Bangkok is braced for a fierce political battle now the countdown for the gubernatorial elections has finally begun.
Bangkok and Pattaya are to hold their polls on May 22, which by coincidence, or otherwise, also happens to be the date Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha seized power in 2014 and applied the draconian Section 44 which suspended the local elections in the first place.
In 2016, the Prayut junta booted MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra out of the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration and promoted Pol Gen Aswin Kwanmuang, then deputy governor, as his replacement.
The government earlier lifted restrictions on most local administrative units, but kept the Bangkok and Pattaya elections on hold.
It's believed that the Prayut government has dallied in the capital out of fears it might lose given that it has no proper candidate for the top job.
A defeat would be a major embarrassment for the government, not to mention that it could set the tone for the general election next year.
The Prayut government's lack of confidence may have something to do with the 2019 national election results in Bangkok which featured strong performances by Pheu Thai and the now-dissolved Future Forward Party which altogether grabbed 1.4 million votes against 1.3 million by the ruling Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP) and Democrats.
This may explain why the PPRP has opted out of the Bangkok election, albeit unofficially. The ruling party will instead throw its weight behind, either Pol Gen Aswin, the incumbent governor, or his deputy Sakoltee Phattiyakul, formerly a key figure of the People's Democratic Reform Committee, known for its 2013-14 shutdown drama.
At first glance, many may have jumped to the conclusion that Pol Gen Aswin has the upper hand regarding his long-time control of City Hall. But the fact is his performance has not been very impressive, ie floods and the PM 2.5 hazard, to name but a few.
But it can be said that Bangkok voters do not care much about candidates' campaign policies. Bangkokians are known for unique voting patterns, especially in colour-coded politics, as they were concerned with the majority of governments under fugitive leader Thaksin Shinawatra and his nominees, so promptly threw their support across the floor.
That's the reason the Democrats, then the opposition party, were all-time winners over the past several years. PPRP leaders may now feel a similar need to usher in a sympathetic outsider rather than back one of their own.
Now that the prime minister has been in power for about eight consecutive years, Bangkok voters may have a reason to seek change at the ballot box.
Both the PPRP and Pheu Thai appear wary of similar sentiment hampering the campaigns of anyone running directly under their banners, with the latter lending support to former key party figure Chadchart Sittipunt.
Yet both parties are determined to vie for victory in every one of the city's 50 districts.
Major candidates
Three major candidates: The Move Forward Party's Wiroj Lakkhanaadisorn, Suchatvee Suwansawat of the Democrats and Sita Divari from Thai Srang Thai, veteran politician Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan's breakaway faction from Pheu Thai, are all set to openly run as representatives of their parties.
Prominent activist and ex-senator Rosana Tositrakul also wants to join the race.
The hopefuls are to register their candidacy next week.
Of all the prospective candidates, it's Mr Chadchart who has led in all the opinion polls since the day he made his interest public. It remains to be seen if Pheu Thai's backing will do him harm or good.
Yet, while prospective candidates try to focus on "changes" or a "better Bangkok" -- with the exception of Mr Wiroj's "return Sanam Luang to the people" campaign, most Bangkokians, as I stated earlier, could well dismiss policy as a reason to back a candidate and instead prefer what is known as "strategic voting", particularly if they think it's time for changes at the national level.
Little real authority
City voters' lack of interest in campaign policies may stem from their realisation that City Hall, despite all its laws and regulations, has little real authority of its own.
For instance, crime suppression is a police duty; traffic and city transport are the preserve of the transport ministry.
It's the interior ministry that issues operating licences for hotels.
The same limits can be seen in the areas of health and education.
More importantly, another fact that should be taken into consideration is that City Hall is not an independent administrative unit. On the contrary, the interior ministry still maintains a grip over the agency.
The Bangkok governor, despite being elected, can be sacked by an interior minister who can also dissolve the City Council.
Under such a legal framework, it's hard for a Bangkok governor to turn poll promises into reality without a revamp in the power structure that secures full decentralisation and empowers the victor to implement voters' demands without having first to go cap in hand to the interior ministry or government.
