Phuyai Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 (edited) The draft seems to me to be too detailed and include too many specific provisions. A quick comparision with some other constitutions (China, Australia) supports this view. There are several sections which appear to have been drafted with recent events in mind (see Chapter 12 Scrutiny of the exercise of State Powers, Part 1 Scrutiny of assets). These specifics surely would be better dealt with in lower level legislation. The lack of clarity in some sections may be related to translation, but I suspect rather is not. A financial provision, such as the one in the Australian Constitution (All revenues or moneys raised or received by the Executive Government of the Commonwealth shall form one Consolidated Revenue Fund, to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth in the manner and subject to the charges and liabilities imposed by this Constitution.), might have been a good idea. So how to vote (if I were a Thai): no. Let the 1997 Consititution stand. More confusion is not an improvement. Edited August 17, 2007 by Phuyai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now