Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra has his work cut out trying to win back support from the red shirts, if there are enough of them still around.
Thaksin, now on parole, has been touring former red-shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) strongholds in Chiang Mai, Nonthaburi, Nakhon Ratchasima and Pathum Thani.
His visits included meetings with political dynastic “big houses”, who were power brokers for the red shirts, at ceremonies and parties.
The settings may have been informal, but the underlying motive that brought Thaksin to the provinces was indeed serious.
The ruling Pheu Thai Party is desperate to regain its dominance in politics after having been dethroned as the country’s main force and largest party by the Move Forward Party in last year’s general election.
Despite Thaksin denying he has anything to do with Pheu Thai — he is not a member — his provincial tours were obviously organised to shore up waning support for the party which traces its origins back to the Thai Rak Thai Party that Thakin founded before it was dissolved by the Constitutional Court for electoral fraud in May 2007.
The tours chiefly serve as a strategy to reconnect with the red shirts credited with handing Pheu Thai its resounding victory in the July 2011 general election when the party won 265 out of 500 seats.
The triumph, however, was thought to be “revenge” exacted by the red shirts on the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration for using the military to end their protracted street protests in the commercial heart of Bangkok.
Mr Abhisit led the Democrat Party, which came second in the 2011 poll with 159 MPs, six less than in the previous election.
The red shirts were once diehard supporters of Pheu Thai, which endured a long absence from government during the nine-year rule of Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha’s administration.
Observers agree the period was long enough for the support base of any political party to weaken, as happened with the UDD.
Tida: 'Once bitten, twice shy'
The UDD was in danger of disintegrating as a dominant political force as Pheu Thai fumbled during the Prayut government installed by the coup-engineer, the National Council for Peace and Order.
The Prayut administration exerted significant control over the state’s inner workings and deprived Pheu Thai of the chance to regroup and re-establish ties with the red shirts.
At the same time, a rapid paradigm shift was taking place in the form of the anti-junta pro-democracy movement, which posed a direct challenge to the status quo. It marked the birth of the youth-led protests under the banner of the Rassadorn group, which spread fast among university students and sections of the population previously oblivious to the business of government and politics.
A source said the movement found a close ally, the Future Forward Party, which was later dissolved over an illegal loan and then morphed into the Move Forward Party (MFP).
The Rassadorn group eclipsed the red shirts, who by then had struggled without substantial support from Pheu Thai even though several UDD stalwarts were spotted at many Rassadorn-organised protests against the Prayut administration.
Also, the source said that despite core UDD members standing shoulder to shoulder with the youth-led movement, they were viewed as being mere “auxiliaries” to the Rassadorn cause and were not waging a campaign to push a political agenda of their own, which would have provided a catalyst for the UDD to reassert its influence.
The source said a negative situation was becoming increasingly apparent; the more Rassadorn and the MFP grew in popularity, the less relevant the UDD was finding itself.
This has prompted Thaksin to launch his UDD revitalisation move in earnest. However, reviving the red shirts could prove a futile exercise, according to UDD adviser Tida Tawornseth.
Speaking on a political talk programme recently, Ms Tida said there was little hope of Thaksin working his magic and making the UDD the formidable force it once was.
She argued that many UDD members have hung up their red shirts and switched to wearing orange, the colour of the MFP.
Ms Tida said it was a case of once bitten and twice shy, and it was all Thaksin’s doing. Some UDD supporters became disenchanted by the former premier’s announcement while in self-imposed exile that if a military coup were staged, he would return home immediately to lead red-shirt protesters against the coup makers.
His announcement was relayed to UDD protesters at a mass rally in Bangkok held to support the Yingluck Shinawatra government, which came under intense pressure in 2013-14 to quit over a wholesale amnesty being pushed in parliament. This was allegedly to benefit Thaksin and secure his return without having to face trial.
Ms Tida also said the last straw for the red shirts looked to be Pheu Thai’s decision to drop the MFP in favour of forming a coalition government with the conservative parties that were once part of the Prayut administration.
