'Pick-and-choose' method not suitable to amend charter

Tampering with it indiscriminately could lead to the failure of the whole charter, warned Attasit Pankaew, Thammasat University political scientist.

Nitipol Kiravanich of The Nation talked to Attasit about the issue and more.

 

Q: WOULD THERE BE ANY PROBLEM IF THE CONSTITUTION DRAFTING COMMITTEE (CDC) DID NOT ALTER THE CHARTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL REFORM COUNCIL (NRC), NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (NLA) AND THE CABINET’S PROPOSALS?

 

A: The Constitution is designed in a systematic way, so amending charter articles should be done in as holistic a manner as possible. The CDC simply cannot alter the charter through a “pick and choose” method.

 

Q: COULD THE MIXED-MEMBER PROPORTIONAL (MMP) ELECTORAL SYSTEM – ALONG WITH THE OPEN-LIST SYSTEM, WHICH REFORMERS AND THE CABINET PROPOSE TO AMEND – BE ALTERED OR NOT?

A: If the CDC was to amend the MMP and its open-list system – that means they would have to eliminate political interest groups as well.

Q: CAN YOU GIVE AN EXAMPLE?

 

A: For instance, amending the open-list system would not solve the whole political system of the draft charter. Rather, if we wanted strong government we certainly could not adopt the MMP system, because the MMP system would lead to coalition-government. 

 

Q: ANOTHER FIERCELY DEBATED TOPIC IS AN OUTSIDER PRIME MINISTER, WHICH THE NRC PROPOSED TO ELIMINATE – BUT THE NLA VOICED SUPPORT FOR IT. THE CABINET DID NOT VOICE ANY DISAGREEMENT. WHAT IS YOUR VIEW ON THIS? 

A: We have to weigh up how it would affect the country. I believe the CDC drafted this as an exit in case the country faced a dispute again. If we believed there could possibly be a call for an outsider PM in the future, this article could serve as another [escape route].

 

Q: DO YOU WANT THE PUBLIC TO PERCEIVE THIS AS AN EXIT FOR THE COUNTRY ONCE IT FACES POLITICAL CRISIS – RATHER THAN THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR PEACE AND ORDER (NCPO) AIMING TO HAVE ONE OF ITS MEN BECOME A PM IN THE FUTURE?

A: Yes, because the charter drafters are trying to draft an outsider PM Article under a condition. Surely it is possible for an outsider to be the PM, yet it is not easy to attain the PM position because that person would have to gain two-thirds of parliamentarians’ votes.

 

Q: WHAT ABOUT ARTICLES 181 AND 182, WHICH GRANT EXCESSIVE POWER TO THE PM IN PROPOSING A BILL?

A: The reason drafters stated this charter would grant such authority was because they realised the MMP system would lead to a coalition government. Certainly, there would be conflict among coalition parties and, if the PM was incapable of controlling the parties, it would make his position untenable. 

 

Q: MANY NEW INDEPENDENT ORGANISATIONS ARE SLATED TO BE SET UP UNDER THIS NEW CHARTER, ALTHOUGH THE NLA AND THE CABINET PROPOSED TO AMEND OR EVEN ELIMINATE THEM FROM IT. IN YOUR OPINION, IS IT SUITABLE TO HAVE THESE NEW ORGANISATIONS?

A: [These are] “periphery” organisations, such as the People’s Assembly, the National Ethical Committee and other bodies. It might be too much to put them in the charter draft and there is no guarantee that listing them in the charter would make these bodies function efficiently.

 

Q: CAN YOU PREDICT THE OUTCOME – WHETHER THE NRC WILL APPROVE THE DRAFT CHARTER?

A: It is still difficult to predict the outcome of the vote – at the moment the voting tendency is divided into three groups. There are those who would most likely vote to reject the charter, those who were still waiting to decide once the charter drafters had amended charter Articles, and those who would certainly approve the draft.