Thai analysis: Case of damned if we do, damned if we don't?

[webfact]

ANALYSIS
Case of damned if we do, damned if we don't?
ATTAYUTH BOOTSRIPOOM
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- IT HAS become clear now that the constitution drafters want a national referendum on the charter. They have suggested in writing to Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha that he make sure that such a vote is organised.

The Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) gave five reasons to back its proposal for a plebiscite on the new constitution,

First, the constitution is the country's highest law, and Thai citizens should be asked whether they approve of the laws that bind them.

Second, public participation is of utmost importance in politics and the public needs to vote to express its opinion on the new constitution, as the charter will set the rules for political institutions to follow.

Third, the 2007 constitution also went through a national referendum. The new charter should therefore be subject to the same process in order to ensure its legitimacy.

Fourth, the CDC will have an opportunity to explain to the public the essential parts of the draft constitution.

Last, the new constitution requires that any amendment to it would need to go through a referendum. It stands to reason, therefore, that the constitution itself should go through a referendum.

Support for holding a referendum on the new charter is on the rise. Prayut will have to start getting more serious about this issue.

In addition to the question on whether a referendum should be held, another question is how it should be done.

Many restrictions

What is going to happen if the referendum is organised in the current situation? There are still many restrictions on political debate.

To hold a referendum, both sides will need to be allowed to campaign for and against the draft constitution. They will have to be allowed full freedom to carry out their campaigns so that eligible voters get complete information before making their decision.

The CDC certainly will campaign in favour of the draft constitution, and its members will focus on its advantages and positives. However, detractors of the draft charter should also be given a fair chance to campaign for a "no" vote.

Another question involves what should be done if the draft charter fails the referendum test.

Some groups suggest that one of the recently annulled constitutions - that of 2007 or 1997 (both abolished after a coup) - should be selected. However, that likelihood is only small. The National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) scrapped the 2007 charter after staging a coup less than a year ago, while the coup-makers also view the 1997 charter as problematic.

What is more likely is that the constitution-drafting process will have to start all over again. New members should be appointed to the CDC and the National Reform Committee, in accordance with the post-coup provisional charter, to draft a new constitution.

If that happens, the next general election will be postponed for another year while a new charter is drafted. Also, the government, the NCPO and the National Legislative Assembly will remain in office for another year.

Would this be acceptable to eligible voters? Both options seem unsatisfactory.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Case-of-damned-if-we-do-damned-if-we-dont-30260153.html


-- The Nation 2015-05-15

[tbthailand]

To hold a referendum, both sides will need to be allowed to campaign for and against the draft constitution. They will have to be allowed full freedom to carry out their campaigns so that eligible voters get complete information before making their decision.

there is no way that will ever happen. NO WAY.

[oneday]

If the election has to be delayed so a constitution can be voted on and agreed to by the people of Thailand...then so be it. Far better than to have a deeply flawed guiding document for this country.

[rametindallas]

Tweak the 1997 "People's Constitution" and have done with it. The CDC is trying to reinvent the wheel. News flash! The wheel has been invented already and only needs some fine tuning. Some people are so smart that they're dumb.

[jayboy]

Tweak the 1997 "People's Constitution" and have done with it. The CDC is trying to reinvent the wheel. News flash! The wheel has been invented already and only needs some fine tuning. Some people are so smart that they're dumb.

Happy to agree with you for a change.The 1997 constitution wasn't perfect but far better than its predecessors and successors, and deftly equal handed between reformers and the more traditional.I think a tweaked version would still need to be legitimised through a referendum.

Sadly it's just a pipedream since it placed too much faith in electoral democracy and too much respect for the Thai people for the likes of the crazies now running the show.

[djjamie]

Case of damned if we do, damned if we don't?

I see this OP title in another light.

If the majority do vote yes to the referendum the UDD will ignore that majority and complain and make weak excuses for why they voted yes. If they vote no then the UDD will respect that majority and herald this is a step in the right direction towards democracy.

Remember the last referendum? The reaction by the 7%'er minority could potentially be the same.

Either way this most definitely should go to referendum to let the people decide on the laws that will guide them and people should be free to lobby for or against it. This is easier said that done though because one side like to play dirty politics. Look no further than the hate channel Peace TV. Imagine the rhetoric that would be spewed for a "No" vote. One can be assured the DEM's would highlight the flaws in the draft constitution and offer constructive criticism while on the other side of the political divide it would be threats of violence, personal attacks, offering nothing to benefit the majority and spreading fear and division. Jatuporns mouth would look like the entrance to Luna Park in Melbourne for the whole process. It is all he knows and why reform was needed. So yes Prayut has a lot to think about.

If he allows some to lobby a "NO" vote I can just about smell the burning tires already.

Who let the dogs out!!! It may well be Prayut……Be careful and tread carefully.

Edited May 15, 2015 by djjamie

[meltingpot2015]

There is no such thing as a clean slate in this situation.

What is more likely is that the constitution-drafting process will have to start all over again.

Arn't voters agreeing to certain provisions, or is it simply a "Yes"/"No" question on the whole of the draft charter?.

If it is the former, couldn't the same CDC and National Reform committee members make changes to any rejected provisions (by the electorate). Then have only those changed (tweaked) provisions put to another referendum.

[ExPratt]

Are people going to read it , or are they just going to be swayed by those leading the campaigns. People are just going to vote along with their political tendencies I would image. How about if you like 80% of the constitution but detest the other 20.

