Lack of a permanent charter eroding faith in 'highest law'

Since the 1932 revolt, which ended absolute monarchy and brought about the first charter, the Kingdom has had 18 constitutions – with the 19th provisional one being drafted by military after it took over on May 22. 

This means that the average lifespan of a constitution in Thailand is less than four and a half years – which is even shorter than the lifespan of a cheap car produced in the Far East. 

Five past charters, not including the present one, lasted for less than two years. 

When the junta, known as the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) took over, it tore up the 18th constitution, which was also sponsored by another group of coupmakers, and replaced it with the “provisional charter”. The junta promises that this provisional charter will be replaced by a new “permanent” one. 

The NCPO has also been working hard to calm the fears of those who think the next charter will be far from what they really want. 

While many continue enthusiastically debating the nitty-gritty of the next charter, I can’t help but get the feeling of deja vu. 

For instance, this is not the first time that someone like Bowornsak Uwanno has voluntarily taken up the job of helping create yet another constitution. The first time he did this was in 1997. 

While I can’t say I expect the charter to be drastically different this time, things like the debate on whether the next PM can be directly elected makes it seem as if the constitution is being written to keep people like former PM Thaksin Shinawatra and his proxies out of power. Also, the drafters are more or less the same group of experts.

In other words, the next constitution is looking less and less like a genuine social contract that every citizen can cherish and be proud to recite.

I must confess I never got the chance to properly scrutinise all the articles contained in the now-annulled 2007 constitution, but I hope to be able to fully read the next one. 

Some Thais say they are ashamed about referring to the country’s charters as “permanent”, and somebody on Facebook suggested that they should always be referred to as “provisional”, so we are no longer embarrassed in the eyes of the international community. 

A politician also recently suggested that the next constitution should hold a stipulation that no amnesty will be granted to future coupmakers. 

Of course, future coupmakers will possibly argue that once a coup is staged, the charter and whatever is inscribed in it will automatically become void and non-binding.

That’s possibly why my gut tells me that the next “permanent” constitution will be anything but permanent, as there is almost zero civilian control and the NCPO-sponsored reform process does not include changes in the military. 

Also, these ever-changing charters are making the citizens less attached to the supposed “highest law”, especially since most Thais are a little more than spectators when it comes to drafting the next charter. 

Plus, Thais have yet to achieve a genuine consensus that could become the foundation of a genuine social contract for co-existing as members of the same society.