Meechai says future elections are not winners take all affairs

[webfact]

Meechai says future elections are not winners take all affairs



BANGKOK: -- Future elections will not be winners take all affairs as every vote counts and the voices of the minority in the parliament will be respected, said Constitution Drafting Committee chairman Meechai Ruchupan as he presented a big picture of the draft constitution to the media yesterday (Sunday).

The concept of the right of the minority was applied in constitutional amendments in a way that although the majority vote will dictate charter amendments, the minority vote will be recognized, said Meechai.

On matters of importance of public interest such as environmental issues, he explained that the draft charter will make it compulsory for the state to let the public to participate in decision-making process in the exploitation of natural resources.

The CDC chairman said the draft charter is especially tough against corruption with the entire cabinet or the entire parliament being held accountable for their policies and that they may be fired if the policies backfire and cause extensive damage to the state.

The stringent provisions may make it difficult for the next government to do its job and if the provisions can help preventing corruption, Meechai said they are worth enforcing.

Explaining why Buddhism is not made national religion in the draft charter, Mr Meechai said the CDC asked why Buddhism needs to be declared national religion as most people believe that there is nothing which can prevent Buddhism from being undermined.

Instead of writing the draft in a way of making Buddhism a national religion which is pointless anyway, he said the draft was crafted in a way that the state is duty-bound to protect Buddhism from all forms of subversion.
Mr Meechai admitted that he could not tell for sure that the draft charter would be endorsed in a national referendum.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/content/146974


-- Thai PBS 2016-01-18

[noitom]

New rules by Meechai as he goes along.

[jaywalker]

I wish them luck with their new constitution. Maybe this one will stick.

[JAG]

It certainly will not be a "winner takes all affair" If there is to be an election, in any recognisable form, the result will be largely irrelevant.These proposals will ensure that power will remain in the same hands as at present.

Personally I am sceptical that there will be an election, I suspect that the next government (which will be in effect the same as this government) will enter office with the acclamation of Suthep's great movement, claiming overwhelming popular support but untested at the polls.

Edited January 17, 2016 by JAG

[LannaGuy]

it will be Hobson's Choice all the way

[Squeegee]

There are minorities and then there are minorities.

Meanwhile, ol' Meechai and countless other undead make me realize Thailand is not the lunatics taking over the asylum but the geriatrics managing the retirement home.

[rubl]

I come from a country where there's never really a party with majority of seats, only a party being largest resulting in a coalition government. The Electoral System is proportional representation. Seems Thailand may get a, somewhat watered down' similar setup

[deckape]

Meechai says future elections are not winners take all affairs

In Thailand the winner does, indeed, take all.

[MZurf]

I come from a country where there's never really a party with majority of seats, only a party being largest resulting in a coalition government. The Electoral System is proportional representation. Seems Thailand may get a, somewhat watered down' similar setup

If by watered down you mean a lame duck government controlled by unelected and unaccountable bodies then yes, you're absolutely right.

[JAG]

I come from a country where there's never really a party with majority of seats, only a party being largest resulting in a coalition government. The Electoral System is proportional representation. Seems Thailand may get a, somewhat watered down' similar setup

In your country whatever coalition is out together by the elected parliament rules the country, does it not.

What is proposed here makes unelected bodies the effective rulers, and removes the elected government from power.

Not so much watered down as held under water until it drowns.

[Ichabod]

Elections will not be winner-take-all, but coups will still be.

[worgeordie]

The winners that take all,will be those that hand out the most money,

then when in power do everything to recoup and enrich themselves.

regards Worgeordie

[Srikcir]

"the draft charter is especially tough against corruption with the entire cabinet or the entire parliament being held accountable for their policies and that they may be fired if the policies backfire and cause extensive damage to the state."

So who will have the power to fire the entire cabinet and parliament?

The Junta-appointed unelected Constitutional Court and/or Junta-contrived Senate come to mind.

This provision is just another device to provide for an administrative overthrow of an elected government, followed no doubt by an unelected PM.

Once again in the name of corruption.

[Eric Loh]

If Meechai is so tough on corruption than he should have the moral conviction to include the worst kind of corruption that is power and make coup unconstitutional and treasonable. Or he is just another fake writing the charter on the behest of the elites.

[arrowsdawdle]

I wish them luck with their new constitution. Maybe this one will stick.

Till the next coup anyway.

[arrowsdawdle]

If Meechai is so tough on corruption than he should have the moral conviction to include the worst kind of corruption that is power and make coup unconstitutional and treasonable. Or he is just another fake writing the charter on the behest of the elites.

[arrowsdawdle]

Elections will not be winner-take-all, but coups will still be.

Doesn't get any better than perfect and your post is.

[Squeegee]

What is proposed here makes unelected bodies the effective rulers, and removes the elected government from power.

So, in other words...

This provision is just another device to provide for an administrative overthrow of an elected government

A.K.A. another bloodless coup.

But this time they had the opportunity to veil it before the fact so it doesn't seem like guns or soldiers are involved. After 19-20 attempts they finally have the perfect boomerang government where power can just keep on coming back. Also the perfect way to deceitfully claim they are not what they really are: usurpers.

