EC eyes referendum minefield
Play
Supachai wants the focus to be on disseminating content of charter
ELECTION Commission chairman Supachai Somcharoen yesterday suggested that the public should be asked only one question when responding to the upcoming referendum on the charter draft.
Asking one question would be easier than asking many questions, he said, insisting that the referendum would be legally binding on the government.
Supachai said the government should not be concerned about the cost of holding the plebiscite but should focus on disseminating the content of the charter draft and highlighting the differences between previous charters and the draft.
Supachai said the EC had told Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam the possible issues that may arise from the new election system especially the open list system, which needed a large-size ballot paper and more time to count the result.
He said if polling stations were besieged, officials would not be able to count votes. This would mean the election results would not be known and a new Parliament could not open.
EC secretary-general Puchong Nutrawong said that although the 2007 Charter was scrapped, its organic law, the Public Referendum Act 2009, was still in force.
Puchong said the National Council for Peace and Order wanted the law to be effective in case it held a referendum on the new charter.
But there might be obstacles in its implementation as stipulated in the referendum law, Puchong said, and the National Legislative Assembly had to amend any loopholes as the EC lacked the authority to do this.
Wissanu tried to allay concerns over the cost of holding a plebiscite – potentially up to Bt3 billion.
He said lawmakers had already worked hard to amend the provisional charter to pave way for the referendum.
“It is the price of democracy. If you want democracy, you cannot be stingy. As the saying goes: ‘Don’t be stingy with chilli when slaughtering a water buffalo’, ’’ he said.
Wissanu also urged concerned agencies to speed up formulating the procedures for the referendum from four to three months. He said he personally wanted the referendum to be held, and rejected the assertion that holding it was not worthwhile and a better option was to improve previous charters to get the new one.
“It [improving previous charters to get the new one] is a good solution but there would be people who do not like this method,’’ he said.
Asked if he believed the public had lost faith in the Constitution Drafting Committee, Wissanu said if that were the case the plebiscite was inevitable.
