The ministry’s diplomatic aide memoir objected to the presence of envoys at Pathumwan Police Station last Saturday when Future Forward Party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit arrived to hear charges against him. But the US Embassy told The Nation that attendance at legal prosecutions is standard practice.

“Regardless of the intention, the presence of embassies’ representatives at the police station, with such visibility and [with] the publicity it generated, was clearly an act of political significance, seen by the Thai public largely as a show of moral support for Mr Thanathorn,” read the aide memoir, a copy of which has been seen by The Nation.

Representatives of the United Nations Human Rights Commissioner, the European Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, Finland, Germany and the Netherlands were present at the police station on Saturday when Thanathorn arrived to hear sedition and other criminal charges.

 The charges referred to his presence at an anti-junta protest in 2015 and alleged that he had provided a vehicle for a protester to escape detention.

The billionaire-turned-politician accused the junta of harbouring a political motive for prosecuting him after his party did far better than expected in the March 24 election, capturing more than 80 seats in the House of Representatives.

Future Forward joined the pro-democracy and anti-junta camp that includes the Pheu Thai Party, bidding to compete against the pro-junta Phalang Pracharat to form a government after the election.

The international community and local rights groups have criticised the junta for its plan to try Thanathorn in a military court.

Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai on Tuesday slammed the envoys who showed up on Saturday, saying their presence was diplomatically inappropriate. Foreign representatives could get involved in the Thai judicial process only when their own citizens were prosecuted, he said.

The ministry’s aide memoir says the Thai government respects the rights of foreign embassies to monitor political developments and observe events of significance for the benefit of their analysis and assessment and for promoting friendly relations. But the incident at the police station while police were carrying out their duty “was clearly not consistent with international practice and obligation”, it continues.

However, deputy National Police chief Srivara Rangsibhramanakul said the diplomats were invited to a briefing after Thanathorn’s interrogation at Pathum Wan Police station had finished. They did not join the session as expected, he said.

The US Embassy, whose political counsellor was at the police station on Saturday, said having representatives attend such prosecution proceedings is standard diplomatic practice.

“The US interest in this case, as in many other cases, is to observe the judicial process and obtain first-hand information about the handling of the case,” said Jillian Bonnardeaux, the embassy spokesperson. US Charge d’Affaires Peter Haymond was among the diplomats who met separately with a senior official at the foreign ministry yesterday to take the aide memoir.

AFTER DAYS of debate and dispute over the right formula to calculate MP seats, the Election Commission (EC) president said yesterday that the agency was considering approaching the Constitutional Court to seek its opinion.

EC chief Ittiporn Boonpracong yesterday told reporters a Constitutional Court judgement is among the options the commissioners are looking at.

He said the agency has yet to decide on the formula that it will use to calculate MP allocation.

The EC was studying the similarities and differences between the stipulations in the Constitution and the organic law on MP election, Ittiporn said, adding that the EC had an initial calculation model, but was yet to make the final call.

The model Ittiporn was referring to would allocate seats to 11 small parties who did not gain even half the number of votes required to be allotted a seat in the Lower House. This method was backed by Praphan Naikovit, a member of the now-defunct Constitution Drafting Commission and an ex-EC member, who said the formula had been tested, tried and finalised when the Constitution and the organic law were being written.

Tentative calculations currently show that a party will need at least 71,000 votes to get an MP seat. Proponents of this calculation model cited the Constitution, which says no party should get a seat it is not entitled to. They also argue that handing out seats to small parties would be at the expense of larger parties.

Future Forward Party, which has won over 6 million votes nationwide, could potentially lose up to seven seats.

Popular winner Phalang Pracharat, which supports coup leader General Prayut Chan-o-cha’s return as PM, would also lose two or three MPs in Parliament. However, it is expected to reap dividends from the 11 small parties offering their support to form a coalition government.

The poll authority has been heavily criticised and accused of manipulating the maths to favour pro-junta parties.

While the authority said that giving small parties places in the House would reflect the Constitution’s intention to make every vote count, the method poses a challenge for the pro-democracy camp, which is struggling to muster 250 MPs to form a coalition and block the junta from future politics.

Pheu Thai Party has been striving to prove that the calculation method would be unconstitutional. Yesterday, party executives and legal experts met and agreed that they would discuss the MP-seat calculation in the annual general assembly on April 21, the first Monday after Songkran holidays.

