New charter does not address root cause of national conflict: Abhisit

[webfact]

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW
New charter does not address root cause of national conflict: Abhisit
Jintana Panyaarvudh,
Nitipol Kiravanich
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has identified several flaws in the 315-article draft constitution, saying he is not convinced it will help solve the country's many problems, but may, in fact, lead to new ones.

The draft has just been completed and is awaiting scrutiny by the National Reform Council.

According to the former prime minister, this charter has not been designed to solve the root causes of political conflicts, namely abuse of power, destruction of democracy, and corruption.

"Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren't they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated," the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation.

Abhisit said the problems that needed addressing were the prevention and elimination of the abuse of power. In contrast, though, the CDC thinks that if democracy is put in place, then political parties and politicians will take over the administration and repeat the problems created by the Thaksin regime.

"This confusion is the key issue. For instance, the charter they [the CDC] drafted weakens political parties, so in order to avoid a weak government, they have given it extra power," Abhisit said.

For instance, he said, there is an article that allows the government to push laws through more easily.

The article he was referring to states that the prime minister can declare a cabinet-proposed law or any part thereof as a vote of confidence. Once this declaration is made, if the House of Representatives does not initiate a "no-confidence" motion within 48 hours, then the bill can automatically go through unchanged to the Senate.

"If this article existed in the now-defunct 2007 constitution, the blanket amnesty bill would have gone through," he said.

That amnesty bill was the cause of the political protest campaign against Yingluck Shinawatra's government, which eventually resulted in the May 22 military takeover.

Moreover, Abhisit said, this charter has set up excessive scrutiny measures against MPs.

"Instead of strengthening political parties and focusing more on the executive branch, the drafters are weakening parties and making the executive branch more difficult to scrutinise," he said.

The Democrat leader voiced no concerns about the mixed-member proportional (MMP) electoral system, provided it is democratically fair. However, he said, he finds the open-list and party-list systems contradictory.

He cited the CDC's claim that it wanted the party-list system to acquire politicians who are not good at campaigning. However, he said, under this system, open-list candidates who are not good at campaigning will also fail because they will have to compete with good campaigners who are part of the same list.

As for impeachment, which according to the draft can be put in motion through votes in the House of Representatives and the Senate, Abhisit said that in reality, it would only be the opposition that ends up getting impeached.

He reasoned that normally, the lower-house majority is the government, and the minority the opposition. Similarly, if the Senate is divided into two equal camps, it will always be the opposition that gets impeached.

"The Parliament could become a tool to impeach scrutinisers," he said.

Another issue of concern was the new independent organisations, which he said were granted too much power.

"It is still unclear where the members of the independent reconciliation committee will come from, as the draft only says they will be appointed by His Majesty. Plus, this new body has too much authority in offering pardons to wrongdoers who provide useful information that is beneficial to the case and those who have shown remorse to the reconciliation committee," Abhisit said.

He pointed out that, in reality, it is His Majesty who has the power to grant pardons.

He also voiced concerns about the National Ethics Assembly, saying members of this panel would have to be courageous, as deciding on who exactly can be considered violators of ethical or moral issues is an intricate matter.

The former PM also warned that the public, media, political observers and politicians would be scrutinising the lives and backgrounds of the committee members intensively.

With arguments, debates and voices of opposition against the draft getting louder, Abhisit said the best way to end this criticism would be to hold a public referendum. The plebiscite should give people two choices - whether they want this new charter or the 2007 one - as this would help avoid the problem of the drafters going back to Square 1.

"If you compare the new charter with the previous one, I believe the latter was better," he said.

Abhisit said holding a referendum would be a good rehearsal before a general election is held, as the authorities could stipulate regulations to study the contrasting ideas without giving way to violence.

This way, society could acknowledge democracy, and reconciliation could be promoted, he said.

"Successful reconciliation is not the process of making everyone think along the same lines, but helping those with contrasting ideas be able to live together. Holding a referendum would give Thailand a great opportunity to see if we are able to move towards reconciliation or not.

"The NCPO's [National Council for Peace and Order] success will be determined 'at the end of the road', when people accept their actions or the rules they have created, and allow the country to move forward peacefully," he said.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/New-charter-does-not-address-root-cause-of-nationa-30258056.html


-- The Nation 2015-04-16

[rametindallas]

He's not an effective leader but he is thoughtful and intelligent and he makes some very good points. Thaksin's governments have distorted every charter writer's objectivity. This one especially bothers me: The article he was referring to states that the prime minister can declare a cabinet-proposed law or any part thereof as a vote of confidence. Once this declaration is made, if the House of Representatives does not initiate a "no-confidence" motion within 48 hours, then the bill can automatically go through unchanged to the Senate. "If this article existed in the now-defunct 2007 constitution, the blanket amnesty bill would have gone through," he said.

