THE PASSING of statesman and former prime minister Prem Tinsulanonda was likely to bring about a new and more open political era, shifting away from “Thai-style” democracy and military domination, analysts said.

Prem, one of the country’s most influential political figures for more than four decades who served as Army commander, prime minister and adviser to the Royal Palace, died at age 98 yesterday.

After October 6, 1976, Prem was defined as “political influencer” and as one of the founders of “semi-democracy” in Thai politics, which has continued until current times as “Thai-style” democracy, Stithorn Thananithichot, a political scientist from King Prajadhipok’s Institute said.

Although during some periods, Thai politics was a true democracy, it reverted to a backward democracy, especially with the current Constitution, said the academic.

Without contesting a general election or joining a political party, Prem held the prime minister’s post with the backing of political parties from 1980 to 1988.

Prem left politics and later was appointed a privy councillor and a statesman in 1988 but his charisma and influence continued over Thai politics.

“He was a symbol. You can see why every prime minister and Armed Forces commander had to pay their respects to him on special occasions,” he added.

Stithorn referred to then-premier Thaksin Shinwatra, whose party Thai Rak Thai had won a majority of 375 MP seats in the 2005 election, deciding to dissolve the House in 2006 after a meeting with Prem. At that time, Thaksin was under siege from yellow-shirt protesters.

In his view, Prem was the person who served as the bridge or balance between the conservatives or the establishment and liberal democracy.

Titipol Phakdeewanich, dean of political science at Ubon Ratchathani University, said Prem’s influence and significant role in the military had helped society and people endorsed the role of military in Thai politics.

“Prem represented a ‘good general’. His charisma helped convince people to respect or believe in what he said,” Titipol said.

With Prem’s passing, from now on, military and junta chief and PM Prayut Chan-ocha would not have that endorsement any more and that could lessen their credibility, he added.

He said although the military now would be able to consolidate power in Parliament as the pro-junta bloc appears likely to form the next government, several processes leading to the progress of democracy are taking place as well.

“The military-linked government would be scrutinised as the opposition party is quite strong in Parliament, while people would be more open to new voices or the real philosophy of true democracy,” Titipol said.

However, Yuttaporn Issarachai, a political scientist at Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University, sees no political implications for politics, as Prem’s connection, or the so-called “Look Pa” or Prem’s son, are currently not a major player in the society.

For example, the Democrat Party, the political party seen as closest to Prem and the main party that supported Prem during his premiership, is not a key player in politics anymore, the analyst said.

Analysts agreed that it would be difficult to find a man who has such charisma and respect to replace him and play his role. Yuttaporn said it is not easy in the modern era that a most influential person like the late prime minister would rise to fame and be as well-respected as him, as society now has diversity in power.

“Society has evolved. The new generation has its own ideology. I think the tradition of respecting or clinging to a sole senior person would be in gradual decline,” said Yuthaporn.

“It will be a long time for another person with the charisma and respect that Prem enjoyed to rise, if he did not appoint his successor,” Stithorn said.

If there is any concern during the transition period it could be the relationship inside the military, he added.

As in the past, Prem helped keep the balance of power and relationship of two big factions in the Royal Thai Armed Forces that have dominated the Army for several years. The two are the Burapha Payak royalist military faction – known as the “Eastern Tigers” that propelled junta chief General Prayut to power, and Wong Tewan, or military officers in the 11th Infantry Regiment King’s Guard, known as the “Raab 11”.

“I don’t know if Prayut or Prawit [Wongsuwan, defence minister] can balance the power. If not, a well-respected person like Prem might be needed,” he added.

Upon taking office in 1980, Prem played an important role in stabilising an economy reeling from surging oil prices, said Sakon Varanyuwattana, former dean of economics at Thammasat University.

Thailand was forced to devalue the baht, and at a time when it was also burdened with high public debt stemming from political and economic instability, Sakon said.

Somchai Jitsuchon of the Thailand Development Research Institute said Prem took office just as “risk and volatility were perhaps at their highest levels in Thai economic history”.