Pheu Thai warns EC

The party’s legal chief, Chusak Sirinin, yesterday also read a party statement on the calculation issue, reiterating that the current EC method would be unconstitutional.

In order to secure one seat in the House of Representatives, Pheu Thai insisted that a party must gain at least 71,065 votes.

The number is the product of all the votes obtained by all parties (35,532,647) divided by the number of the seats available in the House (500).

Since the number of MPs already exceeded 500, as Pheu Thai had won more constituencies than the formula required, it would be impossible for the small parties who gained less than 70,000 votes to be in the Lower House, Pheu Thai stressed.

It also submitted an official letter to the EC yesterday, asking it to reconsider the calculation method.

The party’s secretary-general, Phumtham Wechayachai, said the move was necessary in case the party had to pursue legal action against the agency.

In a related development, the Thailand Students Union filed a lawsuit against the EC yesterday for alleged negligence after numerous irregularities occurred during the March 24 election.

This criminal case is in addition to a case brought before the National Anti-Corruption Commission by other activists demanding the impeachment of EC commissioners over alleged irregularities in the conduct of the election.

“I can say proudly that the government of General Prayut Chan-o-cha is not cheating. But if I am wrong, the prime minister will have to deal with [any corruption] problem,” Prem said.

He added that Prayut thought of the country’s interest over his personal benefit.

The elderly statesman and former prime minister was speaking to Cabinet members led by Prayut and armed forces commanders who called on him at his Si Sao Thewet residence. The visitors offered Prem good wishes for the Thai New Year or Songkran.

Prayut told Prem he was pleased the chief Royal adviser was still in good health and has been able to provide them with advice whenever needed.

“Your honour, Privy Council president, has always taught us to focus on the importance of the nation, religion and the King. This thought has been with us all the time,” said Prayut, who also heads the ruling National Council for Peace and Order.

In response, Prem said: “I thank the prime minister, my beloved friend. We are pleased to see the prime minister, the armed forces and different state agencies having taken care of the country.”

He also asked all of them to help move the country forward for the benefit of all its population.

“Thank you again, the prime minister. I will always remember our friendship,” Prem said.

At 98 years old, Prem is still considered a powerful figure in Thai politics although he holds no political position.

On Wednesday, Prem also greeted Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan, who came to the Privy Council president’s house with a bandage on his right hand. Prawit received intravenous fluids for an illness, according to Prayut. Neither of them would answer questions about Prawit’s illness.

Upon meeting Army chief General Apirat Kongsompong, Prem told him to ignore criticism. “Just focus on your work,” Prem said.

Apirat had earlier been involved in arguments with politicians and critics of the armed forces who asked for reforms of the Thai military and abolition of conscription.

Also at his house on Wednesday, Prem exchanged Songkran wishes with the media.

One of the wishes was for Prem to live until 120. In response, Prem joked that he would have to walk on all fours at that age. “But I will always live for the country,” he added.

Pol General Srivara Rangsibhramanakul said the diplomats were invited to a briefing after the interrogation of Thanathorn Jungrungruengkit at Pathum Wan police station finished.

The Future Forward leader, facing sedition charges for an alleged offence he committed four years ago, on April 6 tweeted two photos showing the diplomats sitting in a room with Srivara at the top of the table.

Thanathorn claimed that the diplomats attended the interrogation.

“Observed by the UN, the EU and 11 other foreign embassies, including the US Embassy, during my interrogation by the deputy commissioner of Thailand,” he tweeted.

His tweet triggered criticism about why the diplomats were allowed to join the investigation.

Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai lashed out at the diplomats’ presence at the police station, despite the claim that they only wanted to observe the process.

Don said the only way a diplomat could attend a police interview was if the suspect was a compatriot.

Srivara said the 12 diplomats observed the case. “I did not know how they came up. They began to ask many questions after the questioning of Thanathorn finished. Police then invited them to a briefing,” he said.

“They did not attend the questioning. We invited them in for the sake of good manners. They asked, we answered. No problems at all,” he said.

Srivara said he was willing to talk to the diplomats to make them feel at ease. He showed them documents concerning the case, such as an order to set up an investigation.

Apparently upset by the idea, Prayut said the government must be formed based on the Constitution and laws.

