Draft charter too vague on the need for checks and balances
A robust system of checks and balances is essential to a government responsive and accountable to its people. As Lord Acton said, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”
Yet the Meechai draft charter is vague on what if any checks and balances there are on the legislature – at least as far as freedom of expression goes.
Article 34 reads, by unofficial translation, “Persons have freedom of expression … No limits shall be placed on these freedoms except where legislative powers are used to maintain state security, protect the freedom and rights of others, preserve civil order or public morals, protect public health, or prevent public discord or social hatred.”
So is our freedom of expression subject to whatever limits Parliament decides to place on it – without courts being able to overrule those limits? What if the last Parliament had banned criticism of Yingluck Shinawatra’s midnight amnesty bill because such criticism might sow public discord? What if the current government passed a bill promulgating Prayut Chan-o-cha’s beliefs regarding gender inequality? “Everybody,” the prime minister has declared, “says men and women must have equal rights. [But] Thai society will deteriorate if you think like this.”
Could we be punished for speaking out, even in ways that fully respected the rights of others? I suggest that even our legislature needs checks and balances, which is traditionally the role played by courts.
Burin Kantabutra
