This article marks the coronation day of King Prajadhipok who ascended to the throne on Feb 25, 1926 and became the last absolute monarch of the Chakri Dynasty.
In a file photo, King Prajadhipok hands over the constitution on Dec 10, 1932 following a coup by Khana Rassadorn Party on June 24.
“It seems to me that, if it is to be admitted that some day we may well be forced to have some form of democracy in Siam, we must prepare ourselves for it gradually. We must learn and we must educate ourselves. We must learn and experiment so as to have an idea as to how a parliamentary government would work in Siam. We must try to educate the people to be politically conscious, to realise their real interests so that they will not be misled by agitators or mere dreamers of Utopia. If we are to have a parliament, we must teach the people to vote and how to elect representatives who will have their interests at heart.”
These words resonate eerily in our ears, especially today, 87 years after they were penned by the then absolute monarch, King Prajadhipok (Rama VII). He was setting up the so-called “Committee of the Privy Council” (CPC) as a mechanism to enable elites to learn the ways of parliamentary deliberation of policies and bills, as well as to guard against his unwise actions.
Today, many of us are acutely dissatisfied with our representatives in parliament. We also wonder who it is, the elites or the masses, who do not understand or do not want democracy. Furthermore, we emphasise different aspects of democracy, sometimes pragmatically as and when it suits our immediate interests. Our so-called democracy appears to be convoluted.
Perhaps revisiting why and how King Prajadhipok sought to ease democracy in to Siam would be instructive. It is also opportune since Unesco, at Thailand’s instigation, has recently recognised him as a Great Personality of the World for his outstanding contributions to education, science, culture, social science, the media and the promotion of peace. This was on the Occasions of the 10th Cycle (120th) Anniversary of His Birth on Nov 8, 2013 and the April 20, 2014 Centenary of His Homecoming from further studies in the United Kingdom to begin his service to the country.
“Absolute monarchy, like democracy, may become harmful at any time, because both principles rely on the perfection of human nature. a very frail thing to depend on. A sound democracy depends on the soundness of the people, and a benevolent absolute monarchy depends on the qualities of the King.”
King Prajadhipok’s undated hand-written note in which he discusses dictatorship and democracy.
These sobering thoughts of King Prajadhipok were in the same memorandum of 1927, the year after he ascended the throne. Clearly, as a thinker, he entertained a healthy scepticism about democracy. However, as an analyst of history, he concluded that the days of autocracy were numbered and that democracy was a rising aspiration impossible to scotch. Therefore, as the solely responsible official, he immediately set out to curb the monarch’s autocratic tendencies and to nurture democracy in Siamese political and social governance. Incremental change, involving the blending of traditional and modern ways, was adopted in most aspects of policy, as he was concerned foremost with insuring domestic peace and avoiding bloodshed as well as external interventions.
In addition to the parliament pilot project that aimed to build democracy from above, the King also commissioned a thorough study of local self-government in the form of municipalities so that democracy could be nurtured from below as well.
“It would be better for the people first to control local affairs before they attempt to control state affairs through a parliament. I sincerely believe that if reforms are gradually introduced in this way, a democratic form of government could possibly be introduced without too much harm. But the process must be very gradual and carefully administered in doses. If the experiments fail at every step, then it may be possible to persuade the people that democracy is not for Siam. The danger lies in impatience,” King Prajadhipok wrote. It was in reply to doubts expressed in a committee minutes submitted to him about democracy’s suitability for Orientals.
The King also had two constitutions, for the transition, drafted for consideration.The second one, tabled in early March 1932, envisaged a legislature with scrutiny powers over the executive, rather like the British fusion of powers system. In that country, the monarch sat, and symbolically still sits, at the centre where the powers of the three branches of government overlap. The monarch’s function was to use influence, rather than power, to hold the system together.
