Jump to content

Monitor says Thai election campaign 'heavily tilted' to benefit junta


webfact

Recommended Posts

Monitor says Thai election campaign 'heavily tilted' to benefit junta

By Patpicha Tanakasempipat and Juarawee Kittisilpa

 

2019-03-26T063207Z_1_LYNXNPEF2P0E2_RTROPTP_4_THAILAND-ELECTION.JPG

An electoral staff member shows a ballot during vote counting at the general election in Mae Hong Son, Thailand, March 24, 2019. REUTERS/Ann Wang

 

BANGKOK (Reuters) - The run-up to Thailand's weekend vote was "heavily tilted" to benefit a party close to the ruling military junta, an Asian election monitor said on Tuesday, and criticised a messy ballot-counting process that created mistrust.

 

Persistent confusion about results two days after Sunday's vote have diminished hopes that the first election since a 2014 military coup would end nearly 15 years of political turmoil in Southeast Asia's second-largest economy.

 

The Bangkok-based Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL) stopped short of declaring outright fraud in the election, in which both a pro-junta party and an opposition party linked to a self-exiled former premier have claimed victory.

 

"The environment at large is heavily tilted to benefit the military junta," Amaël Vier, an official of the civil society group that seeks to promote democratic elections, told a news briefing.

 

"A lot of people still express distrust towards the electoral process."

 

Asked if the election had been free and fair, another ANFREL official declined to comment directly, however.

 

"So many things have to be considered together," said its mission head, Rohana Nishanta Hettiarachchie. "It is unfair to conclude that the whole process was free and fair or not."

 

Thailand's Election Commission was not immediately available for comment. It has previously declined to comment on accusations of cheating.

 

With only partial results reported, the party backing junta leader Prayuth Chan-ocha has said it is gathering coalition partners to form a government.

 

But the main opposition Pheu Thai party, loyal to ousted former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, has alleged "irregularities", and is considering legal challenges, while also saying it is putting together a coalition government.

 

It could be days or even weeks before it is clear whether either Prayuth's party or the "democratic front" has won enough seats to form a stable government.

 

Unofficial results for 350 directly elected "constituency seats" in the House of Representatives released on Monday by the Election Commission showed Pheu Thai leading with 137 seats, versus 97 seats for Prayuth's party.

 

But official results, including 150 more "party seats", would not be available until May 9, the election body said.

 

A fuller picture could emerge on Friday, when the election commission releases vote totals for each constituency, used to determine the allocation of party seats, in a complex formula.

 

Even before May 9, but parties are making their own calculations on the basis of partial results and seeking coalition partners to form a government.

The commission has blamed delays and irregularities in early partial results on "human error."

 

Junta leader Prayuth, who as army chief seized power in 2014, is expected to speak later on Tuesday after a cabinet meeting.

 

Since 2004, Thailand has been racked by street protests organised by both opponents and supporters of Thaksin, occasionally spilling into violence.

 

Parties linked to Thaksin have won every election since 2001, but the populist telecoms billionaire was thrown out by the army in 2006, and a government led by his sister was ousted in 2014.

 

(Additional reporting by Panarat Thepgumpanat; Writing by Kay Johnson; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

 

reuters_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-03-26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The monitors were Anfrel....they also monitored Cambodia' election and Myanmar...both systems got a good result...!

I'm surprised they were somewhat critical and reported what they have....they are an election monitoring company for hire and not well regarded outside SE Asia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its been a massive effort over 5 years to complicate, confuse and control by any means possible. A ballot paper especially designed for that purpose, an election commission designated for its complicity and a constitution complex in its effort to leave decisions to the favoured "legal experts". And finally we learn the carefully constructed constitution didn't conclude if the winner was the party with most votes or most seats. Rule by minority is a complex game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ChrisY1 said:

The monitors were Anfrel....they also monitored Cambodia' election and Myanmar...both systems got a good result...!

I'm surprised they were somewhat critical and reported what they have....they are an election monitoring company for hire and not well regarded outside SE Asia.

nonsense!!!Maybe check again before you share wrong information!

https://anfrel.org/the-2018-cambodian-elections-nothing-but-a-charade/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No surprises, my elderly neighbour did not understand the ballot paper an d made his mark where he thought. 

The el.ection was a sop to the International Community, who seem to accept it . Story ends .The truth will never be said nor even published . Thainess rules OK YA !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irregularities in the electon. How is that possible? 

This video now shown on the Australian ABC web-site show soldiers votes being checked for "accuracy" before being put in the ballot box. Hmmmmm

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-27/soldier-checks-ballot-papers-part-of-thai-election-chaos/10942786

I thought "face"was important to Thais. What "face" is this showing to the outside world? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, webfact said:

"The environment at large is heavily tilted to benefit the military junta," Amaël Vier, an official of the civil society group that seeks to promote democratic elections, told a news briefing.

that's nothing new, we all knew it..... next

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Isaan Alan said:

Irregularities in the electon. How is that possible? 

This video now shown on the Australian ABC web-site show soldiers votes being checked for "accuracy" before being put in the ballot box. Hmmmmm

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-27/soldier-checks-ballot-papers-part-of-thai-election-chaos/10942786

I thought "face"was important to Thais. What "face" is this showing to the outside world? 

 

which face, the top front of the down back one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Just1Voice said:

So what's new? Anyone wit 2 working brain cells knew it was rigged to favor the general(s).

 

May one wonder if all the comments on the election would also emerge if the results would have been an overwhelming success for the Thaksin clan, sorry Pheu Thai?

Now it isn't so, and it is all rigged.

But, if I look around me, I see quite a lot of people that didn't vote for TS, simply because they did recognise the fact their votes were used by that club to enrich that club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hansnl said:

May one wonder if all the comments on the election would also emerge if the results would have been an overwhelming success for the Thaksin clan, sorry Pheu Thai?

Now it isn't so, and it is all rigged.

But, if I look around me, I see quite a lot of people that didn't vote for TS, simply because they did recognise the fact their votes were used by that club to enrich that club.

The international media called out the rigged arrangements well before the election took place. The Economist, for example, and there are many others, called it a complete sham. So your observation is pants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entire process made it clear, for those that didn't already know, that everything possible was being done to use a position of authority to manipulate the election. From vote buying to campaigning while the competition was forced to sit on the sidelines. Then the antiquated counting process allowed votes to be done in a way to ensure the pre-choosen victors would be announced as the winners of a legitimate (not) election in hopes that everyone, both do,ester and international, would accept the predetermined results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...