People’s Party’s popularity problem

The People’s Party (PP) promised on its formation in August that it would emerge from the ashes of the Move Forward Party (MFP) on a solid footing.
It managed to arrive on the scene with a bang by raking in millions of baht at a party fundraising event to mark its birth. The party also introduced its leader, Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, who survived the purge caused by the MFP’s dissolution on Aug 7 by the Constitutional Court for its attempt to subvert the constitutional monarchy.
However, the fanfare is over, leaving observers wondering what the PP intends to do and how it plans to realise its ambitious goal of scoring a landslide victory in the next general election three years from now.
Despite having vowed a meteoric rise and a vastly expanded support base, the PP has stuttered and, on occasion, managed to shoot itself in the foot.
At its inception on Aug 9, the PP declared it had inherited all the MFP’s DNA and to prove it, the newly registered party set out to win provincial administrative organisation (PAO) chairman elections and the Phitsanulok Constituency 1 by-election on Sept 15.
As it turned out, the PP got its first taste of defeat when it lost the PAO chairman race in Ratchaburi. The party also lost in the Phitsanulok by-election, widely touted as a “sure bet”.
These stumbling blocks may be attributed chiefly to the party leader’s character, the party’s stance on Myanmar and its perceived inaction in times of national emergency, according to a source.
Since assuming the PP leadership, Mr Natthaphong has pledged to carry on where the MFP left off and remain strongly committed to reform. He made it abundantly clear there will be no “lowering of the ceiling” when it comes to the issue of amending the ultra-sensitive Section 112 — the lese majeste law — which the MFP, as well as its predecessor, Future Forward Party (FFP), had campaigned hard for.
Mr Natthaphong comes across as being less popular than FFP leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and Pita Limjaroenrat, leader of the MFP.
Mr Thanathorn, helped by his image as a fresh-face politician with a successful family business background, was seen as fired up and determined to usher in unprecedented changes. He captured the hearts and minds of many young, first-time voters while in charge of the FFP.
Mr Pita, meanwhile, possessed good oratory skills while his persona was reinforced by his youthful good looks and education credentials. His attributes came in handy in attracting a large following and cemented the MFP’s hold on a large swath of supporters.
Both Mr Thanathorn and Mr Pita were vocally adamant about pursuing changes to Section 112 by effectively lightening punishments against lese majeste violators and seeking to completely rewrite a constitution they dubbed a product of a dictatorship.
Mr Natthaphong, according to the source, has yet make himself as prominent as Mr Thananthorn and Mr Pita on these issues.
The source said Mr Natthaphong needs to carve a niche for himself and create his own “brand” in politics so he can radiate magnetism. The source suggested the PP leader capitalise on his digital communication technology skills as a conduit to achieving the political and social reforms the party wants.
Mr Natthaphong’s perceived mediocrity was confirmed in a recent quarterly poll by the National Institute of Development Administration (Nida) to gauge the popularity of major party leaders.
Topping the rankings was Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, at 31%, whereas Mr Natthaphong ranked third with 22%.
The source noted the opinion poll was a setback for the PP, given that first spot in these popularity surveys over the past few years was mostly occupied by Mr Pita. Even though the PP has maintained first place as the people’s favourite party, its popularity has slipped, to 34%, down from the 49% approval rating the MFP had at the end of June.
The June Nida Poll had 45% picking Mr Pita as prime minister.
The source observed that the PP has taken notice and has mounted a nationwide campaign to ramp up the party leader’s visibility and profile with voters.
The PP, meanwhile, also took a battering during a parliamentary debate spearheaded by its Bangkok MP, Tisana Choonhavan, who spoke in favour of extending Myanmar migrants’ rights and giving access to state welfare on an equal basis to Thai citizens.
The MP argued the offer of welfare was forged out of compassion for humanity and insisted Thailand must do its part to assist people beyond its borders who are facing extreme danger.
What she advocated has irked many critics who slammed the first-time MP for having problem prioritising ideas and showing political naivety. The critics even made a point of ridiculing the party’s name, saying the PP stood for “(Myanmar) People’s Party”.
Also, the PP has found itself under fire after making it known it would not distribute relief items to victims of the catastrophic floods in the upper North, suggesting handouts only serve to forge a culture of patronage which breeds corruption, especially in politics.
