By Puttanee Kangkun in Prachathai English
On 11 December 2025, the Bhumjaithai Party, led by the now Caretaker Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, dissolved parliament, with the aim of capitalizing on the nationalist sentiments stirred up by the armed conflict between Thailand and Cambodia, and the public admiration for the Half-Half Plus Co-Payment Program – a populist program that the government would subsidize half of, in total 2,000 THB per individual daily spent to buy goods. Consequently, intense nationalistic and economic rhetoric has dominated the election programs—combating online scam centers, illicit capital tied to transnational repression, and corruption have become the main emphasis for most parties. These are all genuine concerns, and it is right that they should be raised, but the human rights violations associated with them also need attention.
Thailand has an annual economic growth of less than 2% and a household debt ratio of 90%, making daily life difficult for much of the population. It is understandable that Thai political parties focus their campaigns on economic development to ensure a decent standard of living through adequate income, infrastructure, and improvements in people’s living environment. While these are, of course, essential social and economic rights, fundamental civil and political rights such as equality, non-discrimination, and freedom of expression, among others, must not be ignored either.
The recent record of leading political parties—the Bhumjaithai Party, People’s Party, Democrat Party, Klatham Party, and Pheu Thai Party—reveals a striking gap in the absence of a civil and political rights-based policy perspective. Only the People’s Party and the small-sized Movement Party have addressed civil and political rights in a significant way. The People’s Party’s platform includes introducing the Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) law, ensuring marriage equality, ending all forms of discrimination, strengthening domestic violence laws, ending impunity, protecting freedom of expression, pursuing prison reforms, supporting the Amnesty Act, and community rights as part of their campaign. The Movement Party highlights the importance of the border relationship with Myanmar and questions the legitimacy of the sham election, the rare-earth mineral trade, and Thailand’s global reputation and dignity.
On the other hand, the Bhumjaithai Party’s electioneering shows a commitment to enhancing Thailand’s global standing. Sihasak Phuangketkeow, a current Minister of Foreign Affairs and one of the party’s prime ministerial candidates, has restored public confidence in Thailand’s diplomacy and significantly bolstered the party’s credibility. The Democrat Party, Khlatham Party, and Thai Sang Thai Party do not include any prominent policies in their platforms regarding civil and political rights. While parties address labor rights, the focus is primarily on Thai nationals, specifically on the rights of gig workers and delivery workers.
In the previous election, policies concerning non-Thais living in Thailand, such as migrants and refugees, were discussed openly. This time, however, all parties are barely addressing the issue of irregular migration. During the previous administration, Thailand deported more than 40 Uyghur refugees to China, the Vietnamese human rights activist Y Quynh Bdap to Vietnam, and thousands of people from Myanmar at the Ranong-Kawthaung border. Significantly, the new government we elect does not give a green light to unjust deportations in violation of international humanitarian norms.
Thailand has made some progress: in July 2025, the government granted work rights to at least 40,000 refugees in camps along the Thailand-Myanmar border. Still, refugees are not recognized under the 1951 Refugee Convention, and are subject to arrest, arbitrary detention, and deportation.
Furthermore, during the Thailand-Cambodia armed conflict, human rights defenders faced threats and harassment for spotlighting the violations of International Humanitarian Law committed by Thai forces. These threats were mainly met with silence from the political parties, who should instead have jumped to the defense of our human rights community. Beyond that, parties like the Rak Chart (Love for the Nation) Party or the Economic Party, led by a former military general, gain significant public attention through nationalist campaigns.
Despite ongoing atrocities in Myanmar, Thailand has taken minimal action to address the crisis in its western neighbor. In January 2026, after more than a decade, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) began its first public hearings on the merits of The Gambia v. Myanmar. The landmark case brought under the 1948 Genocide Convention alleges that Myanmar committed genocide against the Rohingya people in Rakhine State. Despite the seriousness of the law of war violations and the scale of the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar, there remains a lack of discourse from Thailand’s main political parties on how to navigate its relationship with Myanmar’s illegitimate military junta.
The failure of political parties to prioritize human rights signals a worrying trend where truth, accountability, and humanitarian principles are sacrificed in favor of nationalism, populism and economic growth–a model long promoted in Asia as the “Asia Tigers” model of development, where human rights and democracy come secondary in importance to economic growth. It is a model that we are increasingly seeing reflected around the world.
On the same day as the election, following a parliamentary resolution, the Election Commission has scheduled a referendum to determine whether the public supports changes to the current military-drafted constitution, which has been widely criticized for its lack of accountability and its undermining of democratic principles. This referendum is even more important than the election. The road to constitutional reform remains long; nevertheless, this referendum represents a critical first step to at least open the door to such reform.
On February 8, 2026, Thai citizens will once again exercise their political rights. We need to cast our ballots wisely to ensure the sustainability of human rights and democracy in the country and to build a future for Thailand that respects freedom, human dignity, and the rule of law. If we vote wisely, we can shape a Thailand that stands as a beacon in the region; but if we get the decision wrong, the implications will not only affect Thai citizens but have ramifications for our neighbors.
This article was originally published in Prachathai English.