Thai charter drafters review the aptness of Article 7

[webfact]

NEW CONSTITUTION
Charter drafters review the aptness of Article 7
KASAMAKORN CHANWANPEN
THE NATION

Commission set up sub-panel to study issues on reconciliation

BANGKOK: -- THE CONSTITUTION Drafting Commission is looking to revise the content of the new charter including the controversial Article 7 that provides for a royally appointed prime minister.

CDC spokesman Amorn Wanichwiwatana said yesterday that Article 7 stated that when no provision in the charter could solve a political problem, it should be left to tradition. He said the CDC had questioned whether such a vague provision needed to be revisited and whether it should be persisted with at all in the new constitution.

There were several attempts in the past by political groups to ask His Majesty the King to exercise his power under the article for their purposes.

Amorn said Article 7 was still the subject of a debate at the meeting and had been set aside for later deliberation, while review of all other articles concerning the monarchy institution had already been done by the drafters and they remained unchanged.

So far, the CDC has gone through at least 26 articles of the new constitution, the spokesman said.

Regarding the working process, Amorn said the CDC meeting had resolved to set up a subcommittee to study issues facing the reconciliation process.

He said the body was tasked with studying and analysing problems concerning reconciliation, the causes of conflicts, and the damage caused.

The Pheu Thai Party yesterday issued a statement on the new round of charter drafting, urging the CDC members to have a clear goal for the country to be ruled as a democracy and constitutional monarchy to promote political stability.

The party also complained that the framework outlined by the junta and Article 35 of the interim charter were hindering democracy.

Also, it said the panel should write a concise and short charter with only a few chapters and articles so that it would be easy for people to understand, especially the clauses stipulating the rights or benefits of the people.

It also suggested that the authorities should use the 1997 or 2007 charter should the new draft fail to pass a national referendum.

In a related development yesterday, the drafting panel met with the National Anti-Corruption Commission to discuss the problems preventing them from fulfilling their duties concerning the legal provisions.

An NACC commissioner, Vicha Mahakhun, said before the meeting that the agency wanted to regain its authority as stipulated in the 2007 charter.

He said the Office of the Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC) should be under the same umbrella as the NACC and the two bodies should work closely together.

The anti-graft body had issued a statement earlier that a change to its authority would make it difficult to tackle corruption because the NACC would only be authorised to interrogate and rule on middle-ranking bureaucrats while officials holding the rank of director or higher would be under the authority of the PACC.

However, fraud often involved culprits from many sectors, including politicians, and public-sector corruption could involve public servants from many different levels. Hence, the NACC was removed from a comprehensive investigation process.

Also, he said he wished to see the charter facilitate better cooperation among independent agencies.

Vicha said the slow work flow about which many agencies complain was due to the vagueness of their duties.

It would be better if the charter could make all of them work well together and not have overlapping jobs.

Today, the panel will hold discussions with another independent agency and go on with writing the charter.

Meanwhile, Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan backed Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha on the proposed National Strategic Reform and Reconciliation Committee, or the "crisis" panel. Prawit, who is also a deputy PM, said the panel would be a mechanism to help prevent the country from reaching a dead end and to move forward.

"I want people to live together happily and to see the conflicts end. From now on, [there should be] no more coups - let the political parties solve their own problems," he said.

Regarding another controversial point to be inserted in the new charter draft about allowing an "outsider" or a non-MP prime minister, Prawit said it all depended on voters, as the charter draft would need to pass a national referendum.

"I insist that no NCPO [National Council for Peace and Order] member, including the prime minister and me, will enter politics. Please don't forget that if MPs won't invite an outsider PM, how one can become [the PM]?" he said.

Prawit said such a clause, if it were incorporated in the draft, would be a way to prevent a future crisis.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Charter-drafters-review-the-aptness-of-Article-7-30270934.html


-- The Nation 2015-10-15

[sawadee1947]

pipe dreams I would say. But you never know. Hope will die last....

[Just1Voice]

The military and the "elites" want Article 7, as this will give the a "legal means" to take over the government - for the good of the people, of course - anytime they don't like the way things are going.

[FangFerang]

I cannot comment on this story at all. I would have to write a book, and it would probably be banned.

[oneday]

Nothing about article 7 is appropriate for a Democracy.

[Just1Voice]

Nothing about article 7 is appropriate for a Democracy.

Nothing about this government is appropriate for a Democracy.

[Srikcir]

Actually the 1997, 2007 and draft 2015 Constitutions state "constitutional practice in the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State." There is no reference to "tradition" per se but constitutional practice is just as vague.

What constitutes constitutional practice might be ultimately decided by the Supreme Court. Since Thailand follows common law that is guided by tradition, culture and custom, the Supreme Court has a lot of independent discretion on its rulings. It is possible, therefore, that the Constitutional Court could rule that installation of an unelected PM follows tradition and legal.

Such an option may explain why language in Article 68 of the 2007 Constitution was deleted in the draft 2015 Constitution:

"No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution."