The EC has finished discussions with the 54 parties contesting the March 24 election in relation to debates about their public policies, which will be taped and broadcast on air from February 26 to March 4.

Party representatives will choose from topics set by the EC, covering the economy, social development, education, agriculture, national security and public health, before having their party leaders, PM candidates or other representatives to participate in the debate.

This is the first time the EC is organising the electoral debate. This time, the most controversial figure expected to be in the debate is General Prayut, who has resisted calls from other parties to step down from his prime minister’s post in the run-up to the election in order to avoid having an unfair advantage.

On Friday, Sawaeng chose not to confirm whether or not the premier could join the debate, saying only that there was no law barring him as a PM candidate from doing so.

Phalang Pracharat has submitted a request with the EC for clarification, asking the commission to look into the ambiguity and to rule on the extent to which the PM can participate in the race as a candidate. The request also asked if Prayut could assist with the campaign now underway, the party’s secretary-general, Sontirat Sontijirawong, said. Sontirat has already stepped down from his post as commerce minister.

EC secretary-general Pol Colonel Jarungvith Phumma said the EC has not been able to clarify anything yet and has yet to see the party’s petition. However, once it has received the petition, the EC is obliged to reply within 30 days.

Jarungvith said the EC needs to review the issue thoroughly, including studying related laws as well as related clauses in the Constitution.

Personally, he said, he cannot at this time predict how the issue will unfold.

A month of Thailand’s first election in more than five years, political parties are rolling out promises for neo-populist programmes, economic revitalisation, political reform and environmental protection. Candidates representing the LGBT community and ethnic minorities are steering human rights to the forefront.

What some cultural scholars and social critics are still waiting for are policy proposals pertaining to art and culture. A seminar last weekend hosted by the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre and Artists Network did little to shed light on the matter.

Ten of the 81 parties contesting the March 24 election had representatives at what was billed as a political forum and some had “art and culture” policies to share. Three of the bigger parties – Phalang Pracharat, Pheu Thai and Thai Raksa Chart – did not participate.

The three-hour forum ended with no one offering a “macro policy” on cultural infrastructure or a strategy to foster a domestic creative industry able to compete on the global stage.

“The fact that only 10 parties are participating suggests that other candidates aren’t too concerned about cultural issues,” veteran artist Manit Sriwanichpoom declared at the forum. He denounced the campaigning to date as rife with propaganda and ideology.

“They lack vision on a national cultural policy,” Manit said.

Phungluang Party leader Kongpop Wangsunthon said it wanted to promote Thai cultural tourism globally, while Piyabutr Saengkanokkul of the Future Forward Party, a legal scholar, said his party wants to amend any law limiting freedom of expression and build more art and communal spaces across the Kingdom.

“We will promote local art globally by establishing an arts fund in every village,” Kongpop said. “Intellectuals in each village will share their knowledge and pass it on to the next generation and carry local wisdom on into cultural tourism.”

Piyabutr noted that many artists and activists had to endure censorship under the military junta for the past four years. “We will use culture as soft power to enhance rights,” he said. “Our party will amend any laws that limit the freedom of expression. We believe that art and culture can drive our society equally.”

With its youthful leadership, Future Forward is specifically targeting younger voters, using pop culture and social media as campaign tools. Last year, it hosted the Future Festival in Bangkok, with film screenings, concerts and art exhibitions.

The party counts dozens of artists among its members, including famous transgender filmmaker Thanwarin Sukhaphisit, whose movie “Insects in the Backyard” was banned by the Culture Ministry.

“We will decentralise cultural management and support local museums,” Piyabutr said. “We also plan to open more community art spaces, provide financial support to artists and establish artist councils.”

The Commoner and Thai Local Power parties are focusing on cultural localisation.

“Freedom of expression and equality are the keys to culture management,” said Laksanaree Duangtadam of the Commoner Party, himself an artist. “We will promote cultural diversity and provide financial support to artists and we plan to build local museums throughout the Kingdom.”

Thai Local Power’s Chuenchob Kongudom agrees that’s a sound approach, along with the promotion of local wisdom in every province as another means to forge a creative economy.

“We should export our arts to the world,” he said. “Thai wine should be as popular as Bordeaux. Our party also plans to promote clusters of local art villages for cultural tourism.”

