TDRI supports pre-election and inclusive reform: Thailand

[webfact]

POLITICAL STALEMATE
TDRI supports pre-election and inclusive reform
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Thailand Development Research Institute President Somkiat Tangkitvanich unveiled his six-points proposal, calling for the pre-election reform which involves all parties.

In his statement, he said the reform should take place before the election, given that any government has never been fully committed to reforms.

In the six-points proposal, he said that there was no progress from the reform council set up by the Yingluck government. Meanwhile, the Abhisit government also established two reform councils, but their suggestions have never been implemented.

"All this convinces the public that any government in power does not voluntarily support reforms," he said.

He also said that through the proposal for reforms, the anti-government People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) may just want to create political vacuum, given that several proposals cannot be completed quickly and outside parties are shunned from taking part. The process to create "absolute democracy" contradicts the democratic doctrine. While both the government and PDRC see the need for reforms, they still differ if the reforms should take place before or after the election.

"In my opinion, both (the government and the PDRC which proposed reform) just want to win a political gain, rather to cooperate for a true reform," he said.

In his proposal, Somkiat supports the 7 private business organisations’ proposal for a reform body, which could be established with an executive decree to ensure that the reform process would start no matter what political parties are in power.

He said one third of the body’s members should be appointed by the government, one third by the Democrat Party and PDRC, and the rest by other social groups. They should focus attention on 4-5 urgent issues which lead to the current political instability, including the check and balance, anti-graft measures, populist policies and fiscal disciplines, as well as the judicial system. A certain timeframe must be in place and the body should closely monitor the progress. If the government shows any sign of reluctance, the body should be empowered to suggest the House dissolution. This would encourage the government to proceed with the reform.

"The reform would succeed if having three key elements: the process that involve all parties; the mechanism to ensure that the reform would be honoured by all; and the mechanism that the government in power will materialise the reform," he said.


-- The Nation 2013-12-24

[Valentine]

Sounds like a fairly sensible solution given that the 2nd paragraph is correct. No government in this country has ever proposed meaningful reform which benefits all equally in the justice, education, electoral systems to name a few.

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

Let's set up a committee to study whether a committee should be set up to study whether a committee should be set up to consider a reform proposal.

[Scamper]

This is actually the most cogent path forward to date. And it improves on the business group initiative from yesterday, because this one actually spells out the composition of the reform panel : one third PTP, one third Democrat and PDRC, and one third other parties. It looks like it could even be embraced and implemented. But the path to nirvana is of course pathed with some caveats as well as good intentions. PTP has to agree. The Democrats have to agree. PDRC have to agree, and other parties need to jump on board, as well. Another key sticking point is that an election has already been called, and Yingluck is adverse to initiating the process until after the election. Will the other parties trust her ? Already they don't. But I think this fellow has made some very cogent points. The one that impressed me the most was when he said that the party in power always seems the most reluctant to pursue reform that transcends self-interest. I think he's spot on. But as I get the sense more and more that this election will not take place, this modus-operandi seems the most refreshing go-to plan yet. And it may just put the country on a real path forward.

[ggold]

Let's set up a committee to study whether a committee should be set up to study whether a committee should be set up to consider a reform proposal.

I think we need a committee to decide that!

[Robby nz]

So who is going to be the one to start to bring it all together ?

Seems everyone except PT agree that reform talks should start before the election but agreeing doesn't make it happen.

I would imagine that with Korn taking time out to formulate reform policy, see :

(http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/689715-korn-to-temporarily-retire-from-thai-democrat-executive-post/)

That the Dems would already have some solid suggestions to put forward and Ideas on how they could be implemented.

Likewise Suthep with the team he has behind him see :

(http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/688935-a-behind-the-scenes-look-at-sutheps-pdrc-war-room/)

Would also have good ideas to put forward, the business group likewise.

It was reported elsewhere that many of the reds also believe in reform before elections and there is a moderate faction of the reds who would in all likelihood be willing to join some sort of an assembly if asked.

