CDC Chairman says draft charter fosters reconciliation, clarifies PM nominee clause

BANGKOK, 18 May 2016 (NNT) – The Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) has affirmed that the draft charter was made to foster reconciliation, while clarifying its clause to require prime ministerial candidates to be announced ahead of general elections.

The statement was made by CDC Chairman Meechai Ruchupan at the training program for provincial-level volunteers in the PR campaign for the draft charter. Mr. Meechai said the clause, which would compel political parties to announce their nominees for prime minister ahead of general elections, is meant to invite greater public participation in politics.

He also revealed that there are mechanisms stipulated in the draft charter in the event that the nominee fails to be elected as a Member of Parliament, a precondition to becoming prime minister. The House Speaker would call a session of both houses of Parliament, where the House of Representatives must vote to appoint an MP as prime minister. The CDC Chairman assured that such a situation would not result in a non-MP prime minister.

Mr. Meechai also defended the inclusion of the Senate in the mechanism. He said both houses are required to override regulations related to Parliamentary sessions, which in turn is necessary to vote for a prime minister that had not been nominated ahead of the general elections. He also argued that this mechanism includes more voices in this extraordinary measure, allowing for a more democratic process.

The training program and the PR campaign are being organized by the CDC in collaboration with the Ministry of Interior.


-- NNT 2016-05-18

Its supposed to be against the law to promote or discuss the charter!

Pure political speech. Twist the words and put them in a way that people believe everything is fine. but if you look at the whole mechanisms you see how rigged it is

In short:

"The (fully appointed) Senate can choose any candidate for PM, as long he has the rank of General (ret.) in the RTA."

compel political parties to announce their nominees for prime minister ahead of general elections, is meant to invite greater public participation in politics

A nice intent but meaningless.

The purpose of the MMA system was to breakup the power of large political parties, promote many small political parties and force a coalition government. For small and numerous parties to form a coalition it would require as a matter of reconcliation that a PM be chosen to the satisfaction of all the parties of a coalition group (a party may be in more than one group for purposes of negotiations). Otherwise, parliament stands paralized and the Senate can facilitate a PM nominee. There is LESS public participation in that process.

Furthermore, the process of achieving a coalition government cannot foresee who the PM will be as of the time of elections. Coalition parties necessary to achieve a coalition will be unknown. And no doubt whomever parties had designated as their PM candidate prior to elections will not be acceptable in the formation of a coalition government because of the reconcliation process. In fact under an MMA system votes for a PM candidate are transferrable to the party that would facilitate the reconcliation process. There is LESS public participation in that process.

Bloomberg has an interesting article on the current thuggery and intimidation.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-19/teenager-with-letters-rattles-thai-junta-amid-growing-crackdown

Bloomberg has an interesting article on the current thuggery and intimidation.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-19/teenager-with-letters-rattles-thai-junta-amid-growing-crackdown

“I find the draft constitution illiberal, unacceptable,” former Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya, whose Democrat Party has long been in opposition to Watana’s Pheu Thai Party, said in Bangkok last week. "With that guided democracy, I only foresee more trouble for Thai political life into the future because there will be incessant demands for more participation."

A remarkable statement by a pro-royalist political faction.

Its supposed to be against the law to promote or discuss the charter!

Depends on which side your on. One side is gagged and the other side can run its gate.

The draft fosters reconciliation but say " No it doesn't " and you'll find out just how much it doesn't !