Direct election of Cabinet may solve a lot of problems

Before the party-list system was introduced and regulations put in place to create strong political parties and government, administrations under the 1991 Constitution were incredibly unstable. None of them were able to last beyond one term, and there were many medium-sized parties that crossed the floor of Parliament. 

Then came the so-called “People’s Constitution” in 1997, which focused on a strong civil government and political parties. Since then, however, Thai politics has been dominated by one political party – that of Thaksin Shinawatra – which won every election since 2001 until the military stepped in on May 22. 

Yet, despite his continued success in the polls, Thaksin-led governments have been accused of corruption, abuse of power and parliamentary dictatorship. Hence, Bangkok’s middle and upper class, along with some bureaucrats and top brass, decided that Thaksin’s grip was too powerful and that something had to change. 

The NRC sub-panel on political reform initially favoured the idea of having a directly elected Cabinet to allow for a clearer separation of power – much like the US system – in order to allow for a stable government and a more effective checks and balances. 

However, Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and NRC member Prasarn Marukpitak voiced their opposition yesterday, with Abhisit pointing out that in recent years, the executive branch has already been too strong and that this proposal would only strengthen it further. Prasarn, meanwhile, said any such move would encourage more corruption and capitalist politics. 

On the other hand, NRC member Chai-Anan Samudavanija voiced his support on Friday, pointing out that this system would allow stability and continuity of government. 

However, sources from the CDC said such a system had never been implemented in Thailand and they did not wish to create risks for the country by imposing an untried political set-up. 

Nakarin Mektrairat, a CDC member, recently came out to suggest that using Germany’s “proportion representation system” would, in effect, reduce the gap between bigger and smaller parties and hence stop any one party from becoming too powerful. 

Given that at this point in time, all sides seem to disagree on how to achieve their ultimate goal, the best thing might be to pay attention to the very distinct and clear opinion of the public. Surveys conducted by Bangkok University and NIDA offer a clear-cut answer – people want a directly elected prime minister. 

I believe the direct Cabinet election idea should also be taken seriously because it responds to the people – they distrust politicians’ representatives and want to take matters into their own hands by electing their executives. 

The idea of a directly-elected Cabinet is also very interesting because this proposal offers a compromise between the notions of preventing any one individual from becoming too powerful and creating an environment for a stable government. 

Getting the Cabinet, instead of just the premier, directly elected would cut down on the prime minister’s power as he or she could no longer claim the democratic legitimacy gained from an election. Instead, all candidates on the Cabinet list would play a part in gaining votes. 

Also, this system could make way for a more stable government, as the Cabinet should be able to claim democratic legitimacy and hence draw more support from medium and small parties in Parliament.