Black May

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Protesters and soldiers during Black May

The Black May ( Thai พฤษภา ทมิฬ , RTGS Phruetsapha Thamin ; thamin can also be translated as "cruel") was a political conflict in Thailand in May 1992. An opposition movement, mainly supported by the urban middle class, protested against the military-backed government by General Suchinda Kraprayoon . This in turn tried to suppress the protests by force, with 52 people killed and hundreds injured, according to official figures. Around 3,500 demonstrators were arrested, some claiming torture and some " disappeared " and never reappeared, with alternative estimates of up to 200 deaths.

background

From 1988 Thailand had an elected government under Chatichai Choonhavan again after twelve years of military rule and “half-democracy” . This invested heavily in the infrastructure. Some rural areas were connected to the electricity and telephone network for the first time during this period. The economic growth was up to 13% per year. However, the government was burdened with significant corruption allegations. Several members of the government were accused of having given themselves or business people close to them lucrative public contracts and thus having enriched themselves. Critics spoke of the “buffet cabinet” because the members of the government served themselves with public money like at a buffet. At the same time, the government cut military spending. The opposition accused her of disregarding her rights and establishing a “parliamentary dictatorship”.

In this situation, in February 1991 the military leadership launched a coup involving the commander in chief of the armed forces Sunthorn Kongsompong , the commander in chief of the army Suchinda Kraprayoon and a clique of his classmates from the 5th year of the Chulachomklao military academy , including Issarapong Noonpakdi (Suchinda's brother-in-law) and Kaset Rojananil. They called themselves the "Council for the Protection of Peace and Order of the Nation" (English mostly called the National Peace Keeping Council , NPKC), promised reforms such as combating the buying of votes and confiscated assets from allegedly "unusually rich" government members. The coup plotters appointed a 292-strong national assembly made up of the military and their supporters to adopt a new constitution . They first installed the non-party civilian Anand Panyarachun as transitional prime minister .

On April 19, 19 non-governmental organizations - trade unions, academics, women’s associations, poverty reduction initiatives and Thailand’s student union - joined forces to form the Campaign for Popular Democracy (CPD). This turned against military rule and for a democratic constitution. The National Assembly's draft constitution, on the other hand, provided for a powerful junta-appointed Senate alongside the elected House of Representatives and the possibility of appointing people to government offices who had not been elected to parliament. There was already a protest against this in November 1991, when over 70,000 people demonstrated on the Sanam Luang in Bangkok's old town. This was the largest political gathering since the Thammasat University massacre in October 1976. General Suchinda then, like Kaset, promised not to seek government office himself, even if this would be possible under the new constitution. King Bhumibol Adulyadej urged the draft to be adopted and the constitution went into effect on December 9, 1991.

The election was then held on March 22, 1992. The choice, however, was by no means cleaner or fairer than the previous one. In this election too, according to estimates by the official election observation committee, half of the votes nationwide were bought, in the poorer northeast region even 70–90 percent. The sums paid have even increased compared to previous elections. It won the close to the military junta, founded shortly before the election Samakkhi-Tham party ("unity and law" or "unity in virtue"), which locally influential officials and entrepreneurs had joined. It formed a coalition with other opportunist parties, including, ironically, the Chart Thai Party and the Social Action Party , against which the coup was directed and whose leaders had denounced the junta for being “unusually rich”. The leader of the Samakkhi Tham party and designated head of government Narong Wongwan were rumored to be involved in drug deals after the election. Although he refused, he resigned from office. Instead, General Suchinda Kraprayoon was nominated as prime minister, contrary to his earlier promise not to seek government office. He ended his military career and was sworn in by the king on April 7th.

course

April

On April 8, the day after Suchinda's inauguration, the former MP Chalard Vorachart went on a hunger strike , which he did not want to end until Thailand had a democratically elected head of government again. Citizens critical of the government began to visit Chalard at his seat near the parliament building and there were smaller demonstrations every day. The government-controlled media, including all television stations, initially did not cover the protests, while independent newspapers gave this large space. In response, the editor of the opposition nearby was the car of Suthichai Yoon, The Nation , the windshield smashed, while the opposition leader Chuan Leekpai of the Democratic Party complained of death threats. At the constitutive session of the House of Representatives on April 16, some opposition MPs wore black armbands to express their "mourning for Thai democracy".

