Constitution Drafting Assembly Appointed by Royal Decree

[Plus]

Of course Senate's relevance depends on what it is used for.

If it's for deliberation (and vetting) of laws, amendments, etc etc, then it's already the job of the elected Lower House. Experience showed that politicians will be able to staff the Senate with their own people and that it is impossible to elect politically independent Senate. Maybe they can appoint senators independent of politicians. That would be a realistic first step towards using the Senate as part of system of checks and balances - whoever appoints the senators will keep the government in check.

I think the original idea was that the Senates should be independent of the government of the day but still be representative. Problem is that in case of a conflict both parties claim to work "for the people". One senator resigned because he thought his work was disruptive for the government as a principle. So much for Checks and Balances.

Appointed Senate does not have to be really appointed - if they set clear quotas and clear professional requirements they can make into a professional body with a minimum leeway for squeezing someone's protege. For example if 25 Senators must be academics with ten years experience of administrative work and they should all come from different universities, even Thaksin would scratch his head to fill this quota.

I still don't know what are they going to do with selecting "independent" bodies. Idependent of what? Independent of people? Independent of politicians who represent the people? Independent of the military?

I think the new Constitution will have a better chance if it reflects realities on the ground rather than idealistic notions that have no chance of ever getting off the ground.

[slimdog]

There's no clear purpose for having a Senate in Thailand anyway. It duplicates either the Lower House or the Council of State.

The Senate has a totally different function to either the lower house or the Council of State.

For one thing, under the 1997 Constitution, the Senate was made one of the most influential of all state organizations. In addition to voting on every bill or organic law that had passed through the lower house, they had the right to demand changes to any such bill or law before it could be passed onto His Majesty for promulgation. The Senate is also considered part of the National Assembly, and so had the right to seek the impeachment of any member of the lower house or cabinet, or a fellow member of the Senate.

In addition they had sole responsibility in the final decision of:

The Election Commission

The Ombudsman

The National Human Rights Commission

The State Auditor

2 Members of the Constitutional Court

2 Members of the Supreme Administrative Court

The Secretary General of the NCCC

The President of the Constitutional Court

Approval of the NCCC members

Approval of Supreme Administrative court members

In addition, if any ruling came from the NCCC regarding corruption, unusual wealth, malfeasance of office or exercising power contrary to the Constitution, they had the right to remove from office:

The Prime Minister

Any Member of Parliament

Any Senator

The President of the Constitutional Court

The President of the Supreme Administrative Court

Prosecutor General

The role of the Council of state is limited to:

(1) To draft laws, by-laws, rules, regulations or notifications upon direction of the Prime Minister or resolution of the Council of Ministers;

(2) To give legal advice and opinions to a State agency or upon direction of the Prime Minister or resolution of the Council of Ministers;

(3) To submit opinions or remarks to the Council of Ministers on the need for new legislation or the amendment, revision or repeal of existing legislation.

Section 7 Council of State Act BE 2522

[hammered]

Of course Senate's relevance depends on what it is used for.

If it's for deliberation (and vetting) of laws, amendments, etc etc, then it's already the job of the elected Lower House. Experience showed that politicians will be able to staff the Senate with their own people and that it is impossible to elect politically independent Senate. Maybe they can appoint senators independent of politicians. That would be a realistic first step towards using the Senate as part of system of checks and balances - whoever appoints the senators will keep the government in check.

I think the original idea was that the Senates should be independent of the government of the day but still be representative. Problem is that in case of a conflict both parties claim to work "for the people". One senator resigned because he thought his work was disruptive for the government as a principle. So much for Checks and Balances.

Appointed Senate does not have to be really appointed - if they set clear quotas and clear professional requirements they can make into a professional body with a minimum leeway for squeezing someone's protege. For example if 25 Senators must be academics with ten years experience of administrative work and they should all come from different universities, even Thaksin would scratch his head to fill this quota.

I still don't know what are they going to do with selecting "independent" bodies. Idependent of what? Independent of people? Independent of politicians who represent the people? Independent of the military?

I think the new Constitution will have a better chance if it reflects realities on the ground rather than idealistic notions that have no chance of ever getting off the ground.

You have outlined a critical point here. The previous 1997 constitution writers missed this completely. The result was a constitution that would have done well in some western countries but was a disaster for Thailand. It will also be good if the usual politicians and academices do not get to dominate the constitution as they always have before.

[hammered]

There's no clear purpose for having a Senate in Thailand anyway. It duplicates either the Lower House or the Council of State.

The Senate has a totally different function to either the lower house or the Council of State.

For one thing, under the 1997 Constitution, the Senate was made one of the most influential of all state organizations. In addition to voting on every bill or organic law that had passed through the lower house, they had the right to demand changes to any such bill or law before it could be passed onto His Majesty for promulgation. The Senate is also considered part of the National Assembly, and so had the right to seek the impeachment of any member of the lower house or cabinet, or a fellow member of the Senate.

In addition they had sole responsibility in the final decision of:

The Election Commission

The Ombudsman

The National Human Rights Commission

The State Auditor

2 Members of the Constitutional Court

2 Members of the Supreme Administrative Court

The Secretary General of the NCCC

The President of the Constitutional Court

Approval of the NCCC members

Approval of Supreme Administrative court members

In addition, if any ruling came from the NCCC regarding corruption, unusual wealth, malfeasance of office or exercising power contrary to the Constitution, they had the right to remove from office:

The Prime Minister

Any Member of Parliament

Any Senator

The President of the Constitutional Court

The President of the Supreme Administrative Court

Prosecutor General

The role of the Council of state is limited to:

(1) To draft laws, by-laws, rules, regulations or notifications upon direction of the Prime Minister or resolution of the Council of Ministers;

(2) To give legal advice and opinions to a State agency or upon direction of the Prime Minister or resolution of the Council of Ministers;

(3) To submit opinions or remarks to the Council of Ministers on the need for new legislation or the amendment, revision or repeal of existing legislation.

Section 7 Council of State Act BE 2522

Whatever its function the elcetd senate was a disastrous experiment that returned a majority of government controlled slaves resulting in the worst senate ever in Thailand. Sad to say but true. It just showed the power of vote buying and government intimidation. Unfortunately the check and balance mechanisms were under this bought body and still to this day the country is experiencing the problems associated with the clique that bought and controlled this inspite of a military coup.

[slimdog]

Yes the last Senate was a disaster, the future Senate which was going through before the coup took place looked worse.

This was certainly one of the weakest parts of the 1997 Constitution. Unfortunetely with the restrictions put on Senators regarding electioneering, people tended to go with names they were familar with, or who were known associates of people they were familiar with.

I am still not convinced that a fully selected Senate is the answer though, maybe a cross between the two, half elected, half selected, with the elected part having the right to actually publicize themselves, rather than a few sheets of paper in the polling stations which nobody paid any attention to...

