The Election Commission and the 2007 elections
Flawed rule-making procedures?
By Jon Fernquest[Introduction|Article]
[Reading Questions|Answers]
 |
The Election Commission (EC) has made the news several times recently for incorrect statements and controversial rules that it has issued.
Yesterday's Bangkok Post editorial provided a thorough overview and critique of the flawed rule-making procedures at the EC.
First, the EC wrongly accused the election watchdog P-Net of misusing public funds. In the end, the EC admitted that it was wrong.
(See photo on right of Election Commissioner Sodsri Satayatham, left, admitting to Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, coordinator of the People's Network for Elections (P-Net), right, that she was wrong in alleging P-Net had improperly accounted for 80 million baht allocated by the Election Commission to assist in poll-watching duties at last year's general election.)
Second, the EC placed severe restrictions on the use of the broadcast and print media by political parties. In the end, the EC backed down and rescinded these restrictions.
Third, last week the EC barred ex-TRT officials from all political participation, not just from running as candidates.
The ex-TRT officials who were barred from running in elections earlier this year have been playing an active role in this year's election, appearing at public events and speaking on politics, having their photos appear on election posters and newspapers, and behind the scenes, advising political candidates on how to conduct their campaign. Today's editorial raises several questions:
1. Is the EC truly independent or is it following the lead of the "coup-makers" ?
2. What is the basis for EC rules? Personal interpretation of what went wrong in past elections? Broad interpretations of the constitutional court ruling that banned the TRT from politics? Or are they just making it up as they go along?
3. How will the restrictions on political participation by ex-TRT executives be enforced? Through lawsuits? Criminal laws? Through 'Heavy fines' ? 'Jail terms' ?
4. If ex-TRT executives are forced to leave mid-sized parties by recent restrictions, will the PPP grow stronger?
Vocabulary from above:
mishaps - unfortunate event that happens to someone (but not serious)
a watchdog - an organisation that oversees and makes sure that everyone plays by the rules
backed down - stop pushing for something they hoped to achieve
rescinded - officially withdraw a law, state that it is no longer valid
behind the scenes - day to day operations and plannning, not visible to public view
making it up as they go along - done step-by-step without a master plan
Reading Questions
Here are some questions to guide your reading (See answers at end):1. What is required for the Election Commission (EC) to avoid the problems it has been having recently, according to the author?
2. What are some of the problems with the way that the EC has been coming up with elections rules recently?
3. What were ex-TRT officials and Thaksin banned from doing last week?
4. Are these new restrictions justified? (Express your opinion)
5. Were the new restrictions transparent laws or something else?
If so, what was it? (Describe)
6. What were the EC's previous controversial and unpopular decisions?
Why were these decisions unpopular?
7. What were the new rules on political activity of ex-TRT officials likely made in response to?
8. Did the EC ban on political activity probably make the ex-TRT officials more or less popular with the electorate? Why? (Express your opinion)
9. Are ex-TRT officials a unified group?
10. Do ex-TRT officials all work for PPP?
11. How has the scattering of ex-TRT officials among many mid-sized parties helped to undermine PPP's power?
12. Why does the most recent EC rule banning ex-TRT officials from political activity actually undermine what the coup-makers hope to achieve?
Bangkok Post Article November 20, 2007
EDITORIALStage-managing the election
EC's flawed approach to rule-making
It is both amazing and troubling that the Election Commission (EC) continues to dig itself into deep holes of trouble and then laboriously climb out again. Amazing, because almost any politically aware citizen could foresee the recent high-profile problems and avoid them with nothing more than common sense.
Troubling, on two accounts. First, commission members seem inclined to fire off rules first and consider them later. This is no way to run the most important national election in recent history. The other troubling aspect is that just when it is absolutely vital that the public trusts the polls, the EC appears vacillating, uncertain, and more interested in its own powers than in producing a credible, trustworthy election. This vote is not all about the EC.
stage-managing - carefully organising and controlling, rather than letting happen in a natural way
dig itself into - making a problem more severe
laboriously - taking a lot of time and effort
politically aware - know in a general sense about how politics works, so able to understand and critique complicated political events
high-profile - very visible to the public, very important
common sense - natural ability to make reasonable decisions and actions
on two accounts - for two reasons
fire off - create quickly (like firing a gun)
vital - necessary and very important
vacillating - keeping changing one's mind, can't make one final decision
credible - believable
trustworthy - able to believe and trust
Banning ex-TRT officials from all political activity as well
The latest EC kerfuffle revolves around what might be called "the rule that isn't".
Last week, under rather strange circumstances, the commission issued a list of forbidden actions by ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra and the other 110 former Thai Rak Thai party executives banned from political office for five years. The list seemed to ban a lot of things that many of the 111 men and women had already been doing - speaking on politics, advising political campaigns, appearing at rallies and getting their photos on election posters and in newspapers among other things.
And then it got very strange.
a kerfuffle - commotion, lots of noisy activity and conflict
revolves around - is concerned with, focuses on
circumstances - situation surrounding an event
rallies - large political meetings to build support for a person, a sports team, or political issue
Threatening and ambiguous suggestions rather than rules
The EC did not ban these activities by the ex-Thaksin loyalists. Rather, it suggested that all 111 refrain from such common activities, and further suggested that if any of them refused to stop, the party they were working for could be banned, and a lot of people could face cheating charges that could result in jail terms and heavy fines. That word bears repeating: Could.
