various provincial military stations had been transferred to Bangkok. Great Britain, [Annual Report 1932], F.O. 371/17178.
34 For example, see Prawatisat thai 2 s 392, a history text Mathayom 3 students study in high school. Prawatisat thai 2 s 392 [Thai History - 2], Ministry o f Education, Bangkok, 1980: 28.
to earn even a little money requires them ... to sweat blood. If the people cannot pay taxes their property is seized or they are forced to labour without pay. Royalty sleeps, eats, and is happy . . . . The king's government rules dishonestly ... It claims to help business and trade but does not actually do it. It despises the common people ... Let us have a clear understanding. This country belongs to the people. Where does the money come from that royalty uses? It comes from the people. The country is poor because of this custom of draining off the wealth of the people ... Money collected by taxation should be used on behalf of the nation and not for the enrichment of royalty. The savings of royalty are sent abroad to foreign banks to await the day when a bankrupt nation is abandoned by its rulers ... This is evil work.35
This strongly worded condemnation of monarchial rule, said to be closely modelled on the proclamation used by the Westernized military officers who brought constitutionalism to Turkey in 1908, was unprecedented in Thai history, and reflected the bitter resentment towards royalty that had built up in certain sections of Thai society over the previous years.36 According to a British report, distaste for royalist rule was so strong among some members of the People's Party that they had wanted to abolish the monarchy immediately and establish a republic in its place. The British account claims that the only reason that this did not happen was due to the action of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Prince Thewawong, who in negotiating with the revolutionaries, argued that, since Siam's treaties with foreign powers were all in the name of the king, his sudden removal would result in the cancellation of existing agreements and might even prompt intervention by the West.37 This was apparently a very effective argument, as the coup leaders, fearful and unsure of themselves at the time, agreed to the continued existence of the monarchy.
The actual role envisaged for the throne, however, was to cause a great deal of friction between the two sides. On 26 June 1932 a constitution drafted by Pridi was presented to Prajadhipok for his approval. Under the provisions of this constitution the king was to be made the official head of state and thereby provide the government with political legitimacy. Real authority, however, was placed in the hands of a non-elected 70 member National Assembly and a 15 man Executive Committee. Furthermore, while the king was given formal power to veto the recommendations of the new administration, this was of little practical value since his objections could be overruled by a simple majority in the National Assembly.
Apart from marking a shift in state power from the royal class to the bureaucracy, the constitution also included a three-stage plan for introducing a 'democratic' political system to the country. During the first stage which began on 27 35
36 37
Ländern, K., Siam in Transition, Greenwood Press, N ew York, 1968: 11-12. Great Britain, F.O. 371/17175, 24 June 1933.
June 1932, the appointed National Assembly was 'to exercise power on behalf of the people.'38 In the second stage, to begin within 6 months or when 'order [was] definitely established in the country', it was planned that the National Assembly would be expanded to include an equal number of elected members. The third and final stage, in which political tutelage would end and the National Assembly become a fully elected body was to take place:
When more than half of the population ... passed the first section of the educational system, and not more than 10 years form the date of the enforcement of the Constitution.39
Interestingly, while most studies claim that this was an interim or provisional document, a recent work, which includes Pridi's account of his meeting with the king presents quite a different picture:
Originally the constitution ... that I prepared on behalf of the People's Party did not contain the word 'provisional' (chua khraw). [However], when I presented it at Sukhothai Palace the king requested that the word 'provisional' be used and actually wrote it on the document himself.40
In other words, the document Pridi presented to Prajadhipok was nothing less than a fully fledged constitution, but the king rejected it as such and a compromise was sought. After some discussion it was agreed that Pridi's constitution, with some modifications to the wording, would be used until such time as a permanent constitution was drafted. Thus, despite the successful military operation mounted by the People's Party on 24 June 1932, Prajadhipok ensured that the question of who held ultimate politcal power was still to be resolved.
The authority of the People's Party was also to be made problematic by its decision to allow many non-royal members of the old regime to play an active part in the new administration. While it carried out an immediate purge and reorganization of the armed forces,41 various high-ranking officials from the absolute monarchy were invited to join the National Assembly and put in charge of the different ministries, which, it should be mentioned, retained most of their old staff 42 In addition, Phaya
Manopakon Nitithada, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals, was appointed president
38 Thawatt, 1972: 117.