[hammered]

Yes the last Senate was a disaster, the future Senate which was going through before the coup took place looked worse.

This was certainly one of the weakest parts of the 1997 Constitution. Unfortunetely with the restrictions put on Senators regarding electioneering, people tended to go with names they were familar with, or who were known associates of people they were familiar with.

I am still not convinced that a fully selected Senate is the answer though, maybe a cross between the two, half elected, half selected, with the elected part having the right to actually publicize themselves, rather than a few sheets of paper in the polling stations which nobody paid any attention to...

Following the US experiment may serve Thailand well! A non-elected senate for a while and later change the selection system to elected when more political maturity is achieved. Worked OK for the yanks I guess.

[Jai Dee]

Feedback set to be sought on constitution

The first draft of the 2007 charter was finalised yesterday, after a last-minute attempt by a constitution drafter to discuss the negative repercussions of allowing a de-facto amnesty for the military junta who staged the September 19 coup was denied by Constitution Drafting Committee chairman Prasong Soonsiri.

Drafter Supot Kaimuk yesterday said the issue had become a "hot potato" since it was revealed last week and that the committee should perhaps discuss it.

However, Prasong intervened to make sure no discussion took place.

Prasong will hand the first draft to Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) tomorrow but the official hand-over ceremony is likely to be held next week, on April 26.

The Assembly, along with many organisations, will be required by the junta-penned interim constitution to provide feedback and reaction for possible amendments.

Other organisations required to provide feedback include all the so-called independent organisations under the 1998 charter, the three courts of law, the Cabinet, the junta-appointed National Legislative Assembly, the Council for National Security (CNS) and some 150 plus universities across the Kingdom.

Already, two pressure groups have vowed to reject the charter if it does not accommodate their wishes.

An alliance for people with disabilities say they wanted a clearer wording that would guarantee them "rights to accessibility".

This did not appear in the first draft finalised yesterday, but drafter Choochai Suphawongse promised to look into it and said there was still time to have it added into the second draft.

Another is more controversial: a Buddhist group who is calling for the recognition of Buddhism as the state religion in the new charter.

Prasong yesterday accused a political group of being behind the on-going protest in front of Parliament, but failed to name it.

"Our chance of succeeding is fair," said Phra Panyamethee of Wat Chadraram, a senior monk, and one of leaders the group. "We don't want do anything harsh because the government and the CNS are fragile."

The monk said although some politicians may be offering support or donations, it was against monks' practise to refuse it. However, he denied the protest was being masterminded by anti-junta elements.

In regard to fears that making Buddhism the national religion would lead to discord or even conflicts between Buddhists and believers of other faiths, such as Islam, the monk replied: "Buddhism is not like other religions. It is rather compassionate and can co-exist with other religions well."

Source: The Nation - 18 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

People's power to be hit by charter: CPD

The new constitution would weaken people's power as well as that of politicians, Campaign for Popular Democracy secretary-general Suriyasai Katasila said yesterday.

He said the CPD suggested the voting process adopted in the 1997 Constitution. It opposed issues in the draft such as larger constituencies and voting for more candidates - instead of one for a constituency. Such changes were against the one-person, one-vote principle.

Moreover, letting people vote for regional representatives would lead to a lack of representatives selected by voters nationwide.

The CPD also opposed selecting the Senate because it would allow for a patronage system and the process could be interfered with.

And, allowing a special panel for times of national crisis would be like trying to solve problems at the end of a crisis. It could also be dangerous to give a group of people power over the charter, he said.

But not all changes were bad. Suriyasai said the draft was better than the 1997 Constitution in that it gave more people's participation, especially by allowing direct participation in gathering signatures to remove a holder of a political position, or to propose laws. The number of signatures required has been reduced from 50,000 to 20,000.

The CPD also supported more transparency in the government's financial affairs.

Source: The Nation - 18 April 2007

[A_Traveller]

BBC News report:-

Last Updated: Wednesday, 18 April 2007, 16:32 GMT 17:32 UK 23:32 Bangkok

Draft of Thai constitution agreed By Jonathan Head

The first draft of a new constitution for Thailand has been agreed by a committee appointed by the military council that led last September's coup.

The draft will be presented to the public later this month before being put to a referendum.

Many of the details agreed by the 35-member drafting committee have already been made public.

One of the draft constitution's main objectives appears to be to limit the power of elected politicians.

It could perhaps be best described as the anti-Thaksin constitution.

It would limit prime ministers to just two four-year terms in office, reduce members of parliament from 500 to 400, and cut the number of senators from 200 to 160, who will now be appointed, not elected.

The number of MPs needed to introduce a motion of no-confidence in the prime minister has also been reduced, from two-thirds, to just a quarter.

Provoke criticism

Those involved in the drafting say the intention is to prevent the kind of abuses of power carried out by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Mr Thaksin was accused of using his enormous personal wealth to buy senators and to cripple the functioning of the independent bodies that had been set up under the old constitution as checks and balances.

The most controversial proposal - to have a non-elected prime minister - has been dropped.

But this draft is bound to provoke strong criticism that it is far less democratic than the constitution the generals threw out when they seized power last year.

The interim government has promised to put the draft to a referendum and hold elections before the end of the year.

If the constitution is rejected, those elections could be delayed by many months.

Link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6568767.stm

Regards

/edit add Time data //

Edited April 18, 2007 by A_Traveller

[Jai Dee]

“Than Mui” calls for CDC to include motion pictures as a form of media in the new charter

Mom Chao Chatrichalerm Yukol (ชาตรีเฉลิม ยุคล) or “Than Mui” and representatives of the Thai film industry submit a petition to the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), requesting CDC to include the word “motion pictures” as a form of media in articles 39 and 41 of the new constitution.

The representatives include mass media academics, those from the Thai Film Federation, and the president of the Thai Film Director Association. The group claims that motion pictures, like other forms of media, has an influence on people’s thinking and perception as well as can be cultural commodities.

Meanwhile, CDC Deputy Chairman Chuchai Suphawong (ชูชัย ศุภวงศ์) who receives the petition says he agrees with the group’s proposal. Mr Chuchai is also the chairman of CDC’s subcommittee responsible for the first draft of the new charter.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 19 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Decision to set Buddhism as official national religion to be announced after Apr 26

The Secretary of the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) Secretary Somkid Lertphaitoon (สมคิด เลิศไพฑูรย์) says the Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) will issue the conclusion on whether Buddhism will be defined as the national religion after April 26th.

In regard to movement requesting for drafting Buddhism as the national religion, Mr. Spmkid says CDA will put more details of Buddhism in the new Constitution. However, he says CDA must hear views from CDC members as well.

