Public referendum for Thai charter draft to be held

[webfact]

NEW CONSTITUTION
Public referendum for charter draft to be held

BANGKOK: -- A joint meeting of National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) and the Cabinet have agreed on Tuesday that the 2014 provisional constitution be amended to allow the hosting of public referendum on the charter draft.

The meeting was chaired by Prayut Chan-o-cha who holds positions of the prime minister and the NCPO chief.

Prayut was quoted as saying the public referendum will delay the timeframe of the road map that the NCPO set after the coup in May last year.

The NCPO will not interfere with the charter draft as the National Reform Committee is being responsible for it.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Public-referendum-for-charter-draft-to-be-held-30260439.html


-- The Nation 2015-05-19

[Mango Bob]

About time.

[BangkokGastronaut]

The NCPO will not interfere with the charter draft as the National Reform Committee is being responsible for it.

Nothing is ever quite what it seems. The good general will not let that happen.

[candide]

If a referendum ever happens, there is a key question. What will be the alternative if the constutution is rejected? Go back to the 1997 or 2007 constitution? Or will another puppet committee work on a similar project with no change on the basic orientations (power to appointed people rather than elected people)?

[smutcakes]

If a referendum ever happens, there is a key question. What will be the alternative if the constutution is rejected? Go back to the 1997 or 2007 constitution? Or will another puppet committee work on a similar project with no change on the basic orientations (power to appointed people rather than elected people)?

Well of course it is, its win win for the Junta, unless they put another Constitution up as an alternative. A relevant article regarding this in the other paper today.

[Docno]

In other news media, this was presented as an excuse for delaying elections still further. Bottom-line is that there will not be any elections until the 'period of uncertainty' has passed (say no more), and we will only see delaying tactics until then.

[JAG]

And once certainty has been re-established, why then, with certainty returned, along no doubt with happiness, there will be no need for elections.

[Srikcir]

So Prayut's claim that the NLA must approve an amendment to the Interim Charter to provide for a referendum was nonsense.

It was obvious that Article 44 gave such power to the NCPO. But why did Prayut continue to deny such power even as he repeatedly exercised it?

[ksamuiguy]

What was wrong with the 2007 Constitution?

[englishoak]

They are planning to distribute 47 MILLION copies of proposed constitution to the public... .

Election delayed until some time in 2017 at the very earliest.

Just as most expected.

[webfact]

CONSTITUTION DRAFTING
Cabinet agrees to charter referendum
KRIS BHROMSUTHI,
WIRAJ SRIPONG
THE NATION



Public could vote on new constitution in January

BANGKOK: -- A NATIONAL referendum on the draft charter could possibly start on January 16, after the Cabinet and National Council for Peace and Order finally gave it their blessing, Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-Ngam told reporters.

Experts believe the move was made to give the draft charter legitimacy.

Speaking after a meeting of the Cabinet and junta, Wissanu said the provisional constitution would have to be amended to pave way for the process.

The proposal for the amendment would be sent to the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) by the end of next month. The NLA would have 15 days to deliberate and vote on it. If the amendment is passed, the Election Commission (EC) will begin organising the referendum.

About 47 million copies of the draft charter need be printed and distributed nationwide. Then the public will need two or three months to study and decide how to vote on it. The whole process would take three to four months.

The referendum could be held in January of next year. A minimum turnout of 80 per cent will be needed to legitimatise the result.

If the charter passes, the election could be held in August or September of next year.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha cautioned, however, that a vote on the charter was still not a sure thing.

There may be many steps along the way and it might not occur at all if the draft charter is rejected by the National Reform Council (NRC).

"I would like to ask reporters not to over-analyse the issue or make sweeping assumptions. The next step in the charter drafting process is whether the draft charter will be approved by the NRC, and whether there is still a need to further amend it before the NRC approves."

The framers have until July 23 to submit the complete draft charter to the NRC, so that gives them less than two months to gather as much public opinion on it as possible and make all necessary changes to contentious articles.

Prayut conceded that the general election would be delayed by about three months as a result.

There is also public debate on whether the vote should be just on the whole charter, or on sections and articles that are considered controversial.

Prayut said it would be up to the EC to consider the details.

No other alternative: Jade

Observers believe the decision to allow a referendum on the proposed charter stemmed from the need to show broad support for it.

"There is no other alternative, as it is a matter of legitimacy for the constitution," Jade Donavanik, a member of the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), said.