Vitidnan Rojanapanich of Chart Pattana Party, another artist, said it wanted to use digital platforms to get the world interested in Thai art and culture.

“Thais like Louis Vuitton more than Thai art, and this is a problem in our society,” he said. “We will merge startups and artists to invent new products. We’ll revolutionise the Culture Ministry for the progressive promotion of Thai art and culture, like the way South Korea promotes its culture around the world. We hope to make Thailand the creative economy hub of Asia.”

Sukthawee Suwannachairop of the Moderate Party said the cultural landscape could be transformed through changes in the law, upgrades in art education and support for the art market.

“We should decentralise and deregulate cultural management by using new technology to upgrade our art and culture,” he said.

“For example, using YouTube as a new learning method. I like the idea of TK Park, which decentralises learning to local communities with its branches upcountry.”

Palinee Ngaarmpring, one of the Mahachon Party’s three candidates for the next prime minister and the only transgender challenger contesting the election, said she was interested in cultural diversity and freedom of expression. “Culture can be a weapon for developing the country,” she said. “We will use market mechanisms to boost contemporary and local art. We will promote local products such as wine and herbal medicine globally.”

Representatives of the Action Coalition for Thailand, Chart Thai Pattana and Democracy parties proffered ideas for conserving Thai culture so future generations can continue enjoying it.

No policies on cultural diversity

Thammasat University anthropologist Yukti Mukdawijitra and art lecturer Thanom Chapakdee of Srinakharinwirot Prasarnmitr University agreed that most of the policies shared involved smaller-scale rather than national undertakings.

“There were no policies about using our cultural diversity to empower society,” Thanom told The Nation Weekend. “Those based on ideology would be difficult to implement. Some plan to build a lot of local museums but don’t talk about sustainable management, professional staffing and long-term funding.”

The mid-1990s Democrat government under Chuan Leekpai built four museums in four regions – Chiang Mai, Khon Kaen, Songkhla and Chon Buri, he noted. “But because of a lack of funding and professional management, these museums are basically dead today.”

Yukti found repetition in many of the policy proposals, such as promoting Thai art globally and cultural tourism.

“What’s lacking is a national policy that will lay the foundation for cultural advancement, like the Thaksin Shinawatra government did in the early 2000s by setting out policy for a creative industry.”

Thaksin, founder of the now-defunct Thai Rak Thai party that has several affiliated parties contesting this election, in 2004 established the Office of Knowledge Management and Development. It was a public organisation with a Bt790-million budget for building a creative economy out of art, design, fashion, food, film and other forms of intellectual property.

Within that structure he established the Thailand Creative and Design Centre and Thailand Knowledge Park (TK Park).

Efforts in this direction continued under the Abhisit Vejjajiva (Democrat, 2008-2011) and Yingluck Shinawatra (Pheu Thai, 2011-2014) administrations. Prayut Chan-o-cha did not overtly pursue the same goal after seizing power in 2014.

Another anti-junta party, Thai Raksa Chart, last week faced legal action, which could lead to its dissolution. Future Forward leader Thanathorn will now face court next week. Thanathorn, along with two other party executives, have been accused of entering false information into the computer system after they criticised the junta on their online livestream “Return Friday to the People” – a parody on the Premier Prayut Chan-o-cha’s televised monologue “Return Happiness to the People” programme.

Future Forward made public on Wednesday night the lawsuit being brought against the party. They encouraged their supporters to show support through online posts with the hashtag #SaveThanathorn, as the party leader could be jailed on February 27 if ordered by the attorney general.

Numerous netizens viewed it as a mistreatment of the anti-junta camp and dubbed the lawsuit as another attempt by the junta to eliminate its rivals from the fray with the election only weeks away.

Thanathorn and his Future Forward Party are popular among young and progressive voters. Observers are also speculating that if Thai Raksa Chart Party were to be dissolved, some of their supporters could transfer their votes to Future Forward, seen as another pillar in the anti-junta camp. NCPO spokesman Colonel Winthai Suvaree insisted yesterday that due legal process was being followed. The NCPO has not done anything to expedite the procedure, he said.

