New Thai Charter: Non-elected Senate without impeachment powers 'okay'

[webfact]

NEW CHARTER
Non-elected Senate without impeachment powers 'okay'
KASAMAKORN CHANWANPEN
THE NATION

Commentators still want CDC to clarify exact authority, duties of Senators

BANGKOK: -- POLITICAL critics find the concept of having non-elected senators acceptable, provided they are not allowed to impeach political office holders.

This comment came after the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC)'s revealed its plan to deprive the Senate of its authority to impeach politicians in a bid to prevent another so-called "spouse" Parliament, where politicians have their kin and close friends run for Senate seats to protect their interests.

Suriyasai Katasila, director of Rangsit University's Thailand Reform Institute, said the idea of appointed senators was acceptable provided they have no impeachment authority. He explained that if senators were to be given the authority to impeach elected politicians, then they would first have to be linked with voters.

However, he said, before anything is done, the CDC first has to disclose exactly what authorities and duties the Senate will be given and how senators will be recruited.

He said they could be recruited via indirect election or selection and that different professional groups could also select their representatives for the Senate. The only drawback to this, he said, was that selecting senators might provoke criticism from those people who are fond of elections.

Sukhum Nualsakul, a former rector of Ramkhamhaeng University, also said he was okay with non-elected senators with no impeachment authority, adding that it would be very unfair if non-elected members of the upper House are allowed to impeach those elected in the lower House.

He explained that though this move was to do away with the "spouse" Parliament, the selection of senators should not be done by a handful of people. He said it would be better if some public participation was allowed, even though there is no direct election.

Like Suriyasai, Sukhum said senators could be selected or indirectly elected from different professions.

However, CDC's new spokesman Chartchai na Chiangmai said the commission has yet to decide on the origin of the Senate. The matter was sensitive and required prudent consideration, he explained, adding that the panel was of the opinion that senators should be mature in the sense that they were well rounded and prudent. And since they would be responsible for passing laws and approving independent organisations and their agents, they would also have to be independent and free of any influence, he said.

He said the CDC has not ruled out the idea of having professional groups choose their representatives in the Senate, though they are concerned that the groups may not be totally inclusive.

Chartchai, a political scientist from National Institute of Development Administration who has been given the job of explaining technical points on the draft charter to the public, explained that this is a dynamic society where new professions emerge daily. Hence, it would be difficult to ensure each profession is represented in the Senate. He also revealed that impeachment powers might be transferred to the judiciary.

Meanwhile, former Democrat MP Nipit Intrasombat said it would be good if impeachment powers were transferred to the judiciary because senators were usually too close to politicians, which made impeachment difficult in reality. He also said he had no problem with having non-elected agencies impeach officials elected by the people, adding that the impeachment process had a lot to do with hearing the testimonies of witnesses. So, he said, the judiciary would do a better job anyway.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Non-elected-Senate-without-impeachment-powers-okay-30273279.html


-- The Nation 2015-11-19

[chainarong]

All the CDC has to recognize is that to have Democratic Elections you need the people to participate in electing all levels of parliamentary candidates and it is very simple, you have two voting papers one coloured red the other yellow on one colour is the candidates for the Senate the other for the Lower House candidates simple really, the CDC method is not only alarming it gives the impression that the Military still want to go back in history and rule Thailand again , perhaps they should study Thailand's history more thoroughly either that or The CDC as a bad case of CRAFT...................... .

[Srikcir]

I agree with chainarong by simply have the senate elected. If it is going to be responsible for passing laws and approving independent organisations and their agents, it should be representative of the Thai people similar to the House.

But the CDC disdains anything reflecting Western cultures (ignoring the Japanese Diet) and an unelected senate seems a non-negotiable provision. That's okay really as there are unelected senate-like organizations in bicameral legislatures in constitutional monarchies throughout the world such as the House of Lords in UK. But the power of those senates is very limited, largely advisory and cannot overrule decisions of elected parliament mininsters!

Shifting impeachment authority to a unelected judiciary solves nothing except to further nontransparency, conflict of interest and divergence from citizens self-determination. CDC has made it cleat that it has an agenda to isolate Thai constituency from parts of government. That should work well with an unelected PM!

[Mudcrab]

I like the Aussie system.

Senators elected for twice as long as the lower house but only half are up for election at the same time as the lower house.

The senate can reject legislation.

If the same piece of legislation is rejected twice this gives the prime minister a trigger for a double dissolution (his choice to use it), i.e. both the lower house and the complete senate go to election.

Seems to keep them fairly honest since a very unpopular prime minister may find himself turfed out if he can't get his legislation through the senate and goes the double dissolution route.

generally this means "bad" legislation must be modified by negotiation to be able to pass.