If PT refuse to take part it would clearly show they have no real interest in reforms.

With all the ideas from each group and The three previous reports on reform which should also have the cobwebs dusted of and be thrown into the mix there should be plenty to get something positive done.

Of course all this requires good will and a common purpose, that may be the most difficult thing to achieve.

Edited December 24, 2013 by Robby nz

[Nibbles48]

I don't think this is as well thought out as people on here seem to believe.

1... one third government, one third Dem/PDRC and one third social groups which will be immediately nobbled by Thaksin and the government. in a secret coalition that they will deny exists even though between them they constantly out vote the Dems/PDRC.. We all know that.

2... No mention in cleaning up the election process with mechanisms to make sure they stay clean.

3... No mention of the constitution which is vague in parts and open to manipulation and misinterpretation.

4... No mention of a much needed system overhaul for amending the constitution and taking that out of the hands of a possible marauding government.

5... No mention of the dreadfully unbalanced Penal system which sees poor people serve out lengthy sentences while people with money walk free the same day after receiving their prison sentence. Would also help to implement a system where absconders from justice have their prison sentence doubled for every year they abscond, handing Thaksin a 64 year term and rising.

Oh and I almost forgot....

7... Clean up corruption within politics, judges and the police force and give them the biggest prison sentences of all.

Edited December 24, 2013 by Nibbles48

[blaze]

including the check and balance, anti-graft measures, populist policies and fiscal disciplines,'

Where was this dreamed up- a grade 4 civics class?

Wow- some local geniuses have discovered a entirely new way to govern a country-

Brilliant.

I hope the stumbling bumbly democracies of the west take heed of these innovations.

The world will be a better place.

Christ- are there no adults in the house?

In our fumbly bumbly way we went through the English Wars- the American Revolution, the introduction of scietific thinking into school curriculums and then the depression- the fascist/Nai/Stalinist years- and we could never come up with something so simple?

The last constituion was intendeed to be a check and balance on the popular will- it failed.

If the courts can not imp0lement the anti-graft laws- maybe the anger should be shifted- we heard that there are 2500 graft cases waiting to be heard.

And yet we hear nothing of prison sentences for those already convicted.

And the courts are paid by Thaksin to be ineffectual? give your head a shake!!!

Edited December 24, 2013 by blaze

[tomacht8]

Idea is good in theory, but should exclude all convicted criminals and people with pending corruption cases.
Hopefully they then still get enough clean people together.

[FangFerang]

"In my opinion, both (the government and the PDRC which proposed reform) just want to win a political gain, rather to cooperate for a true reform," he said.

The voice of reason, speaking the truth in a volatile situation, concerned for his country and his people...and some farang pretend there are no intellectually active, forthright Thais.

This man should run for PM.

Unfortunately, I think there are Thai people of more than one shirt color in the background saying "Eliminate this voice immediately."

[FangFerang]

Let's set up a committee to study whether a committee should be set up to study whether a committee should be set up to consider a reform proposal.

There is a notion in motion toward the goal you suggest, which many hope will be developed into an idea, and, one day soon, finally become a concept that can submitted to the ad-hoc Committee Committee (who will decide which Committee might consider the issue). Details forthcoming at some uncheduled date.

Nice witticism, kindred spirit. +2!

Edited December 24, 2013 by FangFerang

[blaze]

Hey

I got a idea- lets end corruption and sin and then forbid tooth decay and make heart attacks illegal.

after that we can make machines that run on their own energy-

Me and my buds was sippin' a few brew and came up with that last one

In front of our playhouse we gots a big sign- No Shinawatras allowed.

Ya wanna hand me another brewskie while I fire "Le Grando Plan-o"

off to the Nation.

I can see the Thaivisa headline now- "Serious Gents Proposes Solution to Everything'

Edited December 24, 2013 by blaze

[noitom]

The sub headline said that he "unveiled" his six point proposal. Did the reporter think to ask him what are the six points? Did he actually have a proposal or was he just unveiling his notion of a proposal? What are the six points?