“We cannot just draw up regulations on our own. Now, we can only wait for the election results. The establishment of the government cannot be completed now,” the PM said.

“You’ll have to see what motivated them to say that. What do they want?” he asked of the critics.

Prayut was referring to the suggestion by Democrat MP-to-be Thepthai Senapong.

Conflict has revived after the general election, focused on which faction could muster sufficient MPs to form a coalition government.

Thepthai proposed on Monday that a national unity government could be a solution, but not with Prayut as head of government.

Rather, Thepthai said, the chosen PM should be a person acceptable to all sides.

In a related development, the Election Commission (EC) continued to be targeted following allegations of irregularities both in the elections and in the post-election procedures.

These include its choice of method in calculating MP seats, which would allot seats to 11 small parties despite their failure to win sufficient votes to gain a single seat.

Several activists, including Srisuwan Janya and Ekachai Hongkangwan, yesterday lodged complaints with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) demanding impeachment of the seven EC commissioners.

They accused the EC of failing to conduct a credible election and deliver the results.

Meanwhile, anti-junta politician Ruangkrai Leekitwatana yesterday filed a complaint with the Ombudsman to consider nullifying the March 24 election altogether, citing multiple errors related to the vote counting.

Formula ‘unconstitutional’

In a related development, Pheu Thai Party yesterday asserted that the formula the EC planned to use was unconstitutional.

Party member Tossaporn Serirak told the press the EC’s calculation allocating some 11 seats to smaller parties that had gained less than 70,000 votes could not be permitted.

Citing the Constitution, the politician said the formula could only be used if there were not enough MPs in the House.

Not only had the smaller parties failed to gain sufficient votes, said Tossaporn, but their entry into Parliament would be at the expense of larger parties that had got the votes, he explained.

Future Forward Party, for example, would lose seven seats if the EC changed the formula to favour the smaller parties, he said.

“I believe they will use this incorrect formula to pave the way for a particular party to become the coalition leader,” Tossaporn said. “Previously, the spokesman of that party has said they would make a deal with these small parties to muster MPs to compete with Pheu Thai’s coalition.”

Tossapon yesterday also petitioned the EC to reconsider its calculation method.

Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit was officially hit with three charges, including sedition for an offence he allegedly committed in 2015.

“The acts of those foreign diplomats can be considered as diplomatically inappropriate and not in line with the United Nations’ diplomatic principles.

“They can only get involved in the Thai justice system if their citizens are accused and charged for committing offences in Thailand. In that case, they have the absolute right to get involved in questioning and the legal process,” Don Pramudwinai said.

He added that nobody would be allowed to do this in their countries, so he wondered why the diplomats thought they could do this in Thailand.

A group of foreign envoys, including a UN official, showed up at Pathum Wan Police Station on April 6 when Thanathorn faced official charges.

The diplomats were later seen shaking hands and taking pictures with Thanathorn at the stairs of the police station.

Thanathorn later posted two photographs showing the diplomats sitting in a room with chief investigator Pol General Srivara Rangsibhramanakul at the top of the table and Thanathorn near him.

The caption read: “Observed by the UN, the EU and 11 other foreign embassies, including the US Embassy during my interrogation by the deputy commissioner of Thailand.”

Srivara, who is also deputy National Police commissioner, said yesterday that the diplomats did not attend the questioning session, but that he had invited them for a briefing later on.

Don reiterated that the diplomats should not have done this, adding that if they wanted to gather information about the case as they claimed, they could have done so without attending the questioning session.

Don said his ministry would explain its concerns to the countries whose diplomats showed up, but added that he was considering whether to “invite” them for talks verbally or with a letter. Asked if the envoys have the right to show up, if invited by a Thai individual, Don said: “No, they are not. The individual in question could not invite them to engage in our justice system.

“All foreign diplomats should ask the Foreign Ministry and the government first if they are invited to attend such activities. In this case, the Foreign Ministry was not asked.”

Meanwhile Pannika Wanich, spokesperson for Future Forward Party, said that on April 4 a UN official contacted her party, Thanathorn’s lawyer and Pathum Wan Police Station saying he wanted to observe the April 6 interrogation session.

She added that the party has good ties with the ambassadors of the US, Canada and the European Union and that the party knew in advance that their diplomats would be attending the questioning session.

