Thailand’s former PM contender awaiting court decision on whether to dissolve party
WASHINGTON — Thai progressive leader Pita Limjaroenrat and his Move Forward party won the biggest bloc in the country’s House of Representatives in elections last year. But Pita’s bid to become the country’s prime minister failed to receive enough support in the parliament.
Pita spoke recently with VOA about a ruling expected this week by the Constitutional Court in Thailand on whether to dissolve the Move Forward party and to ban Pita and other party executives from politics. Prosecutors have alleged party officials violated the constitution by campaigning for an amendment of a law, known as Article 112, which shields the country’s royal family from defamation.
The following interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.
VOA: How would you describe your feeling ahead of the ruling?
Pita Limjaroenrat: Content. I'm very happy with what I have achieved. It's true that it's a very much a roller-coaster political ride, from an election winner to a parliamentarian at risk of being banned for either 10 years or potentially for the rest of my life. But I have chosen to look at it from where I have come from. It's an honor for me to serve my country and to have done my best in the past three or four years. As a rookie leader, as a new party, to be able to bring about change and hope, within the hearts of the Thai people.
VOA: In the opinion column that you penned for The Economist on Aug.1, you wrote, “Move Forward and I have become the latest casualties of such judicial overreach…. The elite's judicial overreach and other quick fixes designed to preserve status quo will not always work in the long run.” Why does the tone differ from being “content?”
Pita: I wanted to point out that this is quite systematic. I'm trying to tell the readers from my penmanship that I'm not the first one. I'm the last casualty; that means I'm not the first one. And there has been 33 political parties [put] in the graveyard in the past 20 years. So if you look at it from a macro perspective, that means, you know, it's quite a systemized way of keeping elected politicians at bay. Thirty three political parties, 249 politicians being stripped away of their political rights. So, you know, I'm not taking it personally, just for me. And I'm trying to tell the readers that the stakes are not just about my personal political future nor about only the future of my party, but it's really all about democracy as a whole in this country.
I'm not giving up and I'm not losing hope. I still remain optimistic because I travel all around the country meeting young people who are still very much alive and very much ready to cast the ballots in the voting booth. So ballots over battles, ballots over bullets.
VOA: What about the impact of the verdict specifically in shaping the conversation about Article 112 in Thailand?
Pita: You know, finally, as a country, as a society, we should be able to have a safe space, or a mechanism, to make sure that diversity or diverse views or conflicts get dissolved away. And that's why we thought that parliament would be the best place to find that consensus.
VOA: The court case draws international attention. What does this court fight mean to your ambition for Thailand’s global stature?
Pita: The international community is concerned in terms of similar values, which go beyond borders. But to me, personally, I feel like the definition of constitutional monarchy, the Thai way, has to be developed within the Thai society itself.
It's a kind of governance that finds that kind of proportion, or the kind of balance, with the constitution, which is about the people and the monarchy. And each country is different. So I'm not trying to look outside of Thailand and define that definition.
VOA: What political bargains have you made? Any areas that you think should not be compromised?
Pita: I think I am flexible in terms of operations, but very consistent in terms of principles. You know, the more I wait, the more I wait to become the leader of the country, I feel the need to double down on the reform agendas that I have made, whether it's demilitarization, whether it's de-monopolization, whether it's decentralization.
I’m willing to be flexible on various things. For example, I remember when I was forming the coalition and there was a questioner asking that, ‘if I join your coalition and the quota is supposed to be this X amount of ministers, can I have two more? Because I felt like that's a mark that would switch me from not joining your coalition, to joining your coalition.’ I said, ‘fine, as long as you promise to us, through that MOU, that you will deliver X and X policies that you and I campaign on, before people cast the votes for us.’ So that is an example of a flexibility I'm willing to do. But not like a reversal, or flip-flop politics.
VOA: If this is one of the last remarks you will share to your constituents before you’re banned from holding a political office, what would you say?
Pita: Keep moving forward. ... I can speak on behalf of the people on various things as long as, you know, there are people who are willing to listen to me. Keep moving forward.