CDC Secretary says the first draft of new Constitution will be submitted on April 26th at 10.00 hours.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 19 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

More than 250,000 Buddhist demonstrators to stage protest against CDA

Buddhist demonstrators affirm that they will gather more than 250,000 protesters to demand the establishment of Buddhism as Thailand's national religion.

A member of the Buddhism Protection Center of Thailand, Phra Thepvisutthikavi, revealed that anywhere from 200,000 -300,000 Buddhist demonstrators are expected to rally on April 26 to call on the Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) to include Buddhism as the national religion in its revised draft of the constitution, despite CDA Chairman's Prasong Soonsiri's affirmation that such a revision of the constitution was not possible.

CDA Chairman Prasong said that the Constitution Drafting Assembly views Buddhism to be the nation's supreme institution, therefore it would be inappropriate for the religion to be included in the constitution.

The Deputy Secretary General of the Buddhism Protection Center of Thailand, Maj Gen Thongkhao Puangrodpan, affirmed that claims of political motivations behind his group's protest were groundless. The deputy secretary general said that monks would not involve themselves in politics and had a right to express their views.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 19 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Grave flaws seen in draft constitution

There are serious flaws in the draft constitution that could prove dangerous, National Legislative Assembly Speaker Meechai Ruchuphan warned yesterday

Some clauses are unclear while others look good on the surface but contain "hidden dangers", and others are conflicting, Meechai said during the NLA's review of the draft.

It appears that the drafters tried to address the political problems that arose over the past five years, leading them to focus on trivial points rather than "the big picture", he said.

"But, I sympathise with them because they had limited time," Meechai said. He cited as problematic a clause allowing individuals to seek court orders forcing state authorities to honour their constitutional rights. "If this clause is not carefully written we will see court cases being filed daily," he warned.

NLA members yesterday agreed the new draft gave the courts "too much power". They argued this could put unnecessary pressure on the judiciary and eventually damage it.

Others expressed disagreement with specific clauses.

The NLA spent the weekend at the Dusit Resort in Hua Hin deliberating the draft.

Campaign for Popular Democracy secretary-general Suriyasai Katasila said it appeared the first draft was designed to prevent a return of the "Thaksin regime".

Democrat Party deputy spokesman Sathit Pitutecha said while the draft addressed issues of public participation and political corruption, flaws remained. He said an appointed Senate went against democratic principles.

Source: The Nation - 23 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

Constitution debate 'Buddhism defines Thailand'

Groups insist faith must be recognised as the national religion in new charter

Buddhist groups are increasing pressure to have the faith recognised as the national religion in the new constitution. They have threatened to reject the charter if it is not. Movement leader General Thongchai Kuersakul talks to Pravit Rojanaphruk. Below are excerpts.

Why is there a need to have a national religion?

There are many reasons. First, a constitution is the supreme law, and yet the first of the three pillars of the nation, which is Buddhism, is not recognised.

Second, since we are living in a democratic system and Buddhists constitute 94 per cent of the population - or almost 60 million people - [the drafters] must listen to their demands. It was the Constitution Drafting Assembly that tried to promote people's participation in the drafting process and argued it's a people's constitution. Why would they do that if they won't give us a chance?

Third, at a recent world Buddhist conference attended by 43 nations, Thailand was chosen to be the centre of Buddhism of all sects.

Fourth, Buddhism has been rooted in Thailand for 2,200 years and, although there are people of other faiths, they are regarded as minorities. The King has always been defender of the Buddhist faith, but the Thai political system changed in 1932. There has been a need to include Buddhism in the constitution since then.

Another thing is that Thais have a unique identity of being forgiving and accommodating, and Buddhism moulds this unique identity.

What differences will there be if Buddhism is recognised as the national religion?

Actually, none.

People who oppose the move say Buddhism is already the de-facto national religion but our society is now based on law, so we can't avoid [including it in the charter].

Currently, only one organic law has been passed in support of Buddhism in Thailand, and that is the Royal Act on the Sangha. An important point is that there has been an attempt by a [Thai] Muslim scholar to oppose school textbooks describing Buddhism as the national religion.

The point is that the argument was made by citing the lack of such an indication in the charter. The feud has lingered to the present.

Many Buddhists worry that if you succeed it will lead to greater friction with Thais of other faiths, especially Thai-Malay Muslims in the deep South.

They just imagine things. Those professing other faiths never think about it because they coexist with us peacefully.

We have submitted letters to members of the drafting assembly who are Muslim and Christian and all went well. They said the charter should state other religions are recognised and respected by the state. And we have no problem with that.

The media often cite the issue but the truth of the matter is that the conflict in the deep South is about separatist ideology, not religion.

They not only kill Buddhists but Muslims. It's a pathetic argument and when and if they succeed [in freeing Patani], they will declare it an Islamic land.

You claim to have all Buddhists behind you. How many supporters do you really have?

I think I can't answer the question, but it must at least be in the millions. Say if we talked to 1,000 supporters and each convinced 10 more, it would be 100,000. Newspapers like Matichon may oppose it but even its own poll says 99 per cent support our move, and other polls gave us some 60 per cent to 70 per cent support.

But are you not acting against the Buddhist teaching of non-attachment?

In principle we recognise the non-attachment principle. The historical Buddha stated he was no god but the task of caring for the religion is on the shoulders of both monks and lay people. Buddhist monks have a duty to protect Buddhism.

Constitution Drafting Committee chairman Prasong Soonsiri accused your group of being supported by political groups which oppose the junta.

Prasong is 80 years old. I think his mind is messed up. Ours is an innocent force. We insist we do not wish any group of politicians to join us, but many who are Buddhists want to join. His accusation is most evil.

Why, then, do you think Prasong and other charter-drafters are against your demands?

My personal feeling is that there must be a hidden agenda. The 35 drafters must have agreed not to discuss the matter.

I can't explain why, but they know it deep in their hearts. Whatever they think or act, it's undemocratic. They are dictators. They are the ones causing problems and wanting society to be divided with all sorts of demonstrations. You must ask Prasong, for I can't answer for him.

Source: The Nation - 23 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Fine print of charter set for debut

Today and tomorrow, voters can read in newspaper instalments a first draft of the new constitution.

The publication idea is a Constitution Drafting Committee public relations move. Anti-coup groups, however, have criticised the draft ahead of its release.

These include satellite broadcaster PTV, which plans another Sanam Luang rally against the charter on Friday.

Source: The Nation - 23 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Highlights of the Draft Constitution B.E. 2550

In formally submitting the constitution draft to the 12 concerned parties scheduled for Thursday, the 35member Constitution Drafting Committee has spelled out the comparison between the 1997 Constitution and the new draft.

Here is the unofficial translation of the reasons behind the first draft of the new constitution and how it has been designed to improve on the political system.

