Preechaphol Pongpanit, the 37-year-old son of former deputy education minister Sermsak Pongpanit, was chosen as Thai Raksa Chart’s leader yesterday. He was previously a Pheu Thai MP from Khon Kaen province.

Former PM Thaksin Shinawatra’s nephew, Rupop, was chosen as deputy party leader.

The three other deputy leaders named yesterday were red-shirt chief Pongsak Phusitsakul along with former Pheu Thai MPs Sunee Luangwijit and Pruetichai Viriyaroj.

The secretary-general’s position went to Mitti, son of former Palang Prachachon MP Yongyuth Tiyapairath.

Other core leaders attending the meeting yesterday included Thaksin’s niece Chayika Wongnapachant, former finance minister Kittirat Na-Ranong’s son Ton, and former energy minister Pichai Naripthaphan’s son Pachara.

While it was previously believed that Pheu Thai’s big-name politicians might migrate to the sister party, they were conspicuously absent yesterday.

However, the possibility of them moving to other sister parties has not been ruled out.

Key Pheu Thai leader Chaturon Chaisang admitted in a Facebook post on Tuesday that due to the party-dissolution threat and the possibility of Pheu Thai losing a significant share in the Lower House due to the new election method, some party members were considering seeking shelter in other parties.

However, he rejected the notion that the move was related to an internal conflict over Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan’s de facto leadership, saying it was not such a big issue for the members to be moving elsewhere.

Chaturon, chosen to lead Pheu Thai’s policy committee just two weeks ago, was also expected to leave Pheu Thai to prepare for a worst-case scenario. In the Facebook post, he said he has developed a strong attachment to the party, but will have to eventually make a decision.

“When the time comes, all of us will have to make a decision. I will consider the best way that allows me to work according to my ideology,” Chaturon wrote.

Wiwat Yodprasit, 28, was convicted by the court for the shooting at the Lak Si intersection in Bangkok’s Lak Si district.

The area was under a state of emergency declared after anti-government protesters threatened to obstruct voting at different polling stations and the intersection was the scene of a volatile stand-off between pro- and anti-government demonstrators.

The suspect was called “popcorn gunman” due to the image of a masked person holding a rifle in a large empty bag of popcorn seeds with the gun’s muzzle sticking out of a hole in the bag. Many images and video recordings of his actions at the intersection appeared in the mainstream media and on the Internet.

The masked gunman was believed to be one of the security guards protecting protesters affiliated with the People’s Democratic Reform Committee, which at that time held street rallies in Bangkok against the government led by Yingluck Shinawatra. Wearing a balaclava while in action, the gunman fired shots into a department store near the intersection, seriously injuring four people, one of whom later died. The deceased man was identified as Akaew Saeliew, 72, whose daughter Uangfa became a co-plaintiff in the case along with public prosecutors.

Wiwat was charged with murder, attempted murder, possessing a firearm and ammunition without permission, and carrying the gun and bullets in a public place against the law and the emergency decree.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday overturned the Appeals Court verdict acquitting Wiwat. The top court ruled that video footage and photos posted online, which had been produced by the prosecution during the trial, were sufficient to establish that the defendant and the masked gunman were the same person. The defendant’s brother also delivered a damning testimony to the court, saying the masked gunman in the footage resembled Wiwat, the verdict said.

In March 2016, a lower court found the evidence produced by the prosecution and by police officers on duty were convincing.

The court was convinced that Wiwat was the masked gunman involved in the 2014 shooting. The court initially sentenced him to life imprisonment but later reduced the jail term to 37 years and four months due to his confession deemed to be beneficial to the trial. The convict appealed against the verdict.

In June last year, the Appeals Court acquitted Wiwat, giving him the benefit of the doubt. The court said the prosecution had failed to bring the witnesses who had taken the photos and videos of the gunman while in action.

Despite the acquittal, the court ordered that Wiwat remain in detention pending a verdict by the Supreme Court. He did not react on hearing the verdict on Wednesday but did exchange some words with his relatives and lawyer. He was later accompanied by Department of Corrections officials to the Bang Kwang Maximum Security Prison, where he was detained after the lower court’s guilty verdict.

