Evaluation of Thailand’s Democracy: Steps to Consolidation Von der Fakultät Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften der Universität Stuttgart zur Erlangung der Würde eines Doktors der Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften (Dr. rer. pol.) genehmigte Abhandlung Vorgelegt von Nuchjaree Saneyha aus Prachinburi, Thailand Hauptberichter: Prof. Dr. Dieter Fuchs Mitberichter: Prof. Dr. Aurel Croissant Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 18. Mai 2015 Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, Abteilung für Politische Theorie und Empirische Demokratieforschung der Universität Stuttgart 2015 Context Chapter Page Chapter I Introduction 1 Chapter II Political history and the structure of political regimes in Thailand 6 I Thailand’s Political History 6 II The structure of Thailand’s political regimes 16 Chapter III Theoretical framework 25 I Defective democracy theory by Wolfgang Merkel 25 II Consolidated democracy theory 38 Chapter IV Analyzing the partial regimes as defects of Thailand’s democracy 51 I Dimension of vertical legitimacy and control 60 II Dimension of constitutionalism and rule of law 76 III Dimension of effective agenda – control 84 Chapter V Analyzing the stateness problem as a defect of Thailand’s democracy 89 I The concept of the stateness problem 89 II The stateness problems in Thailand 95 Chapter VI Analyzing political culture and political institutions as defects of 152 Thailand’s democracy I Evaluation of Thailand’s democracy regarding the areas of political culture and 153 the design of political institutions as its defects II Comparative politics between Thailand and two democratic countries without 177 any doubts about their consolidation: Great Britain and Germany Chapter VII Conclusion and future outlook of Thailand’s democracy 207 Bibliography Curriculum Vitae Abbreviations PDRC The People’s Democratic Reform Committee PAD The People’s Alliance for Democracy UDD The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship or the red shirt group NACC The National Anti-Corruption Commission EC The Election Commission TRT Thai Rak Thai PPP People’s Power Party PT Pheu Thai Party DP The Democrat Party The conservative power group This term in this thesis refers to royalists, the military, bureaucrats, the Democrat Party, some major business group, intellectuals, independent government agencies, middle class people from Bangkok and people who support the PDRC, despite living in the upper south The democratic support group This term in this thesis refers to 1. The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship or the red shirt group 2. The democratic support group composed of various networks supporting democracy that have come into being amidst the political crisis since late 2013. Normally, these are formed by ordinary people, intellectuals, and students. Examples include The Defense of Democracy of AFDD, The Third Polar Group, The Enlightened Jurists Zusammenfassung Obwohl Thailand sein politisches System von der absoluten Monarchie zur konstitutionellen Monarchie bereits vor 82 Jahren im Zuge der Revolution von 1932 geändert hat, kämpft das Land immer noch mit der Demokratie und ihrer Konsolidierung. Bei dem bedeutendsten Problem, das in der Untersuchung behandelt wird, geht es um die unvollständige demokratische Transition, welche sich in der politische Kultur und den politischen Institutionen niederschlägt, damit diese als Unterstützer der Demokratie wirken können. Auch die anhaltende Krise, die seit Ende 2013 das Land beschäftigt, ist ein Resultat einer unvollständigen Konsolidierung. Diese Vorgänge haben dazu geführt, dass sich das Land nicht von seinen alten Machtstrukturen lösen kann. Nichtsdestotrotz führte der politische Aufstieg neuer Parteien mit Thaksin in der Hauptrolle dazu, dass die konservativen Königstreuen, das Militär und die älteste politische Partei, die Democrat Party, an Popularität verloren haben. Diese Entwicklung hat Thailand nun an den Rand des Zusammenbruchs gebracht beziehungsweise zur innerlichen Spaltung des Landes geführt. Die weitere Entwicklung der Demokratie in Thailand wird stark davon abhängen, ob das Problem mit demokratischen Mitteln gelöst werden kann, oder ob ein militärischer Putsch, eine Kompetenzüberschreitung der Judikativen oder eine ungewählte Regierung. Denkbar ist gar ein Bürgerkrieg. Diese Arbeit stellt positive Strategien und Schritte zur Konsolidierung vor, wie Thailand trotz seiner defekten Demokratie die Konsolidierung der Demokratie in Bezug auf Verhalten, Einstellung und Verfassung erreichen kann. Abstract Even though Thailand transformed its political system from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy as early as 82 years ago after the revolution of 1932, the country is still struggling with its democracy