With charter debate, no excuse for biased voting

In a decidedly last-minute concession to complaints that public dialogue on the flaws and merits of the draft constitution has been severely curtailed, the Election Commission has arranged for a series of televised debates, though the concept has its own flaws as well as merits.

With prominent critics of the draft invited to participate, there is much promise in the debates to be broadcast on Thai PBS between next Monday and August 5. The national referendum on the proposed charter takes place just two days after the final telecast, so the timing is good, affording citizens a chance to hear both sides and then some space in which to make up their minds about how they’ll vote.

Each session will begin at 1pm and last an hour, Election Commissioner Somchai Srisutthiyakorn announced this week. The debates will cover in turn 10 issues selected by the commission, including concerns that the constitution, if approved, would put an end to social-welfare programmes like universal healthcare and monthly subsidies for the elderly. Other issues to be discussed are the fate of free education, the protection of natural resources, how international treaties affect Thai sovereignty, and whether people other than elected members of Parliament can become prime minister.

Somchai said groups critical of the draft charter would be invited to take part in the debates, specifically the New Democracy Movement and the Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw). Their representatives would likely face members of the Constitution Drafting Commission.

Democrat Party leader and former premier Abhisit Vejjajiva has endorsed the debate plan for providing a forum at which both supporters and critics of the draft can publicly air their views, but he’d prefer to see more input. 

The political parties should be 

involved too, Abhisit said, as well as the anti-coup United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship and the royalist People’s Democratic Reform Committee, academics and spokespeople for civil society.

The Election Commission curbed public dialogue on the draft charter early on by introducing pre-emptive legislation controlling the lead-up to the August 7 referendum. So it is a positive development that we will now have an open discussion on some of the key issues on the table.

There are, however, other contentious issues that evidently will not be debated on television. Most notably, there will be no reference to the question that was added to the referendum document – after the next general election, should appointed senators be allowed to help elected MPs choose the new prime minister? The question was added once the referendum format was established, in response to the argument that a fundament of democracy pivots on it. It is the people alone who should be choosing their national leader. Senators, appointed to their posts rather than elected by popular vote, deserve no role in such a crucial process.

Regardless of the issues, though, the referendum will be a test of public astuteness. It has become clear that many voters are waiting for other people – trusted community leaders, local politicians and leaders of political groups – to give them their cues. As consistently happens at general elections, too many voters cast ballots the way they’re told, without thinking through the choices on their own.

No one expects voters to have read the entire draft constitution, let alone understand its legalese, but there are sufficient summaries and analyses of the issues available to provide a guide in making a decision.

The referendum will also test whether the people of a divided Thailand are anchored to their biases. This will be a moment when we cannot be led astray by the prejudices espoused by one side or another, by our customary allegiances to red or yellow. For the sake of democracy, we have to make our own decisions after carefully weighing the pros and cons.