Chavalit: Govt Restraint, Court Prudence Needed

[webfact]

Chavalit: Govt restraint, court prudence needed

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Former prime minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh has urged the government to stop pushing for charter amendments and enactment of the reconciliation laws for now.

In a statement, Chavalit also called on the Constitution Court to be prudent in its ruling in the case against charter amendment, saying a wrong judgement could lead to political crisis. The statement was handed to reporters yesterday by Anusorn Som-on, deputy secretary-general of the New Aspiration Party.

Chavalit said he had sympathy for judges because the country could stand to lose, no matter what ruling the judges made. He said conflict and violence could flare up after the ruling and a lot of people would be affected.

He also had sympathy for the parliamentarians and government and other sides concerned as he believed nobody would like to see more conflict.

He said such conflict would occur because an on-going struggle had been waged towards the wrong goals and the same mistakes had been made in Thai politics for 80 years.

Chavalit said he disagreed with allegations that the charter amendments would violate Article 68 of the Constitution as the amendments would be tantamount to efforts to topple the democratic system.

He said Thailand has had no democracy so far - so the amendments could not be regarded as efforts to topple the democratic system.

Chavalit said if the court made a wrong ruling, it would be regarded as a tool of the dictators. Although he disagreed with complainants who opposed amendments, he said the government should heed polls showing deliberation on the amendments and reconciliation bills should be delayed.

Also yesterday, the Suan Dusit Pollster announced that most respondents in a recent survey said they were not sure whether the charter amendments could be seen as efforts to topple the ruling system or not. The survey was among 1,389 residents of Bangkok and nearby provinces.

Asked whether they thought the amendments would violate Article 98 or be designed to topple the ruling system, 46 per cent said they were not sure, while 24 per cent said yes and 30 per cent said no. Up to 59 per cent of the respondents said they believed conflict would remain at the same level after any charter amendments, while 26 per cent said the conflict would worsen. The remaining 14 per cent said the situation would improve.

Meanwhile, chief coalition whip Udomdej Ratanasathien said Pheu Thai would make a closing statement in the court today. He said the defendants clearly challenged arguments by complainants against the amendments during hearings last week.

-- The Nation 2012-07-09

[Skywalker69]

" reconciliation laws"

When are they going to stop calling it reconciliation.?

[Skywalker69]

"he believed nobody would like to see more conflict"

I think Thaksin wouldn´t mind if thats the price for him to come back to Thailand, retake power and his illgotten money.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Skywalker69

[SuneeTH]

I wonder why his wife is also know as the walking jewelry box.

Is it true that she used to appear in govt ball with a blue diamond on her neck?

[Moruya]

The old warhorse makes his return

Plays both side of the fence.

Roy of the Rovers? Or Roy of the sip et?

[Yunla]

Chavalit said he had sympathy for judges because the country could stand to lose, no matter what ruling the judges made. He said conflict and violence could flare up after the ruling and a lot of people would be affected.

Defending democratic laws, the authority of the Supreme Court and the higher powers it represents, and maintaining state integrity should be the only thing on the Court's mind, and not this 'tiptoeing on eggshells' situation where some judges are living in fear of attack in their own homes and others are being told to obey the PTP regime or face blood in the streets. Democratic laws have to be protected and upheld, any serious contentious changes proposed must be debated at length in parliament, analysed in referendum, and only agreed on by consensus.

Pushing through bills that are totally incendiary is the action of a desperate or insane leadership, one that does not care about the consequences at street-level. Pressure on the Court to not disagree with the government is only to compound the earlier political recklessness. The Court's true loyalties should always lie with Thailand's stable and democratic future and not with the wishes of PTP or the promised retribution by the redmob.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Yunla

[Joeb]

As I read the constitution:

Section 68 says that if someone believes individuals or political parties are trying to do something to overthrough the government, as described in the constitution, constitutional monarchy with King as head of state, then they must submit the charges to the Prosecutor General, who in turn submits a motion to the constitutional court. This was not followed.

Section 291 says that the constitution can be amended (does not have a provision for a complete rewrite) and that amendments are decided by 3 readings and vote of the parliament with no requirement for a referendum. PT is trying for a rewrite, as I read their comments, by using a drafting committee and not planning to just change/amend specific sections.

