Bhokin Backs Rewriting 'Poisonous Fruit' Constitution

[Lite Beer]

Bhokin backs rewriting 'poisonous fruit' Constitution

Praphan Jindalertudomdee

Somroutai Sapsomboon

The Nation

Bhokin

BANGKOK: -- Bhokin Bhalakula, the chairman of a special panel studying charter amendments, believes the government should go ahead and remove the "poisonous-fruit" Constitution although it may be a painful task.

The 2007 Constitution is regarded by the ruling coalition leader Pheu Thai as a fruit from a poisonous tree, which is definitely poisonous and needs to be got rid off. However, their opponents see the Pheu Thai stance on the charter as aimed at serving a vested interest. As a result, the proposed amendments have led to severe conflicts in the society.

Bhokin, a former Parliament president and House speaker, says the coalition would have to be patient in the manoeuvring for the rewriting of the charter so that the country could exit the "black hole" political situation.

"I admire the prime minister a lot. She is patient and not aggressive. She has declined to retaliate against the opponents. I think it's right that we must stop the quarrelling first," Bhokin, a legal expert of the Pheu Thai, said in an interview with The Nation.

Now, Bhokin chairs the coalition panel studying measures on how to amend the Constitution. He is one of the legal experts and brains whose services have been used by former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Bhokin said no timeframe should be set for the study by his panel as it could encounter a lot of problems.

He said his panel would speed up the study and do its best and the decision would depend on the coalition. He insisted that his panel would not make a decision for the coalition partners but would only recommend the best way out and would try to explain to opponents of the move about the need to amend the charter.

"After the government receives the proposals, if it regards the situation as not conducive for the amendments due to prevailing misunderstanding and risk of more problems, the government may wait for the sake of appropriateness. In that case, no one would complain. But if the government goes ahead and the people reject it [in a public referendum], there could be problems," Bhokin said.

"We have gone astray very far from the right path during the past six to seven years. We don't know what are real principles and what is right or wrong. Now, we must start anew without hatred or prejudice. Now, the problems are not related to Thaksin or Sondhi [Limthongkul, a yellow-shirt leader]. But the current problem is that the society has been trapped in a black hole. Anger and emotions are enlarging the black hole every day. We must stop and step back. We must not be emotional when discussing the issue. We will have to cross this black hole.

"I think the government has done the right thing. Although the government was on the right side, it did not stubbornly push for the amendments. It would take more time and the government would be at a disadvantage because there are a lot of coup legacies that could destroy the government. No government in the past had to face so much difficulty in solving the people's problems. It is difficult for the government to solve the problems and it has to be careful at the same time. When people are emotional, we can't retaliate in kind. Although we may feel hurt and feel that we failed to convince the other side, we have to be patient and try harder.

"In my opinion, although the government is hurt, it must tolerate the pain. This is the only solution. After we survive this issue, the black hole will be much shallower. We cannot cross the black hole right away but we will have to make it shallower until it is gone. I can't say how long it will take to reach that goal," Bhokin said.

Bhokin said the charter amendment bill, which is pending the third reading, will have to be deliberated in the final reading. He said MPs and senators would have to vote to approve or reject it depending on the current opinions of the majority of society.

The Pheu Thai earlier contemplated amending Article 68 so that no one would seek a Constitution Court ruling to disrupt charter amendments again.

Bhokin said one side wanted to amend any article to create a balance of power among the three branches but the other side fears that changing particular articles would lead to misunderstanding that the Pheu Thai would seek the changes to benefit itself.

"If we change some articles at a time, we will be attacked for doing it for ourselves. So we will need a constitution drafting assembly to rewrite the charter," Bhokin said.

He insisted that the charter amendments would not be done for Thaksin but the charter needs to be rewritten as it causes injustice.

"In particular, Article 309 endorsed constitutionality of the coup-makers' orders in the past, present and future. This means although other laws, including royal commands, may be found unconstitutional, the laws issued by the coup-makers would never be unconstitutional. I don't understand why we should tolerate this," Bhokin said.

"The entire world discusses the issue of a poisonous tree always yielding poisonous fruits because the US Supreme Court used to make a ruling that way. A thing with a wrong beginning will have a wrong ending as well."

Asked whether Article 309 needs to be abrogated before an amnesty or reconciliation bill could be enacted, Bhokin said the amnesty bill could be enacted with or without Article 309. But he noted that Article 309 would allow politicians to abuse the coup orders to harass their opponents.

