Referendum debate misses the key point

[Lite Beer]

EDITORIAL
Referendum debate misses the key point
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Real issue isn't about putting the charter to a vote

Much has been said about plans to hold a national referendum on the controversial charter draft. And too little has been said about the fact that, given its significant flaws, the document in no way represents a measure of the public's political ideals. We have had constitutions full of promise, only for expectations to be dashed. Whether the draft is approved or rejected in a referendum, it perhaps won't mean much ideologically.

The reasons why the charter draft should be put up for a national referendum are logical, or so it seems.

Before the Yingluck Shinawatra administration was ousted in the 2013 coup, its attempt to change the 2007 Constitution prompted a warning from the Constitution Court, which said that since the charter was approved by the people in a referendum, any alterations would also require a referendum.

Although that charter was negated by the coup, it's only sensible that replacing it should have the public's backing as well.

There is also the matter of our dire political divide to consider. A constitution that has not been approved in a referendum will inevitably be regarded as biased against half the citizenry. A referendum would at least give the current draft a semblance of legitimacy, although full legitimacy is out of the question given that the drafting is taking place under military rule.

Interim Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha doesn't seem to support holding a referendum because he thinks the campaigning ahead of it could cause trouble that might snowball out of control.

The stance is questionable. Prayut evidently fears that a referendum would open a can of worms and allow for a show of mass discontent with his decision to stage a coup. And what happened to the 2007 charter must have taught him that, even if a military-backed charter survives a referendum, its future isn't assured.

So there are political reasons why the charter draft should and should not go to a referendum, and the debate remains inconclusive.

However, the "the real issue" has barely been touched upon, and that is the voting public's inability to foster a sound constitution. We are more than able to write one, but what looks good on paper doesn't necessarily translate into a system that promotes true democracy, freedom of expression, government checks and balances and political accountability.

In Thailand, constitutions have become political tools. Politicians exploit them or find loopholes in order to win and reclaim power. Our charters are never treated as representing common values that transcend ideologies or personalities.

And because of this, we are stuck in a vicious cycle of arguments - should senators be elected or appointed, how best to realign electoral zones, how should the judiciary and the legislature share the authority to deal with corruption, and so on. Thus we go on writing and rewriting new constitutions, tearing them down and writing more.

The debate will continue over whether this new draft should be voted on by the public, but it will not touch upon the most important problem, that composing the highest law of the land has become some sort of a game.

Until the debaters do pay attention to the ultimate obstacle - the question of why Thailand can have the world's best constitution on paper and yet still manage to mess up - they will carry on arguing over the lesser issues again and again.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Referendum-debate-misses-the-key-point-30260211.html

-- The Nation 2015-05-16

[zaphod reborn]

EDITORIAL

Referendum debate misses the key point

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Real issue isn't about putting the charter to a vote

In Thailand, constitutions have become political tools. Politicians exploit them or find loopholes in order to win and reclaim power. Our charters are never treated as representing common values that transcend ideologies or personalities.

-- The Nation 2015-05-16

No, the failure of Thai Constitutions and, in fact, all Thai laws is the direct result of the acceptance of poor legal craftsmanship. Every Thai law is fraught with vague and ambiguous generalities and the country lacks a real judicial system to properly interpret these laws. Politicians and government workers exploit the loopholes for their personal gain. Until Thai universities properly teach law to future drafters of charters and legislation, and the country implements a real judicial review branch of government, all charters and laws will continue to be failures.

[canuckamuck]

Not to mention the aversion to applying the laws they have, dependant on the social standing of the transgressor.

Until they get past the concept of entitlement and demand equality and accountability, this country will have much in common with Sisyphus.

[quandow]

This is frighteningly similar to what's occurring all over the globe. The last (at least) 4 or 5 U.S. presidential debates were hamstrung as no contentious subjects were allowed to be discussed, and the G.W. Bush election was an outright fraud. The latest UK elections seems to have brought out many cries of foul play. Thailand is merely following suit, subjecting its uneducated and uninformed masses to policies that will benefit the elite at the cost of what otherwise would be an honest republic.

The deeper you look, the more you see that governments are now shills for corporations. It saddens me to think that, unless drastic actions are taken, we will all eventually be united in the shackles of a global economy run by bankers and backed up by dangerous military drones (flying and non-flying).

Heavy sigh . . . other than that, things are GREAT!

[Srikcir]

The referendum on the 2007 Constitution had only MATHEMATICAL semblance of legitimacy when approved by only 51% of the electorate under strict political constratinst against opposition parties. No small wonder that the PTP coalition began almost immediately upon gaining control of the executive branch and parliament to amend the constitution.

A super majority (70%?) should be required to approve the constitution. Since voting in Thailand is mandatory, a super majority is not unreasonable.

[phoenixdoglover]

The problem is that the military thinks they are part of the "checks and balances".

We cant talk about why that is.

[tbthailand]

Well, the Nation pretends to address the issue, but misses the point...

However, the "the real issue" has barely been touched upon, and that is the voting public's inability to foster a sound constitution. We are more than able to write one, but what looks good on paper doesn't necessarily translate into a system that promotes true democracy, freedom of expression, government checks and balances and political accountability.

The real issue has not been touched on.

The military needs to be politically neutered. Until that happens, there will never be a constitution that can survive the coup-happy generals and their elite allies.

[Thai at Heart]

EDITORIAL

Referendum debate misses the key point

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Real issue isn't about putting the charter to a vote

In Thailand, constitutions have become political tools. Politicians exploit them or find loopholes in order to win and reclaim power. Our charters are never treated as representing common values that transcend ideologies or personalities.

-- The Nation 2015-05-16

No, the failure of Thai Constitutions and, in fact, all Thai laws is the direct result of the acceptance of poor legal craftsmanship. Every Thai law is fraught with vague and ambiguous generalities and the country lacks a real judicial system to properly interpret these laws. Politicians and government workers exploit the loopholes for their personal gain. Until Thai universities properly teach law to future drafters of charters and legislation, and the country implements a real judicial review branch of government, all charters and laws will continue to be failures.

This is not accidental. The whole system is set up to be subverted if necessary. This is what allowed Thaksin in in the first place. No one thought that someone like him would have the balls and ability to use these loopholes for his benefit.

They don't know how to write a universal constitution since they fundamentally don't believe in the equal rights of all Thais. Some are more equal than others.

[greenchair]

Most countries began with a floored system of law and governance . Over decades the floors have been tweaked and changed. Changing one law can take 2 or 3 generations. Even if the laws are not liked, they are trusted and depended upon , long past the politicians expiry date.

The law and education systems of thailand are constantly being destroyed completely with the vision of starting fresh,instead of slowly working through the core system and making changes along the way.

No new political system is ever going to be perfect.

They should have soldiered on with what they had and continued to fight for a better system. Eventually they would have found the right path.

Now it all begins again.

And again

And again