The Draft Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2550 has been written with an aim of taking the Kingdom back to a full democracy, with a general election expected within 2007. It seeks to correct the weaknesses inherent in the 1997 Constitution, which led to monopoly and abuses of State powers, political mismanagement that lacked transparency, good governance, and ethics; to failure to scrutinize the exercise of State powers and inadequate protection of the rights and freedoms of the people.

The present Draft Constitution addresses those problems on four fronts, including:

1. Protection, promotion, and expansion of the rights and freedoms of the people;

2. Reduction of concentration of power and elimination of its abuses;

3. Making politics transparent, moral and ethical; and

4. Strengthening and increasing the effectiveness of the scrutiny process by making the scrutiny bodies freer, stronger, and more efficient.

1. Protection, promotion, and expansion of the rights and freedoms

A constitution does not belong to just a handful of people or politicians, but should belong to all people. It should give political space to all and encourage all to participate in determining their own destiny.

1.1. The present Draft Constitution provides more rights and freedoms than the 1997 Constitution. The new features include:

- Recognition of the rights and freedoms of international conventions, to which Thailand is party, with the same binding effect as those provided in the present Draft Constitution (Section 4);

- Protection of the privacy of personal information (Section 35);

- Increase of rights in the criminal justice process through reform to improve access to the justice process, making it easier, quicker, more convenient, and more widely available at reasonable costs. Children, youths, women, the old, and the disabled and handicapped will get appropriate protection in the criminal procedure (Section 40). And more significantly, for the first time the people will have the right to bring a case before the Constitutional Court directly;

- Legislation for the first time of labour rights to safety and welfare at work and security of employment during and after employment (Section 44);

- Greater protection of the rights and freedoms of the press than ever before, prohibiting not only closure of mass media, but also interference in the presentation of information, directly or otherwise (Section 45 and Section 46); prohibiting ownership or share-holding in mass media by holders of political office to prevent the use of mass media to advance their own personal benefits (Section 47 paragraph five);

- Twelve years of free education with special support for the needy, the disabled or handicapped, or those in financial difficulty so that they may receive education on par with others (Section 48). In addition, there will be educational courses and trainings by vocational units and the private sector. Alternative education, self-education, and learning as a life-long process will also receive support (Section 48);

- Children, youths, and family members to enjoy more rights for physical, mental, and intellectual development compatible with their potential and environment (Section 51);

- Persons without a home or adequate income to have the right to receive State aids for the first time (Section 54);

- Extension of community rights to cases where individuals get together, with duration not long enough to be an original local community (Section 66 paragraph one). Further, before undertaking any project or activity which may cause serious environmental damage, the public, particularly those directly affected, will have to be consulted (Section 66 paragraph two). The community can sue a government agency, State agency, State enterprise, local government, or other State agency which is a juristic person to ensure compliance with the community rights provisions (Section 66 paragraph three);

- Rights for the people to monitor and to demand scrutiny of the performance of duties of a holder of political office - first time ever (Section 61 paragraph one), including access to detailed contents of Bills being considered by the National Assembly (Section 138 paragraph five) in addition to the right of access to official information (Section 55);

- Public hearings to be required before signing any international agreement with an impact on the people. After signing the agreement, the State has to give the people access to the detailed contents of the agreement signed and promptly provide remedies for those adversely affected in a fitting and just manner (Section 186 paragraph two and paragraph four); and

- People of 100,000 or more to be able to petition to get the Constitution amended - another first (Section 281(1)).

1.2 To make the exercise of rights easier through the following measures:

- Rights and freedoms are arranged in a clear and readable form: rights and freedoms of individuals (Section 32-Section 38), rights of the criminal justice, rights of information and complaint (Section 55-Section 61), rights of community (Section 65-Section 66), rights to uphold the Constitution (Section 67-Section 68), etc;

- Rights and freedoms provided in the Constitution may be invoked even if they have not been enacted; the people may exercise those immediately in courts (Section 28 paragraph three);

- The State has to promote, support, and help the people to exercise rights and freedoms (Section 28 paragraph four); and

- The number of signatures needed to recall a holder of political office will be reduced to 20,000 from 50,000 (Section 160 and Section 262 paragraph three).

1.3 Making the exercise of rights and freedoms more efficient with clear safeguards:

- Removing the phrase "as provided by law" from all Sections on rights and freedoms, which means the provisions of the people's rights and freedoms take immediate effect upon the passage of the Draft Constitution, not pending their enactment;

- Placing a time limit on enactment of organic-law Bills, so as to prevent those in authority from delaying their passage to restrict rights and freedoms (Section 293 and Section 298);

- Giving the people the right to bring before the Constitutional Court directly cases involving violation of the rights and freedoms provided in the Constitution (Section 208);

- Giving a community the right to bring cases involving violation of the rights and freedoms directly before the Constitutional Court (Section 66 paragraph three); and

- Allowing the National Human Rights Commission initiate legal action in the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Administrative Court where a law, rules, or injunctions contravene the Constitution, or human rights have been violated, doing so on behalf of the injured party (Section 248(1) and (2)).

1.4 Making the Directive Principles of the Fundamental State Policies explicit all round and more binding than before on the government by:

- Clearly differentiating the Chapter on the Directive Principles of the Fundamental State Policies to cover all aspects, including security, religion, society, education and culture, law and justice, international affairs, economy, land, natural resources and environment, science, intellectual property, energy, or public participation;

- Increasing the Principles of the Fundamental State Policies in key areas. Inter alia, the State has to develop a work system that stresses development of quality, morality and ethics of its staff; has to encourage the State agencies to adopt good governance; has to undertake law and criminal justice reforms (Section 80(5), (6)); has to encourage and support the philosophy of sufficiency economy (Section 82); has to restructure the tax and duty system to make it more equitable (Section 83(3)); has to protect the interests of farmers in production and marketing (Section 83(9)); has to provide basic public utilities and make sure they do not fall into private monopoly (Section 83(11)); has to regulate land uses based on professional principles, covering lands and waters throughout the country; has to give farmers land-use rights widely (Section 84), etc; and

- Requiring the in-coming government to declare its policy to the National Assembly ensuring that it is in line with the Directive Principles of the Fundamental Policies, stating setting out clearly what it plans to do and the related timeframes. In addition, it has to submit an annual report to the National Assembly documenting the implementation progress and results as well as problems or obstacles encountered over the past year.

1.5 Allowing public participation in the administrative activities of the local government and greater decentralization of powers to local governments so as to make them the bedrock of democracy at the national level.

- The local government has complete freedom to manage its own affairs in all aspects, including organization of public services with variety and diversity (Section 274 paragraph one) and determination of its own administrative structure to suit the local conditions and needs (Section 275 paragraph nine).

- Personnel management of the local government will be reformed such that the personnel will have the status of civil servants like their counterparts at the national level, with their own committees independent of the central government's control, powers to transfer personnel across agencies, and their own ethic committee as well (Section 279).