Bhokin said he could not tell how the reconciliation bill or amnesty bill would be enacted as it would depend on the MPs to consult one another on the basis that what has been done was not right and needs to be corrected in line with the rule of law.

Among other things, Bhokin said charter amendments might be made to turn the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office to a two-court system instead of a one-court system.

He said the Thai political court system was modelled after the system in France, which contradicted the human rights principle because it used only one court.

"In France, they use the court in traitor cases but we are using the system for all cases. Not only politicians but also their supporters have to go to this one-court system," Bhokin said.

"Actually, this system runs against the Constitution but no one understands this. They think the court should be used to get rid of corruption without thinking that it could be used to persecute others. By the human rights system, there must be two courts as everybody should have the right to appeal against court rulings without deadline."

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office was set up under the 2007 charter. It sentenced Thaksin to two years in jail in the case over the purchase of a Ratchadaphisek land plot.

Bhokin says independent organisations should exist in the new charter but the role of judges to appoint members of the independent organisations should be restricted. He said the court's image would be damaged if it involved itself in politics too much.

Bhokin said Thaksin had done nothing wrong in the Ratchadaphisek land case.

"If you ask anyone who has no prejudice, they will say the case is very weird. Khunying Pojaman bought the land from the Financial Institutions Development Fund and the FIDF is under the control of the central bank. Thaksin allowed his wife to buy the land because a wife needs to get permission from the husband to buy a land as it will be counted as mutual assets. So, there was no point of corruption in this case. It would have been a corruption case only if the land had been sold at a lower price with cooperation from government officials. Had it been that way MR Pridiyathorn Devakula [then BOT governor] would have already been in trouble," Bhokin said.

-- The Nation 2012-08-26

[KireB]

What a <deleted>!

Quote 1: He insisted that the charter amendments would not be done for Thaksin but the charter needs to be rewritten as it causes injustice.

A pure lie, it's all done for Thaksin and whitewashing his crimes!

Quote 2: "In particular, Article 309 endorsed constitutionality of the coup-makers' orders in the past, present and future. This means although other laws, including royal commands, may be found unconstitutional, the laws issued by the coup-makers would never be unconstitutional. I don't understand why we should tolerate this,"

Maybe because the majority of Thais voted in favor for this poisonous constitution through a referendum. Democratically!

[OzMick]

"It would have been a corruption case only if the land had been sold at a lower price with cooperation from government officials."

A deliberate lie. The law forbids the sale of government assets to government officers and their immediate families - the price paid is immaterial. Thaksin's hubris led him to believe he would get away with it, or bribe the judges. He should have changed the law first, like he did with capital gains tax, or had the DSI pervert the definition like Yingluk's perjury.

[MikeOboe57]

I admire the prime minister a lot

or how to ruin your reputation in a single sentence.

[Noistar]

What a <deleted>!

Quote 1: He insisted that the charter amendments would not be done for Thaksin but the charter needs to be rewritten as it causes injustice.

A pure lie, it's all done for Thaksin and whitewashing his crimes!

Quote 2: "In particular, Article 309 endorsed constitutionality of the coup-makers' orders in the past, present and future. This means although other laws, including royal commands, may be found unconstitutional, the laws issued by the coup-makers would never be unconstitutional. I don't understand why we should tolerate this,"

Maybe because the majority of Thais voted in favor for this poisonous constitution through a referendum. Democratically!

IMHO still seems to revolve around a desire to remove the 'parentage' of the 2007 Constitution, rather than a need to change it to better Thailand.

In a Democracy with MPs capable of individual thought, such a major change would be able to be considered. With the immature MPs in this Government, led by a 'tired' but seemingly dis-interested PM, such a change is dangerous.

The 2007 Constitution was a result of the coup - fact.

Let's have some idea of what a 2012/13/14 Constitution will be to better Thailand. Lighting the touch-paper of 'reconciliation' doesn't seem to be in Thailand's best interests.

That is before the next coup-Constitution

[animatic]

The phrase is 'Fruit Of A Poisoned Tree'.

But that is only the case if the public didn't vote it into being.

They did.

[Ricardo]

Wasn't Bhokin a Deputy-PM, and then later a Minister of the Interior, under former-PM Thaksin's Thai-Rak-Thai governments ?

So clearly no possibility that he's biased in any way.

[asiawatcher]

A very elongated article in explanation of nothing. I for one can't see why the Constitution needs changing at all but then I am not in exile and I am not Thai.

[bigbamboo]

And replace it with his 'durian' Constititution......?