Rattled by domestic political turmoil amid the fall of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos to communist regimes, Thailand continued to suffer as several governments in succession fought with Thai communist insurgents. But then the discovery of natural-gas reserves in the Gulf of Thailand led to development of the Eastern Seaboard, which remains the country’s largest industrial hub. “In the second half of his premiership, Prem helped lay sound economic foundations and improved Thai global competitiveness significantly,” said Somchai.

Prem was well known for recruiting technocrats to work with him in reforming the economy and attracting foreign direct investment, both economists noted.

They included Sommai Hoontrakul as finance minister, Pisit Pakasem as secretary general of the National Economic and Social Development Board and respected economist Virabongsa Ramangkura as a close adviser. The economic foundation they established led to an influx of foreign investment and assured subsequent governments of high economic growth, Sakon said.

While Prem was premier from 1980-1988, the growth rate started to accelerate. GDP rose by 11 per cent in 1988, up from an average of 5.3 per cent in 1982-1986, noted Anusorn Tamajai, dean of economics at Rangsit University. The baht’s devaluation triggered a drop in imports and an increase in exports, helping balance trade overall. The trade deficit narrowed and Thailand enjoyed a surplus some years, Anusorn said. The Prem government demonstrated fiscal discipline, he believes.

The Plaza Accord Agreement of 1985, by which the US compelled Japan to appreciate the yen against the dollar, delivered to Thailand many Japanese manufacturers. Negotiations under the Uruguay Round of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade also contributed to increased international trade for Thailand in the latter years of Prem’s tenure. “Prem and his technocrats successfully pushed Thailand’s status among developing countries, giving it a high economic growth rate in their later years, but they focused on it too much, paying little attention to income inequality, which has become a big issue today,” said Anusorn.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha in his first turn as premier initiated the Eastern Economic Corridor scheme to introduce high-tech industries on top of the region’s existing petrochemical, electronics, machinery and auto sectors, whose roots date back to the Prem era.

The economists believe Prayut seems to be following Prem’s approach to economic management and development.

The vote for speaker showed that Phalang Pracharat had won over the key undecided parties – Democrat and Bhumjaithai – and was poised to lead the coalition.

But the next administration, which would need maximum votes in the lower house to move policies forward, could face hurdles at every step.

Though the lower house speaker and deputy speaker positions went to Phalang Pracharat-backed figures, giving it the upper hand in Parliament, the wins were narrow and indicated possible future swings.

Democrat Chuan Leekpai triumphed over Pheu Thai candidate Sompong Amornvivat by 23 votes (258-235). The figure suggests some defections in the anti-junta bloc.

But in the vote for the position of first deputy speaker, veteran politician Suchart Tancharoen defeated first-time MP Yaowalak Wongpraparat from the fledgling Future Forward Party by just two votes (248-246).

The second deputy speaker’s post went to Supachai Phosu, who secured 256 votes against 239 for Seri Ruamthai candidate Prasong Buranapong.

In such a tight situation, smaller parties that would back the Phalang Pracharat-led coalition are seen to have a significant leverage over the pro-junta party.

The Democrats and Bhumjaithai, who together have 103 MPs, look likely to gain a fair share of Cabinet portfolios.

The hiccup in the vote for speaker on Saturday could portend Phalang Pracharat’s fate in the lower house.

Suchart reportedly was to run for speaker, but Phalang Pracharat had to nominate Chuan at the last minute, leading to some discontent among pro-junta MPs.

Apparently, in a struggle to overcome internal disagreement, the pro-junta bloc motioned for postponement of the speaker’s election but failed when some pro-Suchart MPs voted against the move.

Aside from such internal challenges, it was also observed that the pro-junta camp would face strong opposition from Pheu Thai and Future Forward.

The elections of all speakers was expected to be completed in a single day, but the process dragged out to two full days, partly because the rival blocs locked horns and neither was prepared to give way.