She defended the diplomats, saying they were aware of the protocol but decided to attend the session any way, because they believe the sedition charge is severe.

The diplomats were also concerned because this action is being used against a political leader who has just made his debut and his party has unofficially gained some 80 seats in Parliament.

It was 5pm on a Sunday evening last month when ballot boxes were closed and poll officials started tallying votes nationwide in Thailand’s first election in years.

Parit Wacharasindhu, better known as “Itim”, a Democrat Party candidate in Bangkok’s Bang Kapi-Wang Thong Lang constituency, realised he was going to lose when tallies started being posted.

“In some parts of my constituency, Future Forward candidates led the tally, followed by Phalang Pracharat, leaving us – the Democrats – behind in third position,” Parit said in an interview.

Losing his first election may have been a nightmare for Parit, leader of the “New Dem”, but for the Democrat Party it was a catastrophe.

The country’s oldest party won some 11.4 million popular votes in the 2011 election, but managed to secure only third position with 3.9 million votes, tipped to win just 55 seats.

The Democrats, who marked their 73rd anniversary last week, failed to secure a single seat in Bangkok – their traditional stronghold – losing to Phalang Pracharat and Future Forward.

In the South, another normally dependable Democrat bastion, Phalang Pracharat and Bhumjaithai swept up votes in several constituencies.

The Democrat party marked their 73rd anniversary last week.

The results of the first election in eight years proves that Thailand remains a divided nation, with a clear split between the pro- and anti-Thaksin camps, analysts say.

One camp, which calls itself democratic, is led by the Shinawatra-backed Pheu Thai, while the other is led by the pro-junta Phalang Pracharat Party. Both sides have been battling it out for political control, and this division is one of the reasons behind the Democrats’ huge loss, according to Stithorn Thananithi-chot, a political scientist at King Prajad-hipok’s Institute.

Both Phalang Pracharat, which nominated Prayut Chan-o-cha as its only PM candidate, and the Democrats are seen as allies in the anti-Thaksin camp and both share the same supporters, he pointed out.

However, since in this election, voters could only cast a single ballot, they had to choose just one party.

Obviously, supporters of the anti-Thaksin camp decided to opt for Phalang Pracharat – even though they back Democrats – because they want Prayut to return as prime minister, he said.

“We call this a tactical vote – voters cast their ballot using their head instead of their heart,” the academic explained.

Stithorn also pointed out that the 7 million popular votes the Democrat Party lost compared to the previous election – from 11.4 million in 2011 to 3.9 million – had clearly gone to Phalang Pracharat, which won 8.4 million popular votes.

The Democrat political strategy has obviously failed, said Titipol Phakdeewanich, the political science dean at Ubon Ratchathani University.

He said the Democrats failed to realise that the demographic and behaviour of voters has changed since Thaksin Shinawatra’s now-defunct Thai Rak Thai won by a landslide in 2005.

While its rival, Thai Rak Thai, which later became Pheu Thai, uses policies to attract voters, the Democrats continue with negative campaigns, with mudslinging and accusations of vote buying, he said.

“Campaigns like this no longer work in the modern era. Voters now understand the electoral system better and focus more on policies that parties have on offer. Money cannot influence them any longer,” Titipol said.

He added that by refusing to accept the reality of the Thai political landscape, the Democrat Party has ended up alienating its supporters.

A ‘facelift’ necessary

The rise of Future Forward, which won more than 80 seats in its electoral debut, is a model that this old party should copy. It’s time the Democrats began transforming from a party that is controlled by the older generation to one that allows the new generation a larger role, the academics suggested.

Last year, the party introduced “New Dem”, a group of 21 young party members led by Parit – former party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva’s nephew – with the hope of acting as a bridge to engage with the 8 million first-time voters. However, this group failed to meet the aim.

The Democrat Party has been facing a crisis in its party structure for a decade now, said Yuthaporn Issarachai, a political scientist at Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University.

The party still follows the old political system and focuses on seniority, so the New Dem cannot take part in making any decisions or introducing changes, Yuthaporn said.

“Hence, they were unable to win new supporters or secure their old supporters,” he said.

The academics agree that the key for the Democrat Party to survive will be to infuse it with new blood, and allow the new generation to come up with a strategy for the future.

The party really needs to build a connection with young voters, as they are growing up and will become a part of future politics, Titipol said.

