Why Aren't You Excited About A More 'Democratic' Charter?: Thai Talk

[webfact]

THAI TALK

Why aren't you excited about a more 'democratic' charter?

Suthichai Yoon

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Now that the second reading of a bill to pave the way for the drawing up of a new constitution has been passed, I should, as a law-abiding, democratically active citizen, get very excited. Why don't I feel that shot of adrenaline? What's wrong with me?

I am not even sure whether I should feel cynical about the prospect of the country plunging into another public show of amending the charter to make the political game more "democratic". It's not that I don't think we should go all out to get rid of all "undemocratic" clauses in the current Constitution.

My problem is that I don't see how things can get better before they get worse.

There is little doubt that the bill to allow the establishment of a Constitutional Drafting Assembly (CDA) will pass its third and final reading in the next few weeks, considering the mandatory 15-day break after the second reading. The bill requires a Royal Decree for the election of CDA members within 15 days after the law comes into effect. It also states that the process to recruit members of the drafting body is to be done within 90 days.

Anyone following the 15 days of deliberations in the second reading in Parliament will tell you that they were at first duped into assuming that the heated debate would actually change anything substantial from the original draft. It was, when all was said and done, more or less a big hoax. The opposition pretended to put up a fight. The ruling party retreated from its originally tough stand to allow some room for some critical verbal attacks, knowing that it would win in the end - and it was important to be magnanimous in victory.

The only change from the original draft was that instead of applying local administration election law, the election process will follow those formulas for the election of MPs and senators. And that didn't necessarily make it more "democratic" in any sense of the whole clause.

The basic feature of the new Constitutional Drafting Assembly is that it will include 99 members - 77 elected to represent each of the country's provinces, and another 22 to be appointed by Parliament. Of these 22, six will be experts in public law, six in political science or public administration, plus 10 with experience in politics, public administration, or the economic and social fields - or who have had experience in charter writing.

Thailand has been through this same kind of exercise before. Last time we did this, we claimed to have produced the "most democratic" charter in our history. But then, some people complained about the Constitution according excessive power to the executive branch, while others said it was meant to accord stability to the ruling party. It was this "most democratic" charter that laid down the establishment of "independent agencies" to serve as checks and balances. But the current ruling power has suggested that the independent agencies are "too independent".

Our charter writers were once hailed for including a clause that would punish all executives of a political party if any one of them was found guilty of cheating in an election. But once some major figures were charged with election fraud and their parties were dissolved, complaints started to emerge that this particular clause was "undemocratic".

The new argument is: if an executive of a certain party commits fraud, why should the whole party be punished? But when the clause was first written down, none of the leading politicians raised any question. It's typically a case of: it's "democratic" if others get caught, but not me.

It's highly interesting that the draft constitution specifically says that changing the political system from a constitutional monarchy is not allowed. It also prohibits amending the charter to deviate from the current status of Thailand being a single state. The charter also prohibits changing any clause in the chapter on the monarchy.

You demand the election of "independent" people from around the country to draw up a "democratic" constitution and you tell them what they can't change?

-- The Nation 2012-05-17

[CosmicSurfer]

Duhhhhh.... TIT !!!!

[JohnAllan]

Of course, the appointed charter amendment committee members should tell the government that if their hands are going to be in any way tied, as to what they can, and cannot, change, they are not interested in doing the job.

But I doubt that will happen.

[phiphidon]

It's highly interesting that the draft constitution specifically says that changing the political system from a constitutional monarchy is not allowed. It also prohibits amending the charter to deviate from the current status of Thailand being a single state. The charter also prohibits changing any clause in the chapter on the monarchy.

Of course it's highly interesting - what draft constitution is he talking about? There is not one in existence at the moment as it cannot be talked about or written until the CDA has been formed, which it hasn't.

If he is talking about the draft institution for the 2007 constitution then that is the very reason they are talking about ammending the current constitution, the junta written 2007 one.

And who in the PTP has said anything about changing the political system from a constitutional monarchy or deviating from a single State. No one - this guy is just stirring the pot.

[tlansford]

It's highly interesting that the draft constitution specifically says that changing the political system from a constitutional monarchy is not allowed. It also prohibits amending the charter to deviate from the current status of Thailand being a single state. The charter also prohibits changing any clause in the chapter on the monarchy.

Of course it's highly interesting - what draft constitution is he talking about? There is not one in existence at the moment as it cannot be talked about or written until the CDA has been formed, which it hasn't.

If he is talking about the draft institution for the 2007 constitution then that is the very reason they are talking about ammending the current constitution, the junta written 2007 one.

And who in the PTP has said anything about changing the political system from a constitutional monarchy or deviating from a single State. No one - this guy is just stirring the pot.

Stirring the pot, correct.

also, stating this way,

"Thailand has been through this same kind of exercise before. Last time we did this, we claimed to have produced the "most democratic" charter in our history."

ignores the 2007 charter altogether. Which is odd, since it is not the 1997 constitution which will be changed, but the 2007 constitution.

Wonder where the writer was for the "last time we did this"... ?

[TheCure]

A country which has been trough so many military coups and so many constitutions over the last 50 years can only be named a banana ....