Public expects most Kla Tham MPs to back Cabinet in censure vote, NIDA Poll finds
Prof Nidhi Eoseewong: Historian who blazed new trails through Thailand's past and present
AI In-Brief
Thailand News in Brief
Thai PBS World
Thailand and the world, every day
AI can make mistakes. Please double-check.
Prof Nidhi Eoseewong: Historian who blazed new trails through Thailand's past and present
21 Sept 06:43Key points summarised by AI
Prof. Nidhi Eoseewong (1940-2023) was a highly influential Thai historian, opinion leader, and political commentator, renowned for his profound impact on intellectual discourse.
He was celebrated for meticulously re-examining and rewriting significant portions of Thai history, particularly from the Ayudhya Dynasty, often challenging mainstream, establishment-backed narratives.
Nidhi received prestigious awards, including the Fukuoka Academic Prize, for his groundbreaking academic work and his witty, insightful columns on contemporary Thai culture, politics, and society.
After retiring from Chiang Mai University, he remained a prolific academic and commentator, co-founding Midnight University and continuing to publish extensive works on history and current affairs.
Public expects most Kla Tham MPs to back Cabinet in censure vote, NIDA Poll finds
Yesterday 12:30Key points summarised by AI
A recent NIDA poll indicates that a plurality of the public (30.38%) anticipates Kla Tham Party MPs will vote to support all 18 cabinet ministers targeted in the upcoming no-confidence debate.
Respondents believe the Ministry of Interior (38.78%) and the Prime Minister’s Office (21.37%) will face the toughest questioning during the censure debate.
Economic issues, particularly alleged incompetence in addressing problems (34.27%) and the rising cost of living (25.88%), are cited as the primary concerns for the government during the censure.
The public holds high expectations for the Opposition's case, with 45.65% believing clear, concrete evidence will be presented against all 18 ministers, and 41.22% expecting substantial evidence against specific ministers.