Sounds to me like the whole process is failing. I am unsure about how the Prosecutor General is selected. I says by the Public Prosecutors

Commission and endorsed by the Senate. No idea what the party affiliation of the current Prosecutor General is, but if PT related the I am sure the people pressing the charges with the court bypassed them on purpose. I would like to hear the court's justification for hearing this case without going through the Prosecutor General. Likewise, I would be interested to hear why PT wants a rewrite rather than amending the part of the constitution that they object to.

[Nickymaster]

Chavalit said he had sympathy for judges because the country could stand to lose, no matter what ruling the judges made. He said conflict and violence could flare up after the ruling and a lot of people would be affected.

HYPOCRITE. You guys don't give a s..t about the judges or people who don't agree with you.

WHY have you guys started this mess if you already know that everybody could stand to lose?

Maybe all for just a few?

[carra]

Chavalit said he had sympathy for judges because the country could stand to lose, no matter what ruling the judges made. He said conflict and violence could flare up after the ruling and a lot of people would be affected.

Defending democratic laws, the authority of the Supreme Court and the higher powers it represents, and maintaining state integrity should be the only thing on the Court's mind, and not this 'tiptoeing on eggshells' situation where some judges are living in fear of attack in their own homes and others are being told to obey the PTP regime or face blood in the streets. Democratic laws have to be protected and upheld, any serious contentious changes proposed must be debated at length in parliament, analysed in referendum, and only agreed on by consensus.

Pushing through bills that are totally incendiary is the action of a desperate or insane leadership, one that does not care about the consequences at street-level. Pressure on the Court to not disagree with the government is only to compound the earlier political recklessness. The Court's true loyalties should always lie with Thailand's stable and democratic future and not with the wishes of PTP or the promised retribution by the redmob.

One would think said judges would know procedure before making a judgement, If they had gone through due process then there would not be this predicament now

[Thai at Heart]

Chavalit said he had sympathy for judges because the country could stand to lose, no matter what ruling the judges made. He said conflict and violence could flare up after the ruling and a lot of people would be affected.

Defending democratic laws, the authority of the Supreme Court and the higher powers it represents, and maintaining state integrity should be the only thing on the Court's mind, and not this 'tiptoeing on eggshells' situation where some judges are living in fear of attack in their own homes and others are being told to obey the PTP regime or face blood in the streets. Democratic laws have to be protected and upheld, any serious contentious changes proposed must be debated at length in parliament, analysed in referendum, and only agreed on by consensus.

Pushing through bills that are totally incendiary is the action of a desperate or insane leadership, one that does not care about the consequences at street-level. Pressure on the Court to not disagree with the government is only to compound the earlier political recklessness. The Court's true loyalties should always lie with Thailand's stable and democratic future and not with the wishes of PTP or the promised retribution by the redmob.

One would think said judges would know procedure before making a judgement, If they had gone through due process then there would not be this predicament now

That is precisely the nub of the problem. We now have a Minority Report style of judiciary.

[Yunla]

One would think said judges would know procedure before making a judgement, If they had gone through due process then there would not be this predicament now

To borrow your phrasing, if PTP had known about parliamentary 'procedure', gone through the 'due process' of debate, and not tried to rush through the fractious reconciliation bill without even allegedly reading the bill first themselves, then the ensuing 'predicament' would not have arisen in the first place.

There is only one reason we have this constitutional dilemma today and that is PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their immediate democratic right following their election.

The Constitution Court is not the problem in this picture. The problem is the PTP's undemocratic reconciliation bills themselves, and PTP's acts of human-rights abuse and privacy-law crimes that accompanied PTP's attempts to push through immensely unpopular and undemocratic bills at any cost.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Yunla

[OzMick]

Restraints not required, simple incarceration would do.

[jayboy]

PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their democratic right following their election.

The issue of PTP's actions on Thaksin's possible return is obviously for discussion.

However your suggestion that PTP has proposed to alter LM legislation is a terminological inexactitude (ie a lie).Indeed the PTP leadership has gone out of its way to make it clear that is not on the agenda.Whether it should be amended is a matter on which many will have different views.

However although your observation was inaccurate and misleading, it does have a wider significance in that in Thai politics some - usually when they are losing the argument on another issue - have the tendency to throw the LM issue into the pot simply to stir up emotions on a sensitive issue and specifically to throw mud at political opponents in the hope some of it will stick.