So parliament might not be my playground and Thailand doesn't want me, but all over the country will be my playground. ASEAN will be my playground. Asia will be my playground. And the world will become my playground until we can meet again.
Pita spoke recently with VOA about a ruling expected this week by the Constitutional Court in Thailand on whether to dissolve the Move Forward party and to ban Pita and other party executives from politics. Prosecutors have alleged party officials violated the constitution by campaigning for an amendment of a law, known as Article 112, which shields the country’s royal family from defamation.
The following interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.
VOA: How would you describe your feeling ahead of the ruling?
Pita Limjaroenrat: Content. I'm very happy with what I have achieved. It's true that it's a very much a roller-coaster political ride, from an election winner to a parliamentarian at risk of being banned for either 10 years or potentially for the rest of my life. But I have chosen to look at it from where I have come from. It's an honor for me to serve my country and to have done my best in the past three or four years. As a rookie leader, as a new party, to be able to bring about change and hope, within the hearts of the Thai people.
VOA: In the opinion column that you penned for The Economist on Aug.1, you wrote, “Move Forward and I have become the latest casualties of such judicial overreach…. The elite's judicial overreach and other quick fixes designed to preserve status quo will not always work in the long run.” Why does the tone differ from being “content?”
Pita: I wanted to point out that this is quite systematic. I'm trying to tell the readers from my penmanship that I'm not the first one. I'm the last casualty; that means I'm not the first one. And there has been 33 political parties [put] in the graveyard in the past 20 years. So if you look at it from a macro perspective, that means, you know, it's quite a systemized way of keeping elected politicians at bay. Thirty three political parties, 249 politicians being stripped away of their political rights. So, you know, I'm not taking it personally, just for me. And I'm trying to tell the readers that the stakes are not just about my personal political future nor about only the future of my party, but it's really all about democracy as a whole in this country.
I'm not giving up and I'm not losing hope. I still remain optimistic because I travel all around the country meeting young people who are still very much alive and very much ready to cast the ballots in the voting booth. So ballots over battles, ballots over bullets.
VOA: What about the impact of the verdict specifically in shaping the conversation about Article 112 in Thailand?
Pita: You know, finally, as a country, as a society, we should be able to have a safe space, or a mechanism, to make sure that diversity or diverse views or conflicts get dissolved away. And that's why we thought that parliament would be the best place to find that consensus.
VOA: The court case draws international attention. What does this court fight mean to your ambition for Thailand’s global stature?
Pita: The international community is concerned in terms of similar values, which go beyond borders. But to me, personally, I feel like the definition of constitutional monarchy, the Thai way, has to be developed within the Thai society itself.
It's a kind of governance that finds that kind of proportion, or the kind of balance, with the constitution, which is about the people and the monarchy. And each country is different. So I'm not trying to look outside of Thailand and define that definition.
VOA: What political bargains have you made? Any areas that you think should not be compromised?
Pita: I think I am flexible in terms of operations, but very consistent in terms of principles. You know, the more I wait, the more I wait to become the leader of the country, I feel the need to double down on the reform agendas that I have made, whether it's demilitarization, whether it's de-monopolization, whether it's decentralization.
I’m willing to be flexible on various things. For example, I remember when I was forming the coalition and there was a questioner asking that, ‘if I join your coalition and the quota is supposed to be this X amount of ministers, can I have two more? Because I felt like that's a mark that would switch me from not joining your coalition, to joining your coalition.’ I said, ‘fine, as long as you promise to us, through that MOU, that you will deliver X and X policies that you and I campaign on, before people cast the votes for us.’ So that is an example of a flexibility I'm willing to do. But not like a reversal, or flip-flop politics.
VOA: If this is one of the last remarks you will share to your constituents before you’re banned from holding a political office, what would you say?
Pita: Keep moving forward. ... I can speak on behalf of the people on various things as long as, you know, there are people who are willing to listen to me. Keep moving forward.
So parliament might not be my playground and Thailand doesn't want me, but all over the country will be my playground. ASEAN will be my playground. Asia will be my playground. And the world will become my playground until we can meet again.