FRIDAY, March 29, 2024
nationthailand

All paths to charter change involve some sort of risk

All paths to charter change involve some sort of risk

The government stands on the threshold of a momentous decision to chart its next step following Friday's judicial ruling on charter change.

Despite passionate arguments from the red shirts, coalition allies and pro-amendment academics to sway the government one way or the other, the decision will not be finalised before a thorough review of the verdict on the charter amendment bill.

 

The eight judges of the Constitution Court will release their ruling, accompanied by individual opinions, through the Royal Gazette in the next two weeks.
Given irreconcilable differences between the anti- and pro-amendment camps, the government has to tread carefully in order to ensure its stability, as well as avoid exacerbating the political volatility.
By the time the House session resumes next month, one of four scenarios will likely emerge as the chosen path to plough on with a rewrite of the charter.
In the first scenario, the charter amendment bill will either be withdrawn or put on hold pending a referendum vote.
Should the government choose to consult the people and ask for a mandate to overhaul the political system, the outcome of the referendum will likely settle the debate on charter change once and for all.
Many see the referendum as a sustainable solution to bridge the political divide. But the government will be at risk if the outcome favours no change.
The Election Commission has already indicated it would need a minimum of four months to organise and complete a referendum vote.
The lesson of the last referendum, held to endorse the 2007 Constitution, is still fresh in memory. Despite complete control of state mechanisms, the junta had a hard time outpacing opponents of the coup-sponsored charter.
The second scenario is that the government would opt for final passage of the bill and give the Constitution Drafting Assembly a full mandate to overhaul the charter.
Under this option, the anti-amendment camp would definitely take the case back to the Constitution Court. Furthermore the government would be targeted for a smear campaign questioning its loyalty to the monarchy.
Although the high court ruled the bill constitutional, the ruling set one condition – the charter must not be rewritten in its entirety. Its opponents would cast doubt on the extent of charter change in order to pin blame on the government for presenting a questionable legislation for royal endorsement.
The third scenario is that the government might still push for the bill’s final passage but instruct the CDA to amend certain provisions and not rewrite the entire charter.
And in the fourth scenario, the idea of forming a drafting assembly would be dropped altogether and either the government or Pheu Thai Party would sponsor an alternate bill to amend the charter.
All four scenarios would prove to be tough choices for the government.
A referendum may eventually help in overcoming the political divide but the fate of the government would, at the same time, plunge into the unknown.
If the government chooses to appease the red shirts and Nitirat academics by keeping the charter rewrite in its present form, then it risks inflaming political volatility.
Should the government opt to abandon the formation of a CDA and to cap charter amendments in lieu of introducing a new charter, it would antagonise the red shirts and other coalition supporters.
There is just no way to please all sides. The government can only hope it can pick the path of least resistance among these tough choices.
 
RELATED
nationthailand