Not much hope of voters understanding the charter 

Not much hope of voters understanding the charter 

The completed draft constitution by Meechai Ruchuphan's Constitution Drafting Committee is up for public scrutiny. It is a thick volume of importance, yet boring to read because of all the legal jargon that is difficult to understand, even for people with some legal background.

This so-called draft supreme law has altogether 270 sections grouped into 15 chapters, and one provisional chapter which is being fiercely criticised by opponents of the National Council for Peace and Order for allowing the military junta to stay on in power until the elected government is installed in office.

More importantly, this draft retains the special powers of the NCPO chief, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, to invoke Section 44 of the interim charter during the transition. That means Gen Prayut can wave the big stick and do whatever he thinks fit for the good of the country.

My question is, how many of the people who will have to vote in a referendum on the draft will carefully read the whole document to understand it and to know which sections are good and which are bad -- or which are undemocratic? How many of the eligible voters will just glance through the draft? How many will just read the draft selectively? And how many will just ignore it completely and only listen to what their favourite parties have to say?

Honestly, I will not read the draft in detail because it is full of incomprehensible legal jargon and countless cross-references. Most of the jargon will simply confuse readers and give them a headache. I feel the majority of eligible voters will not read the draft, even those who post comments on social media.

That brings me to my next question: how can voters decide in an informed manner which way to vote in the referendum? Or will they be merely blinkered voters placing a ballot in the way they are told to by their preferred politician, like blind men trying to figure out what an elephant looks like in an Aesop's fable?

Instant negative reaction to the draft from the likes of Chaturon Chaisaeng, a core member of the Pheu Thai Party, is to be expected. To him, the draft is the devil and there is nothing good about it.

In a message posted on his Facebook page, the former Chachoengsao MP said the completed draft is full of content that was earlier criticised heavily. There is additional content, but altogether it makes the draft much more "evil".

According to the veteran politician, the draft charter robs the people of sovereign power and puts it into the hands of non-elected people and organisations which have no link to constituents, such as the Senate, the Constitutional Court and a variety of independent organisations which are beyond scrutiny by the people. The next elected government will be a lame duck, weak and unable to govern, and it will eventually collapse, paving the way for the military to stage a comeback.

Section 270 grants an amnesty to the NCPO and enables the NCPO chief to do whatever he wishes -- with impunity.

Another veteran politician, this time Uthai Pimchaichon, branded the draft charter as a "hat" charter. This refers to legal guru Meechai often wearing a hat during meetings, suggesting he might be hiding something on his head.

Mr Uthai's criticism of the draft charter is quite mild in comparison with Mr Chaturon's.

Now back to Mr Meechai and his responses to the criticism. He claims the CDC had been responsive to the views of the political camps all along, but their proposed charter amendments lack substance.

For instance, the issue of a democratic charter. Mr Meechai's defence is the draft was written in a way that gives the people the right to participate in the decision-making of political parties. For instance, the people have a say in the parties' choices of election candidates.

As for the 1997 and 2007 constitutions favoured by Pheu Thai, Mr Meechai pointed out they were democratic and crafted by reform-minded legal hands, but badly flawed. For instance, he said they advocated impeachment of corrupt politicians but none were.

We will hear a lot of criticism and counter-criticism from the CDC and its supporters, and there will be opposition to the charter and its advocates until the referendum takes place -- some informed, some with little knowledge of the essence of the draft.

A summary of the draft in layman's language would be helpful, with the important issues being highlighted so voters can know how to vote.

Unlike the Borwornsak draft, which allowed people to express their views on individual key issues, this charter is designed in a way that we are to vote "yes" or "no" for the entire draft alone. 


Veera Prateepchaikul is former editor, Bangkok Post.

Veera Prateepchaikul

Former Editor

Former Bangkok Post Editor, political commentator and a regular columnist at Post Publishing.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (11)