‘National unity government’ dangerous and undemocratic  

A so-called national unity government has always been a favourite gambit for Thai politicians who lose elections. By utilising this benign-sounding concept they can sweep aside the voters’ verdict and prevent opposing factions from taking power.    
Advocates call it “national unity government” despite knowing full well that no such government can exist. Non-partisan Thai politicians simply no longer exist in this era of deep and bitter national division.
It was sad though predictable, then, to see the Democrats’ Thepthai Senapong float the idea again, after his party suffered a huge setback in the March 24 election. Exploiting the Election Commission (EC)’s apparent inability to produce a clear result, Thepthai has sought to convince the public that a national unity Cabinet is badly needed.
His idea immediately fails the test of credibility with his proposal that former prime minister and Democrat patriarch Chuan Leekpai lead the “unity” government. No neutral observer believes that Chuan is non-partisan.
In reality, and contrary to Thepthai’s claim, the current political phase has not yet reached a dead end. There are many moves still in play – provided the EC works diligently to produce the final election result and the military elite allows the game to proceed without intervening.
First of all, the EC must make a clear decision on the formula used to calculate the number of party-list MPs, in accordance with the Constitution and election law. The commission should stick to the formula indicated in the charter. Using its own proposed formula would invite more trouble rather than a solution, since it would bring too many parties into the equation. More importantly, any such method might be unconstitutional.
The rules of the game dictate that the election winner is the party which manages to obtain the most seats. This gives it the legitimacy to gather a coalition to form the new government. The popular vote is irrelevant in the parliamentary system. The only majority that counts is that of seats in the House of Representatives.
While the junta-sponsored charter allows the 250 appointed Senators to vote for a new prime minister, they should bear in mind that they are unelected figures and sit in parliament without a mandate from the people. It is undemocratic to vote against the people’s will. The group with the most seats in the lower house gets to nominate its candidate as prime minister, and senators would be defying the democratic will if they opposed that nomination.
Like it or not, the military and the elite who will be handpicked by the junta to sit in the Senate should set a precedent by voting in accordance with the will of the people, not that of the junta.
The election was far from perfect, but the elite, military and notably the junta must accept the outcome of a situation that they themselves created. The junta should now allow its opponents the chance to form a government to run the country, as mandated by the people.
Using underhanded legal tactics and other dirty tricks to retain power is not acceptable. The people delivered their verdict via an election by whose rules all parties agreed to abide. That process and its outcome are the only effective solution to the deep and lasting political problems in this country.
All parties must now allow the EC to do its work in accordance with the constitution and law. The elite, military and junta must not use their influence to force the agency off its course. 
If the system functions properly, a so-called national unity government will be unnecessary.