[jerojero]

Well now.... I think it's blah, blah blah won't work .... Followed by my idea blah blah blah will work. I'm Thailand,s saviour waiting in the wings.

[canuckamuck]

Abhisit's education will likely get him in trouble with the new bosses. Although it is good he can speak his mind.

[geriatrickid]

He's alive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Almost a forgotten man, pushed to the sidelines, what better time than the end of Songkran when people are still hung over and not paying attention to toss out a few words of wisdom. His name will make the news reminding the population that he is still around. However, no one will pay attention.

Poor Abhisit. He should have taken his education and obtained some real world experience in the workforce before becoming a professional politician. Poor chap is cut off from 90% of Thai society. The General has a better understanding of the people than he ever will.

[oneday]

"...Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren't they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated," the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation..."

I am amazed at this comment from Adhisit...a very sane and almost certainly accurate statement.

[Always18]

"...Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren't they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated," the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation..."

I am amazed at this comment from Adhisit...a very sane and almost certainly accurate statement.

Irrespective of whether or not you agree with his politics, Abhisit is a very intelligent guy and, having been born in the UK, has had the benefit of an excellent western education.

Sadly, he is one of the very few Thai politicians who actually understands what the term "democracy" means.................

Edited April 16, 2015 by Always18

[Srikcir]

"root causes of political conflicts, namely abuse of power, destruction of democracy"

These are topics Abhisit knows well.

- Shutdown an elected government

- Support for a coup against a democratically elected government

- Charged with abuse of power in the 2010 murder of PTP protesters

Abhisit's only REAL concern is his loss of power and the mechanisms in the 2015 draft Constitution that will severly limit his power should he be elected PM. His concern for democracy is merely tissue wrapping.

[Your Thainess]

You made your bed, now lie in it Mark.

[canuckamuck]

"root causes of political conflicts, namely abuse of power, destruction of democracy"

These are topics Abhisit knows well.

- Shutdown an elected government

- Support for a coup against a democratically elected government

- Charged with abuse of power in the 2010 murder of PTP protesters

Abhisit's only REAL concern is his loss of power and the mechanisms in the 2015 draft Constitution that will severly limit his power should he be elected PM. His concern for democracy is merely tissue wrapping.

Clearly he is saying the new PM will have too much ability to push through an agenda and not the opposite.

[JOC]

Poor, poor Mark!!

He sacrificed his bishop (Suthep), assured that the coup would be followed by an appointed government with him as the new PM!!

But Prayut tricked him, and now little Marky are throwing the toys out of the pram...............

[phoenixdoglover]

I agree with Abhisit on his basic view: the Junta and the CDC do not have any belief in democracy. We can expect a new Charter to reflect that view.

[Baerboxer]

Poor, poor Mark!!

He sacrificed his bishop (Suthep), assured that the coup would be followed by an appointed government with him as the new PM!!

But Prayut tricked him, and now little Marky are throwing the toys out of the pram...............

Your imagination is running away again.

[Baerboxer]

"...Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren't they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated," the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation..."

I am amazed at this comment from Adhisit...a very sane and almost certainly accurate statement.

Irrespective of whether or not you agree with his politics, Abhisit is a very intelligent guy and, having been born in the UK, has had the benefit of an excellent western education.

Sadly, he is one of the very few Thai politicians who actually understands what the term "democracy" means.................

He may understand what democracy means. But what has he done to actually improve things for the population. Did he fight corruption, including the corrupt monopolies that dominate a protected Thai economy? Did he ensure changes in education, content and availability to give all the people opportunity? Did he address the control and manipulation of the legal system by rich hiso elites who place themselves and their extended families above and beyond the law?

Did he address the multitude of social issues Thailand faces?

Did he even put forward any polices to address these issues?

Or was he simply the alternative side of the spectrum to the Shin kleptocracy and planned Shin political clan dynasty.

I'm sure he does understand democracy and the real issues Thailand needs to address - but so far he doesn't have the balls to do it.

[JAG]

"...Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren't they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated," the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation..."

I am amazed at this comment from Adhisit...a very sane and almost certainly accurate statement.

Irrespective of whether or not you agree with his politics, Abhisit is a very intelligent guy and, having been born in the UK, has had the benefit of an excellent western education.

Sadly, he is one of the very few Thai politicians who actually understands what the term "democracy" means.................

Bit of a shame he wasn't prepared to practice it last year then wasn't it?

