PM's Sincerity Questioned Over Thailand Charter

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE

PM's sincerity questioned over charter

By Piyanart Srivalo

The Nation

One proposed change to the Constitution has returned to haunt the ruling Democrat Party - and might end up being another bombshell. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva circulated a report by a reform panel led by Sombat Thamrongthanyawong on charter amendments to solicit opinions.

He also asked the National Statistics Bureau and other agencies to carry out surveys on proposed changes.

It is expected that the report, which proposes amendments to six points, may be considered by the Cabinet next Tuesday, before it goes to Parliament, provided all concerned agencies agree.

When the draft is tabled at the Cabinet meeting, Abhisit will put three points up for debate: whether only party executives should be punished instead of dissolving an entire political party; whether a referendum is needed to gauge public opinion on the changes; and a possible timeframe for the amendments.

Though Abhisit appears eager to push through the amendments, he also seems to be reluctant about some changes. He's making matters more interesting by saying that changes won't be made if the political situation remains uneasy.

Moreover, he said, the draft provisions would most likely not cover political parties and the electoral system because the amendment process would take a while due to the need for corresponding changes to organic laws. Changing the electoral system is one of six points proposed by the panel.

Key members of the Democrat Party have always been opposed to certain amendments - especially the one related to changing multiple-seat constituencies to single-seat ones, which was fully backed by other coalition partners.

Democrat Party's secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban, who always backed these changes, fought long and hard with key party members. As the government manager, when he was setting up the administration, he promised coalition partners that they could push for these amendments provided they backed Abhisit for the premier's post.

Suthep played the part of a middleman - getting the coalition partners to stay with the government. The coalition partners, however, were afraid of being thrown out so they continued backing the ruling party.

But Abhisit's latest move appears suspicious, and the coalition partners can't help but wonder if he's sincere.

A key leader of Chart Thai Pattana Party, who asked not to be named, said that, as per the PM's prediction, it looked like it would take a long while before any changes are made to the electoral system.

"We are closely monitoring [the premier's stance]. It [the change] is our priority or we may have to run the next election, which would be held sooner rather than later, with the current system. If the government won't amend it, then they should not amend other points either," the leader said.

He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them.

This time around, it looks like Bhum Jai Thai Party has less bargaining power because its status in the coalition is not quite stable. Chairman of the party, MP Prachak Kaewklaharn, said Bhum Jai Thai could find it acceptable if the government amended the charter as per the proposals put forward by Sombat's panel.

Meanwhile, there was opposition to the amendments from senators known as the "Group of 40". They said politicians wanted to amend the charter for their own interests and that could lead to another round of conflict.

Abhisit, meanwhile, seems to face pressure from both inside and outside government. Except, this time it won't be easy for him to manage the conflict, because he no longer has Suthep by his side. Suthep had to stand down as deputy PM to run in a by-election in Surat Thani.

-- The Nation 2010-10-27

[OzMick]

"He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them."

Some people call it democracy.

[rubl]

It seems the only thing politicians agree upon is the need for charter changes. Now we only need to agree on what, where, when and how. Ignore the why, not important

Edited October 27, 2010 by rubl

[SergeiY]

"He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them."

Some people call it democracy.

yes, as in

"The coalition partners, however, were afraid of being thrown out so they continued backing the ruling party."

[SanSaiExPat]

"He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them."

Some people call it democracy.

This isn't a democracy or a republic and these aren't democrats. This is a variation of some type of quazi constitutional monarchy.

[rubl]

"He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them."

Some people call it democracy.

This isn't a democracy or a republic and these aren't democrats. This is a variation of some type of quazi constitutional monarchy.

There's a difference between 'called democracy' and 'being a democracy'. Sharing responsability through discussions is democratic. Constitutional monarchy doesn't exclude being a democracy as well. for instance the UK, the Netherlands, etc. There are also some non-democratic non-democracies, some have 'Democratic' in their official country name only.