The NCPO, like their military predecessors who staged the coup in 2006, needs to legitimise the draft charter |by holding a referendum, |as the drafting process itself was undemocratic.

"A sizeable group of people have expressed their will to have their say (on whether to accept the draft charter)," Attasit Pankaew, a political science lecturer at Thammasat University, said.

The draft charter had brought up the possibility of a referendum if needed, so it would be contradictory to not allow that to happen.

Besides what the referendum should look like, voters should be informed about the way it would be held, including the consequence of rejecting it. Either the people accept or deny the draft. If rejected, the drafting process should begin anew.

"Should voters reject the draft, there should be alternatives to it, either by replacing it older constitutions or doing the whole drafting process all over again," he said.

Despite the ban on political gatherings of five or more people, experts said politicians and people should be able to meet and debate the merits and faults of the draft charter.

Both experts agreed that all stakeholders - whether voters or politicians from all spectrums - should be allowed to discuss and express their views.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Cabinet-agrees-to-charter-referendum-30260501.html


-- The Nation 2015-05-20

[NongKhaiKid]

BBC is carrying a very interesting report about a general election being delayed..

A staff member of the Asian Institute of the University of Tasmania was interviewed and was VERY pointed in his thoughts on how things will go making it clear his view is that the military will hang onto power.

Edited May 19, 2015 by NongKhaiKid

[cornishcarlos]

A minimum turnout of 80% ? 80% of who ?

What elections ever get 80% turnout !!

[englishoak]

About 47 million copies of the draft charter need be printed and distributed nationwide. Then the public will need two or three months to study and decide how to vote on it. The whole process would take three to four months.

The referendum could be held in January of next year. A minimum turnout of 80 per cent will be needed to legitimatise the result.

1 How many pages are the copies x 47 million ? im getting a vision of war and peace here but much less interesting, how will they stay awake to digest it ?

2 Do they really think 80% will turn out for a referendum ? Ive not read anywhere its mandatory to take part and if its not it wont be 80%, unless they say it is of course.

There isnt going to be any elections anytime soon imo, ahh well nevermind , saves having another coup in the next year or so i suppose.

Edited May 19, 2015 by englishoak

[NongKhaiKid]

About 47 million copies of the draft charter need be printed and distributed nationwide. Then the public will need two or three months to study and decide how to vote on it. The whole process would take three to four months.

The referendum could be held in January of next year. A minimum turnout of 80 per cent will be needed to legitimatise the result.

1 How many pages are the copies x 47 million ? im getting a vision of war and peace here but much less interesting, how will they stay awake to digest it ?

2 Do they really think 80% will turn out for a referendum ? Ive not read anywhere its mandatory to take part and if its not it wont be 80%, unless they say it is of course.

There isnt going to be any elections anytime soon imo, ahh well nevermind , saves having another coup in the next year or so i suppose.

No problem with turnout and result figures and if there's any possibility a couple of TAT's top ' statisticians ' can be seconded to help with the presentation.

Hope they won't blow their cover by claiming voters ' flocked '' to the polls.

[FangFerang]

I don't think there will be an election until after Yingluk is found guilty and a "cooling off period" happens afterward...just to make sure no insurgents raise a stink.....

This all looks like an A Team plan, with the elites smoking cigars right now and muttering, "I love it when a plan comes together."

"Me, too."

"Me, three."

[Fat Haggis]

Even Stevie Wonder seen this coming so it isn't a surprise at all.

Many here predicted what would happen and the time frames, and I've stated all along, this has nothing to do with reforms or reconciliation it's about the snouts in the trough when the day arrives.

The problem with having all your ducks in a row, it makes it easier to hunt them and shoot them down ?

[Anthony5]

I have said it before, and will say it again, superman doesn't want a referendum because there are so many clauses in that nobody with a conscience would ever accept.

But since he is losing it and know that there will be uproars if he doesn't, he make the conditions so tough that they can not be met.

[emilymat]

Also, a decision is to be made as to whether or not to have the vote on the whole charter or simply 'clauses considered to be controversial'.

Who makes the decision on what that means.? I'm with Nongkhai Kid here, I think an election is light years away.

[meltingpot2015]

Yes, there needs to be a referendum on the draft charter. If not anything to give the charter legitimacy.

Although the General does not seem too fond of it.

