MPs and senators continue to debate details of charter drafting assembly

Parliamentarians yesterday continued to debate the appropriate number of Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) members, and whether they should be appointed or elected.

Yesterday was the fourth day of the second reading of the charter amendment draft. 

It was the second day devoted to the debate on Article 291/1, concerning the number and method of selection of CDA members. 

The debate on the Article is considered the most controversial and has drawn the highest number of registrations of MPs and senators seeking to join the arguments.

Many senators support the idea of using the 1997 Constitution as a guideline for electing CDA members. According to this proposal, the assembly would consist of 200 elected members representing their provinces in proportion to population.

Many Democrats support a proposal from party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva that the CDA comprise 125 elected and 25 appointed members.

While some parliamentarians have proposed an increase in the number of appointed charter drafters, others say there should be only elected members.

The Cabinet has recommended the CDA comprise 99 members – one from each of the 77 provinces and 22 appointed by Parliament. Of the 22, six would be experts in public law, six would be knowledgeable in political science or public administration, and the remainder would have experience in politics, public administration or charter drafting.

Senator Kamnoon Sitthisamarn proposed that the CDA should consist of 200 members, taking as its model the senatorial election method prescribed in the 1997 Constitution. 

Allowing each voter to pick one candidate, and giving each province representation on the CDA according to population, would respect voters’ equal rights while allowing diversity, the senator said. 

Senator Prasert Chitapong proposed that the CDA have 175 members – two from each province and 21 members selected by experts

“The CDA member with the most votes from a province would represent the majority; the second-most popular represents the minority and [allows for] diversity,” Prasert said.

 

‘One representative enough’

Pheu Thai MP Peerapan Palusuk, a member of the parliamentary ad hoc panel on charter amendment, opposed having more than one CDA member from a province. 

He said it would be hard to justify to the public the inclusion of a runner up who may have garnered far fewer votes than the most popular candidate. 

Having only one person from each province would provide for a far clearer result, he said.

“People will choose the person they think most suitable,” he said.

“The CDA members are required to communicate with the people. 

“They have to meet and let people participate. They have to listen to the people’s opinions as much as they can. If each province has one CDA member, [this process] will be clearer,” Peerapan said.

A war of words erupted yesterday after Senator Somchai Sawangkarn said that in proposing a total of 99 CDA members, the Pheu Thai Party was trying to dominate the assembly. He said he had learned that Natee Sornwaree, a key member of the red shirts, had said at an event to open a Red Shirt Village in Chiang Rai that the CDA would include 53 members from the red shirts. 

“Will the charter drafting be for the sake of all groups, or will it be according to a blueprint?” asked Somchai.

Pheu Thai MP Sunai Chulpong-satorn was also at the event, Somchai said.

Sunai counterattacked, saying he had joined anti-charter-change rallies, despite Parliament’s resolution to change the Constitution.