CDC president playing a key role in drafting of new charter
Play
Borwornsak has ultimate power to steer direction of new constitution
SINCE THE work of the Constitution Drafting Committee began last week, it has become clearer and clearer that its president will play a key role in steering the direction of this new charter.
The public knew instantly after the coup that this day would come. Every time there’s a putsch in this country it all ends up with tearing up the old charter and the “junta’s charter” drafted as the new one.
Political observers have voiced concerns that the military may have its own blueprint for the new constitution already, but military-related agencies, including the framers themselves, have rejected such claims.
One whole week has passed and more than 90 articles have been written, or almost one-third of the constitution.
The process has been open for the media to observe, which has allowed some of them to get a clearer picture of who can dictate the draft, who proposes most of the contents of articles, and even who keeps silent most of the time.
The drafting of the charter one article after the other has also shown some drafters’ sincerity in proposing a charter to empower our citizens and their concern for civil rights, even participation in the small legal details.
However, that does not guarantee their ideas would be included in the constitution because the final say rests with the committee’s president, Borwornsak Uwanno.
For instance, some drafters suggested inserting the definition of civil rights clearly in the main charter, or the international treaties of which they are part, but the CDC president cut them short and made it clear that the text must be concise.
Borwornsak evidently explained that if there was no need for the articles to be lengthy, then they should be brief. If the terms are stated excessively, in return what has not been stated in the charter could limit the interpretation abide by legal area as well.
The debate between the drafter and the president was seen as very sincere.
It showed that no side was right while the other was wrong, merely who has more authority |or less, and who is willing to back |off from his proposal.
Many members reserved their right to support their president most of the time, overlooking other beneficial proposals by other members to empower their own citizens.
However, some drafters spent most of the time voicing neither a worthwhile suggestion for the charter nor any support.
They even opposed other members’ proposals.
Keeping their mouths shut could be a sign to the public that their minds are also shut.
Or it could indicate that they are highly dissatisfied with the draft to the point that they do not want to participate in making suggestions anymore.
For that reason perhaps these CDC members, who are also members of the National Reform Council (NRC), are waiting for the right moment to shoot down the whole draft when it is forwarded to the NRC to have the final say – “yes” or “no” – to the charter.
If an NRC member, who had pushed for his proposal to be inserted in the new charter, doesn’t see it in the final version, it could also spark a dispute among these junta-appointed agencies.
If the military cannot manage these two organisations properly, this constitution might not pass and these two organisations will be dissolved.
Then the whole process of drafting has to start again from scratch with a new cast of drafters.
If that happens, the party that benefits the most is the military. They will have to continue running the country for at least two more years so that the composition can be finished, even if they have denied from the beginning after seizing power that they wanted to stay in power for a long time.