Thanathorn, Klaikong Vaidhyakarn and Charuwan Sarankate have been charged with violating the computer crime law, as they criticised the junta’s move to recruit former MPs of other parties to its party.

Winthai said the computer crime law is a normal law, and was not one created by the NCPO in order to attack a particular group of people. The spokesman also explained that Thanathorn and the two others had accused the Thai justice system of becoming a political tool. It was an act to undermine the justice system of the country, he said.

Thanathorn yesterday took part in an election rally in Bangkok as usual and was welcomed warmly, especially by younger voters. He told reporters he had no worries about the lawsuit and remained high-spirited for the election rally.

“If I really get jailed, other members in the party are more than ready to carry out the work and the election campaign,” Thanathorn said. “These include [deputy leader] Piyabutr Saengkanonkul and [spokesman] Pannika Wanich.”

Another anti-junta party, Thai Raksa Chart, last week faced legal action which could lead to its dissolution. Future Forward leader Thanathorn will now face court next week. Thanathorn, along with two other party executives, have been accused of entering false information into the computer system after they criticised the junta on their online show “Return Friday to the People” – a parody on the Premier Prayut Chan-o-cha’s televised monologue “Return Happiness to the People” programme.

Future Forward made public on Wednesday night the lawsuit being brought against Thanathorn. They encouraged their supporters to show support through online posts with the hashtag #SaveThanathorn, as the party leader could be jailed on February 27 if ordered by the attorney general.

Numerous netizens viewed it as a mistreatment of the anti-junta camp and called the lawsuit another attempt by the junta to eliminate its rivals from the fray with the election only weeks away.

Thanathorn and his Future Forward Party are popular among young and progressive voters. Observers are also speculating that if Thai Raksa Chart Party were to be dissolved, some of their supporters could transfer their votes to Future Forward, seen as another pillar in the anti-junta camp. NCPO spokesman Colonel Winthai Suvaree insisted yesterday that due legal process was being followed. The NCPO has not done anything to expedite the procedure, he said.

Thanathorn, Klaikong Vaidhyakarn and Charuwan Sarankate have been charged with violating the computer crime law, as they criticised the junta’s move to recruit former MPs of other parties to its party.

Winthai said the computer crime law is a normal law, and was not one created by the NCPO in order to attack a particular group of people. The spokesman also explained that Thanathorn and the two others had accused the Thai justice system of becoming a political tool. It was an act to undermine the justice system of the country, he said.

Thanathorn yesterday took part in an election rally in Bangkok as usual and was welcomed warmly, especially by younger voters. He told reporters he had no worries about the lawsuit and remained high-spirited for the election rally.

“If I really get jailed, other members in the party are more than ready to carry out the work and the election campaign,” Thanathorn said. “These include [deputy leader] Piyabutr Saengkanonkul and [spokesman] Pannika Wanich.”

 Critics yesterday largely chorused in agreement that the Army, which often intervenes in politics, deserves a budget reduction and reform. Social activist Veera Somkwamkid wrote on his Facebook page that he agreed with the policy proposal to cut the defence budget. It is a source from which highranked officers could unlawfully seek benefits, the critic explained.

“The cut should not affect ordinary military officers because we’re not cutting their salary,” Veera said, adding that the surplus from the cut could be allocated to other areas such as public health and education.

Junta critic and leader of Seree Ruam Thai party Sereepisuth Temeeyaves yesterday said his party also proposed to reduce the size of the Army and would reallocate the funds to improve the quality of people’s life. “The Army is part of the problem facing the country, especially in the past five years since the coup. If I get a chance to run the country, I will abolish conscription and disband the unnecessary units including their headquarters and the court. We’re not in wars. These are not necessary,” he told an election rally in Prachuap Khiri Khan.

Student activist Parit Chiwarak

Seree Ruam Thai party joins Pheu Thai Party, Democrat Party, Future Forward Party in calling for an examination of the military budget. The criticism came after Army chief General Apirat Kongsompong told politicians to listen to the anthem “Nak Paendin” (“worthless”) if they were planning to reduce the defence budget or nullify conscription. “Nak Paendin” was part of the grand propaganda in 1970s against the communist movement.