[Thai at Heart]

PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their democratic right following their election.

The issue of PTP's actions on Thaksin's possible return is obviously for discussion.

However your suggestion that PTP has proposed to alter LM legislation is a terminological inexactitude (ie a lie).Indeed the PTP leadership has gone out of its way to make it clear that is not on the agenda.Whether it should be amended is a matter on which many will have different views.

However although your observation was inaccurate and misleading, it does have a wider significance in that in Thai politics some - usually when they are losing the argument on another issue - have the tendency to throw the LM issue into the pot simply to stir up emotions on a sensitive issue and specifically to throw mud at political opponents in the hope some of it will stick.

There was an excellent article in the other paper yesterday, how if all else fails, blame everything on being a threat to the monarchy, and all bets are off. At least on this issue, they can't blame it on the foreigner bogeyman, although I am sure someone will try.

[carra]

One would think said judges would know procedure before making a judgement, If they had gone through due process then there would not be this predicament now

To borrow your phrasing, if PTP had known about parliamentary 'procedure', gone through the 'due process' of debate, and not tried to rush through the fractious reconciliation bill without even allegedly reading the bill first themselves, then the ensuing 'predicament' would not have arisen in the first place.

There is only one reason we have this constitutional dilemma today and that is PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their immediate democratic right following their election.

The Constitution Court is not the problem in this picture. The problem is the PTP's undemocratic reconciliation bills themselves, and PTP's acts of human-rights abuse and privacy-law crimes that accompanied PTP's attempts to push through immensely unpopular and undemocratic bills at any cost.

I refer you to post #7

Sadly for you, no matter how much you wish something to be wrong does not make it wrong

[Yunla]

PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their democratic right following their election.

The issue of PTP's actions on Thaksin's possible return is obviously for discussion.

However your suggestion that PTP has proposed to alter LM legislation is a terminological inexactitude (ie a lie).Indeed the PTP leadership has gone out of its way to make it clear that is not on the agenda.Whether it should be amended is a matter on which many will have different views.

However although your observation was inaccurate and misleading, it does have a wider significance in that in Thai politics some - usually when they are losing the argument on another issue - have the tendency to throw the LM issue into the pot simply to stir up emotions on a sensitive issue and specifically to throw mud at political opponents in the hope some of it will stick.

Due to the gaping policy-vacuum at the heart of PTP, and their refusal to discuss and debate anything much, we do not know what is actually on the PTP's real agenda beyond Thaksin and his 46bn, if they should get a blank cheque rewrite of the constitution, your assertion that PTP have no interest in LM or any related greater state upheavals is infact a 'lie' by yourself, I won't dress the word lie up in any linguistic finery if you don't mind. Your lie word applies equally to you in this context since you do not actually know if PTP are wanting to change LM in future or not. Many people including myself suspect that they do. You do not know the PTP long term agenda. Neither do I. But we can assume that if they get carte blanche to rewrite along their own whims LM reform and worse may indeed be very much on their agenda.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Yunla

[carra]

Restraints not required, simple incarceration would do.

Well if the judges made a simple mistake no need to send them to prison, they can just admit they got it wrong due to lack of knowledge and then they don't have to drop the people in it that instructed them to fail in their procedural duties.

[carra]

PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their democratic right following their election.

The issue of PTP's actions on Thaksin's possible return is obviously for discussion.

However your suggestion that PTP has proposed to alter LM legislation is a terminological inexactitude (ie a lie).Indeed the PTP leadership has gone out of its way to make it clear that is not on the agenda.Whether it should be amended is a matter on which many will have different views.

However although your observation was inaccurate and misleading, it does have a wider significance in that in Thai politics some - usually when they are losing the argument on another issue - have the tendency to throw the LM issue into the pot simply to stir up emotions on a sensitive issue and specifically to throw mud at political opponents in the hope some of it will stick.