[hammered]

The Big constituencies is about the only thing Dems and PTP agree on.

This one could be interesting as every party wants changes that will favour it over other parites in addition to the few changes that all want. Self interest could see the true side of polticians well exposed, not that it is exaclty hidden most of the time. This isnt about the country or its people. Oh and of course if the polticos manage to utterly discredit themsleves it crerates opportunities for those who favour extra-parliamantary and undemocratic action. Things seem to be building nicely right now.

[SanSaiExPat]

"He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them."

Some people call it democracy.

This isn't a democracy or a republic and these aren't democrats. This is a variation of some type of quazi constitutional monarchy.

There's a difference between 'called democracy' and 'being a democracy'. Sharing responsibility through discussions is democratic. Constitutional monarchy doesn't exclude being a democracy as well. for instance the UK, the Netherlands, etc. There are also some non-democratic non-democracies, some have 'Democratic' in their official country name only.

You are exactly right. However, here in Thailand, unlike the UK or the Netherlands, the "Constitution" is very, very, weak and the other part of the form of government here or those who would pretend to speak for it overrides the constitution part whenever their power is threatened.

[rubl]

"He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them."

Some people call it democracy.

This isn't a democracy or a republic and these aren't democrats. This is a variation of some type of quazi constitutional monarchy.

There's a difference between 'called democracy' and 'being a democracy'. Sharing responsibility through discussions is democratic. Constitutional monarchy doesn't exclude being a democracy as well. for instance the UK, the Netherlands, etc. There are also some non-democratic non-democracies, some have 'Democratic' in their official country name only.

You are exactly right. However, here in Thailand, unlike the UK or the Netherlands, the "Constitution" is very, very, weak and the other part of the form of government here or those who would pretend to speak for it overrides the constitution part whenever their power is threatened.

Still a long way to go, for sure. Other countries also needed time. And remember one of the universal rights: to make your own mistakes rather than learn from others.

Edited October 27, 2010 by rubl

[SanSaiExPat]

"He said putting the draft to Cabinet was typical of the Democrats, because they wanted others to share responsibility with them."

Some people call it democracy.

This isn't a democracy or a republic and these aren't democrats. This is a variation of some type of quazi constitutional monarchy.

There's a difference between 'called democracy' and 'being a democracy'. Sharing responsibility through discussions is democratic. Constitutional monarchy doesn't exclude being a democracy as well. for instance the UK, the Netherlands, etc. There are also some non-democratic non-democracies, some have 'Democratic' in their official country name only.

You are exactly right. However, here in Thailand, unlike the UK or the Netherlands, the "Constitution" is very, very, weak and the other part of the form of government here or those who would pretend to speak for it overrides the constitution part whenever their power is threatened.

Still a long way to go, for sure. Other countries also needed time. And remember one of the universal rights: to make your own mistakes rather than learn from others.

True but how long? How many lifetimes? In this or the next? The one thing that Thaksin offered and delivered on was economic freedom. That is why he was removed. The economic freedom the farmers and the middle class begin to enjoy threatened the elites. Now Thaksin is gone and demonized. No he wasn't perfect by a long shot but he offered and delivered hope for the industrious, He invented OTOP. He was reforming the miserably bankrupt educational system and tried to decentralize the school system giving more control to local Tambon. He initiated the "One District, One Dream School" project. He made Thailand one of the first supporters of the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project and pressured the Thai Ministry of Education committing to purchase 600,000 computers The junta later canceled the project along with all the other educational reforms he instituted. Why? Well you'll have to ask yourself that question but maybe an educated electorate wouldn't put up with this corrupt system any longer. What has the current prime minister done to improve or reform the educational system in Thailand? I think the opposition today in Thailand should adopt this old Jimmy Cliff song. It might inspire. "The Harder they Come" There is a great line in the song which so aptly applies to Thailand, "Well they tell me of a pie up in the sky. Waiting for me when I die. But between the day you're born and when you die, They never seem to hear even your cry"