The pro-election activists, led by the Democracy Restoration Group, had announced plans to assemble at Thammasat University at 5pm on Monday and remain there overnight, before marching to Government House on Tuesday morning.

They plan to deliver an ultimatum to the prime minister, General Prayut Chan-o-cha, to hold a general election this year, instead of next February as promised by the premier.

Reports said academics, political activists and local-rights activists in some provinces had been called by security agencies to ask whether they would join the demonstration.

Titipol Phakdeewanich, dean of political science at Ubon Ratchathani University, told The Nation that the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) and the Internal Security Operations Command had called him on Monday to ask if he was planning to attend the event at Thammasat University, and to ascertain if he was aware whether any other university staff and students were planning to go.

The NCPO has already tried to stop the red shirts and political activists from going to the assembly, the dean posted on his Facebook page.

Indeed, it has visited political activists in order to pressure them not to go to Bangkok, he added.

Deputy Police Commissioner Pol General Srivara Ransibrahmanakul revealed the order on Monday, but did not say how long the surveillance would last.

The close-watch area is designated for 50 metres around Government House, he said.

Srivara also said he had ordered the superintendent of Chana Songkhram police station to revoke permission for the pro-election activists to stay overnight on Monday inside Thammasat University as planned.

The pro-election activists, led by the Democracy Restoration Group, have announced plans to assembly at the university at 5pm on Monday and remain there overnight before on Tuesday morning marching to Government House. They plan to give PM Prayut an ultimatum to hold an election within this year instead of next February as promised by the premier.

“The assembly is a political protest, which violates an order of the National Council for Peace and Order. We will take legal action if there is any violation,” Srivara said.

He said he would personally inspect the situation on Tuesday when the group marches to Government House. The Royal Compound is close to 150 metres from Government House, and a gathering within that distance is barred under the 2015 Public Assembly Act, he said.

Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai said on Sunday the premier wanted to visit key EU members including France, Italy and Britain to forge cooperation in a range of sectors.

The EU announced in December it was resuming political contact with Thailand at all levels, setting aside concerns about its military rule since the 2014 coup.

European ministers have been visiting Thailand since February to strengthen political and economic ties, Don said, and he also has visited EU headquarters in Brussels.

The foreign ministry expected to finalise the details of Prayut’s trip soon, he said.

The respondents were from 19 universities including Thammasat University, Chulalongkorn Univ-ersity, Prince of Songkla University, Khon Kaen University and Chiang Mai University.

Asked whether the military figures behind the coup ran the country better than elected politicians, 86.2 per cent of those polled said, “No”.

More than half of the respondents also said they had no confidence that the 2017 Constitution would successfully fight corruption, protect people’s rights and freedoms, prevent vote buying, defend human rights or promote welfare.

Of those polled, 70.8 per cent said they were not confident that the junta’s 20-year national strategy would usher Thailand towards progress.

Up to 35 per cent of respondents said the next prime minister could be “anyone except Prayut”.

The survey found Future Forward Party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit (6.8 per cent) was even more popular than former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra (5.7 per cent) and Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva (4.1 per cent). Prayut got support from just 1.9 per cent of respondents. Stand-up comedian and writer Udom Taepanich enjoyed 1.1 per cent backing respondents on the question of who should become the next prime minister.

Asked which party they would vote for, 22.7 per cent of those polled said they would cast their ballot for Democrat Party. About 20.3 per cent said they would vote for Pheu Thai Party. Future Forward Party garnered 10 per cent support. Up to 21.6 per cent said they would vote for a new alternative. Only 2.5 per cent said they would vote for a pro-military party.

Dr Samchai Sresunt, who teaches at Thammasat University’s Puey Ungphakorn School of Development Studies, said these findings reflected the lack of trust for the current government held by university students.

“They do not want the pro-military party. They do not want Prayut,” he summarised.

Thanapol Phanngam, Kasesart University student, said new-generation people no longer trusted that the current government would fight corruption, citing Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwon’s luxury-watch scandal as a reason.

He was referring to a gathering on Saturday in the Ratchaprasong area in memory of the 2010 May political protest that ended in deaths following a military crackdown on protesters.

Sansern said he based his assertion on a recent survey by National Institute of Development Administration in which respondents were asked their opinions on the junta’s policies of returning happiness to the country in the past four years since it seized power.

Sansern said the survey found that what made the respondents happiest was the junta’s peacekeeping and lack of political disturbance.

“The results of the survey reflect that the society does not want to see a repeat of chaos,” he said.

