• 
• 

Published on January 10, 2008

Assoc Prof Attachak Satayanurak, a historian at Chiang Mai University, and key member of the Midnight University, had urged the public to cast a 'no vote' to send a signal for the re-drafting of the Constitution and to reject both major parties. He talks to The Nation's Pravit Rojanaphruk. Excerpts:

What does 2.1 million 'no votes' signify?

It reflects a wish for more participatory politics. The 'no vote' rejects the current power relations and recognises the current system will cause problems in the future.

Could these 'no votes' eventually lead to a third way of politics or is it merely a voice of people bored with both the military junta and traditional politics?

 A true people's party or new form of politics is something we aspire to. We need a Constitution that first strengthens the government. Secondly, the government must be subject to scrutiny. Also, the people should have the power to punish the government and supervise government's policies. The 2.1 million 'no votes' were much higher than we expected. I personally thought only a few hundred thousand would vote that way.

What about those who voted for the People Power Party (PPP) simply to punish the junta although they themselves were no fans of the party or Thaksin Shinawatra?

Those who voted for the PPP in order to slap the junta on the face were not a large number. Many who voted for the PPP are PPP supporters... I think people are smarter now in voting and we're now seeing a balancing of power through voting decisions where some may vote for the PPP at the district level but cast votes for the Democrats in the party list ballot, so the Democrats can be a strong opposition.

What are the prospects for drafting a new Constitution and abolishing the Internal Security Act?

I think the PPP will likely form the government. But if the Democrat Party were to form one, it has a higher chance of accommodating the old power relations with the military, while the PPP is likely to amend the charter in a way that would put politicians back in the driver's seat. It may lead to a Senate with a new role, perhaps merely to offer criticism.

We will try to mobilise the 'no vote' as much as possible because I don't want the re-drafting of the charter to fall into the hands of politicians.

What about the urban/rural divide. Any hope of bridging the gap?

There will surely be conflicts. First, there will be a class war. As long as the middle class thinks the poor are naive, nothing can be done about it.

The middle class should recognise a transformation is taking place among the poor and it goes beyond selling and buying votes.