His lawyer, Puangthip Boonsanong, said the defence had expected the case against him to be rejected, but they respected the court’s decision. She would later apply for a royal pardon on Wiwat’s behalf, the lawyer added.

Lawyer Chokchai Angkaew, who represents the co-plaintiffs who are family members of the gunman’s victims, said that they were satisfied with the imprisonment verdict.

Don said foreign observers typically visit countries with problematic elections. “Allowing foreign observers means we have problems, in their eyes or in our own view. It means we can’t take care of ourselves. And that’s inauspicious.” He added that the best observers of the election could be eligible Thai voters and their compatriots.

“My question is whether the media wants our country to be viewed as problematic in the eyes of the international community. The fact is that we have no problems holding an election,” Don told reporters at Government House.

For the sake of credibility, politicians and critics have sought foreign monitors to be observers during the general election tentatively scheduled for February 24. The Election Commission (EC) has reportedly taken requests from foreign organisations to observe the national vote.

The foreign minister said yesterday that foreign countries are actually following developments regarding the upcoming election through their missions in Thailand.

“We don’t need to rely on foreign countries for everything that we do. Having foreign intervention would mean we are still immature and undeveloped. We can do it ourselves and we have succeeded many times already,” he said.

Don cited the national referendum on the Constitution in 2016, which he said had gained praise and acceptance from the international community. He said that this was not a matter of narrowmindedness. “It would be a pity if we have to rely on others all the time. We need outside assistance only if we can’t do it with the knowledge and methods we have.”

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha yesterday dismissed an allegation by politicians that the junta was trying to gain an advantage over political parties by not lifting the political restrictions although the voting date was drawing near. General Prayut, who also heads the ruling junta National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), said complete relaxation of post-coup political restrictions would be in line with the relevant laws.

“This has nothing to do with the NCPO,” he said at Government House.

According to the PM, the law states that talks among relevant parties about the lifting of political restrictions can take place only after a decree is issued setting the election date, which is expected by December.

In response to a warning by some politicians of violence during the poll, Prayut said the government was doing its best to maintain peace and order. “I don’t know who wants to create disorder. If they dare to do so, I don’t think the public will agree with them,” he said. While politicians are still prohibited from campaigning for votes, the premier has frequently made trips to the provinces in recent months, meeting local residents.

He is scheduled to travel to Kanchanaburi today. Prayut’s trips during this period would focus on provinces where the government’s popularity is poor, according to a source familiar with the matter. After each of his trips, relevant agencies would survey local residents about their opinions regarding the PM’s visit, the source said.

ACM Prajin, who oversees the Department of Corrections, said the agency reported to him that Boonsong has fallen ill from an intervertebral disc disorder that requires immediate surgery at the Police General Hospital.

“His slipped spinal discs pose a danger. Without proper treatment, he could become partially or completely paralysed,” he said.

Naras Savestanan, director-general of the Department of Corrections, said yesterday that doctors from the Police General Hospital, who regularly examined Boonsong, have suggested an operation to treat his disorder.

“His condition is rather severe. The hospital run by the Department of Corrections is not equipped well enough to deal with his case, so Boonsong needs to get his operation at the Police General Hospital,” Naras said.

He also said that Boonsong had underdone physical therapy for a long time to treat this problem related to spinal discs. However, a check with the hospital showed no appointment for Boonsong’s operation.

According to a source, Boonsong has undergone regular examinations at the hospital.

A recent X-ray examination discovered degradation in his cervical bones, requiring corrective surgery.

Boonsong, 58, was sentenced by the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders in August last year to 42 years’ in prison for his involvement in irregularities, in which state-owned rice was supposed to be sold to China in a government-to-government deal.

The rice was never exported to China but ended up in the hands of a private company with connections to government figures.

The supposed rice sale to China stemmed from the previous government’s rice-pledging scheme, in which rice was bought from farmers at rates well above the market price.