Although the Saturday gathering ended without violence, Sansern said the government believed that no one – including local business operators – wanted to see the gathering as it reminded them of the old times.

Rachaprasong was the gathering place for protests by red shirts against the then-government of Abhisit Vejjajiva that ultimately saw a military crackdown that caused a number of fatalities including of foreign journalists.

Criticising a protest planned for tomorrow by those known as “People Who Want to Have an Election” in which organisers have said they would march on Government House tomorrow, Sansern said the protest may affect the traffic flow and cause trouble for other peoples.

“Many people are fed up with protests that happened in the country in the past 10 years and pushed the country backward. The planned gathering may cause risks of confrontation and violence.” There was no need to protest, he insisted.

ALTHOUGH the military seized power in 2014 through a coup, the junta has done little to reform the country as promised and only tried to entrench itself to perpetuate its rule.

In its four years – equivalent to the term of an elected government – it has turned Thailand into a bureaucratic polity with the military playing a vital role in weakening the power of politicians and other political institutions, scholars said. The National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), led by Prayut Chan-o-cha, is the military junta with the longest reign in recent Thai political history. There were also junta governments in 1991 and 2006 following coups but they were in power for only a year or so.

Serious divisions among the civilians, the unity of the military, the junta’s iron fist as well as “populist policies” – known in the junta’s lexicon as “happiness” to cosy up to the people – has enabled the current military dispensation to survive in power for the past four years.

“The coup has changed the country’s political landscape. The military has laid deep foundations to retain power in the future through its 20-year national strategic plan,” said Yuttaporn Issarachai, a political scientist at Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University.

After the coup, political power was transferred from politicians to the military and the bureaucracy, he said.

The NCPO commissioned the military to perform a dual function – protect national security and promote development – said Wanwichit Boonprong, a political science lecturer at Rangsit University. “Undeniably, it would enhance the political role of the military,” he said.

However, military power alone would not enable the survival of the junta for long unless it also has strong support from big corporations, which dominate the Thai economy.

The military has enjoyed increased acceptance from big businesses, says Titipol Phakdeewanich, dean of political science at Ubon Ratchathani University. “When they are doing well in their businesses, getting wealthier or getting benefits facilitated by government policies like Pracha Rath, it is no surprise that they support [the military],” he points out.

Pracha Rath is a public-private partnership project initiated by the government with the aim of boosting the economy and the incomes of local communities throughout the Kingdom.

The military rule is damaging, instead of building Thailand. The worst damage the junta has done is by voiding democracy, violating human rights with legal impunity, and weakening institutions that have the role of guaranteeing accountability and transparency in Thailand, said Paul Chambers, a lecturer at Naresuan University. Moreover, the defence budget has soared while other ministry budgets have seen cuts, he said.

The military regime is opaque. The junta has been widely criticised for its failure to crack down on corruption. Members of this junta leadership have failed to declare unusual wealth, such as the case of number two leader Prawit Wongsuwan and his numerous luxury watches.

Other potential cases of corruption have also been hidden under the rug such as that of the Chan-o-cha clan. “Junta leaders can get away with malfeasance because there is no monitor to oversee the junta leaders,” Chambers said.

However, the regime in its current form cannot cling on, as the demand for an election is growing. Scholars who spoke to The Nation foresaw many possibilities of the junta retaining power after the poll, which they said would be a way to legitimise military power, rather than democratisation.

Many politicians who put their personal interests ahead of democracy would support Prayut retaining power, Titipol predicted.

Prayut, like junta leaders before him is trying to transform the NCPO organisation into a political party, said Chambers. This new military political party model follows the Myanmar military model – to stand behind a political party nominee but also to oust elected governments if need be, he said.

Prayut, last November, invoked his sweeping powers under Section 44 to amend the internal security legislation.

He set up the Internal Security Administration Committee to help the Internal Security Operation Command deal with domestic threats. The move is seen as politically motivated to expand Isoc’s or the Army’s fundamental power in the provinces as it will set up provincial internal security administration committees.

The Isoc will play a vital role in the upcoming election campaign, Wanwichit said. Under the new structure, the agency, which he said would act as the military’s representatives, would be able to monitor intelligence, political movements, and the popularity of political parties as well as talk to civil society and villagers to see whether there would be any threats. “The party [if set up] would maintain the NCPO’s ideology and political boundaries indefinitely, with the Isoc playing a ‘mentor’ role to foster it,” he added.