Besides what the referendum should look like, voters should be informed about the way it would be held, including the consequence of rejecting it.

Yes voters need to be aware of the consequences of rejecting the draft charter.

"Should voters reject the draft, there should be alternatives to it, either by replacing it older constitutions or doing the whole drafting process all over again," he said.

"replacing it with older constitutions"?, has that ever happened in Thailand?. Where a draft charter was rejected at a referendum, it has been replaced with an older constitution and put to a referendum?.

I wonder if that means, if the draft charter is rejected at a referendum, without starting the whole process again, appointing new members for the drafting comittee etc, (lets not forget the general is running out of members to appoint to the drafting committee), a referendum is held to ask "would you prefer the a) 1997, 2007, c)1978, or d) 1991 constitution. (possibly (e) none of the above - to make it like a multiple choice exam)

The 1978 constitution seems to have lasted the longest in modern times.

[smedly]

Ordinarily I support the idea of a referendum but I don't believe it will work in this case, this new charter is radical in the sense that it is designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse, it will also hold MP's and government highly responsible for their actions and ultimately transparent to the public, powerful systems and independent institutions will be put in place to maintain checks and balances all of which I agree 100%, influential people will not want it as it will put an end to their pocket lining aspirations which were so easy in the past.

The problem is that there will be many losers mostly those that have been creaming and thieving from the Thai public for years so there will be huge opposition to it ever passing a referendum, but for those that will oppose it the alternative is also just as bad as the current administration will be in office for another extended period which means many of them could become the focus of further investigation prosecution and conviction for their past wrong doings as we can clearly see going on currently.

[heybruce]

What was wrong with the 2007 Constitution?

People voted for the PTP in spite of Prayuth warning them to "vote carefully". So the military wants a constitution that renders elected officials powerless, that way it doesn't matter who the people vote for.

[Fat Haggis]

Smedly, how can you advocate the stamping out of corruption and power abuse, when it's still happening within the current Junta, of which there's no transparency, and they have a complete amnesty?

An Amnesty akin to that that brought the protestors in their hundreds of thousands onto the streets in 2013/2014?

That in itself is an abuse of power.

[heybruce]

Ordinarily I support the idea of a referendum but I don't believe it will work in this case, this new charter is radical in the sense that it is designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse, it will also hold MP's and government highly responsible for their actions and ultimately transparent to the public, powerful systems and independent institutions will be put in place to maintain checks and balances all of which I agree 100%, influential people will not want it as it will put an end to their pocket lining aspirations which were so easy in the past.

The problem is that there will be many losers mostly those that have been creaming and thieving from the Thai public for years so there will be huge opposition to it ever passing a referendum, but for those that will oppose it the alternative is also just as bad as the current administration will be in office for another extended period which means many of them could become the focus of further investigation prosecution and conviction for their past wrong doings as we can clearly see going on currently.

Designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse? No, it moves power from elected officials to unelected officials who are not accountable to the voters.

Ultimately transparent to the public? Help me out, how is this charter transparent? Where does it mandate that government meetings minutes and attendees be made public, government spending be done through open competitive bidding on contracts, and the government be periodically audited and results published?

Many people think accountability is all that is needed to stamp out corruption. They're wrong. Accountability is necessary, but far from sufficient. If you leave a stack of cash unguarded and easily accessible someone is going to steal it no matter how stiff the penalties against theft. Similarly if government deals are negotiated and spending commitments made behind closed doors, people will cut deals that benefit themselves, not the country.

The military exhibits this more than any other component of government. Military contracts are negotiated behind closed doors and generals get rich. The fact that there is no accountability, since no government dares investigate or audit this coup prone military, makes the problem worse. Under the junta this is being extended to all of the government. In all the stories about big government spending plans, has the phrase "awarded through open, competitive bidding" been mentioned? Yet some people expect this self-serving military to lead the way in eliminating corruption. Fat chance.

[smutcakes]

Ordinarily I support the idea of a referendum but I don't believe it will work in this case, this new charter is radical in the sense that it is designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse, it will also hold MP's and government highly responsible for their actions and ultimately transparent to the public, powerful systems and independent institutions will be put in place to maintain checks and balances all of which I agree 100%, influential people will not want it as it will put an end to their pocket lining aspirations which were so easy in the past.