A rosy future awaits, finally free of the nose-picking back rows at UN general assemblies where the perception is there are no soldiers present.

[Baerboxer]

I come from a country where there's never really a party with majority of seats, only a party being largest resulting in a coalition government. The Electoral System is proportional representation. Seems Thailand may get a, somewhat watered down' similar setup

Proportional representation often seems to result in multiple elections and government changes, running without a government. or stagnated parliaments where nothing seems to progress. Not saying that's the case in Netherlands but certainly is in others,

First past the post gives odd results - like the UK where UKIP get massively more votes than SNP, but the latter gets vastly more seats in parliament.

Federal systems also have pros and cons.

No system is perfect, so good luck with these guys on trying to come up with a solution.

In the UK, there is a joke that whoever wins the election, the government will be the same.

[Krataiboy]

entire cabinet or the entire parliament. . . may be fired if the policies backfire. . .

Fired by whom? In a democracy only the electorate has the power to kick out a government. If this clause is typical of the content of the proposed new Constitution one can only pray that the mass of mostly ill-educated and politically naive Thais will actually bother turning off the telly long enough to actually read it.

[Krataiboy]

"The . . . entire cabinet or the entire parliament. . . may be fired if the policies backfire and cause extensive damage to the state".

Fired by whom? In a true democracy, this function resides exclusively with the electorate.

The more one reads of what is being proposed, the more one hopes Thais will abandon the telly for a few hours and give the draft Constitution the attention it deserves rather than simply nod it through.

Act in haste. . .

Edited January 18, 2016 by Krataiboy

[trainman34014]

As there won't be an election for several years to come i would say all this is at present is a waste of breath !

[elgordo38]

The wishes of minorities must be respected. Sounds like an end run around democracy and a touch down for the elite.

[RubbaJohnny]

it will be Hobson's Choice all the way

Agreed incorporating Hobson-Jobson

[rubl]

Interesting all comments here, especially since they're based on the fragmentary information we receive at times. Anxiously awaiting a somewhat more 'final' draft of the to be proposed charter.

[dhream]

So the state will soon be deporting religious organizations, which undermine, by evangelism, the home team? Just looking for clarification on that bit about the state having to 'defend' a religion.

Religions! The self appointed 'defenders' across all faiths get more absurd the more they decline into irrelevance!

[jesimps]

I come from a country where there's never really a party with majority of seats, only a party being largest resulting in a coalition government. The Electoral System is proportional representation. Seems Thailand may get a, somewhat watered down' similar setup

Proportional representation often seems to result in multiple elections and government changes, running without a government. or stagnated parliaments where nothing seems to progress. Not saying that's the case in Netherlands but certainly is in others,

First past the post gives odd results - like the UK where UKIP get massively more votes than SNP, but the latter gets vastly more seats in parliament.

Federal systems also have pros and cons.

No system is perfect, so good luck with these guys on trying to come up with a solution.

In the UK, there is a joke that whoever wins the election, the government will be the same.

Yes but can't you see that by what he says, even if by some miracle your beloved non-Dems were elected, there would still be some junta appointed body to have the last say. So in effect the junta holds power forevermore irrespective of whose name is on the government.

Still, I suppose if you've resigned yourself to never winning another election in your lifetime then this at least keeps the opposition out of power.

We have a saying for this sort of thing in the UK, it is "Cutting off your nose to spite your face"

Edited January 18, 2016 by jesimps

[dhream]

Meechai says future elections are not winners take all affairs

In Thailand the winner does, indeed, take all.

That's because the true power base is already well sewn up, the eventual elections will make everybody feel the happiness, for a wee while, but whichever party 'wins' might well be hamstrung by whatever invisible 'defenders of the constitution' bid them.

[ddavidovsky]

And the current regime has no sense of irony in the fact that they have ushered in a 'loser take all' system?

Anyway, no one ever said the system should be winner take all. Parliament is there to give all sides a voice.

[LannaGuy]

I come from a country where there's never really a party with majority of seats, only a party being largest resulting in a coalition government. The Electoral System is proportional representation. Seems Thailand may get a, somewhat watered down' similar setup

Proportional representation often seems to result in multiple elections and government changes, running without a government. or stagnated parliaments where nothing seems to progress. Not saying that's the case in Netherlands but certainly is in others,

First past the post gives odd results - like the UK where UKIP get massively more votes than SNP, but the latter gets vastly more seats in parliament.

Federal systems also have pros and cons.

No system is perfect, so good luck with these guys on trying to come up with a solution.

In the UK, there is a joke that whoever wins the election, the government will be the same.

Hmm never heard that joke... I don't think Cameron vs. Corbyn could be considered 'the same' nor Kinnock vs. Thatcher I suppose Blair was fairly 'right' for the Labour Party but he's now history. The SNP is a Scottish ONLY party whereas UKIP covers England too! I think you should stay away from quoting UK politics which has been fairly stable for decades! UKIPs leader lost his seat, by the way, anyway let's get back on topic.

The reason Meechai says this is because he knows who will win and he is desperately trying to come up with systems to ensure that the 'winners' power is depleted by committee's, councils and any means available.