More obstacles in the road to democracy

The Constitution Drafting Commission has no choice but to reject the Cabinet’s proposal of a clause permitting the junta to overrule the authority of the next elected government. Rather than ensuring a peaceful transition to civilian rule, as claimed, the clause would block the route back to democracy and deepen the divisions rending the country. 
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha’s junta has revealed its intention to retain power for an indeterminate period after the election by proposing a clause that would allow a special set of rules to override the constitution during the transition to full democracy.
In a letter to the constitution authors, the Cabinet suggested the measure would ensure “stability during the transition”. It would, the junta-installed Cabinet said, guard against a repeat of the turmoil that very nearly turned Thailand into a failed state prior to the coup on May 22, 2014. “During the transitional period – the turning point that decides the life or death of a country – a temporary measure must be allowed where necessary, in order to maintain peace and order,” it said.
In short, the Cabinet is proposing a quasi-democracy in which the military, the elite and the bureaucracy retain control of the levers of power while politicians chosen by popular mandate merely provide the illusion of genuine democracy. 
The government, the junta and the military are working hard to portray a post-election scenario of political uncertainty, yet they have never clarified exactly what they mean by this “transition period”. The Cabinet said it believes any resumption of political conflict in the wake of the election “may be worse than before”.
The underlying message here is that elected politicians are too corrupt to be entrusted with power, and that elections cannot find the right people to govern, a job best left to the trustworthy and better qualified military and bureaucracy. The implication is that Thais are incapable of making wise choices at the polling booth, and thus full-fledged democracy is not suitable for Thailand.
This outrageous proposal is just one example among many of the anti-democratic beliefs that animate the junta’s supporters and its mechanisms. Another is a draft bill approved by the junta-installed National Steering Reform Assembly for a non-elected strategy committee that would guide government planning for at least the next 20 years. Most controversially, members of that panel would include the chiefs of the reform assembly and the National Legislative Assembly.
Clearly, whoever is elected to form the next government in an election whose date remains shrouded in uncertainty, Prayut and his generals want to still be able to dictate the country’s direction. Political parties with a popular mandate to enact policy would be prevented from doing so if their plans contradicted the national-strategy committee’s intentions. Failure to heed the committee’s “guidance” could result in those elected to govern being punished in some way.
The first draft of the constitution currently being publicly discussed already represents a threat to the restoration of democracy. The drafters should not be tempted to place further obstacles along the road to civilian rule. Rather, they should be keeping democratic principles foremost in mind and rewriting the draft from beginning to end.
Members of the CDC should have realised by now that military and other state officials, given absolute power without transparency or accountability, are just as likely to be corrupt as elected politicians. The only cure for endemic corruption is commitment to genuine democracy.