Någon länk till dessa tidningsartiklar och forskningsrapporter, finns det att delge oss obildade? Att IL inte varit söder om Hua Hin vet vi men han uttalar sig ändå bergsäkert om hur det är i södra Thailand...
Att röstköp förekommer i södern betvivlar jag inte alls, på lokal och bynivå men jag har ännu inte sett något som tyder på att det förekommer i den närmast industriella omfattning som Thaksin ägnar sig åt i parlamentsvalen.
Noterar att du backar att par steg i just denna tråd och kan medge röstköp från andra än Thaksin trots bristen på videobevis. Gott så.
Källor, visst:
Där kan man bland annat läsa följande från Duncan McCargo:
"Callahan has argued that the south, with its more unified regional identity and strong leaning towards the Democrats, is often seen as “beyond vote-buying”, yet his study details allegations of illegal practices by the Democrats in Hat Yai in 1995 (Callahan 2000: 50– 51), noting that Pollwatch officials believed Democrat vote-buying was widespread in the region (Callahan 2000: 20). He also suggests that bureaucratic bias in favour of the Democrats was quite pervasive in the South, including Chuan¹s own Trang constituency (Callahan 2000: 20, 57). While it may be the case that regionalist sympathies for the Democrats reduced the salience of electoral manipulation in the South – it might be suggested that the Democrats would largely “win anyway”, even without cheating, and that illicit benefits offered around elections were simply part of an ongoing relationship between the party and its supporters – southern sympathy for the party did not prevent the commercialisation of elections in the region.
Notera alltså att det är Pollwatch som hävdar omfattande röstköp sedan långt tillbaka. I sydliga provinser. Också.
Resten av hans paper kan du läsa här om så önskas
En MP från Demokraterna som åkt dit för röstköp kan du läsa om i the Nation (dock inte mer söderöver än Samut Prakan)
"The Election Commission (EC) red-carded the Democrat party's Samut Prakan MP-elect Soracha Weerachart-wattana (สรชา วีรชาติวัฒนา) for vote buying in the last re-election. Six MPs were endorsed by the commission.
EC Secretary-General Suthipol Thaweechaikarn (สุทธิพล ทวีชัยการ) said the EC's meeting had unanimously agreed to disqualify the Democrat party MP for violating the election law on grounds of distributing money attached to her name cards. The disqualification resulted in a re-election in the first constituency of Samut Prakan province. Ms Soracha and two other people were also sentenced to a fine."
Hur det kan gå till när Demokraterna köper röster redogör Bangkok Post för, originalänken dock arkiverad:
Sutheps brorsa har visst torskat också, men det var ju ”bara” på provinsnivå.
Men det handlar ju som sagt egentligen mer om betydelsen av röstköp. Du vill uppenbarligen ge det en stor betydelse. Jag är tveksam. Inte ens ledande Demokrater verkar heller tycka det:
Läs tex intervjun med Demokraternas förre finansministern Korn på en av länkarna ovan.
En annan Demokratisk ledare, Alongkorn Ponlabboot, säger så här apropå Thaksins framgångar;
"He said that when the Democrats lost the 2001 general election to Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai Party, he thought it was because Thaksin was quick in coming up with new policies. Then, after winning the election, Thaksin's party immediately implemented its campaign promises, resulting in strong public faith and popularity.
"Don't put it down to vote-buying, electoral fraud or populism," Alongkorn said.
Sen har vi förstås Chang Noi i The Nation med några krönikor på samma tema, samt Baker och Pasuks forskning
“Vote-buying has not disappeared. At election time, some candidates still hand out money for fear of being judged “small-hearted” or “ungenerous” if they don’t. But the point is, this money is no longer determining the election result. At the last general election in July 2011, the pattern of voting was very distinctive. Across large areas of the country, adjacent constituencies gave candidates of the same party victories by very large margins. Across much of the Northeast, Pheu Thai candidates won over 60% of the vote, and Democrats less than 10%. Across the upper North, the Pheu Thai candidates won over 50% and the Democrat around 20%.
Across the South (except for the Muslim-majority far South), Democrat candidates won more than 60% of the vote and the Pheu Thai under 10%.
This pattern is not what you would expect if vote-buying was determining the result. For a start, why would the parties buy far more votes than they needed? When vote-buying did matter 30 years ago, the pattern was very different. What we see from the 2011 pattern is the results of voting on the basis of mass-shared sentiment. Recent false claims about vote-buying are a key part of the campaign to undermine electoral democracy. The real problem is that more people understand the value of the vote, and are using it in their own interest.”
Önskas fler källor?