Boonsong’s deputy minister Poom Sarapol and senior officials in the Commerce Ministry are also serving lengthy |jail terms in the same corruption |case.

Yingluck Shinawatra, who headed that government, fled the country just days before the court was scheduled to read its verdict in a related case against her that also stemmed from the corruption-plagued populist project.

In September last year, the court sentenced former prime minister Yingluck in absentia to five years in jail for negligence that led to the corruption.

In his testimony, Panthongtae told the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases that the Bt10-million cheque given to him by property group Krissada Mahanakorn was part of an investment in a joint business venture.

The cheque handed to Panthongtae was part of the Bt10.4-billion loan the company’s affiliates had dishonestly obtained from the state-run Krungthai Bank in 2003, when the defendant’s father Thaksin was serving as prime minister. The property firm’s affiliates had managed to secure the loans despite their poor credit rating.

Most of the bank’s executives and senior members of the property group, including its boss Vichai Krissadathanont, were sentenced to prison in 2015. In September this year, the 79-year-old businessman and five others were indicted for alleged money laundering in connection with the loan.

Meanwhile, Panthongtae pleaded not guilty to the money-laundering charge yesterday and also asked for permission to submit his testimony in writing. The court accepted his request and set December 14 as the deadline for submission.

The court has also scheduled four meetings with the prosecution and defence in January, February, March and April for both sides to crosscheck their witnesses and evidence. The court has also ordered both sides to meet on June 25 next year to discuss the scheduling of testimonies by their witnesses.

The court will decide on January 22 whether the cases against Panthongtae, Vichai and others should be merged as requested by the public prosecutors.

Panthongtae’s mother, Khunying Pojaman Na Pombejr, and his younger sisters Pinthongta Kunakornwong and Paethongtarn accompanied him to court yesterday for moral support.

Many politicians from Pheu Thai Party, who are close to the Shinawatras and loyal to Thaksin, were also present to back Panthongtae. They included the party’s leader, Wirote Pao-in, its secretary-general Phumtham Wechayachai, and former foreign minister Noppadon Patama.

It was the first time FWP had reached out to Bangkokians on the capital’s streets since the creation of the party. Thanathorn said he chose to kick off the campaign in Bangkok’s Bangrak and Chinatown districts because it was where his family came from originally.

“It’s nice to start this [campaign] where I grew up. We have been very warmly welcomed around here,” he said. “Those who didn’t already know about [the party] got to know us today. And those who already knew us, showered us with their support. The feedback has been great.”

The party members marched along the 1.3-kilometre route along Yaowarat Road, which hosts the largest Chinese community in Bangkok, to both introduce the party and encourage the passers-by as well as the local merchants to apply for membership of the party.

Although political activities have been restricted by the ruling junta, the party on Monday said that it had been granted permission by the Election Commission to enrol new members.

FWP leader Thanathorn himself walked into different stores along the street, handing out leaflets bearing information about membership applications and introducing FWP as “a party of the new generation volunteering to drive new politics”.

A number of people on Monday greeted the group warmly. Some asked to take a photo with Thanathorn. Although it is widely believed that FWP’s main supporters are the younger generation, Thanathorn on Monday met mostly with middle-aged female supporters.

Some of the local merchants on Monday admitted that they did not know much about the parties but welcomed the introduction of the new party on Monday. Others claimed to be a fan and said they had been following the party’s news closely.

At one point a woman, likely in her 50s, appeared sceptical and asked Thanathorn directly how he would approach corruption and whether he would really be able to prevent future coups.

Thanathorn responded that law enforcement agencies would be the instruments to tackle corruption and that he would try to prevent future coups before agreeing to take a selfie with the woman. The woman declined to give her name to The Nation.

During the march on Monday, a man eagerly came out of a gold shop where he was shopping and loudly celebrated FWP, saying, “Go, Go FWP!”

Later identifying himself as Bunchong Kunsupsak, he said he was rooting for FWP, hoping the party could bring new hope to Thai politics.

“I’m tired of the old politics,” the 66-year-old said.

