2005–2006 Thai political crisis

Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was embroiled in several controversies after assuming power following the 2001 election. These controversies included alleged conflicts of interest due to his family's holdings in Shin Corporation and a violent crackdown on drug dealers. However, none of these controversies caused significant damage to his popularity, and he became the first elected prime minister to serve a full term, subsequently winning re-election in January 2005.

The origins of the crisis may be traced to the controversy surrounding Viroj Nualkhair, CEO of state-owned Krung Thai Bank (KTB).[2] Viroj faced pressure to leave his position after KTB reported higher than expected levels of non-performing loans in 2004. Viroj was vigorously defended by Sondhi Limthongkul, a media tycoon who had previously been a staunch Thaksin supporter. As KTB CEO, Viroj had forgiven Sondhi's personal debts by 1.6 billion baht and arranged for further rounds of debt forgiveness. When Viroj was forced out of his position, Sondhi's public criticism of Thaksin started to increase.

The Sondhi-Thaksin conflict escalated when Sondhi's Channel 11/1 was temporarily ordered to stop broadcasting due to a contract dispute between cable operator UBC and the government regulator.[3][4]

In September 2005, Sondhi reportedly made repeated disrespectful on-air references to King Bhumibol Adulyadej. Among these references was a claim that the government's 2004 appointment of Somdet Phra Buddhacharya as acting Supreme Patriarch in place of the critically ill Somdet Phra Yanasangworn contravened the prerogative of the King. According to Thai ecclesiastic law, the Supreme Patriarch is nominated by the Sangha Supreme Council and formally appointed by the King. Somdet Phra Phuthacharn's appointment was vehemently opposed by Luang Ta Maha Bua, an influential monk with close affiliations to Sondhi (see Luang Ta Maha Bua's opposition to Thaksin Shinawatra). After discussions with King's principal private secretary, Arsa Sarasin, MCOT executive, removed the program.[5][6]

The Administrative and Constitutional Courts (the first in Thai history) were set up to be based on the French and Italian judicial system, where the judge has direct authority and supervises the investigation into the facts of the case. This is in contrast to the civil and criminal justice systems in Thailand (and most countries) based on the role of a judge as the one who examines the case based solely on the arguments of the prosection and defence attorneys. The administrative court was set up to resolve complaints against the misconduct, neglect or outright abuse by bureaucratic and government agencies. The constitution court was set up to resolve conflicts about unconstitutional legislation.

Apparently the drafters of the 1997 Constitution, one of the most "democratic" constitutions, were quite far sighted by putting in a mechanism to resolve abuses and misconduct by people in authority. But then the Constitutional Court was initially not seen as important, and few anticipated the nature of potential conflicts in legislation could be critical. So the more experienced judges did not see any prestige in taking up position within that judiciary.

Their oversight became glaring when Thaksin's 1st Asset Concealment case was brought to the Constitutional Court. His TRT party had just won the popular vote by a historic majority, but he had not completely disclosed his assets as required by the law. A false asset disclosure would normally disqualify someone from taking up any political post for five years. But he pleaded with tears in his eyes that it was just a clerical error. The judges voted narrowly by a 7–8 margin, allowing Thaksin to take up the office of Prime Minister. Thaksin himself claimed that people had overwhelmingly voted for his party and his wealth was distributed in many assets that the clerical error could probably be an "honest mistake".

An anti-Thaksin protester wearing the anti-Thaksin slogan "Fight for the King." Her shirt is royal yellow, the official colour of the PAD.

The prime minister faced growing pressure to resign following the sale of his family's controlling stake in Shin Corporation to Temasek Holdings, the Singapore government's investment agency. Although the SEC's investigation of the transaction cleared Thaksin of all wrongdoing, critics have still accused him of insider trading, use of tax law loopholes, selling out the nation, and other offences.

Anti-Thaksin protesters are largely composed of urban upper/middle class royalist Bangkokians, dubbed the "Blue Blood Jet Set" by the Bangkok Post. They have been joined by supporters of the controversial Santi Asoke Buddhist sect, followers of the controversial monk Luang Ta Maha Bua, and state enterprises employees who oppose privatisation. Some academics and intellectuals have also joined the protests.

However, the protests have been divisive. Many urban upper/middle class Bangkokians have expressed frustration at the protesters. Early in 2005, a majority of the employees at state-owned Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand supported privatisation. The popular but controversial Dharmakaya Buddhist sect has come out in support of Thaksin. Several members of King Bhumibol Adulyadej's Privy Council have asked protesters to seek a peaceful resolution to the situation. Supreme Commander General Ruengroj Mahasaranond said "I should like to direct my message at a certain person who resorts to self-promotion by invoking the name of His Majesty...Rivals should not involve the monarch in their quarrels".[32] Many academics have urged the protesters to adhere to the constitution and not pressure the King to appoint a replacement prime minister. Many also note that the majority of Thailand's population, particular the rural poor, are strong supporters of Thaksin.

