Democracy Beyond the Ballot Box: Digital Resurgence of Thai Civil Society

Thai democracy showed signs of consolidation following the defeat of military-backed parties in the 2023 general elections. However, the emergence of the Pheu Thai-led government, formed through a backdoor pact with the conservative establishment, undermined the collective mandate of many Thai voters and dampened prospects for further democratisation. Despite the setbacks, there appear to be tender shoots of democratic governance sprouting in the form of civil society.

Neither the election results nor the outcomes of the government formation process paint a complete picture of the state of Thai democracy. If democracy is defined, at least in part, by the degree to which society can hold its government accountable, then certain aspects of Thailand’s democratic potential remain resilient, albeit in a different form. Within a dysfunctional political system that has hampered the effectiveness of the electoral process and parliamentary channels in ensuring accountability, Thai civil society has developed an uncanny capacity for monitoring government policies, scrutinising government budgets, ensuring electoral integrity, and coordinating citizen-led initiatives.

This growth is paradoxical. It emerged against a backdrop of significant obstacles to democratic development in Thailand over the past decade. During the military rule by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) from 2014-2019, the NCPO not only cracked down on political activities, protests, and dissent, but also imposed strict restrictions on political parties and public gatherings. To centralise control, the NCPO exercised broad emergency powers under Section 44 of the Interim Constitution, promulgated a junta-backed 2017 Constitution, and influenced key appointments to institutions such as the Constitutional Court, Election Commission, National Counter Corruption Commission and the Senate. These conditions prompted civil society groups and activists to advocate for greater accountability, transparency and citizen involvement in the political process, including a return to civilian rule.

At the forefront of these efforts is the Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw), a Thai civil society organisation that has been a key player in promoting freedom of expression, judicial integrity, and democratic principles. iLaw has undertaken a broad range of democracy advocacy activities, chief among them being monitoring the use of Section 44 and raising awareness about constitutional issues, the judicial process, and important parliamentary bills. Yet, when examining broader developments since 2019, the influence of organisations like iLaw is more accurately seen as growing in tandem with — and to some extent as a result of — heightened political engagement among Thai citizens. This was especially true, following the pro-democracy movements of 2020-2021 and the expansion of digital platforms as avenues for political participation and activism.

In essence, Thai democracy has managed to cultivate more robust foundations, at least in one critical dimension, amidst a turbulent post-election scenario that seemingly stifled the deep-seated demand for change among the Thai populace.

In much the same way that Thailand’s pro-democracy movements were organised organically through social media platforms such as Twitter, these same tools have empowered civic organisations to rapidly form networks, pool resources, and coordinate their efforts on a larger scale. This phenomenon is best exemplified by Vote62, a collaborative project by iLaw, Opendream — a Thai social enterprise that leverages digital technology to pioneer tools aimed at enhancing health, education, and livelihood — and Rocket Media Lab, a company dedicated to open data journalism. Together, they created a real-time election reporting platform, offering a means of verification against potential electoral irregularities similar to those witnessed during the 2019 general elections. In the 2023 general elections, Vote62 crowdsourced election monitoring, trained volunteers, and collected photos of election results at the polling station level from over 30,000 polling stations nationwide.

Another noteworthy example is the #ConforAll (Constitution for All) campaign, led by iLaw in partnership with other NGOs and watchdog organisations. Primarily driven by social media and supported by on-the-ground volunteer efforts, the campaign seeks to rally support to rewrite the current junta-drafted constitution through a fully and directly elected constitution drafting assembly. The Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) had abruptly declared that only physical signatures would be deemed valid just three days before the submission deadline on 25 August last year. The campaign surmounted the obstacle by amassing over 200,000 signatures, greatly exceeding the 50,000-signature threshold needed to petition the Cabinet for a national referendum.

The significance of the #ConforAll campaign is twofold. First, it illustrates the potential of citizen-led reform initiatives in a challenging political environment, where a cross-over government is unlikely to initiate or follow through with reform on its own due to the risk of alienating its conservative stakeholders. Second, it demonstrates the viability of digital activism to bring about tangible outcomes in a governmental landscape not yet fully receptive to digital technologies. These online-to-offline initiatives by civil society groups have established a precedent, evolving into a new model for civic engagement. Building on this momentum, iLaw plans to launch a new campaign to collect citizens’ signatures to propose a bill to grant amnesty to individuals prosecuted or facing charges related to political activities since 19 September 2006—the day of the coup that overthrew Thaksin Shinawatra’s government.

While the burgeoning role of civil society groups is notable, it is crucial to highlight that this potential is amplified through strategic collaborations with political parties. An example of this is the recent collaboration between WeVis, a civic technology organisation, and KaoGeek, a Discord-based community of data-oriented Move Forward Party followers. Under the leadership of WeVis’ Thanisara Ruangdej and Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, a Move Forward MP and the chair of the House Committee on Budgeting Study and Budget Administration, the collaborative effort focused on converting the draft budget for the 2024 fiscal year into a machine-readable format. This made it more accessible and transparent to the public in line with best practices in open government data.

In essence, Thai democracy has managed to cultivate more robust foundations, at least in one critical dimension, amidst a turbulent post-election scenario that seemingly stifled the deep-seated demand for change among the Thai populace. This indicates that, despite the encroachment of unelected interests on democracy and the ongoing suppression of freedom of expression, the seeds of a more participatory and responsive democratic landscape may indeed be taking root in Thailand. This is not in the ballot box, but in the collaborative efforts of a citizenry that is growing more assertive in reclaiming their role in shaping their nation’s political narrative, often against the backdrop of elite dominance.

2024/16