- Public participation at the local level will be boosted, allowing local residents to hold referendums on local matters of importance (Section 278 paragraph one and paragraph two), reducing the number of signatures required to recall a holder of local political office and to legislate local ordinances (Section 276 and Section 277), making the local government inform the public with respect to budgeting, spending, and performance so that the latter can tale part in scrutinizing and monitoring its management (Section 278 paragraph three).

- The supervisory and monitoring system of the local government will be restructured to improve its efficiency, adopting a common standard so that the administration can operate independently, giving due consideration to the suitability and difference in development levels and management efficiency of the area. The local authority is to be encouraged to determine its own modus operandi according to its needs and to set up their scrutiny mechanism (Section 273 paragraph two).

2. Reduction of concentration of power and elimination of its abuses

The 1997 Constitution wants a strong and efficient government, which is well and good. However, if the strength and efficiency is concentrated in the hands of one single person, it can easily lead to abuses of powers, as it obviously did. It is therefore necessary to reduce concentration of power and adjust the balance of power. This the new Draft Constitution tries to do by the following measures:

2.1 Empowering the people so that they become players, not watchers on the sideline by virtue of the numerous Sections cited in Part 1, for example:

- Allowing public participation in all political spheres, e.g., in administering affairs of the State (Section 55, Section 138 paragraph five, and Section 186 paragraph two), holding referendum on important issues (Section 161), and amending the Constitution (Section 282 paragraph one);

- Giving the people and the community power to sue the State for improper use of powers (Section 208 and Section 66 paragraph three); and

- Making it easier for the people to exercise their rights, e.g., reduction in the number of signatures required to recall a politician and to propose a law both at the national and local level (Section 159, Section 160, Section 276, and Section 277).

2.2 Preventing monopoly and abuse of State powers by the government as follows:

- The Prime Minister can only serve two terms or eight years (Section 167 paragraph three);

- In issuing a Royal Decree, the government will be subjected to scrutiny by the Constitutional Court. Not something to be done at whims and fancy, such legislation is reserved only for unavoidable emergency, not just to evade the scrutiny of the National Assembly (Section 181).

- A Chapter on money, finance, and budget is to be added - the first ever in Thailand - to prevent undisciplined spending and creation of a financial burden on the future government and on the country (Section 162 to Section 166). Under the present Draft Constitution, the government is required, specifically in its budget statement, to clearly state objectives, activities, plans, and projects (Section 163 paragraph one); spending from the central budget will be capped and must be justified on the basis of necessity (Section 163 paragraph two);

- The National Assembly, courts, and statutory Independent Agencies can request amendment directly to Parliamentary committees so that the government can no longer use budget appropriations as a bargaining chip (Section 164 paragraph nine). Similarly, the statutory agencies can table amendment to its own regulations to the National Assembly directly and unobstructed by the government (Section 138(3));

- The Office of Public Prosecutors will be independent from the government and can thus inspect the exercise of State powers without the government's interference, especially in proceedings against holders of political office (Section 246); and

- The scope of responsibilities of the care-taker government will be defined clearly such that it will not be able to interfere with civil servants' performance of duties, nor to use State apparatuses to support any political party or any candidate in a general election (Section 177).

- Merger of political parties with sitting members is prohibited during the term of the House to prevent excessive majority (Section 99).

2.3 Giving good people a chance to sit in the House of Representatives and freeing the members of the House from the undue influence of their party so that they can fully and truly represent the interests of the electorate and country, with the following provisions:

- The electoral system of the House of Representatives will be changed. Constituencies will be larger so that good candidates can compete in a more level field with their moneyed counterparts. The party-list system will be replaced by proportional representation with constituencies based on provincial groupings rather than the whole country, which will prevent excessive concentration of representatives from the central region. The 5% cutoff rule will also go, which will give small parties a better chance, thus conducive to political diversity.

- Members of the House of Representatives will be free from parties' resolutions in interpellating, debating, and even voting on a motion of no confidence (Section 158 paragraph two); and

- Members of the House of Representatives will be table a Bill without his or her own party's permission (Section 138(2)).

2.4 Members of the Senate will be free from the dominance of political parties since they will be selected from provinces and, separately, from occupational groups (Section 106), not through election which is prone to political meddling. With the proposed selection process, Thai politics will cease to be the exclusive preserve of elected politicians, but will belong to the people from diverse backgrounds, areas, occupations, and genders while opening up opportunities to the socially underprivileged as well (Section 108 paragraph two).

2.5 Members of the House of Representatives and of the Senate are prohibited from intervening and interfering with the performance of duties by civil servants to advance their own or party's interests, directly or otherwise, as well as in posting, appointment, move, transfer, promotion or salary increases (Section 257).

3. Making politics transparent, moral and ethical

Political transparency, morality and ethics were in serious deficit in the 1997 Constitution. Flouting those rules, the ruling politicians used all tricks and cunning to get round the law, breed conflict of interests, and enrich themselves on the back of hardships of the nation and people. For good governance, the present Draft Constitution offers the following solutions:

3.1 A clearly written Chapter on morality and ethics for holders of political office and State officials

- The ethics for holders of political office and State officials will set a clear code of conduct and criteria, apparatus, and system for efficient performance of duties, complete with a penal procedure for breaches of the code (Section 270 paragraph two); and

- A serious breach will, under the present Draft Constitution, result in removal from office (Section 270 paragraph three).

3.2 Measures to prevent political conflict of interests:

- Members of the House of Representatives and of the Senate are not permitted to hold any position in the civil service, State agencies, State enterprises, local councils, or as an administrator or civil servant in the local government. They must not receive, infringe, and interfere in the award of concessions from the State, civil service agencies, State agencies or enterprises, or be a partner in contract with the State, civil service agencies, State agencies or enterprises construable as monopoly, collusion, or partnership or holding shares in companies that obtain concessions or be a partner in contract thereof, directly or otherwise. They are not permitted to receive any payments or benefits from civil service agencies, State agencies or enterprises beyond what the civil service agencies, State agencies and enterprises offer others in a comparable business deal. Nor are they permitted to be partners or shareholders in companies involved in mass media, or partners in contract (Section 256);

- The Prime Minister, ministers, spouse, and minor offspring are prohibited to be a partner or a shareholder in partnership companies or companies, or to retain partnership or shares in the partnership companies or companies in amounts as specified by law. If the Prime Minister or a minister wishes to continue to receive the said benefits, he or she must inform the President of the National Counter Corruption Commission within 30 days of his or her appointment to office. He or she must transfer all the shares into a trust to be managed by an assets management company as required by the law. And he or she must refrain from any act that bears the resemblance of management of the shares or in the activities of the company in question (Section 260).