The problem is that there will be many losers mostly those that have been creaming and thieving from the Thai public for years so there will be huge opposition to it ever passing a referendum, but for those that will oppose it the alternative is also just as bad as the current administration will be in office for another extended period which means many of them could become the focus of further investigation prosecution and conviction for their past wrong doings as we can clearly see going on currently.

You have obviously read all the new Constitution in depth, perhaps you could enlighten us on the parts of it which are designed to stamp out corruption and abuse of power?

[smedly]

Ordinarily I support the idea of a referendum but I don't believe it will work in this case, this new charter is radical in the sense that it is designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse, it will also hold MP's and government highly responsible for their actions and ultimately transparent to the public, powerful systems and independent institutions will be put in place to maintain checks and balances all of which I agree 100%, influential people will not want it as it will put an end to their pocket lining aspirations which were so easy in the past.

The problem is that there will be many losers mostly those that have been creaming and thieving from the Thai public for years so there will be huge opposition to it ever passing a referendum, but for those that will oppose it the alternative is also just as bad as the current administration will be in office for another extended period which means many of them could become the focus of further investigation prosecution and conviction for their past wrong doings as we can clearly see going on currently.

Designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse? No, it moves power from elected officials to unelected officials who are not accountable to the voters.

Ultimately transparent to the public? Help me out, how is this charter transparent? Where does it mandate that government meetings minutes and attendees be made public, government spending be done through open competitive bidding on contracts, and the government be periodically audited and results published?

Many people think accountability is all that is needed to stamp out corruption. They're wrong. Accountability is necessary, but far from sufficient. If you leave a stack of cash unguarded and easily accessible someone is going to steal it no matter how stiff the penalties against theft. Similarly if government deals are negotiated and spending commitments made behind closed doors, people will cut deals that benefit themselves, not the country.

The military exhibits this more than any other component of government. Military contracts are negotiated behind closed doors and generals get rich. The fact that there is no accountability, since no government dares investigate or audit this coup prone military, makes the problem worse. Under the junta this is being extended to all of the government. In all the stories about big government spending plans, has the phrase "awarded through open, competitive bidding" been mentioned? Yet some people expect this self-serving military to lead the way in eliminating corruption. Fat chance.

you are welcome to your opinion but I disagree , no democratic government in the world is given a mandate to do as they please, they all have to work within a framework of law and rules, up to now Thailands elected governments have been able to pretty much do as they please or try too which is exactly why the people rise up and take to the streets or the military has to step in, that is exactly were previous constitutions have failed by allowing such abuse

Not saying the charter is or isn't transparent but future Governments will be/need to be, they will no longer be able to lie to the people as was seen many times during PTP time in office

The most recent revelations of corruption in government and public office is shocking to say the least and it must be stopped one way or the other

As for the military - for now a necessary evil until the political system no longer requires intervention which is why it is so important this charter is right and puts an end to this endless cycle of abuse most recently by Thaksin

[smedly]

Smedly, how can you advocate the stamping out of corruption and power abuse, when it's still happening within the current Junta, of which there's no transparency, and they have a complete amnesty?

An Amnesty akin to that that brought the protestors in their hundreds of thousands onto the streets in 2013/2014?

That in itself is an abuse of power.

really please give examples of your claims or is that just your opinion

[smutcakes]

Ordinarily I support the idea of a referendum but I don't believe it will work in this case, this new charter is radical in the sense that it is designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse, it will also hold MP's and government highly responsible for their actions and ultimately transparent to the public, powerful systems and independent institutions will be put in place to maintain checks and balances all of which I agree 100%, influential people will not want it as it will put an end to their pocket lining aspirations which were so easy in the past.

The problem is that there will be many losers mostly those that have been creaming and thieving from the Thai public for years so there will be huge opposition to it ever passing a referendum, but for those that will oppose it the alternative is also just as bad as the current administration will be in office for another extended period which means many of them could become the focus of further investigation prosecution and conviction for their past wrong doings as we can clearly see going on currently.

Designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse? No, it moves power from elected officials to unelected officials who are not accountable to the voters.

Ultimately transparent to the public? Help me out, how is this charter transparent? Where does it mandate that government meetings minutes and attendees be made public, government spending be done through open competitive bidding on contracts, and the government be periodically audited and results published?