Note: General Prayut Chan-o-cha staged a coup four years ago to topple an elected government| on the pretext of bringing about reforms and cleaning up the political system. The Nation |presents a series of analyses on the consequences of the coup and the rule of the military regime.

The respondents were from 19 universities including Thammasat University, Chulalongkorn Univ-ersity, Prince of Songkla University, Khon Kaen University and Chiang Mai University.

Asked whether the military figures behind the coup ran the country better than elected politicians, 86.2 per cent of those polled said, “No”.

More than half of the respondents also said they had no confidence that the 2017 Constitution would successfully fight corruption, protect people’s rights and freedoms, prevent vote buying, defend human rights or promote welfare.

Of those polled, 70.8 per cent said they were not confident that the junta’s 20-year national strategy would usher Thailand towards progress.

Up to 35 per cent of respondents said the next prime minister could be “anyone except Prayut”.

The survey found Future Forward Party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit (6.8 per cent) was even more popular than former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra (5.7 per cent) and Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva (4.1 per cent). Prayut got support from just 1.9 per cent of respondents. Stand-up comedian and writer Udom Taepanich enjoyed 1.1 per cent backing respondents on the question of who should become the next prime minister.

Asked which party they would vote for, 22.7 per cent of those polled said they would cast their ballot for Democrat Party. About 20.3 per cent said they would vote for Pheu Thai Party. Future Forward Party garnered 10 per cent support. Up to 21.6 per cent said they would vote for a new alternative. Only 2.5 per cent said they would vote for a pro-military party.

Dr Samchai Sresunt, who teaches at Thammasat University’s Puey Ungphakorn School of Development Studies, said these findings reflected the lack of trust for the current government held by university students.

“They do not want the pro-military party. They do not want Prayut,” he summarised.

Thanapol Phanngam, Kasesart University student, said new-generation people no longer trusted that the current government would fight corruption, citing Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwon’s luxury-watch scandal as a reason.

Chuan, the Democrat Party’s chief adviser who turns 80 in July, was pitted early this year against Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha as a key competitor for the premiership after the next election.

Observers at that time argued that only a post-election alliance between the country’s two largest political parties – Pheu Thai and Democrat – would be able to thwart the ruling junta’s return to power through General Prayut’s comeback as head of government.

Chuan, a former leader of the Democrat Party, was viewed as a “compromise” choice. Pheu Thai and their “red shirt” supporters certainly would not allow current Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva to lead their coalition government, given their past bitter mutual hostility.

Now, after Mahathir’s success, talk of pushing Chuan as a PM candidate has been revived. Political analysts view him as a strong contender for the premiership, as it is highly likely he will be one of the three PM candidates from the Democrat Party. The new Constitution that came into effect in April last year, requires that political parties nominate no more than three prime ministerial candidates before contesting an election.

Democrat leader Abhisit said he believed Chuan, who is viewed as his political mentor, commanded considerable support from voters, as many people had both respect and faith in him.

“Chuan is a model good politician in the democratic system,” Abhisit said. However, the Democrat leader said it remained unclear who would be the party’s three PM nominations. That would be decided by its new executive board, who would be elected by Democrat members after the junta ban on political activities was lifted, he added.

Former Democrat deputy leader Alongkorn Ponlaboot voiced support for Chuan contesting the prime minister’s seat.

“After Mahathir’s return as prime minister at 92, many people are thinking of Chuan as an alternative. He is a symbol of honesty. If the Democrat Party reforms itself and has a new vision, it may recreate a ‘Mahathir phenomenon’ here,” said Alongkorn, who served as deputy president of the post-coup National Reform Steering Assembly.

Observers believe that Prayut will seek a return to power.

One thing is for sure: A new political party linked to the ruling junta, the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), will be set up to complete the mission to return Prayut to Government House.

Whatever its official name, the “NCPO party” will become another major player after the election, in addition to the Democrat and Pheu Thai parties. And there is a high likelihood that none of the three alone will win an absolute majority in the House of Representatives.

Two of them would need to join forces in order to gain a House majority. An alliance between Pheu Thai and the NCPO party is likely impossible. The Democrats are more likely to get the upper hand among the three; they can choose whether to join the Pheu Thai or the pro-junta party.

The Democrats last won a general election in 1992 under Chuan’s leadership. He became prime minister for the first time after the national vote, which was held following the collapse of a pro-military government that cracked down on pro-democracy protests against a non-elected prime minister. “The Democrat Party certainly will become part of the post-election government. But whether we will get the PM seat depends on the numbers after the election,” said a source in the country’s oldest party.