On April 20, around 50,000 citizens took part in the protests. On April 25, the CPD, the Student Union and the four opposition parties (Democrats, New Hope Party , Palang Dharma Party and Solidarity Party) called for a new mass gathering, attended by an estimated 100,000 people. Meanwhile, newspapers close to the opposition had begun to refer to the parties in the governing coalition as "parties of the devil" and the opposition parties as "angel parties". In the period that followed, this became a common term for the two sides of the conflict. Since a large part of the government critics consisted of younger, urban middle-class members who used modern means of communication such as cell phones, pagers and fax machines to organize the meetings at the time, mocking terms such as "mobile phone mob", " yuppie mob", were circulating for the protesters . “Limousine mob” or “yogurt drinking mob”.

May 1st to 7th

Two separate Labor Day celebrations were held in Bangkok on May 1, one organized by the government and one by independent trade unions. After 24 days of hunger strike, Chalard Vorachart collapsed and was hospitalized. But his daughter Jittravadee took his position and continued the strike. Chalard's collapse contributed to the expansion of the protests, with around 100,000 demonstrators again gathering on May 4.

On May 5, Chamlong Srimuang - a member of the strictly religious Santi Asoke sect , chairman of the Palang Dharma party (which had won 32 of the 35 constituencies in Bangkok) and governor of Bangkok from 1985 to January 1992 - also joined and vowed to fast to death if Suchinda did not resign. Chamlong, who had been an officer himself until 1985 but belonged to a clique (the Young Turks ) rivaling Suchinda's fifth year , resigned as chairman of the Palang Dharma party in order to devote himself to extra-parliamentary protest. The media attention focused on him and he became the most important face of the opposition movement. Other prominent democracy activists also joined the hunger strike, including Prateep Ungsongtham , an activist for the rights of slum dwellers; the law student and general secretary of the student union Prinya Thaewanarumitkul; the medical professor Sant Hathirat; as well as union representatives.

On May 6, 150,000 government opponents gathered around the parliament building. For the first time, Prime Minister Suchinda felt compelled to take a public position. He accused his former military colleague Chamlong of only wanting to spread his radical Santi Asoke sect, while he blamed the parliamentary opposition leader Chavalit Yongchaiyudh from the Party of New Hope, also a retired general, of communist tendencies. Instead of discrediting the opposition politicians, these statements were seen more as signs of Suchinda's desperation.

Since there was hardly enough space in front of the parliament, Chamlong called - contrary to the advice of his colleagues from the CPD and the student union - to move the protest to the Sanam Luang , a large square in the city center. The commander in chief of the Thai armed forces, Air Force General Kaset Rojananil, called on the demonstrators on May 7th to end their protests. They cleared the Sanam Luang, but only to move back to the Royal Plaza by Parliament.

May 8-14

On the night of May 8th, the demonstration camp was surrounded by the police and barbed wire barriers were put in place to prevent further influx. However, workers broke this barrier at one point with a car, while 70,000 others gathered at Sanam Luang. May 8th was an extremely hot day and Chamlong, who only consumed water but refused to use sugar or saline solutions, or medical supervision, collapsed.

Meanwhile, according to a report in the New York Times , the four opposition parliamentary parties wrote to King Bhumibol Adulyadej asking for action. A government plane dropped leaflets urging protesters to give up. However, most of them did not follow suit, even when heavy rain set in. The army broadcaster claimed that the protesters wanted to disrupt the Royal Plowing Ceremony, which traditionally takes place on Sanam Luang. As a result, a regained Chamlong ordered a transfer to the nearby Ratchadamnoen Boulevard . The other organizers, some of whom disagreed with this decision, had little to say against his charisma and media presence. TV and radio stations praised Chamlong's concession "for peace and the unity of the nation". The next morning, he asked his followers "permission" to end his hunger strike, as he needed strength to continue the fight against the Suchinda government.

Until then, the protests were peaceful and relaxed, downright exuberant, the government critics were taken care of by food stalls and street vendors, and on the stages political speeches alternated with skits critical of the government by comedians and songs, which among others was performed by folk rock singer Aed Carabao . The American anthropologist who specializes in Thailand, Alan Klima, emphasized in his report of the protests how “incredibly friendly” the participants were to one another and compared their patient listening during the speeches, which often dealt with morality, justice and truth, to their behavior of the faithful at sermons in a Buddhist temple.