The party was accused of being insensitive, and its MPs representing flood-stricken constituencies were lambasted for not doing enough to reach out to people in distress.
Gen Pisal Wattanawongkiri’s resignation from the Pheu Thai Party is unlikely to allow the ruling party to walk away from the Tak Bai tragedy easily, according to analysts.
Pheu Thai has been under growing pressure to get Gen Pisal, one of the key men involved in the massacre, to stand trial before the case’s 20-year statute of limitations expires on Oct 25.
If a suspect cannot be brought to face trial by that date, they will no longer be criminally liable.
Gen Pisal served as commander of the Fourth Army Region, whose personnel were involved in the Tak Bai massacre, which occurred when security forces dispersed a simmering protest in front of a police station in Tak Bai district of Narathiwat province on Oct 25, 2004. The protesters were calling for the release of six detainees.
Seven demonstrators died at the scene, and 78 others later died from suffocation or organ failure while being transported in trucks to a military camp 140 kilometres away.
Gen Pisal — a list MP until Monday when he quit the party and relinquished his MP status — was granted leave to receive medical treatment overseas until Oct 30, five days after the statute of limitation expires.
His whereabouts are unknown, although he was reported to have initially gone to the UK, while some sources said he is now in Japan. A warrant was issued for his arrest by the Narathiwat Provincial Court following his no-show at a crucial hearing.
Political pundits warn that it is too early for Pheu Thai to breathe a sigh of relief following Gen Pisal’s resignation as the matter can still be used against the party and its leader Paetongtarn Shinawatra, who are being widely criticised for not doing enough to bring the former commander to justice.
To critics, Pheu Thai was slow to address the matter and lacks sincerity in wanting to bring Gen Pisal to trial and give the victims and their families closure.
They say the ruling party should at least have issued a letter to Gen Pisal calling on him to turn himself in or released a statement confirming its commitment to seeing the law run its course and to resolve the violence in the restive region.
Instead, some key Pheu Thai figures, including Defence Minister Phumtham Wechayachai, came across as trying to distance the party from the Tak Bai case, saying Gen Pisal’s disappearance was a personal matter.
Pheu Thai secretary-general Sorawong Thienthong pointed out earlier that Gen Pisal would remain an MP even if the party decided to expel him.
Mr Sorawong was assumed to mean that in the event of expulsion, an MP is given a 30-day window in which to move to another party and retain their lawmaker status.
Faced with rising pressure, the ruling party was prepared to vote on Gen Pisal’s membership, but Gen Pisal apparently made it easy for them by quitting.
According to Olarn Thinbangtieo, a political science lecturer at Burapha University in Chon Buri, Pheu Thai did not take action against the former MP possibly due to Gen Pisal’s ties with the party’s alleged de facto leader, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
The Tak Bai incident took place in 2004 when Thaksin, father of Ms Paetongtarn, was prime minister. The massacre was seen as a major contributor to the upsurge in violence in the three southern border provinces.
He said the party might also have underestimated the extent to which the victims’ families would go to in seeing justice served after almost two decades.
Pheu Thai might also believe that Gen Pisal quitting would spare Ms Paetongtarn from any ethics probe.
However, the storm has not yet been weathered and Pheu Thai’s lack of will to resolve southern problems could be exploited and the violence could flare up again, according to the academic.
Another disappointment has been Justice Minister and Prachachat Party leader Pol Col Tawee Sodsong, who has kept silent, possibly to avoid coalition tension, Mr Olarn said.
As minister overseeing the administration of justice, to stand by and let the statute of limitations in a legal case expire under his watch may invite a backlash.
“Pol Col Tawee has chosen to stay silent rather than be proactive, while the public expects to see more action from Prachachat, whose support base is in the far southern region [that includes Narathiwat],” he said.
The academic said government critics like former red-shirt leader Jatuporn Prompan, Sondhi Limthongkul, a former leader of the now-defunct People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD), or the yellow shirts, might take advantage of the statute expiry issue to heap pressure on the coalition.
The Tak Bai lawsuit was filed in late April this year with the Narathiwat Provincial Court against nine former top officials, accusing them of murder and other serious crimes. In August, the court accepted the lawsuit against seven of them, including Gen Pisal, and threw out charges against the other two.