Thai politics: Changes to draft charter - who will call the shots?

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE
Changes to draft charter - who will call the shots?
NITIPOL KIRAVANICH

BANGKOK: -- THE KEY issue in finalising the draft charter at this point is perhaps who among relevant agencies will give in first.

For the past month, agencies related to the drafting process such as the Cabinet and the National Reform Council (NRC) have submitted their proposals to alter some articles included in the draft by the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC). The 2014 provisional constitution gives them the authority to do so.

The proposals of the two main agencies - the Cabinet and the NRC - contradicted what the charter drafters had laid down in their first finished draft.

For instance, the NRC's proposals include: The PM must be a member of the House of Representatives; adoption of a new mixed-member proportional (MMP) electoral system and its open-list system; and political-interest groups should be excluded from the parliamentary system.

The Cabinet has suggested eliminating new independent organisations such as a "National Ethical Committee", "Reform Movement Council", "Strategic Reform Committee", and a new election committee, and opposes the merging of the Office of the Ombudsman and National Human Rights Commission.

Both the Cabinet and the NRC have proposed scrapping Articles 181 and 182, which they say grant excessive power to the prime minister in proposing a bill.

However, unlike the NRC, the Cabinet has not opposed the idea of an "outsider PM". Surely the Cabinet works more closely with the National Council for Peace and Order than other appointed agencies such as the NRC, the CDC and the National Legislative Assembly, leading the public believe that the government and the NCPO would wish to leave open the possibility of some of their people becoming prime minister in the future if there is a coalition government formed under the new MMP electoral system.

The constitution drafters are now put in a tough position, under pressure to alter their draft. Their intentions and the principles behind the new charter are now facing opposition with suggestions either to alter or eliminate many of their proposals.

The real question is, who will blink first? actual question now is who will recede from their proposals and goalsand who would still be stubborn enough to stand their grounds, because all these matters give us a vivid understanding that while some get what they want the others will not

For example, if the CDC eliminates new reform bodies from the draft as requested by the Cabinet, the reformers will be demoralised from pursuing their national reform plans, and if the article on appointment of an outsider PM is scrapped from the draft, the Cabinet may not like it.

These complex issues lead to the next big poser. Should the charter drafters give more weight to the Cabinet or the reformers? Because it will be the NRC, not the Cabinet, that will be voting for approval or rejection of the draft.

If the new charter draft does not pass the NRC's approval process by September, both the CDC and the NRC will be dissolved and fresh charter drafters and reformers will be appointed.

The drafting of the new constitution will go back to Square 1, delaying the election for another year at least.

At the same time, the Cabinet derives its authority from its proximity to the junta. This places the CDC in a quandary to decide whose opinion counts the most.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Changes-to-draft-charter--who-will-call-the-shots-30261163.html


-- The Nation 2015-05-29

[tbthailand]

Changes to draft charter - who will call the shots?

the guy with the big guns, of course...

Come on Nation! this is not a burning issue... Stop being so daft. Everyone knows who will call the shots. The General is the head of the NCPO/Junta/PM and half a dozen other titles... The interim charter gives him carte blanche to rule as he likes....

So who the heck do you guys at The Nation think is going to call the shots?

[oneday]

"...At the same time, the Cabinet derives its authority from its proximity to the junta. This places the CDC in a quandary to decide whose opinion counts the most..."

Uh-huh...and there's where they all miss the point...

It's not whose opinion counts the most or who is scared of the NCPO the most, it's WHAT IS BEST FOR THE PEOPLE!!!

Put all the crucial questions to a vote and then go back and hammer out a constitution that reflects what the people want.

[Srikcir]

"This places the CDC in a quandary to decide whose opinion counts the most."

It is the plurality of the 30 million Thai people whose opinion counts the most - for BETTER OR WORSE.

That's how a democratic society operates: politically conflicted, unhappy, disgruntled, competitive, biased, opinionated, rigid, irrational, etc. So long as the rights and liberties of every Thai is respected and protected equally, it matters little whether there is a quandry among the Junta-clone organizations over the language of the draft 2015 Constitution.

All the prior Thai constitutions failed because the military refuses to concede its "extra-constitutional" powers to the sole possession of the Thai people. Perhaps the Thai people would be better served with a fundamental change that rescinds military authority over the people's sovereignty and holds the military accountable to the people.

[jcisco]

"This places the CDC in a quandary to decide whose opinion counts the most."

It is the plurality of the 30 million Thai people whose opinion counts the most - for BETTER OR WORSE.

That's how a democratic society operates: politically conflicted, unhappy, disgruntled, competitive, biased, opinionated, rigid, irrational, etc. So long as the rights and liberties of every Thai is respected and protected equally, it matters little whether there is a quandry among the Junta-clone organizations over the language of the draft 2015 Constitution.

All the prior Thai constitutions failed because the military refuses to concede its "extra-constitutional" powers to the sole possession of the Thai people. Perhaps the Thai people would be better served with a fundamental change that rescinds military authority over the people's sovereignty and holds the military accountable to the people.

And how do you propose that effective inversion of power, without any mechanism that can affect submission to authority from the most powerful group of citizens in the country bar no other. That is the catch 22 and since it appears that the army, navy and airforce are not capable of being a deterrence against other branches of military either in capability or due to be long term associates across decades of cohorts there is no way out there like many democracies hedge their military's power.