Since we do not know what is actually on the PTP's real agenda beyond Thaksin and his 46bn, if they should get a blank cheque rewrite of the constitution, your assertion that PTP have no interest in LM or any related greater state upheavals is infact a 'lie' by yourself, I won't dress the word lie up in any linguistic finery if you don't mind. Your lie word applies equally to you in this context since you do not actually know if PTP are wanting to change LM in future. Many people including myself suspect that this is the case. You do not kow the PTP long term agenda. Neither do I. But we can assume that if they get carte blanche to rewrite along their own whims LM reform and worse may indeed be very much on their agenda.

and many of us suspect it is not the case.

you do realise everything you post can easily be countered by just saying the opposite, I have yet to see a factual post from you, it is all hyperbole and opinion,

[Thai at Heart]

PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their democratic right following their election.

The issue of PTP's actions on Thaksin's possible return is obviously for discussion.

However your suggestion that PTP has proposed to alter LM legislation is a terminological inexactitude (ie a lie).Indeed the PTP leadership has gone out of its way to make it clear that is not on the agenda.Whether it should be amended is a matter on which many will have different views.

However although your observation was inaccurate and misleading, it does have a wider significance in that in Thai politics some - usually when they are losing the argument on another issue - have the tendency to throw the LM issue into the pot simply to stir up emotions on a sensitive issue and specifically to throw mud at political opponents in the hope some of it will stick.

Due to the gaping policy-vacuum at the heart of PTP, and their refusal to discuss and debate anything much, we do not know what is actually on the PTP's real agenda beyond Thaksin and his 46bn, if they should get a blank cheque rewrite of the constitution, your assertion that PTP have no interest in LM or any related greater state upheavals is infact a 'lie' by yourself, I won't dress the word lie up in any linguistic finery if you don't mind. Your lie word applies equally to you in this context since you do not actually know if PTP are wanting to change LM in future. Many people including myself suspect that this is the case. You do not kow the PTP long term agenda. Neither do I. But we can assume that if they get carte blanche to rewrite along their own whims LM reform and worse may indeed be very much on their agenda.

Well, the nub of this issue, is, is any government allowed to modify lese majeste, without it being accused of being a threat to the monarchy?

Of course, rather incongruously, we aren't supposed to even say so, so maybe we can just think about whether it can be reformed..................

[Yunla]

Well, the nub of this issue, is, is any government allowed to modify lese majeste, without it being accused of being a threat to the monarchy?

Of course, rather incongruously, we aren't supposed to even say so, so maybe we can just think about whether it can be reformed..................

My interests as an impartial visitor to Thailand, when regarding the state is my sincere wish to see it remain and progress forwards in a peaceful prosperous manner, as a 'parliamentary democracy constitutional monarchy', to not be upturned or subverted, to be strengthened and improved for the benefit of the entire populace, and most critically of all, to not become a criminal dictatorship as we are now sadly seeing under Shinawatra and their thugs.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Yunla

[animatic]

...Chavalit said he disagreed with allegations that the charter amendments would violate Article 68 of the Constitution as the amendments would be tantamount to efforts to topple the democratic system.

He said Thailand has had no democracy so far - so the amendments could not be regarded as efforts to topple the democratic system.

Chavalit said if the court made a wrong ruling, it would be regarded as a tool of the dictators. Although he disagreed with complainants who opposed amendments, he said the government should heed polls showing deliberation on the amendments and reconciliation bills should be delayed....

Yes both sides of the fence and his fuzzy butt in the middle to see which way he needs to fall.

He admits that Thailand "Has No Democracy So Far".

But is this acknowledging the lack of actual democratic functions

caused by corruption on a massive scale,

or is he trying to slip one by meaning ambiguously that

'there is no constitutional Deomcracy at all', or that 'what is there is a sham'?

Who are those 'dictators' he is referring too? this could be construed two ways,

and one is clearly LM land the other fair play.

...he said the government should heed polls showing deliberation on the amendments and reconciliation bills should be delayed....

He is also quite rightly saying,

you may have had this as one of many vote getting planks last summer,

but now the tide of polls shows this is clearly not wanted under the current situation and methods.

Fence sitting, teetering with the winds of chance.

Wondering which way he will fall this time.

[animatic]

PTP believe their hamfisted attempts to free Thaksin and to alter LM, are somehow their democratic right following their election.

The issue of PTP's actions on Thaksin's possible return is obviously for discussion.

However your suggestion that PTP has proposed to alter LM legislation is a terminological inexactitude (ie a lie).Indeed the PTP leadership has gone out of its way to make it clear that is not on the agenda.Whether it should be amended is a matter on which many will have different views.