Also, young voters were the force behind Future Forward’s brilliant debut.

“This loss does not mean the end of the party. The Democrats can win big in the next election if they can capture young voters,” Titipol said.

But many challenges lie ahead.

Titipol also wondered how the oldest party would be able to end the long-held perception that it has always made compromises with the military at a time when the new generation is concerned about the future of democracy in Thailand.

Yuthaporn agreed, saying the party needs a “facelift” or a move to “re-democrat” itself.

“Getting the new generation more involved will open a new chapter for the party. But will the old, conservative generation make way for the new?” he asked.

Stithorn also agreed that the Democrats needed to create a balance between the two generations.

So, he said, as a short-term solution, former party leader and premier Chuan Leekpai should come to the party’s rescue by taking up the leadership. Later, the party can take time to find its position, reposition itself and finally re-brand itself, he said.

The academics agree that the Democrat Party can restore its popularity, though it may be a tough task and might take longer than five years.

“It will be tough and take longer because they are not fighting against the opposition, but actually a junta-backed party in the same [anti-Thaksin] segment, especially if Phalang Pracharat leads the next government,” Stithorn said.

“The party will have to wait for Phalang Pracharat to fall. The weaker Phalang Pracharat is, the stronger the Democrats will become.”

THE UNDER-FIRE Election Commission (EC) finds itself in more hot water after an activist group said it planned to lodge a petition with the anti-graft body today, seeking an investigation into the poll agency’s conduct and alleged irregularities.

Srisuwan Janya, secretary-general of the Association of Organisations for the Protection of the Thai Constitution, said yesterday the group would submit the petition at the headquarters of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) in Nonthaburi province.

The petition alleges offences committed by all seven members of the EC, and Srisuwan said the evidence will include the names of voters and “witnesses” to the alleged offences.

He said the group wants the NACC to refer the matter to public prosecutors, who he believes will bring it before the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders. “If the court agrees to accept the case, the seven commissioners have to stop working until a verdict is delivered,” he said.

EC deputy secretary-general Sawang Boonmee defended the body, saying the allegations were groundless and the Thai electoral process was one of the world’s most secure, as it was safe from any kind of fraud or cheating.

The system is transparent as the election committee is stationed in all 350 constituencies and 92,300 polling stations across the country, Sawang posted on his personal Facebook page yesterday.

More than a million volunteers, independent observers from home and abroad, political parties’ representatives and media were allowed to watch the process at the polling stations, he said.

However, he said, the system is a bit complicated since there are 350 different ballot cards for all 350 constituencies because candidates have different numbers.

Previously, candidates of a political party had the same number for all constituencies. A lot of voters living overseas also got it wrong in advance voting as they were confused by the ballot cards.

Sawang said the polling hours were longer than in previous elections – from 8am to 5pm, rather than until 3pm as in the past. With the high numbers of eligible voters – more than 51 million – officials had to work 15 to 18 hours on election day, he said.

Complicated system

The turnout of 74 per cent is the highest-ever since elections were held under the 1997 Constitution, he said. Eighty-one political parties and more than 12,000 candidates were in the electoral fray, he said, adding that usually only 20 to 30 parties and a few thousand candidates take part. The legal complexities as well as a complicated system and different ballots overwhelmed election officials on the day, he said.

The most complicated issue has been the announcing of results. The commission until now has only released the total number of votes each party won, but there is no confirmation yet on how many Lower House seats they translate into.

The two major camps competing for the right to form the government have made equally strong claims. While the pro-junta Phalang Pracharat Party claimed it had the people’s mandate as it got the most number of votes – 8.4 million – the anti-junta Pheu Thai has staked its claim as it has won the most seats – 137 out of 350 constituencies.

An even more contentious issue is the right formula for calculation of party-list MPs, as different formulas would favour different camps.

Election commissioner Sawang defended the delay, arguing it was a long process as the Constitution and the election law had laid out a complicated formula for calculating the number of seats.

Also, he said, the intense rivalry between parties had resulted in a spree of complaints. “There are so many groundless allegations against the Election Commission,” he said. “If such allegations are backed with solid evidence, the commissioners cannot escape action.

“If anybody has the evidence to prove that our work was without transparency, and neither free nor fair, then please show us the evidence so we can tackle the problem,” he said.