NRSA's 1st VP disagree with calls for advance announcement of back-up charter

BANGKOK, 18 April 2016 (NNT) - A vice president of the National Reform Steering Assembly disagrees with calls for an advance announcement by the National Council for Peace and Order related to the version of the previous Constitution to be put to use in case that the latest draft does not pass the public referendum.

NRSA’s 1st Vice President Alongkorn Ponlaboot said that, because the public referendum has always been and will be referred to only one version of the draft Constitution, he does not agree with calls for the NCPO’s to announce now which previous charter will be made effective.

Mr. Alongkorn said that while such a suggestion does not go in line with the public referendum law of both past and present charters, offering an alternative Constitution to voters will only confuse people more.

He urged both proponents and opponents of the latest draft charter to discuss what they consider are good or bad about it and back their claims with facts and reasons in order to help the people obtain a broader view about the draft Constitution.

-- NNT 2016-04-18

yeah, right.

Being transparent about how you plan to screw the people is just confusing.

Better to leave it at "take this turd and savour it or else you get whatever turd is behind door number 3" ....

It's a bit late to complain about the confusion of alternative Charters. That confusion was introduced by the PM months ago.

This referendum has devolved into unacceptable choices. I suppose the Thai people will consider whether they should participate at all. A low turnout would probably be the most problematical result for the Junta.

He urged ..... opponents of the latest draft charter to discuss what they consider are good or bad about it and back their claims with facts

A convenient Catch-22 conundrum - facts can only be ascertained if the Meechai draft constitution passes.

And to make matters more perplexing is Prayut's declaration "that not only are political parties banned from holding press conferences, any remarks that would damage the referendum will carry a prison sentence of 10 years."

"He urged both proponents and opponents of the latest draft charter to discuss what they consider are good or bad about it and back their claims with facts and reasons in order to help the people obtain a broader view about the draft Constitution."

Why can't these people get together in the same room and come up with a concensus on freedom of speech and open debate. This man is urging people to do things which could land them in prison for 10 years.

And who turned the referendum on a so called "constitution" into a choice between two constututions, one of them secret, in the first place? Why pretend it is still a yes or no vote when it is now a this one or that one vote? No-one is fooled!

It's a bit late to complain about the confusion of alternative Charters. That confusion was introduced by the PM months ago.

This referendum has devolved into unacceptable choices. I suppose the Thai people will consider whether they should participate at all. A low turnout would probably be the most problematical result for the Junta.

A low turnout would probably be the most problematical result for the Junta.

A low turnout would garner international criticism at worse and favored at best by the NCPO.

The EC did propose a deviation from the 2009 draft constitutional referendum process to require a majority of registered voters to vote "yes" on the draft for it to pass. This idea was to assure a public mandate for the draft constitution whereas only about 33% of registered voters voted for the 2009 draft constitution.

However .....

In March 2016 the NLA passed an NCPO-proposed amendment to the interim charter. Under the amendment, eligible voters in the referendum mean voters who actually cast the ballots and the passage of the charter draft will be determined by the majority of the votes casted.

According to Deputy Prime Minister Wisanu, "the amendment was meant to pre-empt a boycott of the referendum. So even if there is a boycott, if the majority of the actual voters vote in support of the charter draft, the charter draft will be endorsed."

Recent Suan Dusit Poll of Suan Dusit University showed only about 41% say they will definitely cast their votes on the referendum. All Prayut needs is 51% of that 41% or about 21% of all registered voters to pass the Meechai draft constitution. That’s even lower than the approximate 33% of registered voters who passed the 2007 draft Constitution.

Furthermore, Wisanu has stated that if the draft was rejected in the referendum the government would amend the draft and have it promulgated without another referendum - an inconvenient but unstoppable action.

Edited April 18, 201610 yr by Srikcir

Lol, this is another example of self righteous idiots thinking people are too stupid to vote. Just said in a different manner.

As to low turnover, I don't think it will make any difference. In case of a no vote, the constitution that eventually be put active will not massively change from the one Thailand gets in case of a yes vote.

This referendum offers no choice and is just window dressing.

It's a bit late to complain about the confusion of alternative Charters. That confusion was introduced by the PM months ago.

This referendum has devolved into unacceptable choices. I suppose the Thai people will consider whether they should participate at all. A low turnout would probably be the most problematical result for the Junta.

A low turnout would probably be the most problematical result for the Junta.

A low turnout would garner international criticism at worse and favored at best by the NCPO.

The EC did propose a deviation from the 2009 draft constitutional referendum process to require a majority of registered voters to vote "yes" on the draft for it to pass. This idea was to assure a public mandate for the draft constitution whereas only about 33% of registered voters voted for the 2009 draft constitution.

However .....

In March 2016 the NLA passed an NCPO-proposed amendment to the interim charter. Under the amendment, eligible voters in the referendum mean voters who actually cast the ballots and the passage of the charter draft will be determined by the majority of the votes casted.

According to Deputy Prime Minister Wisanu, "the amendment was meant to pre-empt a boycott of the referendum. So even if there is a boycott, if the majority of the actual voters vote in support of the charter draft, the charter draft will be endorsed."

Recent Suan Dusit Poll of Suan Dusit University showed only about 41% say they will definitely cast their votes on the referendum. All Prayut needs is 51% of that 41% or about 21% of all registered voters to pass the Meechai draft constitution. That’s even lower than the approximate 33% of registered voters who passed the 2007 draft Constitution.

Furthermore, Wisanu has stated that if the draft was rejected in the referendum the government would amend the draft and have it promulgated without another referendum - an inconvenient but unstoppable action.

I agree with your analysis.

But in my view, the domestic political situation (ALL things considered) ensures the Junta will engineer to stay in power until such time as their power base is assured. On the other hand, a low turnout, well below a majority, would further cement an international conclusion of an illegitimate government coupled with a flawed referendum; which could result in a sanctions regime.

In my opinion, the Thai people will not revolt, and will suffer through continued abuses. International pressure, which results in economic strain, could effectively divide the country in a non-political way, pitting the business community against the old guard.

I would not care to wager anything, though. This is looking unpredictable.

The last referendum had a 57% turnout and the military was busing voters to the poling stations. Part reason for the above 50% turnout was that the Dem Party supported the draft and the south folks turnout was impressive. The north had just the opposite low turnout for obvious reasons. This time the major parties and host of others like the academic, activists etc have voicing their disapproval of the draft. The turnout is likely to be much less.

I think the irony is that the low turnout may benefit the draft and most junta supporters will vote and will influence the poll result. Better that the parties encourage their supporters to vote and then we have a better reflection of people sentiment of the draft.