However although your observation was inaccurate and misleading, it does have a wider significance in that in Thai politics some - usually when they are losing the argument on another issue - have the tendency to throw the LM issue into the pot simply to stir up emotions on a sensitive issue and specifically to throw mud at political opponents in the hope some of it will stick.

Due to the gaping policy-vacuum at the heart of PTP, and their refusal to discuss and debate anything much, we do not know what is actually on the PTP's real agenda beyond Thaksin and his 46bn, if they should get a blank cheque rewrite of the constitution, your assertion that PTP have no interest in LM or any related greater state upheavals is infact a 'lie' by yourself, I won't dress the word lie up in any linguistic finery if you don't mind. Your lie word applies equally to you in this context since you do not actually know if PTP are wanting to change LM in future. Many people including myself suspect that this is the case. You do not kow the PTP long term agenda. Neither do I. But we can assume that if they get carte blanche to rewrite along their own whims LM reform and worse may indeed be very much on their agenda.

Well, the nub of this issue, is, is any government allowed to modify lese majeste, without it being accused of being a threat to the monarchy?

Of course, rather incongruously, we aren't supposed to even say so, so maybe we can just think about whether it can be reformed..................

Well this government is clearly, definitively aligned with a group showing serial LM infractions and comprising those who sidle right up to the line of saying as much, but don't dare only because of the LM laws. This could be a a strong indication of their actual feelings on the subject.

Edited July 9, 2012 by animatic

[Thai at Heart]

Well, the nub of this issue, is, is any government allowed to modify lese majeste, without it being accused of being a threat to the monarchy?

Of course, rather incongruously, we aren't supposed to even say so, so maybe we can just think about whether it can be reformed..................

My interests as an impartial visitor to Thailand, when regarding the state is to see it remain and progress forwards in a peaceful prosperous manner, as a 'parliamentary democracy constitutional monarchy', to not be upturned or subverted, to be strengthened and improved for the entire populace, and most critically of all to not become a criminal dictatorship as we are sadly seeing under Shinawatra and their thugs.

All very possible, whilst reforming lese majeste. Someone a while back requested that people stop abusing the law, and that went in one ear and out the other, we have people being locked up for various offences quite regularly depending on the wind of the day, and yet there are many perfectly functioning constitutional democracies that have survived for hundreds of years without such a draconian law. I think the Thai monarchy will survive more than perfectly even if the law is reformed. But to not be able to propose it for change, is judicial over-reach.

I don't wish for there to be violence either, but I don't see how proposing to reform this law which is debated among the academic sets of Thailand freely, is going to suddenly plunge Thailand into crisis. Its a law, laws get debated and changed all the time.

[Thai at Heart]

Well this government is clearly, definitively aligned with a group showing serial LM infractions and comprising those who sidle right up to the line of saying as much, but don't dare only because of the LM laws. This could be a a strong indication of their actual feelings on the subject.

I don't know about your personal opinion on the law, but in my opinion, it is too draconian, and it is too open to abuse and is misused. Changing it to a more practical, fair law, would be a good thing in my opinion. That's progress to some, and the end of the world to others I guess, and if it prevents crazy situations like the old man with his phone, would undoubtedly be a good thing.

[jayboy]

Due to the gaping policy-vacuum at the heart of PTP, and their refusal to discuss and debate anything much, we do not know what is actually on the PTP's real agenda beyond Thaksin and his 46bn, if they should get a blank cheque rewrite of the constitution, your assertion that PTP have no interest in LM or any related greater state upheavals is infact a 'lie' by yourself, I won't dress the word lie up in any linguistic finery if you don't mind. Your lie word applies equally to you in this context since you do not actually know if PTP are wanting to change LM in future or not. Many people including myself suspect that they do. You do not know the PTP long term agenda. Neither do I. But we can assume that if they get carte blanche to rewrite along their own whims LM reform and worse may indeed be very much on their agenda.

My earlier comments stand.I had assumed you had been caught out telling a lie about the PTP's position on LM.Your latest response however simply suggests you are just ignorant of the facts, not least because the PTP has made a number of explicit statements on LM legislation (ie no change).In fact the radical left has strongly criticised the PTP for essentially reinforcing the position of past governments on this matter.If you wish to speculate that the PTP leadership in its heart of hearts wishes to establish a Soviet style republic, by all means do so.There are many other tin foil hat enthusiasts out there.