This was seen as reneging on a promise made to the MFP — Pheu Thai’s closest pro-democracy ally — for which Pheu Thai could not be forgiven by many red shirts who share the same pro-democracy ideology as the MFP and its supporters, according to Ms Tida.
Are senators fit to sit?
It was a Senate election unlike any before it — a three-week process in which the senators were chosen in three rounds of voting by their fellow candidates who competed in 20 profession categories.
The candidates were not required to hold a degree, but they had to be over 40 years old, have at least 10 years of experience in their respective fields and have ties to the district in which they applied to run.
Kittisak: Riled by a senator-elect
The election went ahead amid concerns that the organic law governing the process could be in breach of the charter, while the rules left applicants confused over whether they could campaign for votes.
There were also many claims about attempts to fix the vote, and the caretaker Senate earlier this week decided to set up a special 23-member panel to look into election irregularities.
The public was divided over whether the Election Commission (EC) should endorse the result first while investigating complaints or only endorse those not facing complaints.
Many senators-elect, including Nantana Nantavaropas, who represents the media professional group, could not wait to see the back of the junta-appointed senators who had assumed a caretaker role for two months.
“The outgoing Senate had better refrain from performing any major role while the country waits for a new Senate,” she was quoted as saying.
Her remark was thought to have prompted a retort from one of her soon-to-be predecessors, Kittisak Rattanawaraha, who spoke in parliament on Monday, two days before the Senate poll results were certified by the EC.
Without naming names, Mr Kittisak said senators are not recognised by law as having assumed office until their election is certified by the EC and subsequently royally endorsed and published in the Royal Gazette.
“Could a certain new senator who overstepped the mark and riled others please learn to hold their tongue this instant?” he said.
The outgoing senators’ term expired on May 10, but the law says they should continue to serve until the new senators assume office.
Caught in the thick of it, the EC took two full weeks to review the process before certifying the election result on Wednesday.
The law does not specify when results must be certified, only that the poll agency must wait five days before announcing them. The new senators were expected to be announced on July 2.
Refusing to call it a postponement, EC chairman Ittiporn Boonpracong said a deferral was necessary to ensure that the agency addressed all the issues so that the election was clean, fair and lawful.
The EC’s decision to endorse all the winners and the substitutes this week was highly anticipated by Thanaporn Sriyakul, director of the Political and Public Policy Analysis Institute because the majority of the complaints involved candidate qualifications.
About 70% concerned the backgrounds of the applicants, while alleged election fraud accounted for less than 10%. Moreover, all the fraud-related complaints filed in court were thrown out due to lack of evidence.
In his view, election fraud, especially claims about collusion to fix the vote, was hard to prove and the complainants often could not provide evidence as to who paid the money.
Following the general election last year, the EC disqualified only two MPs, despite numerous complaints.
“It is no different from allegations [of vote buying] in the general election. It is hard to find evidence to back the charges and hold the cheaters accountable,” he said.
When most of the complaints concerned a candidates’ eligibility, the best course of action for the EC was to endorse the winners first. This is because the law allows the EC to do so when there is clear evidence and the action does not nullify the election process, according to the analyst.
As for questions over whether some of the new senators are properly equipped to perform their duties, Mr Thanaporn said the public should not be overly concerned about a senator’s education, even though some have only a basic education.
He also argued that it is unfair to question their ability or judgement based on their educational backgrounds. He pointed out that several MPs in the past did not have a formal education but proved themselves up to the job.
“There’s no need to get all worked up about the education of farmers, drivers or vendors.
“If you can’t prove they cheated their way in, what can you do? At this point, it’s anybody’s guess if they can do better or worse than their predecessors,” he said.
Earlier, Somsak Prissananantakul, a Bhumjaithai Party member, also urged the public not to berate the senators-elect over their educational background. He said the law is designed to ensure that candidates who come from ordinary backgrounds have the same chance as more privileged candidates to enter the Upper House.