On 14 January 2006, hundreds of protestors headed by Sondhi Limthongkul, former senator Pratin Santiprapop, Klanarong Chantik, and Democrat MP Kalaya Sophonpanich stormed into Government House at half past midnight, overwhelming security forces. They occupied the building for twenty minutes before regrouping outside and continuing their protest.[33]

An anti-Thaksin rally on 4 February 2006 at the Royal Plaza drew a very large crowd. Police and foreign media estimated the turnout to be 40,000 – 50,000. Some local newspapers estimated that up to 100,000 attended.[34] Afterwards, protests waned, with rewer protesters showed up at the Royal Plaza the next weekend. Most Thai newspapers estimated the turnout at 30,000 – 50,000 people. Phoochatkarn Raiwan (owned by Sondhi Limthongkul, the leader of the protest) estimated 100,000 attended. The BBC, Reuters, and AFP estimated 5,000 – 15,000 attended.[35]

The PAD's protests took on an increasingly critical tone in February. In a single protest on 26 February 2006, Buddhist leader Sulak Sivaraksa called Thaksin a pitiful dog and chairman of the northeastern teachers' group Auychai Watha called for Thaksin's children to "become whores infected with venereal disease." The behaviour of the protesters was condemned by the Chairperson of Amnesty International Thailand. Protestors often harassed journalists and newscrews.[36]

On 3 March 2006, a pro-Thaksin rally at Sanam Luang arranged by the TRT party was attended by a massive crowd. Local media reported that up to 200,000 people attended.[37][38] Some foreign media reported up to 150,000 attended.[34] In this rally, Thaksin promised that "If my party receive less votes than the number of people abstaining combined with votes for smaller parties, I will not accept the premiership...I beg the three opposition parties, Democrat, Chat Thai and Mahachon, to join the contest. If they really insist on a boycott, they can campaign for voters to mark "abstention" to reject me".[37] He also promised to amend Article 313 of the Constitution to allow representatives of the people to draft a new charter as occurred in 1974 after the 1973 bloodshed. Some additional laws later would be amended, he said. The whole political reform would take about one year before a referendum to endorse the new charter and another parliament dissolution before a new election. Anti-Thaksin protesters have claimed that most of the attendants were uneducated people who were paid to attend.

On 5 March 2006, while Thaksin was campaigning for the April 2006 elections in the rural areas, tens of thousands of protesters in Bangkok, shouting "Thaksin Get Out" and "Restore Power to the King", demanded the resignation of the Prime Minister. The anti-Thaksin rally included the burning of an effigy of him in a mock funeral to cries of "Thaksin out! Thaksin out!"[39][40] It was described as "the biggest anti-government demonstration in Thailand since 1992" in some news reports.[41] The protest also included a satirical Chinese opera and performances of anti-Thaksin Lam tad singing.[42]

Starting 13 March 2006, anti-Thaksin protests moved to permanent tents and stands outside Government House at the Miskawan Intersection, leading to massive traffic jams in that area. By 5.30 pm, 18 March 2006, approximately 3,000 were protesting at Government House (source: Thai Rath, 19 March 2005).

On 18 March 2006, Nuansri Rodkhrut, a representative of the Thai Red Cross, met protest-leader Chamlong Srimuang to inform him that protest tents were in space reserved for the 2006 Red Cross Fair. She was roundly booed by protesters. The Red Cross Fair is held annually at the Royal Plaza, Amphorn Gardens, Sri Ayuthaya Road, and the Miskawan Intersection from the end of March to early April. The fair is hosted by the Thai Red Cross Society and was to be attended by Princess Sirindhorn. Chamlong responded "The protest area does not belong to any individual. Our move from Sanam Luang to Government House to kick out PM Thaksin is our job. I have been to the Red Cross Fair since I was a kid, and I don't want to disrupt it. In fact, it is good that the protesters can visit the fair and raise its attendance. Few Fair attendees will visit the area used by the protesters." He suggested to Nuansri that the entrance booth of the Fair be moved 10 meters behind the main stage of the protests. Nuansri responded that she would seek further guidance from her superiors. On the same day, Traffic Police Commander Phanu Kerdlabphon warned that any disruption of Princess Sirindhorn's visit to the Fair would "surely lead to trouble". Chamlong was quoted as saying "If the officers consider it is against the law, then, come and arrest all 100,000 of us here".[43]

Starting 15 March 2006, Thaksin supporters have moved en-masse to Bangkok from the North and North-east in a caravan of Ee Taen (slow-moving diesel-engine powered farming vehicles),[44] Thai: อีแต๋น). The "Mob Ee Taen" (so called by the Thai press), as of 18 March 2006, numbered thousands of demonstrators in several hundred Ee Taen and had chosen Chatuchak Park, in the north of Bangkok, as its demonstration site.

