Better input needed in charter debate
Play
Ref: "Academics urge CDC to seek public participation", National, December 19.
They need help from somewhere. The input to date is not encouraging:
A directly elected prime minister and cabinet is complete nonsense (letters to the editor – passim). All should be elected as MPs first.
The 350 Lower House representatives elected by multi-winner constituency electoral rule – presumably to ensure that multiple parties are elected in areas where a socialist party might sweep the board and to thwart the demagogue.
Representative candidates must not be the spouse or sibling of politicians – may mean that dedicated politicians are excluded from parliament. Better to ensure that the politicians represent their electorate, although only one from the Shinawatra family in the House has appeal!
Each political party must choose constituency candidates – no independent candidates to sidestep the multi-winner rule.
Authorities can seize assets from the siblings of politicians if they were obtained corruptly – the assistants of politicians who normally hold the cash can keep it.
Politicians are responsible for their associates’ misconduct – politicians should be responsible, full stop. Does it need a constitution to say that!
Politicians and high-ranking public servants cannot sit on the board of a state enterprise – if you cannot trust them for that they should not be in office. State enterprises need as many educated, dedicated people as they can get.
Bills to be enacted on the prevention of populism – only unpopular bills allowed? Looks like the second bite of the cherry on the second rule above.
Reduce the length and number of terms for high-ranking officials of independent organisations – if you have a good one, get rid of them quickly in case they improve with experience.
Police reform and the decentralisation of power to local units – unless the influence of senior and retired police officers is removed, there will always be a problem.
Richard Bowler
Bangkok
