POLITICIANS were unable to influence voters in the Northeast as much as in previous ballots despite calls for a “No” vote to the military-backed constitution draft in Sunday’s referendum.

It is widely perceived that the Northeast, commonly known as Isaan, is the major stronghold of Pheu Thai Party, whose government was overthrown by the 2014 military coup.

Results from the referendum show 51 per cent of voters in the region disagreed with the draft, down from the 62.8 per cent of Isaan folk who opposed the military draft in the 2007 referendum.

Analysts believe that politicians did not influence the vote a great deal due to military suppression since the coup.

Pheu Thai politicians could do little to mobilise local support to vote the way they would have preferred, Attasit Pankaew, a political |scientist at Thammasat University, said.

The politicians did not stage activities during the lead-up to the referendum because they had few benefits to gain from doing so, critics say.

They would also be taking a risk, given that political activities were banned by the junta.

Nidhi Eoseewong, a well-known independent scholar, said in an interview with Prachatai that politicians can run a campaign in general elections and they build relationships with the people and both have mutual benefits. But in the referendum, politician were banned from any political campaigns.

“The voters did not ‘love’ the politicians that much to do whatever the politicians asked them to do,” the prominent historian said.

Some villagers in the country’s first red-shirt village, Ban Nong Hu Ling, which houses around 300 |supporters, had expected to see 90 per cent of votes rejecting the draft, but the result turned out to be less, village head Kongchai Chaikung said.

Kongchai was also a “Kru Kor” – an official trained by state agencies to spread the referendum issue to local people.

He told The Nation he did not expect the villagers to vote ‘Yes’ or believe what he had told them before the referendum.

He said he anticipated a relatively high “No” result in the region compared to the 2007 referendum. However, the voters in Isaan nearly approved the junta’s charter with 49 per cent backing it in Sunday’s referendum compared to 37 per cent in 2007.

That was partly because local people did not study or understand the constitution draft, he said. They did not digest the content of the draft, as they only received one-sided information from the “Yes” camp, he said.

“No chance”

“The dissent[ers] had no chance to campaign,” he said.

So, voters only made their decision based on their sentiment, some critics said.

Kongchai said people “really” want the referendum to be done and looked forward to the next general election. He said many villagers put high hopes on their future elected representatives.

“Many people still understand that if the draft passes, the economy will be better, the elderly will receive better social welfare, and the country will be well reformed following the junta’s roadmap,” the village head said.

“Only good things will come. So, why say ‘No’?” he said.

Attasit also said the narrow margin did not indicate that Isaan people had lost faith with their “once favourite” Pheu Thai Party, as the regional turnout was relatively low, around 50-55 per cent.

That compared to about 70 per cent turnouts for general elections over the past 10 years, he said.

The 20 per cent who did not vote did not want to take part in the referendum but would vote in the next general election, he said.