Senate question looms over charter referendum

Everyone knew the political situation would be very fluid leading to the charter referendum, but a lot more unpredictability has been added by recent developments. The “additional question” that Thai voters will have to answer at the ballot booth on August 7 is making things complicated for every party, not least because it concerns what has always been one of the most contentious points of Thai politics, the relevance of the Senate.
Besides deciding whether they accept the draft charter or not, voters will have to say if they want an appointed Senate to share power with the elected House of Representatives in selecting the next prime minister. Political parties may join hands in a silent conspiracy to say “No” to this. Pheu Thai doesn’t like the proposal for obvious reasons, while the Democrats, in public at least, have also slammed the idea.
If the charter is passed and voters also say “Yes” to the additional question, the Senate will virtually become the biggest political party when selecting the prime minister is concerned. Another constitutional headache would also arise as to whether, now that the next prime minister is picked by the Senate in collaboration with elected politicians, the chamber should be empowered to censure him or her along with the House of Representatives.
Thailand has long been debating whether it really needs a senate and, if “Yes”, whether the senators should come by “appointment” or from a direct election. The country has also been grappling with proposed measures to ensure that senators play an appropriate role in the country’s best interests. The referendum question takes things to a whole new and glaring level. The Thai people will be asked if the Senate’s power can go as far as choosing the prime minister.
One thing needs to be made clear, though. The proposed power of the Senate will, if approved by the people, be temporary. Opponents, however, will be saying that such a power will mean Thailand will be a “half-baked democracy” for a few more years after the next election.
The Democrats, despite standing to be less affected by this “additional question” than Pheu Thai, can’t be seen as supporting that. Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has, understandably, come out with all guns blazing against “taking Thailand backwards”.
A campaign against a high-powered and appointed Senate is not easy to launch and carry out. Referendum rules have seemed strict so far and it remains to be seen how many people want to defy them, and how they would do so. This doesn’t mean debate, open or underground, can break the age-old impasse regarding the Upper House. To some, senators can guarantee accountability and transparency. To others, senators are thinly veiled anti-democracy forces, especially when they are appointed instead of elected. Elected senators, to some, mean the flower of democracy is in full bloom. To others, elected senators are irrelevant because they can be secretly controlled by political parties and they therefore will only help, not counterbalance, politicians.
The referendum, it’s safe to say, will be pretty much about the Senate, its relevance, what role the Thai public want it to play and how much power it should wield. Certainly, there will be some voters who have made up their minds on the draft constitution regardless of what it says about senators, but for those who want to ponder the document’s essence before making a decision, the Senate issue can stand out as the definitive factor.