Charter criticised for unelected Senate, voting system, agency powers

Suriyasai Katasila, director of Rangsit University's Thailand Reform Institute, warned that society must not fall victim to political sentiment to reject the charter draft, but instead judge it with wisdom and reason so the country can achieve true reform.

He pointed out several aspects of the draft that he said needed to be changed. Firstly, the mixed-proportional system allowing voters to cast only one single vote, he said, distorted the intentions of voters in their selection of MPs.

Human rights, consumer rights, rights of the less privileged and labourers, and public participation are much less provided for than in the 1997 and 2007 charters, Suriyasai said.

Also, the charter has no provisions regarding state investment in state enterprises, which could lead to the privatisation of state enterprises and pave the way for capitalists to take ownership. By contrast, the 2007 charter draft stipulated that the state must maintain a 51-per-cent stake in such enterprises, he said.

The draft also empowers independent agencies but fails to put in place a transparent selection process for their members or specify a mechanism by which the public can check their powers, Suriyasai said.

The mechanisms to decentralise power and bridge social and economic gaps are weaker than those suggested by the previous charter drafting panel led by Borwornsak Uwanno.

The charter also lacks a mechanism to drive reconciliation even though the issue has been established as one of six major objectives, Suriyasai added. 

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha summarises the new charter draft as one that will prevent corrupt people from rising to power or exploiting national resources, Government spokesman Sansern Kaewkamnerd said yesterday.

The prime minister thanked the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) led by Meechai Ruchupan for finishing the charter amid pressure from politicians.

Prayut had said politicians attacked the charter draft because they stand to lose their own interests and do not care about the public interest, Sansern said.

Democrat Party deputy leader Ong-art Klampaiboon approved of the charter’s anti-corruption mechanism, provisions that checked the abuse of power by the political majority, and mechanisms to boost the financial discipline of the state. 

But he questioned why charter writers recommended only nine years of free education when the Democrat-led government had provided for 12 years. He also urged Meechai to specify that Parliament’s vice president must be a member of the political opposition in the interest checks and balances.

Ong-art questioned the provision that would allow a non-elected prime minister, saying that if the objective were to address the country’s political crisis, the charter should clearly specify when a non-elected premier could take power and under what circumstances. 

He also disapproved of the single-vote, single ballot electoral system, saying it would lead to vote-buying and fail to reflect voters’ intentions.

He said the charter draft must be reviewed and it was too soon for the Democrats to decide whether to accept or reject it.

Sukhothai Thammathirat deputy rector Yuthaporn Issarachai said the draft provided strong anti-graft and checks-and-balances mechanisms but contained flaws in the mixed election system, the allowance of a non-elected prime minister and the indirect elections of senators. 

He disagreed with the move to reduce the powers of politicians who have a direct link to the people and instead strengthen the independent agencies that are not accountable to the people, 

He said the Constitutional Court could be given too much power to rule when a non-elected prime minister could take over government.

He also disapproved of provisions that would make it difficult to amend the charter.

National Reform Steering Assembly’s political reform committee spokesman Wanchai Sornsiri approved of the charter although said it did need some changes.

 “The country needs a balance between democracy and political stability. If we have the same mechanism as previous charters, we will go back to the same vicious circle,’’ he said.

He said politicians who attacked the charter draft did not criticise it fairly.

Pheu Thai caretaker secretary-general Phumtham Wechayachai challenged Meechai to come up with a draft which is “more cruel” than the present one. He was referring to Meechai’s remark that if politicians reject this draft, they would face a more cruel draft in the future.

“We reject the Borwornsak draft and we reject the Meechai draft,” Poomtham said. “If you are bold enough to force the people to accept the more cruel one, go ahead.”