The party’s march concluded at a local traditional, small Chinese coffee shop where Thanathorn’s mother, Somporn Juangroongruangkit, talked to the press.

She said Thanathorn had always been keen about politics and social work. However, in the past 16 years, he had worked in the family business and only decided to join politics this year when he was 39, she said.

The mother said she disagreed with the idea at first. However, as her son had already set his mind on this path, she had to support him and wished him success, Somporn said.

“I can guarantee that this man is not in politics for his own gain. He just wants to help society,” Thanathorn’s mother said. “I asked him to choose between [the family business] and Thailand and he answered without hesitation that he chose Thailand. So, I understand his determination.”

More than 51 per cent of respondents in the latest Nida Poll said the song “Prathet Goo Me” (My Country Has These…) simply reflected some truths in Thai politics and society, according to results of the survey released yesterday.

Almost 40 per cent of those surveyed said they viewed it as another song criticising the country and politics.

Another 11 per cent said the song’s lyrics contained foul language and 8 per cent of the respondents disagreed that the song made “too severe accusations” against the country.

Some 4 per cent of those surveyed also found it inappropriate for the song’s music video to re-enact a violent scene that took place during the massacre of student protesters outside Thammasat University in October 1976. Most respondents – 58.1 per cent – said they had never listened to the song or viewed its music video while the remaining 41.9 per cent said they had previously.

However, more than half of people who had listened to it – 53.7 per cent – said they felt indifferent about the song, 30.9 per cent said they liked it, and 15.4 per cent said they disliked it. The survey was conducted by the National Institute for Development Administration (Nida) on 1,259 eligible voters (people aged 18 and over) in all regions of the country between October 31 and November 2. In another survey conducted by Suan Dusit University, it was found that 60.4 per cent of the respondents said the song was used by a certain group of people to make political attacks for their benefit.

Another 35.7 per cent called on people to listen to opinions that differ from theirs while 20.7 per cent of those surveyed said the song reflected truths in society, namely the difference of views among people, according to results of Suan Dusit Poll released yesterday.

The survey was conducted on 1,117 people between October 30 and November 3.

The speakers at the event entitled “Towards a Free and Fair Election: Situation in Thai Society” said the post-coup government had yet to lift the ban on political activities and by extending its control over the Election Commission (EC) has drawn up an “unfair” system.

They called on international agencies to observe the election, which has been tentatively scheduled for February 24.

“To be free and fair, there must be equal access to national media, resources, a fair election-supervising authority, as well as political freedom of electorate, candidates, and political parties,” said Sunai Phasuk, Asia Division senior researcher of Human Rights Watch.

But as freedom of expression, association and assembly – the main characteristics of a democratic society – remain blocked, Thailand should have other countries coming to observe the electoral process, he said.

Sunai was speaking at the panel discussion held at Thammasat University (TU).

He was joined by former EC member Gothom Arya, Pheu Thai Party senior politician Chaturon Chaisang, EC deputy secretary-general Matha Silapun and TU political scientist Janjira Sombatpoonsiri.

Following the 2014 military coup, democratic countries such as the United States, members of the European Union, Japan and Australia have criticised the junta. They have called for free and fair elections that would lead to the formation of a democratically elected civilian government.

Chaturon said he did not think the upcoming election would be a free and fair one.

The national vote was drawing closer but political parties can’t even communicate their policies to the people, he said. “The bans on political campaigning when the election is drawing near point to a lack of democracy and fairness.”

The veteran politician said the government needed to restore freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly as well as lift other bans imposed on political parties.

Gothom, a former election commissioner and peace campaigner, yesterday also called on the EC to help prevent people in power from taking advantage over other political players in the run-up to the next election.

He said that in order to ensure fairness, the junta government must not interfere in the work of the EC. “How can the |EC work if they are afraid of being dismissed from their positions?” he asked.

In March, EC member Somchai Srisutthiyakorn was removed from office by junta leader General Prayut Chan-o-cha for “causing confusion” regarding the election date.

TU political scientist Janjira said elections are often used as a means to give legitimacy to authoritarian governments and keep them in power.