3.3 Stricter rules on the declaration of assets and liabilities for the holder of political office. Apart from his or her own, his or her spouse's, and minor offspring's, the amounts declared must include assets entrusted to others as well, directly or otherwise (Section 250). Just like ministers, members of the House of Representatives and of the Senate are also required to disclose their wealth to the public (Section 252).

3.4 Easier removal of members of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, the Prime Minister, and ministers on judgment by the court

- Upon the final judgment of imprisonment by the court, regardless whether it is a suspended sentence or not, a member of the House of Representatives or of the Senate is considered officially removed from office except in the case of negligence or minor offence (Section 119(4)).

- Upon delivery of a prison sentence regardless whether a final judgment or a suspended sentence, the Prime Minister or the minister is considered officially removed from office, except in the case of negligence, a minor offence, or defamation (Section 178(4)).

3.5 The President and Vice-President of the House of Representatives, the Prime Minister and ministers are prohibited from engaging in anything that bears the characteristics of a conflict of interests.

- The President and Vice-President of the House of Representatives are not permitted to concurrently hold an executive post in a political party (Section 119 paragraph six).

? The Prime Minister and ministers are not permitted to vote on matters relating to post assignment, performance of duties, or being party to the benefits thereof (Section 173 paragraph three).

4. Strengthening and increasing the effectiveness of the scrutiny process by making the scrutiny bodies freer, stronger, and more efficient

The scrutiny bodies and statutory Independent Agencies, which were the high hope of the people in the 1997 Constitution, were subjected to heavy political meddling and in the event failed to discharge their duties effectively. They stand in need of restructuring.

4.1 The selection process for the scrutinizing bodies must be restructured, and persons of independence recruited. Under the Draft Constitution, the Selection Committee will comprise the President of the Constitutional Court, the President of the Supreme Court, the President of the Supreme Administrative Court, the President of the House of Representatives, and the Opposition Leader.

4.2 The powers and duties and the way the scrutinizing bodies work must be improved. The Draft Constitution proposes the following measures:

- Under the Draft Constitution, the Constitutional Court will be vested with the power to consider cases of rights and freedoms violation brought before it directly by the people (Section 208).

- The Division of the Prosecution of Holders of Political Office of the Supreme Court will consider cases of politicians accused of not declaring their assets and liabilities or cases involving falsification of assets and liabilities declared (Section 254 paragraph two).

- The National Counter Corruption Commission will only handle cases involving high-ranking political officer holders and civil servants so as to increase its efficiency (Section 243(3)).

- Ombudsman may initiate lawsuits where public damage has occurred or public interests must be protected without waiting for complaints (Section 237(1) paragraph two).

- The National Human Rights Commission is also to receive a boost in power as it will be allowed to bring cases before the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court if any a law, ordinance, decree, or act contravenes the Constitution; and to act for and on behalf of the injured party whose human rights have been violated (Section 248(2) and (3)).

- The National Economic and Social Advisory Council will give comments on all Bills (Section 249).

- The statutory Independent Agencies, the National Assembly, and the courts can amend their own budgets directly before the Parliamentary committees (Section 164 paragraph nine).

- Members of the House of Representatives can censure the Prime Minister more easily if they can gather votes of one quarter of the total number of the existing members of the House (Section 154 paragraph one). They can also lodge a no-confidence debate against a minister who has moved to another cabinet post to avoid sanctions (Section 155 paragraph two and paragraph three). Both the Prime Minister and ministers can now be made to answer questions in person on the House floor (Section 158).

- The Office of Public Prosecutors will be separated from the government so that it can work more independently in the scrutiny of the exercise of State powers (Section 246).

4.3 Setting up a system of scrutiny over the performance of the statutory Independent Agencies

- Issue of a "red card" and "yellow card" by the Election Commission can be appealed to the Supreme Court. Similar problems at local government elections can be dealt with by the provincial appellate court or regional appellate court (Section 233).

- Rules, orders, or other actions of the statutory bodies relating to the application of law or to performance of administrative duties can be scrutinized by the Supreme Administrative Court (Section 218 paragraph one).

- Ombudsman will have power to investigate negligence of duties or misfeasance of other statutory agencies or agencies within the justice process (Section 237(1)(d or ?)).

Source: The Nation - 24 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Ex-senators want CDC to reconsider qualifications of senators

A group of former senator calls for the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) to reconsider qualifications of senators as they claim that more than 90 percent of the public want to see senators to be elected.

The group is led by Siriwat Kraisin (ศิริวัฒน์ ไกรสินธุ์), the former senator of Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, says his group opposes the idea of appointed senators initiated by CDC. CDC proposes that senators should be appointed by representatives of each province and profession.

Mr Siriwat says further that the constitution drafting should focus on resolving the country’s crisis more than creating conflicts and the new charter should also stick to principles of democracy.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 25 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

1st Army Area Command calls for Buddhist organization not to put pressure on charter drafters

Commander of the First Army Area Command calls for the Thailand’s Buddhist Organization to stop pressuring the constitution drafters to set Buddhism as state religion.

First Army Area Commander, Lt.Gen.Prayut Chan-ocha (ประยุทธ์ จันทร์โอชา) reveals that he has instructed military and police officers as well as officials from the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) to monitor a demonstration arranged by the Buddhist organization. The demonstrators have gathered in front of the Parliament House.

Lt.Gen.Prayut also requests those who voice support for the designation of Buddhism as the national religion not to travel to Bangkok to join the rally. He expresses his belief that the demonstration would not escalate as both the constitution drafters and the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) have accepted the demonstrators’ proposal for consideration.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 25 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Interior Ministry instructs governors to inform residents of first charter draft

The Ministry of Interior instructs governors across the country to inform their residents of contents of the first charter draft and listen to the people’s opinion toward the new constitution.

Deputy Interior Minister Banyat Chansena (บัญญัติ จันทน์เสนะ) chairs a teleconference meeting between the governors. He says during the meeting that as the Cabinet has already approved the Act draft concerning the public hearing for the new charter, the governors should now study the Act draft and inform provincial officials about the public hearing method. In addition, he reveals that the government will organize the public hearing at the same time with the implementation of a democracy development project. According to the deputy minister, the prime minister will explain details of the project to the governors himself.

Meanwhile, Permanent Secretary of Interior Phongphoyom Wassaphoot (พงศ์โพยม วาศภูติ) calls for the governors as well as relevant units to help the government campaign for people’s participation in the constitution drafting. The permanent secretary says he was informed that some provinces had not provided cooperation with the authority when it comes to the constitution drafting.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 25 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Rayong teachers request for concrete and clear detail of educational law in new Constitution

Representatives of teachers from Rayong (ระยอง) province have requested for more concrete explanations and details concerning the issue of education in the new Constitution.

