The Democrat Party has ruled Bangkok for almost a decade and is facing its toughest hurdle in the upcoming gubernatorial election. With its bitter rival –the Pheu Thai Party – in top form, the ineloquent MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra is becoming ill-at-ease as he wrestles district-by-district with Pongsapat Pongcharoen, a former five-term police spokesman. In the final week before the March 3 race, we explain how a loss at this juncture might entail a shake-up in the Democrat Party’s top management.
Fading popularity
It was supposed to be an effortless triumph for Sukhumbhand Paribatra, the Democrat candidate for Bangkok’s governorship. The capital has served as the party’s stronghold at both the local or national levels since the 2006 military coup and Sukhumbhand was a returning candidate who enjoyed decent public approval.
In the previous two general elections, Democrat Bangkok MPs outnumbered those of the Pheu Thai Party. In 2011, the margin between the Democrats and the People’s Power Party (PPP) – a de facto political predecessor of Pheu Thai – was 23-to-10; in 2007, it was 27-to-9. In the Bangkok Metropolitan Council, Democrats won 46 out of 61 seats. In district council seats, they won a combined 289 out of 36. In the past two gubernatorial elections, Democrats beat candidates from the Pheu Thai Party and the PPP with ease, posting wide margins of 300,000 to 400,000 votes.
Now, however, while Bangkokians are contemplating who should oversee the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) up until 2017, Sukhumbhand’s prospects of winning are anything but definite. Throughout 2013, we have seen him exhausting all his efforts to close the approval-rating gap with Pheu Thai candidate Pongsapat Pongcharoen, who is enjoying a lead in major opinion polls.
Sukhumbhand’s fading popularity stems directly from his past performance as governor, which many Bangkok residents considered lackluster. Last July, according to Bangkok University’s Bangkok Poll, he scored an approval rating of just 5.63 out of 10 for his overall three-and-a-half-year performance, down 0.15 from a 5.78 approval rating in January 2012. And, less than two weeks before the Democrat Party announced that it would be endorsing Sukhumbhand on Dec. 27 in that same year, the pollster reported that only 51.7% of Bangkok residents believed that the governor was actively doing his job.
During his four-year term, which started on Jan. 11, 2009, Sukhumbhand was also involved in several scandals, a factor that is taking a grave toll on his current campaign. With the help of social media websites, accusations against him are still circulating throughout the online world.
The most controversial aspect of Sukhumbhand’s tenure was the Bangkok Futsal Arena (BFA) in Nong Chok district, a 12,000-seat stadium built on a 10-rai plot of land that failed to stand up to inspection from the international soccer regulatory agency FIFA, and was thus unable to serve its purpose of hosting the 2012 Futsal World Cup.
“I am sorry for all Bangkokians that FIFA did not choose this arena,” Sukhumbhand responded, after FIFA stated on Nov. 6, 2012, that security and safety at the stadium were not up to par. “I did not build the arena for FIFA. I did it for Bangkok’s people.”
A few days later, an Internet meme of Sukhumbhand went viral. It was the picture of him standing in front of the scandalous arena in the background and his quote “I did not build the arena for FIFA. I did it for Bangkok’s people” in the foreground. Sukhumbhand subsequently held a press conference, citing his intention to sue FIFA for causing damage to the BMA by not using the venue in its competition. He claimed that the BMA’s construction efforts had proceeded according to a preset timeline and in accordance with FIFA’s requirements.
In September 2011, Sukhumbhand was accused of corruption after a Pantip forum thread exposed that many of the security cameras installed in parts of Bangkok were in fact dummies. Sukhumbhand shrugged off the allegation by reasoning that they had been set up under former Bangkok governor Apirak Kosayodhin and that the installation of all 1,325 dummy cameras was intentional in order to save money and meet the needs of budgetary constraints.
Sukhumbhand is also dogged by scandals related to BTS contracts, the construction of a giant water tunnel, red-shirt protests and a controversial prayer ceremony. This latter scandal stemmed from his decision to take part in a ritual that he believed would keep floodwaters away from Bangkok.
To be fair, Sukhumbhand may not be guilty of all the transgressions of which he stands accused. But with his attention usurped by these matters, it leaves me wondering what he has actually done and what he will bring to the city, if he is elected for another four years as Bangkok’s governor.
Continuity vs. Creativity
The dummy security camera scandal led Sukhumbhand to order the removal of all the fakes and to add 24,000 more cameras to ensure roadside safety across Bangkok. For his second term, he promises to install 27,000 more CCTV cameras in crime-prone areas. This is one of many policies he has proposed under his campaign slogan of “moving forward immediately.”
“Urban work is often complex,” Sukhumbhand told me during a recent interview. “Sometimes it’s very hard to achieve everything within a couple of years. We need the continuity, rather than having someone new start from scratch.”
Sukhumbhand claimed that he has added 5,024 rais of green space to the city in the past four years and that he will add more 5,000 more rais in his second term, plus 10 public parks. He said that he has installed 20,000 Wi-Fi hotspots in Bangkok and will push forward with another 5,000 Wi-Fi locations, if reelected. He insisted that he has provided 100,000 people with vocational lessons and will train another 200,000 interested residents during his second term. He is proud of Bangkok having been named the world’s best city by Travel+ Leisure magazine for the past three years consecutively and pledged to boost the competitiveness of Bangkok’s business sectors.
Despite Sukhumbhand’s contention that continuity is key to success, it seems as if Bangkok residents yearn for initiatives that will prove the creativity and guts of their governor.
When I queried Somchai Lertsawtham, a 22-year-old college student, about the most outstanding project Sukhumbhand had undertaken during his first term as governor, he had a hard time coming up with an answer.
“I am not sure. This is pretty tough. Let me think,” he said. “I remember the Dog Park and Bangkok being the World Book Capital.”