[Yunla]

not least because the PTP has made a number of explicit statements

Ah yes. And now we are into realms of 'believing the words of a gang of out-on-bail criminals, headed by a fugitive criminal'.

You can believe PTP's words if you like.

I have a condo you might like to buy, it has a 'built in sunroof with a rain-collection system'.

[thaiphoon]

Several bickering posts have been removed.

[animatic]

Well this government is clearly, definitively aligned with a group showing serial LM infractions and comprising those who sidle right up to the line of saying as much, but don't dare only because of the LM laws. This could be a a strong indication of their actual feelings on the subject.

I don't know about your personal opinion on the law, but in my opinion, it is too draconian, and it is too open to abuse and is misused. Changing it to a more practical, fair law, would be a good thing in my opinion. That's progress to some, and the end of the world to others I guess, and if it prevents crazy situations like the old man with his phone, would undoubtedly be a good thing.

I can not disagree with that. Too draconinan for sure.

So draconinan even trying to amend it is considered an infraction.

On the other hand there are clearly those who would go pretty close to Robespierre and Marat

if not held in check, the hints they make indicate what they mean if read between the intentionally italicized lines.

Some where between Cultural Revolution Jargon and silenced by fear,

there has to be a plausibly fair middle ground. But it seems the Thai art of compromise only applies some of the time, but not on all issues.

Edited July 9, 2012 by animatic

[Yunla]

All very possible, whilst reforming lese majeste. Someone a while back requested that people stop abusing the law, and that went in one ear and out the other, we have people being locked up for various offences quite regularly depending on the wind of the day, and yet there are many perfectly functioning constitutional democracies that have survived for hundreds of years without such a draconian law. I think the Thai monarchy will survive more than perfectly even if the law is reformed. But to not be able to propose it for change, is judicial over-reach.

I don't wish for there to be violence either, but I don't see how proposing to reform this law which is debated among the academic sets of Thailand freely, is going to suddenly plunge Thailand into crisis. Its a law, laws get debated and changed all the time.

I see your point and I agree with some parts of your post entirely.

My problem with the 'unity bill' bundle itself, is primarily freedom-for-Thaksin related, my problem with the accompanying constitutional issues and charter rewrite is that the people who are pressuring to do this, PTP, are fugitive criminals and out-on-bail criminals, who have already shown publicly their contempt for law, for parliamentary procedure, for office of house speaker, have committed conflict-of-interest/ethics violations etc. PTP have violated the most basic fundamental human-rights of people who disagree with them or stand in their way. PTP are so very untrustworthy in every single sense, and only trustworthy people should be allowed to go anywhere near a nation's constitution.

I think to give constitutional reform power of any kind to this group of people is extremely dangerous.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Yunla

[bigbamboo]

All very possible, whilst reforming lese majeste. Someone a while back requested that people stop abusing the law, and that went in one ear and out the other, we have people being locked up for various offences quite regularly depending on the wind of the day, and yet there are many perfectly functioning constitutional democracies that have survived for hundreds of years without such a draconian law. I think the Thai monarchy will survive more than perfectly even if the law is reformed. But to not be able to propose it for change, is judicial over-reach.

I don't wish for there to be violence either, but I don't see how proposing to reform this law which is debated among the academic sets of Thailand freely, is going to suddenly plunge Thailand into crisis. Its a law, laws get debated and changed all the time.

I see your point and I agree with some parts of your post entirely.

My problem with the 'unity bill' bundle itself, is primarily freedom-for-Thaksin related, my problem with the accompanying constitutional issues and charter rewrite is that the people who are pressuring to do this, PTP, are fugitive criminals and out-on-bail criminals, who have already shown publicly their contempt for law, for parliamentary procedure, for office of house speaker, have committed conflict-of-interest/ethics violations etc. PTP have violated the most basic fundamental human-rights of people who disagree with them or stand in their way. PTP are so very untrustworthy in every single sense, and only trustworthy people should be allowed to go anywhere near a nation's constitution.

I think to give constitutional reform power of any kind to this group of people is extremely dangerous.

Trustworthy? That rules out practically every Thai politician not just those in the PTP.