The lyrics labelled leftists as enemies of the state that needed to be eliminated. A favourite of ultranationalists, it is viewed by many others as hatefilled and divisive. Following heavy public criticism concerning both the need for Army reform and the Army’s chief’s aggressive reaction, a military spokesman yesterday came out to defend its controversial budget.

While the public appears sceptical of the relations between the militarybacked government and the rising defence budget, the spokesman LtGeneral Kongcheep Tantravanich said the allocation was proportionate. The budget rise (from Bt183 billion before the 2014 coup to Bt227 billion this year) was also proportionate to the national budget’s overall increase, he said. In fact, he insisted, it had been reduced by some 5 per cent in relative terms. A budget cut would affect numerous security units and their work, including disaster relief units, he said.

The Army sees its responsibility as not limited only to war. In response to criticism about the military intervention in politics, Kongcheep said it was difficult to explain. However, if the people had not wanted it, the intervention could not have taken place, he said. In a related development, a couple of the prodemocracy protesters led by student activist Parit Chiwarak also protested in front of the Royal Thai Army Headquarter against Apirat’s invocation of the song. They called on Apirat to revoke the order to play the controversial song in the military barracks across the country, saying that the anthem only incite hatred and violence. It is said that in the massacre on October 6, 1976, the farright played the song as they launched a crackdown on students at Thammasat University.

ITS latest bid to fight the possibility of dissolution, the embattled Thai Raksa Chart Party yesterday defended its nomination of Princess Ubolratana, saying it had been done at the wish and consent of the Princess.

The party’s lawyer, Surachai Chinchai, explained that the nomination was done with innocent intent and the party had no special goals behind it.

“We innocently believed that we could do it. Also, it was done at the wish of the one who was nominated,” he said. He also insisted that the party had not falsely used the Princess’s name, and that Ubolratana had agreed to be named the party’s sole prime ministerial candidate.

The nomination of Ubolratana, who is the elder sister of His Majesty the King, was submitted to the Election Commission on the morning of February 8 by party leader Pheeraphon Pongpanit.

However, her nomination was short-lived as the King issued a decree that members of the Royal Family could not be involved in politics.

The controversial nomination led to several complaints against the party as well as petitions for its dissolution. In response, the EC on February 13 petitioned the Constitutional Court to dissolve the party, saying its act breached the political party law that prohibited any opposition to constitutional monarchy.

A day later the court agreed to consider the petition and told Thai Raksa Chart to submit its defence within seven days. Speaking to reporters after submitting the defence documents, Surachai said: “When the King issued the order on February 8 at 11pm, the party immediately announced the following morning that it was adhering to the order willingly. This showed our loyalty to the King and the monarchy, and also showed that we had no intention of pursuing the nomination.”

Insisting that the nomination had been done innocently and with the Princess’s consent, Surachai also argued that the ban for “opposition to the monarchy” targeted moves to install communism in the country or commit treason.

He said the party did not commit any of these crimes, as Ubolratana had given her consent to the nomination. “The petition does not just call for the dissolution of the party, but also calls for the banning of party executives from politics for life.

This is equivalent to capital punishment in politics,” he said.

Petition ‘not in line with law’

He also pointed out that the EC had submitted the petition to the Constitutional Court without even investigating the issue. “Therefore, the steps taken by the EC were not in line with the law,” he said, adding this made its petition to the Constitutional Court illegitimate.

In its defence, the party has submitted a list of 19 witnesses, 14 of whom are party executives and five outsiders. However, he refused to say whether the controversial candidate would be among the five witnesses.

Separately, a party source claimed the Princess would not testify in court. As to whether the Constitutional Court will deliver its ruling before the March 24 election, Surachai said he believes voters should first have a chance to vote. “This will benefit the justice system,” he said.

The EC has been widely criticised for its haste in taking the case to court, with some saying this was a form of discrimination and a move to remove Thai Raksa Chart from the fray. Thai Raksa Chart is a pro-Thaksin Shinawatra party, believed to be fielded in the election to help Pheu Thai Party gain party-list MP seats.

The creation of separate parties was a result of the new election system that gives big parties only a few seats in the House of Representatives.

The Shinawatra camp’s election aspirations could be seriously hurt if Thai Raksa Chart were to be dissolved.