Critics set conditions to join TV charter debate

CRITICS of the draft constitution have conditionally agreed to take part in a televised debate to be organised by the Election Commission (EC).

The agreement is contingent on public participation in choosing the topics of debate and a fair allocation of time for both sides. 

Some critics also want the debate to be aired during prime time.

The anti-charter New Democracy Movement (NDM) suggested yesterday that members of the public should pick the topics of the debate.

Meanwhile, the Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw) group said it was not sure on whether to take part, but may join if the topics of the planned debate are relevant to its field of expertise and if group representatives are given equal time to speak.

The responses came after EC member Somchai Srisuthiyakorn said on Monday that a new television programme would be aired on Thai PBS the week before the August 7 referendum for supporters and critics of the draft charter to exchange views. 

Somchai said anti-charter groups including NDM and iLaw would be invited to debate in the programme after heavy criticism was levelled that charter critics have not been given equal opportunity as charter proponents to express their viewpoints.

A non-profit organisation, iLaw has been calling on the EC to allow free campaigning and public participation in the run-up to the vote.

Key NDM member Rangsiman Rome said yesterday: “Yes, we’ll definitely accept the invitation [to debate the constitution]. All this time, we have always called for opportunities like this. There is no reason for us not to join the show.”

However, the activist said he was worried that the referendum was fast approaching and wanted the EC to speed up its work. “There is not much time left,” he said.

 

‘Show should air on all channels’

Rangsiman also said the show should allow public participation by letting ordinary people select topics for debate.

“It isn’t difficult and doesn’t take much time. We can have people vote for the topics they are interested in via Facebook. After all, we are doing this for them, right? So, they should be able to choose what information they want to know,” the activist said.

Yingcheep Atchanont, project manager of iLaw, said yesterday the group was not exactly “anti-charter” and he was not sure whether participation would be appropriate in the debate.

“The role of iLaw is not to move against the charter or anything. We just support and promote public participation and freedom of expression, making sure people have a voice to express their concerns,” he said.

Yingcheep did not completely rule out participating but set conditions for iLaw joining the event.

“We’ll have to see whether the topics relate to our work, such as rights and freedom or participation. If yes, we might do it. Also, we’ll have to be sure that we will be able to speak as much as our opposition,” he said.

The iLaw group and its allies have raised similar concerns to NDM – that anti-charter groups have not received the same opportunities to speak in EC-sponsored TV programmes on the charter that currently air every Monday and Wednesday. 

Although charter critics have been allowed to take part in the programmes, they have complained that they have had less time than charter proponents to voice their opinions.

Pheu Thai politician Noppadon Patama, a former foreign minister, said the TV debate was a good start for protecting people’s right to information.

Many Pheu Thai politicians have spoken out against the charter draft and said they would vote against it.

However, Noppadon suggested that instead of airing the debate on only one channel from 1pm to 2pm, the show should be broadcast simultaneously on all channels during primetime from 6pm to 9pm. Otherwise, he feared the debate would not have much of an audience.