It has been almost a year since the coup d'etat. Many people, from media commentators to academics and politicians, are quick to offer opinions or even pass judgements on the success or failure of the government and the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO).
Such an exercise can only be useful if we all remind ourselves of the context and the goals we wish to attain for our country. Last year, I wrote the NCPO would ultimately be judged on its ability to hand over a better political system as part of a reform package as it hands power back to the people. I suggested then that progress on the economy and reforms would be the biggest challenges for the NCPO and the government.
A year on, there is little doubt about some of the achievements of the regime. We all live in a far safer and more stable environment and Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha continues to demonstrate determined and well-intentioned leadership. In particular, his attempts to clean up some government departments and businesses have proved to be well received.
Yet on the main challenges, it would be unwise and unfair to pass judgement upon them without taking a somewhat deeper look.
- Abhisit's last hurrah? Will quit if Democrats fail again
Take the economy first; many had hoped that an end to protests and stability would guarantee a rapid, sustained economic recovery. But they are disappointed, with many ministers even admitting that growth continues to be below targets and expectations.
Yet we must recognise that global factors have not been favourable and the hangover from unsustainable populist policies will be with us for a while. This government is making significant progress on upgrading infrastructure, most notably in the transport sector. It is also attempting to address the issue of fairness through tax reform. These are long-term measures, however, so cannot be expected to instil immediate confidence and drive growth recovery today because people are suffering from losses in purchasing power. Insufficient income support for farmers, failure to pass on the benefits of lower oil prices, even putting up cooking gas prices and the lack of a quick stimulus plan did not help fix the concerns of today.
This picture of the economy is reflective of a broader picture of the regime. Despite good intentions, any government that is over-reliant on the bureaucracy will struggle to understand and address the needs of ordinary people. The missing link of course is the democratic process: it is the reason why the regime now feels greater pressure from the economy.
Turning to reforms, no one could expect the NCPO to complete them within a year. There have certainly been moves in the right direction in a number of areas including the draft constitution's reform section. Yet much uncertainty still revolves around the chances of success on issues such as devolution of power, energy and police.
As someone who pushed for such reforms, I still have regrets about the inability of my government to deliver and am now convinced that reforms can only succeed if there is sustained political will driven by support from the people. Trying to force successive governments to undertake reforms via quangos, committees and unelected councils will be doomed to failure — the real missing link here once again would be democracy.
The same can even be said about the apparent stability now. Without Section 44, which cannot be in place forever, peace and order can only be achieved if democracy and the judicial process are allowed to work and confidence of society in them is attained.
All of this points to the importance of getting the constitution and the return to democracy right. It is unfortunate that neither the substance of the draft constitution, nor the process of getting it endorsed, as it stands, will work.
In effect, the draft constitution makes the assumption that a more fragmented political party system, a weaker parliament and a system of accountability through unaccountable independent bodies will solve the persistent political problems of the past. It even appears to leave the door open for a blanket amnesty or a special process for granting a pardon to certain individuals.
This is surely a misdiagnosis, a prescription for messy coalitions, backroom bargaining and undue influence among politicians. This structure cannot produce a clear-cut direction in terms of policy for the country, instead hoping that the bureaucrats and a "different breed" of officials will steady the ship of state. In short, the drafters want to steam ahead with democracy continuing to be the missing link.
As for the process, without a referendum the country will end up fighting about constitutional matters for even more years to come. As we return to elections, our political dialogue should be about how we regain our economic competitiveness, how we can exploit our position as the natural hub of a stronger Asean, and how our economy must work for all Thais. This means upgrading our education, putting in place a much needed and sustained welfare system and facing up to the challenge of an ageing society. Failure to move the country on will undo the achievements of the last year.
But it's not too late to get back on track — if the drafting process can open up the minds of those involved to the various comments and criticisms, and responses are based on the merits of the issue not prejudice. Our future democracy must be based on a strong multi-party system that represents and implements the will of the people while being held to account: this is the only way to make sure people are stronger than parties.
In addition, the solution to our past problems is not about engineering election results so that a particular party will not win or that no party wins. All parties must be able to effectively represent people who support them. Let me be clear, the ultimate beneficiaries of a stronger party system are not politicians, but the people. My belief on this matter is unchanged even if Pheu Thai wins the next election, so long as they serve the people and can be held to account to prevent abuse of power. The country would do worse being run by fragmented parties and political groups with strong bargaining power, whose existence is solely to be in power and serve the highest bidder.
So let everyone be involved in reviewing the draft constitution. Let the people have a final say, with a prior agreement on what will happen should the draft be rejected. Create an atmosphere where the world can see we are getting back to democracy. It might even deliver the much-needed confidence for the economy.
This may mean a delay in terms of returning to elections, but voting under good rules must matter far more than knee-jerk elections. A politician like me can wait. If the regime positions the country on a pathway to peace and progress, I'm sure the people are also willing to wait. However, they will not wait forever.
Abhisit Vejjajiva is leader of the Democrat Party.