The Chief of Rayong Basic Education Association Mr. Aree Kosem (อารีย์ กอเซ็ม) and representative of Rayong teacher association Mr. Narong Suekamnerd (ณรงค์ ซื่อกำเนิด) have requested for a concrete and clear details of educational management in the new Constitution.

Meanwhile, the Rayong representatives have proposed four educational matters. Firstly, the government must manage and create mechanism to encourage all sectors to take part in educational development under the government’s policy. Secondly, the government must create the national education. Next, the government must set up free 12-year compulsory education. In addition, the government must provide adequate educational resources.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 25 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Rejecting new charter could make things worse

Constitution Drafting Com-mittee (CDC) secretary Somkid Lertpaitoon warned those who opposed the new constitution they might have to live with one drafted by the Council for National Security (CNS).

If the new draft charter fails to pass a public referendum, the interim constitution stipulates the CNS is allowed to take recourse with any previous charter by adapting some provisions.

"The CNS can pick the 1997 constitution and change the clause that senators must be appointed or add a clause that Buddhism must be a state religion. I'm not making a threat, but opponents of the constitution should be aware of these possibilities," he said. He pointed out that opponents wanted five issues addressed: the election system for MPs, the appointment of senators, the courts' power to appoint independent agencies, having 11 agencies making decisions when the country was in crisis and the addition of a clause making Buddhism the state religion.

He said the CDC was not concerned about the opposition, because it believed there were many who supported the constitution but remained silent.

He said the CDC could still make changes to the draft constitution now but that after it was forwarded to the Constitution Drafting Assembly, 60 votes would be required to make any further changes.

Source: The Nation - 26 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Ex-senators want national religion

The proposal for the adoption of Buddhism as the state religion gained momentum yesterday as former senators and "more than 10 members of the Constitution Drafting Assembly" voiced support for the idea.

A group of five former senators yesterday said Buddhism should be adopted as the state religion in order to reflect the aspirations of 94 per cent of Thais who are Buddhists.

Under the leadership of Kam-nuan Chalopatham, the former senators asked Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) chairman Noranit Sethabutr to revise the first draft of the charter to insert a clause on state religion. Former senator Wibul Cham-chuen said the charter should represent the view of the majority.

"Every opinion survey has revealed more than 80 per cent of Buddhist Thais want their religious faith declared as the national religion," Wibul said.

After his meeting with the former senators, Noranit said he would forward their request for deliberation by CDA members.

"It would need 10 CDA members to sponsor the debate on state religion and then the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) will have to decide whether to heed the advice and revise the draft," he said.

He said he had no personal opinion and would allow the debate to play its course because the issue was complicated and sensitive.

He dismissed speculation that the push for the state religion had gained momentum after the Council for National Security decided on Tuesday not to block the draft revision if deemed necessary.

CDA member Pichien Amnajwo-raprasert said he expected his colleagues to debate the issue no later than May 25, adding that the debate already had sufficient sponsors to take place.

"Personally, I think Buddhism should be recognised by the new constitution," he said, adding that at least 10 other CDA members shared the same view. CDC member Charan Pakdee-thanakul said concerned parties should try to work out a win-win solution on the issue.

"The solution should address how to give due recognition to Buddhism in the new constitution and at the same time grant equal praise for other religions," he said, arguing that only religious equality could pre-empt divisiveness.

CDC chairman Prasong Soonsiri said concerned parties were free to air their views on draft provisions, including the issue of Buddhism.

"After all the views have been aired, the CDC will then try to a draw conclusion," he said.

Source: The Nation - 26 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Agencies urged to stay impartial when first draft of new constitution rolls out

The Chairman of the Council for National Security (CNS) Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkrin (สนธิ บุญยรัตกลิน) requests agencies not to use their personal opinions to evaluate on the first draft of new Constitution.

In response to rising criticisms of the first draft of new Constitution, Gen. Sonthi says the first draft has been completed by specialized draft writers. He says agencies should consider the benefits of new Constitution.

Gen. Sonthi says the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) and relevant agencies will take responsibility to explain each article.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 26 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

CDC submits first charter draft to CDA today

The Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) submits the first draft of the new constitution to the Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) today (April, 26th). CDA Chairman calls for all sides to study the charter draft thoroughly instead of using some articles to reject the whole charter draft.

The CDA meeting today starts at 10.00 a.m. The main agenda of the meeting is to officially receive the charter draft from CDC which completed the draft on April 18th. CDA Chairman will edit the draft before forwarding it to other organizations for consideration. Suggestions gained from these organizations will be used to improve the second draft of the constitution.

The submission of the constitution draft is expected to be witnessed by Chairman of the Council for National Security Gen.Sonthi Boonyaratglin and Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont.

CDA Chairman Noraniti Sethabutr (นรนิติ เศรษฐบุตร) says the charter draft contains 299 articles. CDA now has the responsibility to interpret each of the articles, starting with article 26. Mr Noraniti adds that a group of more than 10 CDA members can hold a meeting to consider problematic issues concerning the new charter. He also affirms that CDA will consider the draft on the basis of rationality and listen to the public’s opinions.

Meanwhile, more than 300 Buddhist organizations and about 2,000 monks from all over the country have still gathered in front of the Parliament House, requesting the constitution drafters to set Buddhism as the state religion.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 26 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

First charter draft on road to democracy

The first draft of a new constitution for Thailand was formally presented Thursday morning to 12 constitutional organisations, another step forward on the road to democracy following completion of the foundational document by the 35-member Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC).

CDC chairman Prasong Soonsiri presented the charter draft, divided into 15 chapters with 299 articles, to the 100-member Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) in its meeting, which was attended not only by the CDA members but also by representatives from other bodies to formally receive the draft for their review.

According to Article 26 of the interim Constitution 2006 presently in use, after the CDC has finished drafting the first version of the constitution, it must present it to the CDA as well as filing copies to 12 constitutional bodies including the Council for National Security (CNS), the interim government, the National Legislative Assembly (NLA), the Supreme Court, the Supreme Administrative Court, the Election Commission, the Auditor-General, the Parliamentary Ombudsman, the National Human Rights Commission, the National Commission to Counter Corruption, the National Economic and Social Development Board, and several universities.

Prime Minister Gen. Surayud Chulanont, representing the government, and CNS chairman Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratkalin were also present to officially receive the draft.

According to the constitutional process, the CDA, chaired by veteran academic Noranit Sethabutr is to take 30 days to complete deliberations on the draft, during which opinions and recommendations from the other 12 bodies as well as from the public will be compiled for consideration.

Gen. Surayud and Gen. Sonthi, both regarded as the country's top administrators at present, had earlier announced that the draft charter would be ready for a national referendum in late September after being guided through a long process. If approved by the public in the referendum, thenew constitution will take force and a general election will be held in December as planned.

