House Speaker Advocates for Referendum Before Charter Change Vote

[webfact]

Image courtesy of Thai PBS World

 

House Speaker Wan Muhamad Noor Matha believes a referendum is required for public approval before the proposed charter amendment can be acknowledged. He responded to inquiries about potentially addressing significant legislation during a special House session for the 2025 fiscal year’s budget bill reading.

 

However, he emphasized the Thailand charter amendment proposals could not be debated in the House without a preceding legal referendum to acquire voters’ consent for a new charter draft.

 

While the House plans to accept charter amendment proposals, Matha stated there was no guarantee to have them on the agenda until the Parliament’s legal office reviews them. The cabinet earlier agreed to conduct three separate referenda on a new charter, with the first one set to take place in late July or early August.

 

The first referendum primarily asks voters if they agree on developing a new charter, excluding Chapters 1 and 2. If the majority agrees, further referenda will follow, eventually asking voters if they agree with the proposed new charter.

 

The Move Forward Party (MFP) urged the government to reconsider the first referendum question due to potential confusion about Chapters 1 and 2. MFP leader Chaithawat Tulathon clarified this was not about changing these chapters. The party advocates for a complete overhaul if it serves the people’s interests.

 

Chusak Sirinil, a Pheu Thai list-MP and government whip, said the government would decide when to commence proposed amendments to the Referendum Act 2021. With Thailand's ruling party's version already submitted to the House, the government’s law amendment decision may lead to their own version. The cabinet intends to amend the Referendum Act 2021 to remove the practice of a double majority rule in a referendum.

 

-- ASEAN NOW 2024-04-25

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

[mfd101]

Stalling action revving up.

[Will B Good]

Yep...the good folk is Isaan will poor over every word before casting their votes.

[dinsdale]

The Junta's constitution needs to be completely binned and an entirely new constitution drafted and debated in parliament. Then referundums can be held on drafts.

[mfd101]

23 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

The Junta's constitution needs to be completely binned and an entirely new constitution drafted and debated in parliament. Then referundums can be held on drafts.

Can't do that. The 'Old' Senate will continue to sit even after its time is up in May, until the 'New' Senate is voted & appointed under the Junta's Constitution.

 

Or, to put it more bluntly, changes to the rules can be worked up and voted on only under the no-change rules.

 

[NanLaew]

53 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

Stalling action revving up.

 

Yes, pretty much the same result when you mistakenly select the "Extra Wash" button instead of the "Fast Rinse" button on a Bosch, front-loading washing machine.

[dinsdale]

4 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

Can't do that. The 'Old' Senate will continue to sit even after its time is up in May, until the 'New' Senate is voted & appointed under the Junta's Constitution.

 

Or, to put it more bluntly, changes to the rules can be worked up and voted on only under the no-change rules.

 

Agree. Just saying what should happen. Yes the constitution is not a constitution for the people. It's a constitution to maintain the power of the ruling elite and the military and until something changes drastically will remain as such and Thailand will never advance toward a true representative democracy.

[NanLaew]

38 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

The Junta's constitution needs to be completely binned and an entirely new constitution drafted and debated in parliament. Then referundums can be held on drafts.

 

If my memory serves me, only those who seize power via a coup appear to have the right to abrogate an existing charter. It's how they protect their arses. In a more democratic society (I know, I know), the public referendum to amend an existing charter is the only legal way.

 

Anyway, the point here is to seek a public referendum to gauge if the great unwashed can be bothered even want to go down the rabbit-hole of constitutional change (again).

 

Does anyone know the Thai vernacular that equates with 'rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic' ?

Edited April 25 by NanLaew

[Artisi]

18 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Agree. Just saying what should happen. Yes the constitution is not a constitution for the people. It's a constitution to maintain the power of the ruling elite and the military and until something changes drastically will remain as such and Thailand will never advance toward a true representative democracy.

But who cares about true democracy, certainly the money doesn't, the majority couldn't care less as all they want is enough to eat each day and those who do care don't stand a chance. 

Therefore Thailand is screwed regarding any major changes. 

[Artisi]

21 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

 

If my memory serves me, only those who seize power via a coup appear to have the right to abrogate an existing charter. It's how they protect their arses. In a more democratic society (I know, I know), the public referendum to amend an existing charter is the only legal way.

 

Anyway, the point here is to seek a public referendum to gauge if the great unwashed can be bothered even want to go down the rabbit-hole of constitutional change (again).

 

Does anyone know the Thai vernacular that equates with 'rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic' ?

Yes, the Thai vernacular is "Mai bpen rai". 

[ikke1959]

Just write a total new one and throw the old one away as the military do in  a coup...Much easier than for every subject 3 referenda and difficulties to make changes

[hotchilli]

2 hours ago, NanLaew said:

Anyway, the point here is to seek a public referendum to gauge if the great unwashed can be bothered even want to go down the rabbit-hole of constitutional change (again).

Asking what the voters want seems to be a total waste of time, as they ignore the outcome.

[candide]

Isn't it necessary that the Senate first approves the referendum?

[Srikcir]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

excluding Chapters 1 and 2. I

Sorry but the sovereignty of the Thai People does not apparently cover the entire constitution. So what's the point of a referendum for their consent?

[NanLaew]

On 4/25/2024 at 1:47 PM, hotchilli said:

Asking what the voters want seems to be a total waste of time, as they ignore the outcome.

 

It's called going through the motions. Sunak and Starmer are doing it in the UK right now.