[lucky11]

He's not an effective leader but he is thoughtful and intelligent and he makes some very good points. Thaksin's governments have distorted every charter writer's objectivity. This one especially bothers me: The article he was referring to states that the prime minister can declare a cabinet-proposed law or any part thereof as a vote of confidence. Once this declaration is made, if the House of Representatives does not initiate a "no-confidence" motion within 48 hours, then the bill can automatically go through unchanged to the Senate. "If this article existed in the now-defunct 2007 constitution, the blanket amnesty bill would have gone through," he said.

Yes!!! But there won't be any such contentious issues as this now that the Shinawatra's have been eliminated from politics - unless you decree that Pheu Thai, who want to keep the Shinawatra banner as a branding/marketing tool counts as keeping them in the picture (this is ALL they have BTW).

The one good thing about this IS the dilution of the politician's powers and the fact that it has been engineered so that the likely outcome of the election, when held, will ensure that past government abuses will not be repeated with corruption diminished appreciably!!

I also think that the smaller parties getting some say (maybe not that much) but some say, is a good thing.

[wowfactor10]

Again this guy makes good sense :

Abhisit said the best way to end this criticism would be to hold a public referendum. The plebiscite should give people two choices - whether they want this new charter or the 2007 one - as this would help avoid the problem of the drafters going back to Square 1.

That would be a fair choice...

[tonbridgebrit]

Abhisit, you're not going to win. Either, we have no elections and that means the junta will carry on. Or, we have elections, and that means Thaksin is back in charge. Whatever, you'ill never be in charge.
You're not a soldier, so you can't do a coup. And your party will always get less votes than Thaksin, you'ill never beat Thaksin in a vote.

You knew right, that the junta would stay in power for years, you knew this when the coup took place, right ? Anyway, you're only a figure-head for your party, the real power in your party is a load of Chinese-Thais who are very rich, and who own vast assets in Thailand. Stop undermining the junta with your comments. You'd much prefer the junta continued rather than Thaksin being back in power, right ?

[oneday]

1. Or was he simply the alternative side of the spectrum to the Shin kleptocracy and planned Shin political clan dynasty.

2. I'm sure he does understand democracy and the real issues Thailand needs to address - but so far he doesn't have the balls to do it.

The first statement is way off-base and a bit dramatic, IMO

The second statement is pretty close to what I'm beginning to believe given his comments in this article. It almost looks like he wants to do the right thing, but i agree, I don't think he would ever have the guts to go against the REAL ruling elite as represented by Prayut, his generals and all the elite that back them.

[Toscano]

Yes , I think the Junta will stay in office longer than it intends , because they will have difficulty in forming another government under the charter .

Elections ,I believe , may be declared void if a large section of the population refuses to vote . If democracy is not on the future agenda , far better

the present government stays in office .

[gemguy]

Not to worry

I am going to buy my Thai citizenship and then run for Prime Minister.

After the people vote for me and I become Prime Minister I will address all the problems in Thailand and be the first to fix everything that needs to be fixed.

Cheers

[fobuff]

The root cause is the miltary doing multiple coups as they see themselves as saviours but they screw things (democracy) up everytime.

[waitforusalso]

[kimamey]

"...Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren't they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated," the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation..."

I am amazed at this comment from Adhisit...a very sane and almost certainly accurate statement.

Irrespective of whether or not you agree with his politics, Abhisit is a very intelligent guy and, having been born in the UK, has had the benefit of an excellent western education.

Sadly, he is one of the very few Thai politicians who actually understands what the term "democracy" means.................

He may understand what democracy means. But what has he done to actually improve things for the population. Did he fight corruption, including the corrupt monopolies that dominate a protected Thai economy? Did he ensure changes in education, content and availability to give all the people opportunity? Did he address the control and manipulation of the legal system by rich hiso elites who place themselves and their extended families above and beyond the law?

Did he address the multitude of social issues Thailand faces?

Did he even put forward any polices to address these issues?

Or was he simply the alternative side of the spectrum to the Shin kleptocracy and planned Shin political clan dynasty.

I'm sure he does understand democracy and the real issues Thailand needs to address - but so far he doesn't have the balls to do it.

His problem is he never had a majority or total control of his party unlike Thaksin. We'll never know what he would have done if he'd had that advantage.

[visionchaser45]

"...Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren't they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated," the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation..."

I am amazed at this comment from Adhisit...a very sane and almost certainly accurate statement.

Irrespective of whether or not you agree with his politics, Abhisit is a very intelligent guy and, having been born in the UK, has had the benefit of an excellent western education.

Sadly, he is one of the very few Thai politicians who actually understands what the term "democracy" means.................

He knows what it means; he also knows he can't get elected in one.

[tbthailand]

doesn't address the root problems...

abuse of power, destruction of democracy, and corruption.

= military...

of course it doesn't address those things.