What does a constitution for reform and reconciliation look like?

But Dr Borwornsak Uwanno realises that it will be hard to convince the whole country that the new constitution will genuinely represent all the nation’s diverse interest groups. 

“We know that our social capital is relatively small because the National Reform Council wasn’t a popularly elected body. The members were handpicked by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). But we will do our best,” the legal expert admits.

The charter drafting committee will have to submit its work to the National Reform Council, which has the final say on the matter before it is put to a public referendum. The National Legislative Assembly, another appointed body, is also being tested over whether “reconciliation” is part of the agenda or not.

The proposed impeachment of former House speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont and ex-Senate speaker Nikom Wairatpanij, has split the NLA, with one side arguing that wrongs must be put right while the other side insists that if the move persists, national reconciliation would be undermined yet again.

The 87-75 vote, with 15 abstentions, was a narrow victory for those who want to proceed with the impeachment move. The absence of 30 NLA members from the session, on grounds that they had to attend a Royal Thai Army Kathin ceremony, was conspicuous. The uniformed officers were obviously trying to keep a distance from the political fallout.

The Somsak-Nikom case was in fact just a prelude to the more crucial impeachment motion against former premier Yingluck Shinawatra. If found guilty, she could be disqualified for political office for five years – and that could seriously undermine Pheu Thai Party activities once elections are held after the new constitution comes into force.

But the impeachment is unlikely to materialise. At least two-thirds of the 220 NLA members must vote in favour in order for impeachment to be effective. To achieve that number under the current scheme of things is almost impossible – unless the military makes the unlikely open gesture of backing that motion.

But even if impeachment is ruled out, the political undercurrents pitting the pro-Thaksin and anti-Thaksin elements against one another have surfaced yet again, putting the reform process in a precarious position.

Dr Borwornsak’s outline of his personal blueprint for the new constitution puts strong emphasis on “national reconciliation and reform”. Deputy Premier Wissanu Krea-ngam, one of Premier Prayut Chan-o-cha’s trusted legal gurus, has publicly stated that the new charter will be “colour blind” – suggesting that the provisions won’t benefit one group of the recurring conflict over another.

The chief charter drafter said the new constitution will have to embrace clauses that will ensure social and economic equality, well-being and social as well as economic freedom.

“It will definitely not be old wine in a new bottle. Let’s forget that description because none of the country’s past 19 constitutions had incorporated national reconciliation and justice in the economic and social systems,” said Borwornsak.

How those aims are to be achieved in concrete terms remains a huge challenge. Almost all constitutional formulae have already been tried in this country. All the world’s well-known clauses have been included in the past 19 constitutions but none has been able to prevent a coup.

After all is said and done, however, it’s not the legal fine points that determine whether a constitution works or not. It’s the practical adaptation to real-life situations and the political ethical standards, which cannot be written down, that decide whether “democracy” is really practised or not.

Unless broad-based “participatory democracy” is adopted that allows the people at all levels to exercise their rights as proper checks and balances against politicians, the new constitution, no matter how impressive the wording, will be just another draft waiting to be torn up by one of the groups of vested interests with the power of intervention, legal or otherwise.