June 24th marks the 88th year since a small group of civil servants and military officers overthrew Thailand’s absolute monarchy, converting it into a constitutional monarchy. The conspirators, calling themselves the Khana Raad, or People’s Party, struck in the early morning, arresting royal officials and taking control of key military units in the capital. They issued a proclamation alleging the failure of the royal government to solve the problems of the people and promising a new democratic system.
A leader of the 1932 “revolution” announces the end of the absolute monarchy in Siam.
Until 1960 June 24 was celebrated as Constitution Day, a national holiday, but military dictator Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat replaced the celebration of the end of the absolute monarchy with a celebration of the king’s birthday. The date has become yet another point of political dispute over the country’s present and past. Three years ago, the plaque that marked the announcement of the overthrow was stolen and has never reappeared.
Official school history books do not provide much detail on the events of 1932. Some students say their main impression is that the end of the absolute monarchy was premature because the Thai people were not ready for democracy.
Groups opposed to the current military-backed government marked the anniversary with small demonstrations in favor of democracy in several parts of the country. Government officials warned that demonstrators may be arrested for violating strict laws controlling public demonstrations, but no arrests were immediately reported.
A demonstration in front of Parliament House celebrating the 1932 end of the absolute monarchy. The banner calls for the return of a constitution belonging to the people.
Army political power the real target of anniversary demonstrations
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-O-Cha, who has held power since he led a coup overthrowing an elected government in 2014, warned demonstrators not to “cross the line” by criticizing the monarchy. However, it is not the monarchy, but the politically dominant army that is the real target of most opposition groups.
Activist Parit Chiwarak, the founder of the Student Union of Thailand, told the press he simply wanted to recognize a landmark in Thai history.
“June 24th is a watershed moment in Thai history,” Parit said. “It is where absolute monarchy ended and we welcomed democracy.”
Disputes over the constitution
An important result of the 1932 event was the establishment of a constitution. The document finally delivered was a compromise between power for the people and continuing influence for the monarchy. Eighty-eight years later, the constitution, many versions removed from the original, is again a matter of debate. This constitution currently was developed under the military government installed by a coup. It provides the military with a central role in government and limits the power of elected representatives. It also provides the monarchy with significant influence.
“We want to use the revolt anniversary to make our point about the problematic nature of the current constitution drafted by the military,” activist Anusorn Unno told the Bangkok Post.
Political opponents of the military argue that the current constitution falls far short of the democratic objectives of 1932.
Demonstrators at Parliament submitted a document calling for a new, more democratic constitution. They chanted “Dictatorship shall fall, democracy shall flourish, the constitution must come from the people.”
Revolution or change in administration?
The contrasting views of the anniversary and of democracy itself show that the people of Thailand have not yet come to a common understanding of the complex events following June 24, 1932.
Unlike revolutions such as those in France and Russia, the Thai “revolution” was not led by the underclass or radical revolutionaries, but by high-ranking officials who had differing objectives and ideologies. Some saw the Peoples Party, as delivering a “revolution” that would include radical social and economic change, while others sought only “a change in administration” to take power from royal relatives they considered incompetent.
If a revolution, it was certainly an incomplete one. It retained the king as a powerful voice in government and allowed conservative royalists to take positions in the new administration.
But it also went beyond administrative changes. It sparked changes in political thinking that have emphasized the need for “democracy,” and pressured the politically powerful military to hold elections of some sort after most of their 13 successful coups since 1932.
Role of the king
King Prachadipok, last absolute monarch of Siam
Today, some Thais hail the monarch at the time, King Prajadipok, the seventh ruler of the Chakri Dynasty, for giving the people of Thailand a democratic constitution. Others say he had little choice but to agree to the constitution if he wanted to continue to reign.
A year after the end of the absolute monarchy, a high-ranking prince and former minister of war gathered provincial military units and marched on Bangkok. King Prajadipok avoided showing support for either side by departing for the south until the counter-revolution was defeated.
Indirect elections were held soon after, but the king and the new government failed to work out their differences. King Prajadipok abdicated, criticizing the Khana Raad for its authoritarian tendencies. Those tendencies grew stronger over the ensuing years. The Khana Raad failed to evolve into a mass political party or preserve the fragile democracy it had launched. Instead, it split into civilian and military factions that contested for power into the 1940s and 50s when the army smashed the civilian faction, driving many into exile or prison.
Model for more coups
Ever since 1932, the army has used that first “revolution” as the model for mostly bloodless coups to oust civilian governments its leaders found inconvenient. The opposition has sought to use the democratic rhetoric of 1932 to inspire support for a return to a more truly democratic system.
Unfortunately June 24 remains a symbol of the failure of the Thai people to agree on how they want to be governed and a sign of the power the political past still holds over the political present.
——-
For a more detailed account of the circumstances, personalities and ideologies of the 1932 events, please see our book Radical Thought, Thai Mind: A History of Revolutionary Ideology in a Traditional Society. It is available as both a paperback and an e-book on Amazon.com.