Prime Minister Suchinda refused to give in to the protests and would only leave office if the constitution required him to do so. The parliamentary speaker Arthit Urairat, however, showed willingness to change the constitution as a concession to the opposition movement. On May 9, he announced a constitutional change within a week that would allow only one elected member of parliament to be head of government, which Suchinda did not. The protests ended initially, but were to continue on May 17 if the government had not kept its word by then. Again there was internal disagreement over the strategy and some of the protesters who wanted to continue the meeting booed Chamlong when he announced the end of the meeting.

Contrary to Suchinda's accusation that the demonstrators were communists, disloyal to the royal family and violated the holy trinity of nation, religion and monarchy, many of them showed pictures of the king, sang the royal anthem and cleared Ratchadamnoen Boulevard for Princess Maha Chakri's wagon convoy Sirindhorn on May 10th to mark the beginning of the week of Wisakha Bucha (a high Buddhist festival). The royal plowing ceremony on the Sanam Luang on May 14th and King Bhumibol's visit to Wat Phra Kaeo in Wisakha Bucha two days later went completely undisturbed.

May 14th to 17th

The chairmen of the two largest coalition parties declared on May 11th that no compromise had been reached on a constitutional change. On May 14th, 125 representatives from 26 organizations, including the CPD, the Student Union of Thailand, trade unions, election observers and other non-governmental organizations, met at the Royal Hotel to found the Confederation for Democracy . Chamlong Srimuang, Prateep Ungsongtham, Prinya Thaewanarumitkul, Jittravadee Vorachart, Sant Hathirat, the doctor Weng Tojirakarn (a leader of the student protests in the 1970s) and the rail unionist Somsak Kosaisuuk were elected to speak. On May 16, a press conference called for renewed protests the next afternoon if the government had not kept its promise by then.

Since this did not happen, another meeting took place on May 17th at the Sanam Luang, at which, according to conservative estimates, 100,000 citizens attended. Around 9 p.m., a group of around 30,000 demonstrators led by Chamlong set out for the prime minister's residence to urge him to resign. About halfway down the Phan Fa Bridge, the police stopped them with barbed wire barriers. When some of the protesters tried to break through the blockade, the police used water cannons. Government opponents who tried to hijack a water cannon were beaten down. Stones and Molotov cocktails were thrown from the group of demonstrators at the police, who then intensified the violence. Around 100 protesters were injured. At around midnight, the government declared a state of emergency, banned all gatherings and deployed the military to reinforce after a police station was attacked and vehicles were set on fire. The mobilized troops faced an "army of motorcycles" ( CNN ) of the government opponents at the Phan Fa Bridge .

May 18

Around three o'clock in the morning, thousands of soldiers with combat ammunition and an order to shoot the "anti-Buddhist communists" were gathered. Representatives of the protest movement made speeches to the soldiers and tried to give them flowers. The fire opened at around 3:30 a.m. Hours of interrupted shootings followed, with the troops sometimes firing warning shots, but sometimes shooting directly into the crowd with automatic rifles. At around 5:30 a.m., demonstrators at the democracy monument who sang the royal anthem were even shot at . During the pauses between the firing, protesters repeatedly brought the soldiers food and drink and put flowers in the gun barrels. In order to prevent the soldiers from fraternizing with the demonstrators, the military deployed new troops every three hours, some of which were ordered from the Burmese and Cambodian borders to Bangkok. Some of the victims were apparently shot in the back while trying to escape. Some were even executed at close range. Doctors trying to take care of the wounded were beaten up.

On the other hand, militant protesters also attacked government buildings and police officers. In doing so, they pursued a kind of rocking tactic: at times the opposition members were able to push back the police, then they had to flee again from offensives by the government forces. The struggles were mainly carried out by government opponents from the working class, while the leaders, students and middle-class members who were present earlier withdrew. Groups of insurgents who were ready to fight organized themselves spontaneously, sometimes using the newly emerging mobile phones, and tried again and again to exploit weak points in the government forces. At around 2:30 p.m., Chamlong Srimuang was arrested while Prateep Ungsongtham and Somsak Kosaisuuk escaped with the help of the crowd of their supporters. Hundreds of other demonstrators, however, were arrested, often having to take off their shirts and have their hands and feet handcuffed.