The Democrats will certainly bargain for the PM’s seat if they are approached to join a post-election coalition government, if the other key partner wins just slightly more House seats than the Democrats do, according to the source.

Chuan has a better chance than anyone else in his party to win acceptance from the other potential coalition partner, whether it is Pheu Thai or the NCPO party. So, the veteran is going to be a key challenger to Prayut for the premiership.

The threat came as security authorities voiced concern over possible violence or clashes if the protesters moved their rally from Thammasat University’s Tha Phrachan campus to Government House.

Deputy national police chief Pol General Srivara Rangsibrahmanakul said yesterday that forces would keep a close watch for possible intervention by “a third party” having the intention to cause a commotion or violence.

“Police all over the country have been instructed to set up security checkpoints. Searches are being conducted for all kinds of weapons” since midnight on Friday until the end of this month, Srivara said.

He added that at least three companies of police officers had been prepared to provide safety for the demonstrators at their protest site inside the university and also along the route of their march, if they opted to move elsewhere.

Srivara also warned the group, which calls itself “People Who Want to Vote”, that in exercising their constitutional rights they needed to comply with the law on public assembly.

He said their protest inside the university was permitted but that they would not be allowed to move out of the area.

“It’s against the law to move out of the permitted protest area. Their march will affect the traffic and police are not authorised to allow a demonstration on the streets,” he said.

The Metropolitan Police have notified leaders of the protest that the activists are not allowed to move out of the permitted protest area, according to Srivara.

“If they do not comply, we will have to take legal action,” he added.

The “People Who Want to Vote” have threatened to stage a march to Government House to submit their call for Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha to hold the next election in November, as promised previously.

The tentative schedule was postponed until next February after the National Legislative Assembly delayed enactment of the new electoral law by three months.

Meanwhile, a source in the ruling junta, the National Council for Peace and Order, said yesterday that security authorities were worried the pro-election group’s planned march to Government House might result in a clash, or at least cause traffic congestion.

“We ask the demonstrators not to move out of the protest venue,” the source said.

In the statement that he wrote and published on the HRW’s official website yesterday, on the eighth anniversary of the violence that erupted in 2010, Sunai slammed as outrageous that impunity for state-sponsored violence remained a standard operating policy of the Thai military.

“This simply encourages Thailand’s policymakers and soldiers to believe that they can get away with murder,” he said. “It also remains a major impediment to reconciliation between victims and supporters of the red shirts, a group that does not trust the Army and political establishment. Without justice, this is unlikely to change.”

Sunai’s statement commemorated victims of the crackdown on May 19, 2010, when at least 98 people were killed and some 2,000 injured after the government decided to use force against anti-government protesters who had been rallying for weeks. Among the victims were medic volunteers, media reporters and bystanders.

Although evidence showed the military was behind most of these abuses, no one has been held accountable so far. The red-shirt umbrella organisation, the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), has constantly lodged petitions with the National Anti-Corruption Commission to review the cases and hold officials involved in the killings accountable but so far without success.

The families and friends of the victims return every year to the Ratchaprasong intersection as well as to Wat Pathum Wanaram to hold activities in memory of their loved ones and call on the authorities to bring the culprits to justice.

The Ratchaprasong intersection sign on the footpath was enclosed with barricades, preventing the red shirts from using the area to hold their activities. Prominent pro-rights activist Sombat Boonngamanong had planned to hold a symbolic activity at a fast-food restaurant near the intersection but the restaurant was closed ahead of their meeting.

A religious ceremony held at Wat Pathum Wanaram, where a medic volunteer Kamolkate Akkahad was among others killed, saw dozens of attendees including Ivo Sieber, the ambassador of Switzerland to Thailand. The event was observed by scores of police officers.

Kamolkate’s mother, Phayaw Akkahad, who became an activist after her daughter was killed, with others also performed a short play at the temple, demonstrating the lack of justice in the massacre case. She wore an apron similar to the one Kamolkate had worn when she was killed.

Phayaw, along with Pansak Srithep, the father of Samaphan Srithep who was also killed in the crackdown, and another activist eventually managed to march to the Ratchaprasong intersection and stood for a brief moment in silence to commemorate the victims of the crackdown. The activity was watched closely by police officers.

In a related development, UDD leader Nuttawut Saikuar yesterday attended a religious ceremony held for the victims of the crackdown at another temple in Bangkok’s Bangkhen district and said the UDD would continue to fight for justice for those killed.