In the event, this has become the most talked-about and unpopular political decision since... well, since the last Election Commission decision. That would be the so-called iron rules issued last month that forbade perhaps 80% of all normal political activities. That was so unpopular that the EC had to reverse itself and declare the iron rules null and void. But the iron rules were the most unpopular political decision since the EC fought with the country's only independent election watchdog, pushing the highly experienced People's Network P-Net aside like a mangy cur.
refrain from - stop doing
iron rules - strict inflexible rules
declare rules null and void - rules no longer exist, no longer in effect
a watchdog - an organisation that oversees and makes sure that everyone plays by the rules
a mangy cur - a dog with mange (a fatal skin disease that makes the dog look horrible)
Ban on ex-TRT officials counter-productive?
The new and sudden "suggestions" that ex-Thai Rak Thai loyalists disappear apparently came after military intelligence units discovered what the rest of the country already realised - that Thaksin's proxy party, the People Power party (PPP), might in fact win the election. Those behind the Sept 19, 2006 military coup urged the EC to take action.
This was misguided, because if anything the sudden extended ban on the 111 politicians has won sympathy for them in almost all quarters. Even Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, who stands to become prime minister if he can beat the PPP, criticised the new suggestion.
apparently - have heard that it is true, but not sure
military intelligence - soldiers who gather information about enemy movements and preparations
proxy - acting for someone else
misguided - wrong (because it is based on an incorrect idea)
stands to - likely to
Mid-size swing parties dissipate PPP power
The military should be careful what it wishes. Ex-Thai Rak Thai executives had also broken up. Many were working for new parties, which almost guaranteed that the PPP could not gain a majority at the Dec 23 election. Now, effectively fired from their jobs, those men and women may regroup. Puea Pandin founder Surakiart Sathirathai and election coordinator Suranand Vejjajiva yesterday quit their party, cutting its election chances drastically. Matchima group's leader Somsak Thepsuthin said the new rules are barbed wire to keep out all small parties. In a two-party race, the PPP currently holds a wide margin over the Democrats, the ultimate nightmare for the military.
More importantly, the EC has again reduced its own reputation. The Dec 23 election is the single most important event to return Thailand to a democratic track. But polls must win the confidence of all citizens. The EC must stop waffling. It should either ban the 111 politicians, or, much better, admit another lapse in judgment and let them get back on the hustings. Then the commission must stop stage-managing. It must organise the vote, monitor the campaigns, and transparently expose and prosecute cheating. That is the EC's job. Right now, it risks the return to democracy by efforts to micro-manage what should be a free election.
should be careful what it wishes - should be more careful in setting its goals
cutting its chances - making less likely to happen
drastically - changed by a very great amount
barbed wire - wire with sharp points, to keep people and animals off land
holds a wide margin over - would win win by many votes
the ultimate nightmare - the worst situation one could imagine or dream of
return to a democratic track - return to a democratic way of engaging in politics
win the confidence of - make people believe in
waffling - not acting decisively
lapse in judgment - made an unwise decision (when they usually make good decisions)
the hustings - political campaigns and speeches before an election
get back on the hustings - return to election campaigning
stage-managing - managing all the details of what happens on stage during the performance of a play or drama
transparently - acting in a way that is clear and easy to understand
expose - make facts known
micro-manage - manage every detail of some activity (over-manage)
Answer Key:
1. What is required for the Election Commission (EC) to avoid the problems it has been having recently, according to the author?
Common sense.
2. What are some of the problems with the way that the EC has been coming up with elections rules recently?
a. EC members fire off rules first and consider them later.
b. EC undermines public trust by appearing vacillating and uncertain..
c. EC more interested in its own powers than producing a credible election.
3. What were ex-TRT officials and Thaksin banned from doing last week?
a. Speaking on politics
b. Advising political campaigns
c. Appearing at rallies
d. Getting their photos on election posters and in newspapers
4. Are these new restrictions justified? (Express your opinion)
5. Were the new restrictions transparent laws or something else?
If so, what was it? (Describe)
Something else. It was a "threatening suggestion," not a "transparent law." The EC suggested:
a. Refraining from these common activities.
b. If they did not refrain, there might be penalties.
c. Banning their political party might be a penalty.
d. Jail terms might be a penalty.
e. Heavy fines might be a penalty.
[Note: English teachers can use the recent EC "suggestion" to practice modal verbs such as: may, might, will likely, probably will,...etc]
6. What were the EC's previous controversial and unpopular decisions?
Why were these decisions unpopular?
a. Rules forbidding normal political activities such as coverage of candidates in the broadcast and print media.
b. Before that, rejecting the highly experienced and valuable election watchdog organisation P-Net.
7. What were the new rules on political activity of ex-TRT officials likely made in response to?
Apparently:
a. The coup-makers realised that the PPP might win the election.
b. The coup-makers urged the EC to take action.
8. Did the EC ban on political activity probably make the ex-TRT officials more or less popular with the electorate? Why? (Express your opinion)
Probably more popular, because it won sympathy for them among the electorate.
9. Are ex-TRT officials a unified group?
No, they have broken up from their previous grouping udner the TRT.
10. Do ex-TRT officials all work for PPP?
No, they work for new parties nowadays.
11. How has the scattering of ex-TRT officials among many mid-sized parties helped to undermine PPP's power?
If these ex-TRT officials align their mid-sized parties with the Democrat party, for instance, then the PPP will not be able to form a coalition government and will be defeated.
("Ex-Thai Rak Thai executives had also broken up. Many were working for new parties, which almost guaranteed that the PPP could not gain a majority at the Dec 23 election. Now, effectively fired from their jobs, those men and women may regroup...In a two-party race, the PPP currently holds a wide margin over the Democrats, the ultimate nightmare for the military.")
12. Why does the most recent EC rule banning ex-TRT officials from political activity actually undermine what the coup-makers hope to achieve?
If the ex-TRT officials abandon their mid-sized parties and throw their support behind the PPP as they once did with the TRT, the PPP might win.