Pro tem speaker Chai Chidchob had to adjourn the meeting a couple of times when they refused to back down.

Starting from when Phalang Pracharat attempted to postpone the election of the house speaker on Saturday, the two blocs debated for nearly two hours before Chai called a break.

Phalang Pracharat finally gave in and agreed that the chamber could vote to decide whether or not to defer the election.

The election on Saturday took more than eight hours and two other motions to elect the first and second deputy speakers were put off to yesterday.

Yesterday morning, Future Forward motioned for the candidates to give a “vision speech” before the vote, seeking to establish the credentials of its candidate, Yaowalak. But Chai, a highly experienced house speaker aligned with Phalang Pracharat, abruptly dismissed the proposal after the heated |atmosphere showed signs of worsening.

More wrangling followed, especially during the vote to choose the second deputy speaker. Pheu Thai MPs led by Cholnan Srikaew protested over ballots that bore an erroneous surname for the candidate. They also asked Chai to stop the referee from recording the vote count on video.

The MPs said the manner of the recording was suspicious and questioned whether the ballots had been marked to indicate the identities of the voters in order to secure “rewards” later on.

Chai disagreed with both motions despite heated debate and ordered the process to continue.

The elections yesterday also took more than eight hours.

PREM TINSULANONDA, president of the Privy Council and former premier, a statesmen widely regarded as the individual of greatest influence in Thai politics in recent memory, died yesterday of heart failure. He was 98.

Born in southern Songkhla province on August 26, 1920, to a bureaucrat father, Prem made good on his education to climb the social ladder.

He attended Maha Vajiravudh Songkhla, Suankularb Wittayalai and finally what became the Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy. Excelling in his studies, Prem said in a memoir he dreamed of becoming a physician, but the cost of a medical education was too dear.

His military education, however, brought him high social status. Ultimately he was chief adviser to His Majesty King Bhumibol and served as regent following the monarch’s death until Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn was formally named successor.

As a soldier, Prem saw action in the Franco-Thai war, World War II and the battle against communist insurgents in the country. His rise to the military elite paved the way for his entry into politics.

When Admiral Sangad Chaloryu brought down a civilian Democrat government in a coup following the massacre of student protesters at Thammasat University on October 6, 1976, Prem said he was unwittingly aligned with the putsch.

He was Second Army Region Commander at the time, overseeing a strategic area where communist insurgents were active.

Prem was named deputy interior minister in the government of General Kriangsak Chomanan and later served as defence minister and Army chief. He succeeded Kriangsak as prime minister in March 1980, remaining in the office for eight years.

He never contested an election, having been invited to serve as premier by elected politicians. Supported by the military, his regime was dubbed a “quasi-democracy” with its elected component. Prem survived two |coup attempts and multiple no-confidence motions in the House of Representatives.

Prem’s tenure as PM ended with the 1988 election in which the Chat Thai Party emerged victorious and voters demanded that the premier’s job go to an elected MP. Chat Thai leader Chatichai Choonhavan got the nod, only to be ousted in the next military coup, in 1991.

In a Thai-style political compromise, Prem was named to the Privy Council in 1988. He became its president a decade later, cementing a long-established bond with the monarchy. His strong connections to the Palace and military helped ensure he remained an influential figure in politics until the end of his life.

Prem was taken to hospital yesterday morning after failing to rise at his usual time of 5am, according to a source close to him.

Doctors at Phramongkutklao Hospital spent three hours trying to resuscitate him, but he died at around 8am. General Prem’s royally sponsored bathing rite is scheduled for today at Wat Benchamabophit in Bangkok, his family announced.

He defeated Future Forward Party candidate Yaowalak Wongpraparat by 248 votes to 246.

Before the vote, Future Forward Party spokesperson Pannika Wanich proposed that both candidates outline their vision. However, Phalang Pracharat MPs raised objections.

Pro tem speaker Chai Chidchob dismissed the proposal, saying the regulations did not require candidates to do so before proceeding to call for the vote.