Many people think accountability is all that is needed to stamp out corruption. They're wrong. Accountability is necessary, but far from sufficient. If you leave a stack of cash unguarded and easily accessible someone is going to steal it no matter how stiff the penalties against theft. Similarly if government deals are negotiated and spending commitments made behind closed doors, people will cut deals that benefit themselves, not the country.

The military exhibits this more than any other component of government. Military contracts are negotiated behind closed doors and generals get rich. The fact that there is no accountability, since no government dares investigate or audit this coup prone military, makes the problem worse. Under the junta this is being extended to all of the government. In all the stories about big government spending plans, has the phrase "awarded through open, competitive bidding" been mentioned? Yet some people expect this self-serving military to lead the way in eliminating corruption. Fat chance.

you are welcome to your opinion but I disagree , no democratic government in the world is given a mandate to do as they please, they all have to work within a framework of law and rules, up to now Thailands elected governments have been able to pretty much do as they please or try too which is exactly why the people rise up and take to the streets or the military has to step in, that is exactly were previous constitutions have failed by allowing such abuse

Not saying the charter is or isn't transparent but future Governments will be/need to be, they will no longer be able to lie to the people as was seen many times during PTP time in office

The most recent revelations of corruption in government and public office is shocking to say the least and it must be stopped one way or the other

As for the military - for now a necessary evil until the political system no longer requires intervention which is why it is so important this charter is right and puts an end to this endless cycle of abuse most recently by Thaksin

Smedly,can you honestly sit behind your computer and say this is a proper and concerted effort at eradicating corruption?Honestly?

[rubl]

Interesting. A while ago the junta was 'universally' condemned (on TVF that is) to refuse arranging a referendum. Now it's about the procedure, the draft constitution was already torn to pieces. What's next?

[smedly]

Ordinarily I support the idea of a referendum but I don't believe it will work in this case, this new charter is radical in the sense that it is designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse, it will also hold MP's and government highly responsible for their actions and ultimately transparent to the public, powerful systems and independent institutions will be put in place to maintain checks and balances all of which I agree 100%, influential people will not want it as it will put an end to their pocket lining aspirations which were so easy in the past.

The problem is that there will be many losers mostly those that have been creaming and thieving from the Thai public for years so there will be huge opposition to it ever passing a referendum, but for those that will oppose it the alternative is also just as bad as the current administration will be in office for another extended period which means many of them could become the focus of further investigation prosecution and conviction for their past wrong doings as we can clearly see going on currently.

Designed to stamp out corruption and power abuse? No, it moves power from elected officials to unelected officials who are not accountable to the voters.

Ultimately transparent to the public? Help me out, how is this charter transparent? Where does it mandate that government meetings minutes and attendees be made public, government spending be done through open competitive bidding on contracts, and the government be periodically audited and results published?

Many people think accountability is all that is needed to stamp out corruption. They're wrong. Accountability is necessary, but far from sufficient. If you leave a stack of cash unguarded and easily accessible someone is going to steal it no matter how stiff the penalties against theft. Similarly if government deals are negotiated and spending commitments made behind closed doors, people will cut deals that benefit themselves, not the country.

The military exhibits this more than any other component of government. Military contracts are negotiated behind closed doors and generals get rich. The fact that there is no accountability, since no government dares investigate or audit this coup prone military, makes the problem worse. Under the junta this is being extended to all of the government. In all the stories about big government spending plans, has the phrase "awarded through open, competitive bidding" been mentioned? Yet some people expect this self-serving military to lead the way in eliminating corruption. Fat chance.

you are welcome to your opinion but I disagree , no democratic government in the world is given a mandate to do as they please, they all have to work within a framework of law and rules, up to now Thailands elected governments have been able to pretty much do as they please or try too which is exactly why the people rise up and take to the streets or the military has to step in, that is exactly were previous constitutions have failed by allowing such abuse

Not saying the charter is or isn't transparent but future Governments will be/need to be, they will no longer be able to lie to the people as was seen many times during PTP time in office

The most recent revelations of corruption in government and public office is shocking to say the least and it must be stopped one way or the other

As for the military - for now a necessary evil until the political system no longer requires intervention which is why it is so important this charter is right and puts an end to this endless cycle of abuse most recently by Thaksin

Smedly,can you honestly sit behind your computer and say this is a proper and concerted effort at eradicating corruption?Honestly?

you seem to spend all of you time being critical of others on this forum but failing to offer anything to the discussion, maybe you can dream something up instead of poking your rhetoric at others that do