Referendum on new charter: A DECEPTIVELY SIMPLE issue

[webfact]

THAI TALK
Referendum on new charter: A DECEPTIVELY SIMPLE issue

BANGKOK: -- Premier Prayut Chan-o-cha was initially against holding a referendum on the new constitution draft, citing the estimated Bt3 billion budget for the vote which, he said, could be more fruitfully spent elsewhere.

Then, he changed his tone after the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) chaired by Borwornsak Uwanno voted unanimously to go for it. One of the five reasons cited by the CDC was obvious: The last constitution of 2007 had been put into force following a referendum. Last year's coup tore it up. Now that a new charter is to be drawn up in its place, it's only fair and logical that the people should be asked once again whether they approve the latest version.

The premier, with absolute power as head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), suddenly softened his stance on the issue. But then, he didn't exactly say he was going along with the suggestion. Instead, General Prayut put the matter on the table at a joint meeting of the NCPO and the Cabinet on Wednesday. He wasn't going to make that decision on his own. Obviously, he wanted to keep his options open.

Then came the official decision: Yes, a referendum would be held after all.

The referendum, after all, is a double-edged sword. It could help legitimise the new constitution. But it could also serve to derail a controversial charter draft.

Things aren't as simple as they seem. The concept of a referendum wasn't included in the interim constitution after the coup was staged. And if the draft of a new constitution is to be put to a public vote, relevant laws and regulations have to be amended.

To make the necessary changes to the interim charter to get the referendum off the ground, the government and other related agencies will have to debate the relevant details. It's not just deciding to have a referendum that is at the core of the issue. Once the matter is raised, the Cabinet will have to debate on how the referendum is to be held.

That's where the trouble begins. The charter drafters, in adopting the decision to incorporate a referendum in the process, voted not to go into detail on how the public opinion vote will be held, arguing that it wasn't the CDC's responsibility to draw up the "operation plan". The committee ruled that the Cabinet will have to work on the nitty-gritty of the exercise.

Once the Cabinet and the NCPO sit down to thrash out the details, a new round of controversy will undoubtedly be kicked off. The first and most important question is: What question or questions are to be put forward in the referendum?

Will it be a simple "Yes or No" referendum? In that case, the 47 million eligible voters will be asked to simply tick the Yes or No column. But if only one question were to be asked in the referendum, what would it be?

The obvious, but not necessarily satisfactory question, is: Do you accept the draft of the new constitution as is passed by the National Reform Council (NRC)?

While that may sound simple, such a simplistic question would draw new questions from some segments of the general public, who may counter with their own questions: What if we agree with certain clauses and oppose other provisions in the draft?

If the wrong question is put forward, the voters may conclude that the outcome of the referendum can't boost the legitimacy of the new charter.

Probably the most hotly challenged clauses are related to the "open list" formula to replace the "party list" system - and whether a non-MP can become prime minister - as well as whether senators should be directly or indirectly elected to Parliament. Quite a few people would certainly demand the right to have a say on those issues before the constitution is put into effect.

But if all the controversial issues being debated among the drafters and commentators are to be put forward for the referendum, the vote could well turn into a cumbersome exercise that ignites yet more controversies among the general public.

One thing is certain: The election date will have to be postponed now that the referendum process has been put into motion. As things stand now, the NRC will probably vote on the new draft in September, this year. Then, if everything is on course, the referendum will likely be held in late December, this year, or January.

That means an election can't be held until the middle of 2016, at the earliest - barring any last-minute "inconveniences" or unexpected "accidents", that is.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Referendum-on-new-charter-A-DECEPTIVELY-SIMPLE-iss-30260556.html


-- The Nation 2015-05-21

[FangFerang]

It is literally like watching people walk through a mine field.

[Srikcir]

A referendum is not guaranteed, only allegedly being considered by the NCPO. No doubt the NCPO wanted to follow the same path as with the 1997 draft Constitution:

Have the Junta-appointed legislative body vote on it as a whole, pass it, and forward for royal endorsement as the law of the land.

No need to amend the Interim Charter nor for Prayut to invoke Article 44 for a referendum. Elections could be held as early as December 2015.

SIMPLE.

[wowfactor10]

Lot of money and time for a simple referendum.....

I sure it can be done way cheaper and faster by modernising anyway who cares