The farmers were joined by 400 motorcycle taxi drivers, who claim that a Thaksin-initiated crackdown has eliminated the need to make payments to corrupt police and underworld elements.[45]

On 19 March 2006, a group of Thaksin supporters burned a coffin of Apirak Kosayothin, Democrat governor of Bangkok, claiming that the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration was trying to force the protesters out of Chatuchak Park, that the BMA would not provide any water, and provided only two mobile toilet buses. Anti-Thaksin protesters have claimed that the Thaksin supporters are uneducated and had been paid to come support Thaksin.[46] They have also claimed that it is illegal to drive Ee Taen on city streets.

On the week before the 2006 election, the anti-Thaksin rally moved to Bangkok's shopping districts, with rallies at Bumrungrad International Hospital, The Emporium, and Siam Square. Siam Centre, Siam Discovery, Siam Paragon, and many other businesses and office buildings in the protest area were closed, causing up to 1.2 billion baht in losses.[47] On 29 March, the BTS skytrain had to shut down service at the Siam intersection station, though the service also reported record ridership as a result of the protest rallies. The protests also caused major traffic jams throughout Bangkok, especially Sukhumvit Road and Silom Road, both major Bangkok arteries. The local press estimated 50,000 protesters, although foreign press and independent observers noted only 5,000 – 30,000.[48][49]

The anti-Thaksin protesters were harshly criticised, with 50,000 complaints being made to the FM91 traffic radio station. A poll showed that 71% of Bangkokians disagreed with the protests being moved into the city centre.[47] An opinion poll showed that 26% of Bangkok people supported the resignation of Thaksin, compared to 48% three weeks previously.[49] Protest leader Chamlong Srimuang defended the protesters, saying "Two days of traffic jams is a minor matter, but the nation remaining jammed up was a big problem."[50]

Thaksin announced a House dissolution on 24 February 2006, in a bid to defuse the political crisis triggered by his family's sale of Shin Corporation. General elections were scheduled for 2 April. In his weekly radio address following the announcement of his decision, Thaksin promised a series of new populist measures, including pay rises for government workers, an increase in the minimum wage and debt relief for farmers.[61] The opposition Democrat, Chart Thai and Mahachon parties announced a boycott of the election on 27 February.[62]

The Nation criticised Thaksin for calling for parliamentary elections. In an editorial, it noted that the election "fails to take into consideration a major fallacy of the concept, particularly in a less-developed democracy like ours, in which the impoverished, poorly informed masses are easily manipulated by people of his ilk. And Thaksin's manipulation has been well documented. It includes an ingenious use of populist policies that pander to the unprincipled wants and needs of the people."[63]

On 24 March 2006, in front of a rally of 50,000 at Sanam Luang,[64] Democrat party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva demanded that King Bhumibol Adulyadej appoint a new Prime Minister and Cabinet to resolve the political crisis.[64][65][66][67] The People's Alliance for Democracy's (PAD), The Law Society of Thailand, and the Press Council of Thailand also called for royal intervention.[68][69] Pongsak Payakavichien, of the Press Council, also called on the civil service to detach itself from the government and demand royal intervention.

However, demands for royal intervention have met with much criticism. The King himself in speeches on 26 April to newly appointed judges dismissed the notion, saying Article 7 of the Constitution invoked by the anti-Thaksin protestors did not give him that power. "Asking for a Royally appointed prime minister is undemocratic. It is, pardon me, a mess. It is irrational."[70] Worachet Pakeerut, a law lecturer at Thammasat University, noted "We're trying to involve the monarch in politics, but it's still not time. If we appeal for a new prime minister, aren't we asking the monarch to take sides?"[67] Passakorn Atthasit and 20 relatives of people killed in the October 1973 democracy uprising tied a black cloth around the Democracy Monument and said "We don't care if Mr. Thaksin remains in the post. All we care is that the prime minister is elected. Asking for a royally-bestowed prime minister is akin to ripping the charter apart."[67]

