Why the draft's rejection seemed a relief for all sides

Why the draft’s rejection seemed a relief for all sides

  JINTANA PANYAARVUDH

[email protected]

 

THE LONG and protracted journey of Thailand’s 20th Constitution came to an abrupt halt on Sunday when the National Reform Council (NRC) shot down the charter draft, delaying the general election for at least seven months. 

The military-installed NRC overwhelmingly voted 135:105 to reject the charter draft written by the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), which took around nine months to draw up and review the draft. 

The rejection appears to be a relief for all sides, except the CDC.

The anti-coup camp was glad that the junta-sponsored charter draft was rejected, while proponents of the coup were also happy that the junta would get to stay in power a little longer. It worked out especially well for the latter because the junta can maintain order and peace for longer.

It’s a win-win situation for the junta. The military can retain power for several months longer and the new Cabinet line-up will have more time to show positive results and win back the hearts of the people. 

However, while the majority of the NRC members had several reasons to shoot down the charter draft, what was clearer than the result was who actually voted against it. 

According to the results, most of the NRC members who voted against the draft were politicians, military personnel, police officers and public servants.

It was no surprise why the politicians went against the draft. The most controversial issue in the draft they feared was the National Strategic Reform and Reconciliation Committee (NSRRC) since the so-called crisis panel would have more power than the government. 

The draft gave the panel special powers to intervene in a political crisis by seizing both executive and legislative powers from the government and parliament in the event that the government could not function and the national administration was seriously compromised.

But the motives of the security officers and public servants for shooting down the draft, which was the decisive voting bloc that caused the draft to fail, were quite interesting.

It’s not clear why the junta allowed the draft to be rejected, especially if you consider that Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha was upbeat about it, particularly the crisis panel. Several clauses in the draft clearly satisfied the junta’s needs; for example the “outsider” prime minister, the NSRRC, life ban for politicians who commit electoral fraud or corruption, and having 123 out of 200 senators in the first Senate selected by the government. 

So why and how did the junta allow the rejection to happen?

That brings us to another question: why did the NRC members, who were supposed to support the government, as well as the junta who appointed them, vote against the premier’s view.

If we believe the widespread speculation that heavy lobbying was done by the junta to urge the NRC not to pass the draft, it would not stretch the imagination too far to suggest that someone from the junta issued an “order” to reject the draft so that the military could retain power longer than stipulated in the road map.

And it would be difficult for Prayut to explain why those who were appointed by him voted against his view, although he kept saying he would maintain the road map and return democracy to the people soon. 

Or was he just playing out some well-rehearsed drama to convince the people that he wanted to follow the road map – but in a way that nobody expected?

However, now the new round of charter drafting will begin soon. 

A new group of 21 charter drafters will be appointed by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) within 30 days.

No one can guarantee the new drafting team will not put all the controversial clauses desired by the junta back into the new draft. But why not, as the new drafting team will be appointed by the NCPO? 

And this time the decision will belong to the voters in a national referendum whether or not to approve the draft.