The project in Siam aimed towards, significantly, a constitutional monarchy and, in due course, a parliamentary democracy. The Legislature was “at the start” to be comprised of appointed and elected members in equal numbers. Pertinently in the light of subsequent “bureaucratic polity” formats, an option stipulated that not more than half of those royally selected should be serving bureaucrats. However, the two designers of the draft thought it was not timely to grant it yet. It appeared that the King’s princely advisers concurred and that the King respected majority opinion as he often did, as if to show by example the democratic way.
Back in early 1931, the Municipal Bill had been thoroughly drafted and sent to the Law Drafting Department for fine tuning. It lay dormant there despite several palace nudges. The CPC members had not become well versed in the methods of parliamentary deliberation.
Yet, the King’s determination did not flag. In May 1932, commenting on Italy’s Mussolini’s use of education to inculcate the state ideology of fascism, he believed it was too late to teach Thais to support the “Absolute Monarchy”. Siam had fallen “between two stools” of “dictator” (sic) and “democracy” due to indecision. Was it not best to, as speedily as possible, prepare for change to a “Constitutional Monarchy” and direct education to that end, he asked?
Free primary education had already been adopted as state policy. It reached 77% of the sub-districts. The only fledgling university, Chulalongkorn, was allowed to develop despite national budget constraints. Science education was being introduced into schools, and the King personally sponsored science scholarships. He saw the scientific method as a way to counter irrationality and superstitious beliefs but was concerned that modern ways would affect the moral fabric.
He sought to encourage parents and schools to pay attention to the teaching of Buddhism to the young, as its methodology was quite scientific. His overall aim in education was to enable the people to acquire knowledge, to think rationally and to also act morally, qualities desired in democratic citizens-to-be.
As for freedom of expression and the mass media, the King openly admitted that the advent of the free press had fanned doubts about the absolute monarchy. Yet, his policy was not to block press freedom but rather to encourage professionalism and self-regulation. Never was censorship prior to publication used, and only two newspapers among the surprisingly numerous ones were closed down permanently when he was absolute monarch.
Long-standing state subsidy and ownership of the press gradually ceased. The same stance was taken with producers, importers and marketers of movies. The King’s own passion for filming ensured that a large amount of news, documentary, entertainment and edutainment movies were produced.
With his support, radio broadcasting began not long after the BBC. All these were initiatives that opened up vistas to the populace who were to be responsible for their own lives.
Though incrementalism was his method, King Prajadhipok was acutely aware from the start that timeliness was crucial to change and also most difficult to gauge. “Not only are mindfulness and intellect needed, but also good luck. However, if one had done things honestly and to one’s best abilities, one could be said to have performed one’s duties to the utmost,” he consoled himself.
King Prajadhipok’s agenda towards a stable and sustainable democracy on Thai soil was cut short by the Khana Rassadorn’s overthrow of the absolute monarchy on June 24, 1932. Though the coup group asked the King to become a constitutional monarch, and he willingly accepted, it is clear from subsequent conflicts that arose that it and he held to different versions of it and of democracy. Space limitations here preclude exposition on this and on how King Prajadhipok dutifully and proactively performed the roles of such a monarch, as he understood it to be, to the best of his abilities and to the very end.
His abdication of March 2, 1935 can be seen as both a sacrifice to prevent bloodshed and also as an act of self-scrutiny and accountability. King Prajadhipok likely judged himself to have failed to honour his Feb 25, 1926 Coronation vow to provide his people “righteous protection, defence and keeping”. As his abdication letter revealed, he found that, having relinquished his governmental powers in 1932 and became a constitutional monarch, his advice and warnings were not taken notice of.
Furthermore, he had no power under the written constitution to ensure the protection of individual liberties through a system of justice in accordance with universal norms. In addition, his “wish for the people to have a real voice in the policies of the country had not been fulfilled”. So it was that his conscience and integrity dictated that he must resign.
Prudhisan Jumbala is a political sociologist. An elaboration appears in his Prajadhipok: The King at the transition to Constitutional Monarchy in Siam.