Unofficial results as of 3 April 2006 gave Thaksin's TRT Party victory, with 462 seats in Parliament and 66% of the popular vote. However, 38 TRT candidates, all in the Democrat-dominated south, failed to win up to 20% of votes from eligible voters in their constituency, thus forcing the Election Commission to hold by-elections[71] on 23 April.[72] Election Commission commissioner Prinya Nakchudtree said that election laws would allow new applications in 23 April by-elections, allowing the Democrat Party (which had boycotted 3 April elections) to run in the by-elections.[72] However, the Democrat Party has vowed to boycott the by-elections[73] and has petitioned the Central Administrative Court to cancel the by-elections.[74] Many expect that this will prevent Parliament from reconvening and a Government from forming within the 3 May time-limit set by the Constitution.[75]

Thaksin unofficially claimed that TRT won 16 million votes nationwide, with 10 million abstentions and invalid ballots, giving him greater than half of the popular vote.[76] Thaksin had earlier promised to not accept the premiership if he received less than half the total vote.[37]

In Bangkok, despite a large number of abstentions, TRT won in every district with ืnot much more than 20% of votes. Out of 2,329,294 Bangkok votes counted as of 22.31 hrs on 3 April 2006, TRT won 1,035,254 votes, the remainder being abstentions and invalid ballots.[77][78][79]

After unofficial voting tallies became public, the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) petitioned the Administrative Court to suspend the results of the election. Chamlong Srimuang declared that the PAD would ignore the results of the election and that the "PAD will go on rallying until Thaksin resigns and Thailand gets a royally-appointed prime minister."[80]

On 3 April 2006, Thaksin Shinawatra appeared on television to declare victory in the controversial 2006 election, called for unity in the kingdom, reiterated his proposal for a government of national unity, and proposed the creation of an independent reconciliatory commission to end the political stalemate. He offered to resign if the new panel recommended it. The commission could consist of three former parliament presidents, three Supreme Court presidents, three former prime ministers and rectors of state universities. He also suggested that four potential candidates from the TRT could replace him if he stepped down, including former House Speaker Bhokin Bhalakula and caretaker Commerce Minister Somkid Jatusripitak.[81][82][83]

The Democrat Party and the PAD immediately rejected the reconciliation panel. "It's too late for national reconciliation," said Chamlong Srimuang.[84] The PAD claimed that once again Thaksin was using votes to justify himself, and called for a nationwide protest on Friday 7 April to force the Prime Minister to resign.[85][86]

After an audience with King Bhumibol, Thaksin announced on 4 April 2006 that he would not accept the post of Prime Minister after the Parliament reconvenes. However, he would continue to be Caretaker Prime Minister until his successor is elected by the Parliament.[84]

"My main reason for not accepting the post of prime minister is because this year is an auspicious year for the king, whose 60th anniversary on the throne is just 60 days away… I want all Thais to reunite," said Thaksin in a nationally televised speech.[87][88] He then delegated his functions to Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Wannasathit, moved out of Government House, and scheduled a vacation with his family.

The Democrat Party welcomed the decision and promised to co-operate to resolve the current political crisis. However, they continued their boycott of by-elections. Many expected that the boycott would prevent Parliament from reconvening and a Government from forming within the 3 May time-limit set by the Constitution – thus causing a constitutional crisis.[75] In a celebration at Sanam Luang on 7 April, PAD leaders announced that their new goal was the eradication of the Thaksin "regime"[75][89] amid continued concerns that a constitutional crisis, a lack of a government, and continued protests could spoil King Bhumibol Adulyadej's Diamond Jubilee Celebrations on 9 June.[90][91][92][93]

In a rare, televised speech to senior judges, King Bhumibol requested that the judiciary take action to resolve the political crisis.[94] On 8 May 2006, the Constitution Court invalidated the results of the April elections and ordered a new round of elections, later set for October elections.[95] Several judges also called for three members of the Election Commission to resign. The Commissioners refused to do so, citing their constitutional independence. Several legal experts including Worachet Pakeerut and Banjerd Singkanet of Thammasat University noted the unprecedented nature of the judiciary's demands. "I'm concerned that if the courts get too involved in political affairs, politics may hit back. Moreover, it's difficult to examine the courts, and who is to examine the courts' use of power in politics," said Worachet.[96] When the Commissioners still refused to resign, the Criminal Court jailed the Election Commissioners, removing them from their posts.[97][98]

Thaksin returned to work on 19 May 2006, in the wake of the Constitutional Court's nullification of the April elections and catastrophic flooding in the North.[99] However, political tension remained high. On 22 May, Pairoj Vongvipanon, former dean of the Faculty of Economics, Chulalongkorn University, warned Thaksin of assassination: "Thaksin must be careful or else he might be killed. Don't think that assassinations can not occur in Thailand.[100] "