At sunset, the army with tens of thousands of soldiers controlled Ratchadamnoen Boulevard. Meanwhile, 50,000 demonstrators gathered in front of the building of the government department for public relations, which they blamed for a distorted representation of the events in the state media. In the Royal Hotel, doctors and nurses who sympathized with the protest movement set up a kind of field hospital in which they treated injured government opponents. Around 9:30 p.m., the soldiers on the Thanon Ratchadamnoen put a bayonette on. When insurgents pushed two buses into the barbed wire barriers, fire was opened again, this time lasting for half an hour. Protesters fleeing were shot again. Snipers posted on the roofs of houses targeted dead people. Most of the fatalities occurred in the late evening of May 18. Outraged at the distorted reporting, protesters set fire to the public relations building they called the "Department of Lies". The fire also spread to the neighboring tax office. A total of seven different, deliberately selected government buildings were set on fire. Hundreds of working-class government opponents ready to fight - about two thousand according to Somsak Kosaisuuk - were cruising through the city on their motorcycles and were being chased by the military.

May 19th

The very next morning newspapers and magazines were publishing special editions with gruesome pictures of the victims. The term Phruetsapha Thamin ("black" or "cruel May") was coined. Video cassettes with recordings of BBC and CNN coverage as well as self-made, unedited videos were sold by street vendors because Thai television did not report. Leaflets claimed that thousands had died.

Also on the morning of May 19, the military took the Royal Hotel, into which many opponents of the government had fled, who were now brutally beaten and kicked. Detainees had to lie down face down and listen to vulgar insults from the soldiers. Public life in Bangkok came to a standstill that day, there were no buses, schools, offices and shops were closed. At the same time, the demonstrations spread to other provinces, namely Chiang Mai , Khon Kaen , Nakhon Ratchasima , Nakhon Si Thammarat , Songkhla , Krabi , Trang and Pattani . There were condemnations from abroad for the brutal behavior and calls to end it.

On the same day, a procession of people in black clothing, with black banners and black flower arrangements, moved from the Democracy Monument to the Royal Hotel. They laid wreaths in both places, the monument literally sank under lotus blossoms and incense sticks. By the evening of May 19, the military had largely gained control of Bangkok. However, renewed fighting was imminent at Ramkhamhaeng University (the open university on the outskirts that traditionally has many working class students), where around 50,000 government opponents gathered, some of whom were also ready to fight.

Since international media reported unfiltered, Thai people living abroad learned of the events. Many were shocked and tried to educate and support their compatriots at home. So did Princess Sirindhorn, who was just in Paris. According to her own statement, she tried to reach her father as early as the morning of May 19 and persuade him to intervene, but was only able to reach him in the afternoon. It addressed itself in a video message to all conflict parties and called on them to end the violence, which was also broadcast on Thai television on the morning of May 20th. A similar message was published later that day by Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn , who was in South Korea at the time.

May 20th

After consultations with his Privy Council , in particular with the former Prime Minister and General Prem Tinsulanonda , who knew both Prime Minister Suchinda Kraprayoon and the most prominent opposition leader Chamlong Srimuang, King Bhumibol Adulyadej called the leaders of the two conflicting parties to an audience on the evening of May 20 . They had to prostrate themselves to him - according to the court protocol - and he urged both sides to an immediate end to the violence and to a compromise. The entire audience was broadcast on both Thai and international television and was able to act like a “lecture” from the monarch for both sides. Then Chamlong and Suchinda, sitting next to each other, read prepared statements in which they announced concessions. Chamlong was released and the violence ended.

The political crisis was not over yet. Suchinda continued to refuse to resign until the constitution was changed. In the meantime, however, business associations such as the Thai Chamber of Commerce, the Bankers Association, the Industry Association and the Entrepreneurs Association for Democracy Suchinda have called for resignation.

May 21st to 24th

On May 21st there was a new meeting at the Democracy Monument and Chamlong announced that the protests would be revived if the promised constitutional change did not take place again. Some of the government opponents were dissatisfied with the deal negotiated between Suchinda and Chamlong under pressure from the king. They called for the Prime Minister to be punished. "Altars of Democracy" were erected in places where protesters had been shot to commemorate the martyr of Black May. On May 22nd, the Alliance for Democracy publicly demanded the punishment of members of the government and officers who ordered the shootings and Sukhinda's immediate resignation.

