of the Senate. Subsequently, however, she criticized the transitional government appointed by the military increasingly.
After the coup in 2006
In May 2007, formed after the coup " Constitutional Tribunal " the Thai Rak Thai Party forbade against the right to vote due to serious violations. The Democratic Party, which has been accused by their opponents comparable misconduct and bringing forth false accusations against the TRT, it spoke the same time free in a unanimous decision.
In the elections of 23 December 2007, the Democratic Party emerged as the second strongest force. While you lay in Bangkok and in the southern region clearly front and was with the assigned according to party lists seats with the TRT successor organization " Party of the People's Power " (PPP ) almost equal, but this won thanks to their strength in the populous north and northeast. Then the Democrats were the only opposition party. In 2008, she proposed to increase the penalties for lese majeste from 15 to 25 years. In August 2008, they supported the demand of the " yellow shirts " for the resignation of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, whom they held responsible for the rise in consumer prices, among others.
In December 2008, the Thai Constitutional Court banned the PPP and its two coalition partners of electoral fraud and imposed a temporary ban policy against their leaders. The parliamentarians concerned not founded immediately substitute organizations, in particular the Pheu Thai Party. However, a wing of the former PPP under Newin Chidchob became self-employed as Bhumjaithai Party and ran over to the camp of the Democrats. With the voices, and those of the former coalition partner of the PPP Abhisit Vejjajiva was elected prime minister and could form a coalition government. Reasons for the overflowing of the smaller parties were probably money payments and pressure by the military top brass, including through General Anupong Paochinda.
Abhisit said the revival of the economy and the defense of the institution of monarchy among the main priorities of his government. Based on the " Computer Crime Act " they censored the Internet significantly. The Office for the Supervision of information technology blocked between 2007 and end of 2009, 20,000 sites in the opinion of the government " systematically tried to undermine the throne. " Guided by the Democrats government was bitterly opposed by the Thaksin related movement of the " red shirts ". They denounced the manner of the change of government as undemocratic and accused Abhisit pretend to be a puppet of the military leadership. Their protests escalated into serious unrest in 2009 and 2010. In November 2010 the Constitutional Court dismissed an action against the party because of misappropriation of funds of the Electoral Commission of 2005 decided by four votes to two, not to pursue. As mentioned reasons, the Court of form errors.
The Democratic Party came into effect on July 3, 2011 under the leading candidate Abhisit Vejjajiva on at the general election in Thailand, 2011. As a result of the party's defeat, he resigned from the post of party chairman. The party chose him shortly afterwards in the top job and he became parliamentary leader of the opposition against the Pheu Thai - led coalition government of Yingluck Shinawatra. In the direct election of the governor of the capital Bangkok in March 2013, however, the Democrat Sukhumbhand Paribatra was re-elected. The Democratic Party since 2004 already leads the city government.
Members of the Democratic Party at the end of 2013 largely involved in the mass protests against the government. The former Secretary General of the party, Suthep Thaugsuban, in November resigned his seat in parliament and resigned from the party to be only leader of the protest movement. In December, then the remaining members of the party from the House of Representatives withdrew and thus brought the government to dissolve parliament and convene elections. The party has announced to boycott the elections on February 2, 2014. It indicates that it is not possible to election date to carry out in its opinion, necessary reforms in order to create a functioning democracy without undue influence voters and to restore public confidence in the political system. The expected result is therefore no picture of the true voters' will. From protesters disrupt the election preparations and try to prevent the implementation of the ballot to the party leadership distanced however.