and consolidation. The most significant problem found in this research lies in its incomplete democratic transition that affects political culture and political institutions, precluding them from functioning as a support for democracy in Thailand. Furthermore, the ongoing crisis since late 2013 is one of the results of this imperfect consolidation, keeping Thailand in the grasp of the old circle of power. Nevertheless, the rise of a new political group (Thaksin and his party) has managed to win tremendous popularity, diminishing in turn the conservative power group, including the royalists, the military, and the nation’s oldest political party, the Democrat Party. A negative aspect of this is that Thailand has to confront a conflict that can lead to the country’s collapse or the stateness problem. Therefore, democracy in Thailand is in great peril if the country cannot solve the problem through democratic regimes, as the alternatives encompass such unpleasant possibilities as a coup d’état, a judicial coup, an unelected government, the people’s council or even a civil war. However, this research also presents such positive strategies that offer even as defective a democratic country as Thailand options for consolidating its democracy in terms of behavior, attitude, and constitution. Important here is the knowledge of all parties about their respective consolidation tasks. Evaluation of Thailand’s Democracy: Steps to Consolidation Page 1 Nuchjaree Saneyha Chapter I Introduction Research Question Main Questions: Is Thailand a consolidated democratic country? How far has Thailand’s democracy evolved right now? Specific Questions: What are the possible defects in Thailand’s democracy? To what degree is Thailand’s consolidation established? Research Problem This research concentrates to a great extent on the evaluation of Thailand’s democracy in accordance with the three main methods of its study: empirical, quantitative, and comparative. Each of the three methods used in this research highlight different aspects from other works on a similar topic, none of which focus on a historical analysis. It should be noted that the author fully accepts that understanding the political history of a country’s democracy is important in forming a whole picture of how democracy in a country is transformed and democratized. The present research significantly concentrates on a theoretical systematic analysis working with a number of statistics and indexes with regard to the two main theoretical frameworks: “defective democracy theory” by Wolfgang Merkel and “consolidation democracy theory,” dealing with the concept of democratic political culture by Linz and Stepan as well as Edeltraud Roller, Dieter Fuchs, and Krzysztof Zagorski. Furthermore, a comparative study will be undertaken, positioning Great Britain and Germany as counter examples of countries which do not doubt their democracy. The topic of an “Evaluation of Thailand’s Democracy” is of particular interest because of its close relation to the Thai people’s understanding of what democracy is. More and more, that emerges as a major problem of Thailand’s democracy. When asked whether Thailand is a democratic country, is it too easy to answer, “Yes, it is”? Indeed, Thailand has legally been a democratic country for the past 82 years. In 1932, Thailand converted its political system from absolute monarchy into a constitutional monarchy. On the outside, its institutions and procedures already present the trappings of democracy. Then, what is the problem? The problem is that democracy means more than just the transformation itself, along with implementing democratic institutions and procedures; instead, an important aspect of a democracy’s quality lies in the so-called “consolidation.” Diamond (1999, pp.18-19.) and Merkel et al. (2002, pp. 59-91.) define a defective democracy as follows Evaluation of Thailand’s Democracy: Steps to Consolidation Page 2 Nuchjaree Saneyha “The transformation with the implementation of democratic institutions and procedures is not a complete process of consolidation because if the stage of consolidation begins with the institutionalization of a liberal democracy, then the political systems that are in front of this threshold were no longer autocracies but they were not democracies either. These hybrid systems are called ‘Defective Democracies.’” The current political crisis shows even more that the Thai people are more and more confused about the definition and the content of democracy. The demonstrators from the People‘s Democratic Reform Committee or PDRC show a particular disdain for democracy. An example for such negative attitudes toward democracy from the PDRC is provided by its slogan, “Elections bring bad politicians into Thai politics.” This conviction is behind the PDRC’s attempts to prevent