According to official figures, 52 people were killed, 293 missing and at least 505 injured. However, these numbers have often been questioned. Diplomats and medical personnel reported that the military had taken unidentified bodies to be cremated in crematoria. There were over 1000 missing persons reports, the "Committee of the relatives of the heroes of May 1992" later stated the number of disappeared at around 300. Foreign Minister Pongpol Adireksarn also joined in the resignation of his head of government and employees of the Foreign Ministry were in mourning. On May 24, the king granted an amnesty to anyone who was in debt during the conflict. Not having to fear any more punishment, Suchinda finally resigned that same day. Deputy Prime Minister Meechai Ruchuphan initially took over government leadership, and the previous cabinet remained in office.

consequences

Right away

There was displeasure against the amnesty for the perpetrators, especially since the king had no constitutional right to do so. However, Bhumibol enjoyed such influence and prestige that no politician seriously questioned his actions. Suchinda's brother-in-law Issarapong Noonpakdi initially remained in command of the army, while his classmate Kaset Rojananil remained in command of the armed forces. The military justified the brutal crackdown on the protests by claiming that dangerous communists had endangered the nation and the monarchy. They refused any clarification of the events, let alone punishment, and openly threatened another coup if this happened.

On the day after Suchinda's resignation, parliament voted with the votes of the governing coalition to amend the constitution, according to which the head of government would in future have to be an elected member of parliament; the rights of the unelected Senate were restricted, which from then on was only supposed to review draft laws; the Speaker of the House of Representatives became President of the entire National Assembly in place of the Speaker of the Senate; and votes of no confidence were already possible in the second session of the parliamentary year. The first and second readings were carried out on the same day, but the third reading could not take place until two weeks later, after which the change could be decided.

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Arthit Urairat, was - although he himself belonged to the previously ruling Samakkhi Tham party - apparently endeavored to overcome the differences between the so-called "angel" and "devil parties" and called both coalition and opposition parties to form one Government of national unity. When this did not come about, he gave the previous opposition parties the opportunity to form a new majority, but this also failed. So he was forced to propose to the king the candidate of the old government camp (the "devil parties") Somboon Rahong of the Chart Thai party . Bhumibol refused to appoint him. The ruling parties nominated Somboon again, but the king refused again and instead appointed the non-party liberal Anand Panyarachun on June 10th . Paradoxically, this contradicted the constitution that had just been amended, since Anand was also not a member of parliament, against which the mass protests had just been directed. However, Anand was seen as a mutually acceptable, unifying figure, which is why his appointment was unanimously accepted. At the end of July, Kaset and Issarapong finally gave up their posts at the head of the military.

Former President of the Supreme Court, Sophon Ratanakorn, was tasked with investigating the events and presented his report on September 25, 1992. According to this, the government had already prepared for the use of military force on May 7th by launching Operation Phiri Phinat (“destroy the enemy”), a tactical plan to suppress communist uprisings by military means instead of trying to resolve the conflict peacefully. The report found 52 dead, over 3,500 arrests, including some cases of torture, 36 permanently disabled, 120 seriously injured and 115 confirmed missing. There were 207 other disappearances on a list of the Interior Ministry. On the government side, 88 police officers had to seek outpatient treatment, four soldiers were seriously injured and 192 slightly injured. In addition, there was property damage of 1.508 billion baht (60 million US dollars at the rate at the time).

On September 13, 1992 there were early elections, in which there was a record turnout of over 62%. The so-called "angel parties" won, the strongest force were the Democrats, who formed a coalition with Palang Dharma, Party of New Hope, Solidarity Party and the Social Action Party, which was perceived as the "least diabolical" of the old governing parties. The new head of government was Chuan Leekpai, who presented himself as an “advocate of democracy”.

Long term

The Thai economy recovered and had growth rates of around 8 percent in the following three years.

As a consequence of the events of "Black May", the Thai military lost influence. In the following fourteen years (up to the 2006 coup ) the influence of the armed forces on politics and the economy was as small as it is anywhere else in recent Thai history. Parties dominated by the military lost their influence to those who represented the interests of entrepreneurs or the middle class. Instead of retired or active military personnel at the head of Thai Airways , Telecom and State Railways , these were now managed by civilians.

The media landscape has been liberalized in response to outrage over distorted reporting in the state media. Previously, all radio stations were under the control of the government or the armed forces, but now, for the first time, private stations have been licensed (including ITV ) and UHF channels have been opened. Print media gained renown because of their more truthful reporting. In addition, a decentralization of the administration was initiated. Local authorities were given a degree of autonomy and local leaders were now elected instead of appointed by the central government. In this way, at least temporarily, corruption could be contained and the participation of citizens in local issues increased.

Encouraged by the success of the popular uprising, numerous non-governmental organizations, citizens' groups and social groups were founded in all parts of the country, campaigning for various social issues ( fight against poverty, environmental protection, women's or LGBT rights, etc.), the best known of which was the Assembly , founded in 1995 of the poor .