Source: TNA - 26 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Perfect charter an unrealistic goal

The next constitution should be judged only by its ability to aid a smooth return to democracy

Copies of the just-completed first draft of the new constitution have been distributed to 12 ad-hoc oversight agencies assigned to implement political reforms, plus civil society groups and the general public. All are expected to scrutinise this important document and provide feedback. Their recommendations and comments will then be taken into consideration by constitutional drafters for possible revisions before a referendum is held to decide whether the resulting charter is acceptable to the people. Thailand's latest attempt at drawing up a new constitution has proceeded relatively smoothly despite opposition by some academics and political activists, who question the legitimacy of the Constitution Drafting Committee, the Constitution Drafting Assembly and the Council for National Security (CNS), which appointed them. Their rationale is that the military junta, which seized power from the democratically-elected Thaksin government in September last year, and the people they appointed to draft the new charter, cannot be trusted to do the job.

However, even people who do not approve of the military coup should now participate in the process to help improve and refine the proposed new charter. After all, anyone who is not happy with the final version can exercise their democratic right to reject it when a nationwide referendum is held to formally endorse - or oppose - it, in August or September.

That said, no one should have any illusions about this proposed constitution, which is designed to restore democracy in this country at a time of political uncertainty, economic instability and social division.

As such, the proposed new constitution cannot be expected to be anywhere near perfect. The coup is seen by many as having been a necessary evil. On one hand, it was the only possible way to overthrow the Thaksin regime and the culture of corruption and deceit it perpetuated in Thai society. But, on the other, it turned back the clock on democratic development in this country.

Under the best-case scenario, the proposed constitution will serve as a transitional foundation stone that would ensure a smooth transfer of power from the military-appointed interim government to a democratically-elected one. The worst-case scenario would see it become an instrument that might allow overly ambitious military leaders to manipulate politics so that they can maintain their grip on power.

The draft constitution contains many good points that are similar to those in the 1997 charter, particularly in regard to empowering people to participate in politics. However, critics have identified key points in the charter draft as problematic. These include: an over-reliance on the judiciary to reform politics at the expense of an effective system of checks and balances between the administrative, legislative and judicial branches of government; the proposal that the Senate be appointed instead of elected by the people; the empowerment of heads of 11 institutionally-mandated oversight agencies to exercise extraordinary powers to resolve a "national crisis", which is not clearly defined. There are other controversies, but these are the key points of contention.

We strongly hope that, when it prepares its final draft, the Constitution Drafting Assembly carefully considers the input from 12 oversight agencies as well as people from all walks of life.

It should be made very clear that Thailand's quest for a sustainable democracy will require much more than a well-written constitution. The first thing that we must do is to promote better understanding of the constitution, which is the codified embodiment of the democratic aspirations and consensus of people living in this society.

Thai people should take this opportunity to engage in some introspection to understand how they have contributed to the persistent failure of society to put a healthy, self-sustaining democracy in place after almost 75 years of trial and error. Too many people continue to rely on the power of patronage to get things done instead of counting on democratic institutions and the rule of law to function the way they should to ensure that the administrative, legislative and judicial branches of government serve the people wisely, honestly and responsibly. This country needs politically-aware people who exercise their rights effectively in order for democracy to work the way it should.

This should provide the public debate on the final content of the proposed new constitution with some food for thought.

Source: The Nation - Editorial Opinion - 27 April 2007

[MiG16]

Rejecting new charter could make things worse

If the new draft charter fails to pass a public referendum, the interim constitution stipulates the CNS is allowed to take recourse with any previous charter by adapting some provisions.

"The CNS can pick the 1997 constitution and change the clause that senators must be appointed or add a clause that Buddhism must be a state religion. I'm not making a threat, but opponents of the constitution should be aware of these possibilities,"

Source: The Nation - 26 April 2007

BLAH!!! its exactly that...a threat we have been hearing all along and repeated at every occasion when any point of the draft constitution is contested. if they really want to be true to democracy and really want to take the public referendum and public voice seriously, what they should do is take into account the concerns raised by people, and incorporate them into changes in the draft they prepared.

better still, what SHOULD have been done is no new draft should have been prepared, but rather put in place the new elections commission, let them facilitate a fair election, and let the new ELECTED government make amendments to the 1997 Constitution.

but ok so things have not moved in that direction, but again I say instead of repeatedly threatening with what the CNS will do if this draft fails, the drafting committee should ensure that such controversial issues are not incorporated into the Constitution, where the majority of public oppose to them -- elected PM, elected senator, and not to leave the crisis power in the hands of a few individuals for instance.

[hammered]

While much discussion is rightly going on about the reduction of the powers of politicians, little is being said of the strengthening of the rights of the citizen vis a vis the 1997 constitution or any other for that matter. For the first time strong rights would be enshrined in the constitution rather than being covered by the catch all "as set out by law" allowing politicians to ignore setting the rights as was practiced under the 1997 consty. A constitution should be for all the people not just those who control the levers of power.

If the charter is rejected and another is selected, the miltary could still do the peope a service by insuring these clauses are transferrd to any of the previous constitutions and hence improving it, so little time or effort is spent discussing the rights of peopel and so much spent on how much power elite minorities should have.

By the way did anyon notice if the elitist "you need a bachelors degree to be an MP" clause of the 1997 consty still exists in the proposed new one? I may have missed it in my read.

[MiG16]

If the charter is rejected and another is selected, the miltary could still do the peope a service by insuring these clauses are transferrd to any of the previous constitutions and hence improving it, so little time or effort is spent discussing the rights of peopel

what makes you think it is in the military's interest to empower people politically? thai military has over the years always taken the opportunity/advantage of situation to use as excuse for their intervention in politics. if citizens were empowered, they would lose this excuse in the future. so it is much more in their interest to de-strengthen democracy...wait for politicians to abuse the system, and voila!! the milatary comes in to save the day..AGAIN!

[hammered]

If the charter is rejected and another is selected, the miltary could still do the peope a service by insuring these clauses are transferrd to any of the previous constitutions and hence improving it, so little time or effort is spent discussing the rights of peopel

what makes you think it is in the military's interest to empower people politically? thai military has over the years always taken the opportunity/advantage of situation to use as excuse for their intervention in politics. if citizens were empowered, they would lose this excuse in the future. so it is much more in their interest to de-strengthen democracy...wait for politicians to abuse the system, and voila!! the milatary comes in to save the day..AGAIN!

Well unless they had their charter writers deliberately write a draft for rejection, enshrining basic rights for the people in the charter for the first time ever is exactly what has happened if you read it and compare it to the 1997 consty - available on the net. I am not going to speculate what is behind it but only deal in the fact of what is written, and I am talking about one area of a constitution albeit I think a very important one, which I think is justified as everyone else cherry picks a bit they either like or dont like of both the flawed charter and the flawed 1997 consty.