I think they should work for longer on it with all parties and attempt to get to get something that is fair and acceptable to All sides , I know that may be almost impossible, but all sides will have to compromise , imo a referendum on the constitution will be a farce , many people wont have a clue what they are voting for or not voting for. Very much the same as the planned EU referendum

[ExPratt]

There is no such thing as a clean slate in this situation.

What is more likely is that the constitution-drafting process will have to start all over again.

Arn't voters agreeing to certain provisions, or is it simply a "Yes"/"No" question on the whole of the draft charter?.

If it is the former, couldn't the same CDC and National Reform committee members make changes to any rejected provisions (by the electorate). Then have only those changed (tweaked) provisions put to another referendum.

that would mean voters would have to read the Constitution , and vote on all subjects

[greenchair]

Tweak the 1997 "People's Constitution" and have done with it. The CDC is trying to reinvent the wheel. News flash! The wheel has been invented already and only needs some fine tuning. Some people are so smart that they're dumb.

It's the best they have ever had. With a few changes it would work.

It might take 5 or 10 years. But in the end I think the 1997 constitution will be

reinstated. As it should be.

[GinBoy2]

In agreement with many others. 1997 wasn't perfect but it was the best and with amendments could have been perfect. The US constitution wasn't perfect, but the amendments were the mechanism to correct the flaws.

In Thailand's case the amendment process has been supplanted by the coup process.

But whatever the outcome of this process the idea that instant perfection is guaranteed is a pipe dream.

So playmates, here we go again. Maybe we should run a book on how long until the next coup..'to save the nation'

[Your Thainess]

It's actually the opposite of 'damned if you do...' for the junta.

If the referendum takes place and the constitution fails, they get to stay in power longer (which is the entire point as the country awaits a momentous event).

If the referendum doesn't take place, they get precisely the constitution they dictated to the rubber-stamp legislature. Then, all they need to do is make excuses, such as staging violence or judicial maneuvering, to postpone elections.

They win either way. The deck is stacked.

[meltingpot2015]

Write it in to the constitution "if there is another coup Thailand will cease to be an executive monarchy". There will be no more coups.

[meltingpot2015]

It's actually the opposite of 'damned if you do...' for the junta.

If the referendum takes place and the constitution fails, they get to stay in power longer (which is the entire point as the country awaits a momentous event).

If the referendum doesn't take place, they get precisely the constitution they dictated to the rubber-stamp legislature. Then, all they need to do is make excuses, such as staging violence or judicial maneuvering, to postpone elections.

They win either way. The deck is stacked.

If the referendum takes place and the constitution fails, they get to stay in power longer

If the draft charter passes the referendum vote, will you eat your hat?

Edited May 15, 2015 by meltingpot2015

[Srikcir]

If the election has to be delayed so a constitution can be voted on and agreed to by the people of Thailand...then so be it. Far better than to have a deeply flawed guiding document for this country.

"deeply flawed?"

The only serious flaws with the 1997 and 2007 constitutions were the insufficient manacles to control an elected government while maintaining royalists/military control. The 2007 constitution flaws were mainly inadequate number of independent organization throughout every political level in the nation to checkmate elected government actions, and a 50% appointed Senate.

There were flaws related to the admininstration of the constitution such as rejection of the military to support a state of emergency to protect government civil service, government executives, and voters; a constitutional court and Election Commission that defied the constitution; a military that refused civilian control. These are flaws with execution of the constitution's fundamentals but not with the constitution itself.

One might argue the previous constitutions failed to stop corruption. It's administration of the laws that failed-not the constitution. With the exeception of course with illegal military intervention and subjugation of Thai people's sovereignty. That goes to a deeper level of RESOLVE than any constitution can correct. In fact the 1997 constitution held any action violating it as ILLEGAL, making military self-granted amnesties illegal.

[Your Thainess]

If the draft charter passes the referendum vote, will you eat your hat?

Indeed, I would.

[ggt]

A Constitution is a piece of paper...often challenged by those who disagree...keeping lawyers and judges in business...good luck Thailand...

[smutcakes]

If the election has to be delayed so a constitution can be voted on and agreed to by the people of Thailand...then so be it. Far better than to have a deeply flawed guiding document for this country.

I agree but i think they really need to try and find a real cross section of persons to write the charter, people who are not involved in politics, and have never been.

[Plutojames88]

They might not think in truth they are damned....but in actual fact they are for once predicting the outcome accurately .

They seem really to be rigging events to suit and have nil intension of relinquishing power .

And manipulating media to pretend this process is inclusive .

A country where polls and TAT put out news items that appear here regularly supporting the whole show under military rule and in general claim all is peachy.

No Dark times ahead.

They do so whilst they shut down TV stations and go after political leaders, and threaten opponents on the side of democracy.

Another poster below summed it up best for my liking.

However , I do believe in the long run the Internal structures will ignite and Thailand might explode.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Plutojames88

[Plutojames88]

It's actually the opposite of 'damned if you do...' for the junta.

If the referendum takes place and the constitution fails, they get to stay in power longer (which is the entire point as the country awaits a momentous event).

If the referendum doesn't take place, they get precisely the constitution they dictated to the rubber-stamp legislature. Then, all they need to do is make excuses, such as staging violence or judicial maneuvering, to postpone elections.

They win either way. The deck is stacked.