Like Somchai, 38-year-old cloth vendor Prapaiporn Samanthongsakulsampan does not think that it would make any difference if Sukhumbhand were to be reelected.
“He is just doing what he is supposed to do,” Prapaiporn said. She rolled her eyes. “With him or without him, Bangkok will move forward anyway. He should have moved it forward years ago.”
Personality Shortage in Two-Horse Race
Sukhumbhand aims to garner at least one million votes from 4.2 million eligible voters in the Bangkok area. This goal seems achievable when compared to the 934,602 votes Sukhumbhand earned in 2009, which surpassed the 611,699 votes secured by Pheu Thai candidate Yuranunt Pamornmontri that same year. In spite of this humble ambition, many speculate that the massive support Bangkok residents gave him four years ago was simply a holdover from the popularity of former governor Apirak Kosayodhin. In the 2008 gubernatorial election, Apirak won all 50 constituencies, but he resigned one month later after being accused of corruption over the purchasing of fire-fighting equipment for Bangkok.
This time around, Sukhumbhand’s popularity will truly be measured by his own performance and his competency in comparison to his formidable counterpart – Pongsapat. While many of the leading candidates’ policies overlap one another (light rails, monorails, BTS extension lines, BTS fare reduction, CCTV camera installation, bike lanes, citywide free Wi-Fi, et al) voters are resorting to other factors in order to direct their considerations – their personality.
Sukhumbhand’s other big drawback is his politically incorrect verbal expressions, which have curtailed voter enthusiasm. During a Feb. 9 campaign speech, Sukhumbhand reportedly went on a rant after fielding questions from the audience about the Democrat Party’s machinations prior to the governor’s race.
“Asking this question is damn contempt,” Sukhumbhand stammered in a fury. “Don’t insult ‘Koo’ again because ‘Koo’ belongs to Democrat Party.”
The word “Koo” is a rude Thai substitute for “me,” which is normally barred from public speech. Following this rant, Sukhumbhand faced a series of negative comments, questioning the appropriateness of his use of the word. Five days after the incident, Sukhumbhand told the media that he could use the word freely and it had nothing to do with his royal title of Mom Rajawongse (MR) (or “The Honorable” in English). This title signifies that he is a great-grandson of King Chulalongkorn (Rama V).
Sukhumbhand’s shortcoming comes across as more worrying when he has to face an experienced public speaker like Pongsapat, who served for five terms as police spokesman prior to entering politics. Sukhumbhand’s inability to communicate fluently earned him the nickname “Err” – a Thai phrase meaning, “to be autistic.” On Google Thailand, the nickname pops up as the second search suggestion when you type in Sukhumbhand’s name.
“I am not good at speaking,” Sukhumbhand once told Channel Three.
But, putting aside his communication handicap, Sukhumbhand has a strong political and academic background and is actually well qualified for the governor’s position. The 60-year-old received Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees in Philosophy, Politics and Economics from Oxford University and a Master’s Degree in International Relations from Georgetown University. After graduation, he taught as an associate professor at Chulalongkorn University’s Political Science Department for 16 years.
The scholar-turned-politician joined the Democrat Party in the 1996 general election and won the Bangkok seat. He served as a Deputy Foreign Minister under the government of Chuan Leekpai. In October 1999, a group of Burmese dissidents seized the Burmese embassy on Sathorn Road and took 38 people hostage. The 25-hour incident was settled after Thai officials offered the dissidents a helicopter ride to the Thai-Burmese border in western Ratchaburi province. Sukhumband traveled in place of the hostages with the rebels to ensure a bloodless resolution.
Play Hardball or Face Extinction
In this final week before Election Day, the Democrat Party is employing a hardball strategy to help Sukhumbhand get reelected. They went head-to-head with the Pheu Thai Party by bringing up past accusations against the Red Shirt anti-government protest in 2010. The movement resulted in the extensive destruction of property, most horrifying of which was the torching of Central World.
Democrats are attempting to remind Bangkok residents of the brutality of the incident and implicate the Pheu Thai Party in the violence. The phrase “burning the city” has turned up frequently in Democrat rhetoric.
“Bangkok residents should not forget about the torching of the city,” Democrat deputy leader Korn Chatikavanij said to a rally of supporters on Feb. 23. “If Pheu Thai candidate wins, they will laugh and state that Bangkokians forget easily.”
Democrats have also cautioned voters not to cast their votes for the candidate who comes from the same party as the central government. They claimed that such an act would produce a monopoly in the country’s political system, and end with the Pheu Thai Party dictating every aspect of Thai life.
Democrats lately appeared fiercer than ever, probably out of the worry that they will encounter a series of deadly consequences if Sukhumbhand does not secure the governorship. A loss at this juncture would forever change the notion that Democrat supporters are only those with high education, class and income, or in other words – Bangkokians. It will inevitably force Democrats to reposition themselves in the country’s political landscape. Before long, the loss may sway Democrat supporters in other stronghold cities across the Kingdom, particularly in the South, to reconsider the Democrat Party’s value.
The loss of the BMA would also mean reduced media attention for the party and a diminished role at both the national and local levels. And the Democrat nightmare situation is that Pongsapat will satisfy Bangkok’s constituencies for the next four years. In this case, the Democrats could safely be assumed dead in Bangkok politics for at least another eight years.
“If Sukhumbhand loses in the race, Abhisit has to step down from the leadership of the Democrat Party,” said Pichai Rattakul, 85, a former Democrat leader and a respected politician. “We have the upper hand but [Abhisit] gathers such little support.”
The governor’s election is a war of honor for Democrats. On March 3, Bangkok not only picks its next governor but also dictates the future of the 66-year-old Democrat party.
Reader Interactions