She said in many countries in Eastern Europe and Asia, authoritarian governments allow elections to take place but influence the results by controlling the election supervising authorities, tampering with election results, controlling the media, and blocking international agencies from observing the voting.

Matha, of the EC, told yesterday’s discussion that the agency was already well prepared for the next election.

“We have found no obstacles in holding the election. And in this upcoming election, the EC has tools that would make it easier for us to work,” he said, referring to a new law that increases its powers.

Srisuwan Janya, secretary-general of the Association for the Protection of the Thai Constitution, earlier filed a petition with the Office of the Auditor-General asking for an investigation into the Army’s procurement of the Italian-made helicopters at prices he alleged to be inflated.

The Royal Thai Army on Friday dismissed the claims of irregularities in its purchase of helicopters, which Srisuwan said are similar to the one involved in a recent fatal accident that killed Leicester City football club owner Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha.

Colonel Sirichan Ngathong, deputy spokesperson for the Army, said the amount paid for the purchases included the cost of pilot training, spare parts, maintenance and additional equipment.

Also, the size of the models purchased by the Army was a lot larger than the civilian version involved in the accident in England, she said, which is why the helicopters bought by the Army were more expensive.

Srisuwan made the allegation after reports that the crashed Agusta Westland AW169 helicopter cost about Bt280 million. He pointed out that two AW139 helicopters were purchased for Bt675 million each in 2012, when Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha was serving as commander-in-chief of the Army.

Sirichan said on Friday that the Army had purchased a number of Agusta Westland AW139 and AW149 model helicopters in line with mission needs and procurement regulations.

She explained that these models are completely different from the AW169 involved in the UK crash, in terms of size, engine, flight ceiling, load capacity, speed, safety features, the number of pilot and passenger seats and additional equipment.

However, she said, the Army was prepared for scrutiny and will provide information to any state agency that investigates the matter.

“The Army’s aircraft purchases were straightforward and in line with relevant laws and regulations,” she said.

“His information is inaccurate and he could be viewed as making unfair allegations against the Army. Also, it may not be inappropriate to try to link a tragic accident with the Army’s purchase of helicopters,” the spokesperson said.

Meanwhile, Defence Ministry spokesman Lt-General Kongcheep Tantrawanit on Friday suggested that Srisuwan seemed to have “poorly screened” the relevant information before making his allegations against the Army.

“Without a good understanding, you should have come to ask the Army first before giving any information to the media or filing any complaint. Without enough screening and lacking accurate information, you made the public believe what you said,” he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan, who is also Defence Minister, on Friday suggested that Srisuwan made his allegation prematurely.

“He filed his complaint when nothing wrong happened. The Army made these purchases under government-to-government deals, at specified prices. The deals were transparent,” General Prawit, who is also in charge of security affairs, said.

Earlier, Army spokesman Colonel Winthai Suvaree said the prices that the Army paid for the helicopters also included the cost of simulation training for the pilots, spare parts and training for its mechanics.

He said the reported Bt280-million price tag of Vichai’s helicopter was apparently for the helicopter only, while pilots were hired and maintenance services were possibly paid for separately. Also, the price tag cited by Srisuwan was not an official price, but rather one reported by the media.

The hit anti-dictatorship rap song riling the junta-led government, “Prathet Ku Me” (“My Country’s Got…”), has also roused debate and hinted at change in both the political and arts spheres in Thailand, say multidisciplinary scholars.

The 10-member group Rap Against Dictatorship (RAD) used social media as an artistic weapon, its music video-as-political message garnering more than 25 million views on YouTube to date.

The government tried to ban the hit tune, warning that its message and video footage replicating the 1976 massacre at Thammasat University violated the Computer Crime Act’s strictures against information inconsistent with the truth and also threatened national security.

The effort failed. RAD has cheated the censors by using blockchain technology to prevent the government from deleting the video or barring access to it.

But that hasn’t stopped debate from reaching both extremities of pro and con among people from all walks of life, from scholars and politicians to teenagers and monks.

