Tight charter timeframe makes it tough for critics to be heard
Play
Since the appointment of the National Reform Council in October, members have been working under a two-month timetable to draw up proposals for 11 national reform areas that will be submitted for the charter drafters to consider.
The task seems impossible given the timeframe. NRC president Thienchay Kiranan admitted it was a “very challenging” job.
The NRC is meeting from Monday until tomorrow, with the sessions expected to last more than 1,100 minutes in total.
Almost 200 reformers have declared their intention to debate various issues. This means, on average, each member will get only six minutes to speak.
At the end of three days of debate, NRC members will vote on whether to approve or reject the 18 panels’ reform proposals.
Considering the significance of the task and the hope it will lead to years of stability, is the timeframe appropriate?
I would argue that the public needs to see more critical discussion and debate before the proposals are submitted to the Constitutional Drafting Committee, so it can begin the drafting process.
After the final meeting tomorrow, members will either accept or reject each panel’s whole proposal in an all-or-nothing voting process.
It puts members in a tough spot, but the chances are they will likely approve the proposals because of time constraints plus the domestic and foreign pressure for the junta to lead the country to elections as soon as possible.
Hence, many topics that need more time for discussion and compromise will be submitted to the charter drafters, who are also being pressured and rushed to complete the drafting process within a given schedule.
Indeed, there are many issues that are controversial and divisive, such as appointment of the premier, the Cabinet and parliamentary representatives, as well as much-needed police reform and how to appropriately distribute power among local administrations.
There is also a dire need for education reform, with Thai children currently receiving an education ranked near the bottom in Asean, as well as the need to tackle corruption – to name but a few.
All of these are gravely serious issues that will need lengthy debate. Instead, the reformers are given six minutes each to raise their concerns.
And I disagree with NRC whip spokesman Wanchai Sornsiri’s assertion that voting on each panel’s whole proposal rather than specific issues will “resolve all the issues, as the NRC will forward the proposals to the CDC”.
It will force members to look at the overall proposal rather than casting a critical eye over each issue – something they ought to do.
Nonetheless, it must be acknowledged that the junta, the reformers and charter drafters’ task of laying the foundation for national reform that will lead to peace, stability and prosperity is almost an unattainable task given the year-and-a half timeframe they have.
It is therefore very important that the junta and the reformers leave room for future leaders, reformers or those who think differently to contribute and make amendments to the new constitution that can, at best, establish peace and stability now and in the future.
