New charter does not address root cause of national conflict: Abhisit

The draft has just been completed and is awaiting scrutiny by the National Reform Council. 

According to the former prime minister, this charter has not been designed to solve the root causes of political conflicts, namely abuse of power, destruction of democracy, and corruption. 

“Yet it seems like the drafters [Constitution Drafting Committee members] are afraid of democracy. Aren’t they able to tell the difference between democracy and the Thaksin [Shinawatra] regime? They merely believe that democracy can be used to pave the way for the [Thaksin] regime ... which needs to be eradicated,” the former PM said in an exclusive interview with The Nation. 

Abhisit said the problems that needed addressing were the prevention and elimination of the abuse of power. In contrast, though, the CDC thinks that if democracy is put in place, then political parties and politicians will take over the administration and repeat the problems created by the Thaksin regime. 

“This confusion is the key issue. For instance, the charter they [the CDC] drafted weakens political parties, so in order to avoid a weak government, they have given it extra power,” Abhisit said.

For instance, he said, there is an article that allows the government to push laws through more easily. 

The article he was referring to states that the prime minister can declare a cabinet-proposed law or any part thereof as a vote of confidence. Once this declaration is made, if the House of Representatives does not initiate a “no-confidence” motion within 48 hours, then the bill can automatically go through unchanged to the Senate. 

“If this article existed in the now-defunct 2007 constitution, the blanket amnesty bill would have gone through,” he said.

That amnesty bill was the cause of the political protest campaign against Yingluck Shinawatra’s government, which eventually resulted in the May 22 military takeover. 

Moreover, Abhisit said, this charter has set up excessive scrutiny measures against MPs. 

“Instead of strengthening political parties and focusing more on the executive branch, the drafters are weakening parties and making the executive branch more difficult to scrutinise,” he said.

The Democrat leader voiced no concerns about the mixed-member proportional (MMP) electoral system, provided it is democratically fair. However, he said, he finds the open-list and party-list systems contradictory. 

He cited the CDC’s claim that it wanted the party-list system to acquire politicians who are not good at campaigning. However, he said, under this system, open-list candidates who are not good at campaigning will also fail because they will have to compete with good campaigners who are part of the same list. 

As for impeachment, which according to the draft can be put in motion through votes in the House of Representatives and the Senate, Abhisit said that in reality, it would only be the opposition that ends up getting impeached. 

He reasoned that normally, the lower-house majority is the government, and the minority the opposition. Similarly, if the Senate is divided into two equal camps, it will always be the opposition that gets impeached. 

“The Parliament could become a tool to impeach scrutinisers,” he said. 

Another issue of concern was the new independent organisations, which he said were granted too much power. 

“It is still unclear where the members of the independent reconciliation committee will come from, as the draft only says they will be appointed by His Majesty. Plus, this new body has too much authority in offering pardons to wrongdoers who provide useful information that is beneficial to the case and those who have shown remorse to the reconciliation committee,” Abhisit said. 

He pointed out that, in reality, it is His Majesty who has the power to grant pardons. 

He also voiced concerns about the National Ethics Assembly, saying members of this panel would have to be courageous, as deciding on who exactly can be considered violators of ethical or moral issues is an intricate matter. 

The former PM also warned that the public, media, political observers and politicians would be scrutinising the lives and backgrounds of the committee members intensively. 

With arguments, debates and voices of opposition against the draft getting louder, Abhisit said the best way to end this criticism would be to hold a public referendum. The plebiscite should give people two choices – whether they want this new charter or the 2007 one – as this would help avoid the problem of the drafters going back to Square 1. 

“If you compare the new charter with the previous one, I believe the latter was better,” he said. 

Abhisit said holding a referendum would be a good rehearsal before a general election is held, as the authorities could stipulate regulations to study the contrasting ideas without giving way to violence. 

This way, society could acknowledge democracy, and reconciliation could be promoted, he said.

“Successful reconciliation is not the process of making everyone think along the same lines, but helping those with contrasting ideas be able to live together. Holding a referendum would give Thailand a great opportunity to see if we are able to move towards reconciliation or not.

“The NCPO’s [National Council for Peace and Order] success will be determined ‘at the end of the road’, when people accept their actions or the rules they have created, and allow the country to move forward peacefully,” he said.