Anthropologist Sorayuth Aiemueyut, who lectures on visual culture at Chiang Mai University, said people incensed by the limits placed on freedom of expression by the government via the use of laws such as Article 44 of the Constitution have found the song liberating.

“The impact of this phenomenon reflects the fact that many Thais are under pressure for calling for democracy under a dictatorial government,” Sorayuth told The Nation Weekend. “The political-art movement deploying new technology is also animating the current political situation, with thoughts being shared in both the virtual and real worlds, something called ‘digital immateriality’.

“In the social media community, technology is the key tool for social change,” added Sorayuth, a PhD candidate in visual and media anthropology at the Free University of Berlin. “This rap song has raised the level of debate about the arts, politics and music, as well as technology.”

Also drawing junta was Anocha Suwichakornpong’s internationally acclaimed movie “By the Time It Gets Dark”, which similarly took inspiration from the 1976 Thammasat tragedy.

Overt political activity is just now resuming after being banned since the 2014 coup, but arts-related socio-political activism has steadily spread, both online and off. Art happenings, posters and music concerts have given voice to campaigners pressing for a return to democracy.

In some cases the authorities have reacted, in one instance arresting demonstrators outside the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre. Anti-junta artists began adopting “guerrilla” tactics to get their messages out.

The junta-led government has banned many political artworks, songs, films and stage productions. Individuals and groups targeted included Faiyen, a pro-red shirt band living in exile, and graffiti artist Headache Stencil, whose murals have depicted a black leopard and Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan’s luxury wristwatches.

Soldiers stormed Bangkok’s Ver Gallery to shut down an exhibition called “Whitewash”, featuring the politically charged conceptual photography of Harit Srikhao. Online political cartoonist Kai Maew had to set up a fresh link (Kai Maew X on Facebook) after being banned for a while. Also drawing junta was Anocha Suwichakornpong’s internationally acclaimed movie “By the Time It Gets Dark”, which similarly took inspiration from the 1976 Thammasat tragedy.

Rising from the underground

These were hardly the first times Thai artists were moved by bloody political events. Photography artist Manit Stowanichapoom and conceptual artist Nutdanai Jitbunjong have used historical image in their work too, though neither faced a ban.

“RAD moved the art up from underground to protest the junta government, using both online and offline platforms,” said visual-arts lecturer Thanom Chapakdee of Srinakharinwirot University.

Manit Sriwanichpoom’s 2001 conceptual photography “Horror in Pink”

“However the long-time ban on political activism under the military junta forced the RAD artists to look for alternatives.”

The song speaks about the hypocrisy of military dictatorship, the deep political divide, deaths on both sides of the divide and the failure of self-righteousness.

“As artists, we want to reflect the truth of the society we are living in under dictatorship,” a RAD member identified only as Hockhacker told The Nation Weekend. “Thailand seems to be caught in a loop of dictatorship. We want to voice what the majority cannot say directly. The lyrics were based on information we collected on social media, reflecting the sickness of our society.”

Thammasat law lecturer Sawatree Suksri said dictators ban political art because of the strong impact it can have on citizens. It’s easy to understand and thus makes convoluted political issues understandable, she said at a recent seminar on “Art, Power and Disobedience” held at her university.

Rap Against Dictatorship’s music video “Prathet Ku Me” (“My Country Got’s…”) hits more than 25 million views on YouTube to date.

Thanom noted that Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has often used culture as a form of “soft power” to promote nationalism in conservative ways, like dressing in traditional Siamese garb and crooning mild pop tunes. Most recently, if tardily, he’s jumped onto the new media with posts on Facebook and Twitter as he woos voters ahead of the February poll.

Meanwhile the recently founded pro-democracy Future Forward Party is tapping artists to help its election campaign. Targeting younger people, the party is hosting the “Future Fest: Art, Music, Culture” this weekend at Bangkok’s Jam Factory, with political art and an open discussion about it.

Another RAD member known as the Liberate P initially planned to attend the fest but changed his mind because he didn’t wish to be seen as supporting Future Forward either.