The drafting of a new, liberal “constitution of the people” called for by the Alliance for Democracy took place with intensive public participation, but it also took a long time. It came into force on October 11, 1997 and represented a compromise between the conservative elite and the liberal middle class. Nevertheless, it is considered to be the most liberal constitution in Thai history.

See also

Web links

literature

  • William A. Callahan: Imagining Democracy. Reading "The Events of May" in Thailand. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore / London 1998
  • George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. People power in the Philippines, Burma, Tibet, China, Taiwan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Thailand, and Indonesia, 1947–2009. Volume 2, PM Press, Oakland (CA) 2013. Chapter Thailand , Section 1992 “Black May” , pp. 315-329.
  • Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. Democracy Sustained. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 1992.
  • David Murray: Angels and devils. Thai Politics from February 1991 to September 1992, a Struggle for Democracy? White Orchid Press, 1996.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Michael Leifer: Dictionary of the modern politics of South-East Asia. Routledge, London 2001, ISBN 0-415-23875-7 , p. 260. Keyword “Suchinda Kraprayoon”.
  2. ^ Pasuk Phongpaichit, Chris Baker : Power in transition. Thailand in the 1990s. In: Political Change in Thailand. Democracy and Participation. Routledge, London / New York 1997, pp. 31-32.
  3. ↑ Michael K. Connors: When the dogs howl. Thailand and the politics of democratization. In: At the Edge of International Relations. Postcolonialism, Gender and Dependency. Continuum, 1997, p. 133.
  4. ↑ Daniel Arghiros: Democracy, Development and Decentralization in Provincial Thailand. Curzon Press, 2001, p. 173.
  5. ^ William A. Callahan: Imagining Democracy. Reading "The Events of May" in Thailand. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore / London 1998, p. 117.
  6. ↑ Daniel Arghiros: Democracy, Development and Decentralization in Provincial Thailand. Curzon Press, 2001, p. 173.
  7. ↑ Bernd Schramm: Social Policy in Thailand. The development of a welfare state between paternalism and modernity. Institute for Asian Studies, 2002, p. 52.
  8. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 315.
  9. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 316.
  10. ↑ Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, p. 30.
  11. ↑ a b George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 316.
  12. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 317.
  13. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, pp. 317-318.
  14. ^ Alan Klima: The Funeral Casino. Meditation, Massacre, and Exchange with the Dead in Thailand. Princeton University Press, Princeton / Oxford 2002, pp. 108-109.
  15. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, pp. 318-319.
  16. ↑ a b George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 319.
  17. ↑ Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, pp. 30-31.
  18. ↑ Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, p. 31.
  19. ↑ a b c George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 321.
  20. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, pp. 321–322.
  21. ↑ a b George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 322.
  22. ↑ a b c Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, p. 33.
  23. ↑ Federico Ferrara: Thailand Unhinged. The Death of Thai-Style Democracy. Equinox Publishing, Singapore 2011, pp. 31-32.
  24. ^ Paul M. Handley: The King Never Smiles. A Biography of Thailand's Bhumibol Adulyadej. Yale University Press, New Haven 2006, ISBN 0-300-10682-3 , pp. 1-2.
  25. ↑ a b c George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 325.
  26. ↑ a b Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, p. 34.
  27. ↑ Kobkua Suwannathat-Pian: Kings, Country and Constitutions. Thailand's Political Development, 1932-2000. Routledge Shorton, London / New York 2003, ISBN 0-7007-1473-1 , pp. 178-179.
  28. ↑ Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, p. 37.
  29. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, pp. 326–327.
  30. ↑ Federico Ferrara: Thailand Unhinged. The Death of Thai-Style Democracy. Equinox Publishing, Singapore 2011, p. 33.
  31. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 327.
  32. ↑ a b George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, p. 326.
  33. ↑ George Katsiaficas: Asia's Unknown Uprisings. 2013, pp. 329-332.
  34. ↑ Garry Rodan, Kanishka Jayasuirya: Hybrid regimes. A social foundation approach. In Jeffrey Haynes: Routledge Handbook of Democratization Routledge, Abingdon (Oxon) / New York 2012, pp. 175-189, at p. 182.
  35. ^ Albert HY Chen: The Achievement of Constitutionalism in Asia. Moving beyond 'constitutions without constitutionalism'. In: Constitutionalism in Asia in the Early Twenty-First Century. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2014, pp. 1–31, at p. 24.