Bangkok Post - Today's Top Stories

Get me rewrite

By Mongkol Bangprapa

Academics and activists have proposed that a constitution drafting committee be formed to draw up a new charter as a way to defuse growing conflict in society.

Setting up such a committee, which would involve the public, would require an amendment to Article 291 of the constitution.

The aim of the proposal was to come up with an alternative to the People Power party’s (PPP) plan to amend the charter that has been strongly opposed by the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and other activists.

Its opponents see the charter amendment move as an attempt by the PPP to avoid possible dissolution and to help save former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra from a raft of charges made against him.

The idea was floated at a forum at Chulalongkorn University’s faculty of political science yesterday.

Participants agreed that such social conflict could culminate in a violent confrontation. They said amending the charter should not be aimed only at solving short-term political problems.

They agreed the present constitution is flawed and some provisions need to be corrected, such as the selection of members of some independent organisations and the appointment of senators.

Participants, including leading scholars from various universities and prominent activists, said the charter amendment plan needed greater public participation involving people from various walks of life.

An efficient public relations campaign should also be launched to present the plan to a wider public.

They suggested that public referendums be held to settle some controversial issues in the present charter.

Pairote Polpetch, a coordinator of the Union for Civil Liberty, said the abrogated 1997 charter is viewed by the government as the best one.

Therefore the PPP-led government should respect the idea of involving people in the process of drafting the constitution, as shown in the 1997 charter.

The government should look to the constitution drafting assembly under the 1997 charter as a model.

The 1997 constitution drafting assembly comprised representatives elected by the people and appointed academics.

Mr Pairote stressed the need to keep politicians who covet power on the sidelines during the drafting process.

The PPP earlier made it clear that it wanted independent agencies to revert to their former working structures under the 1997 charter.

Mr Pairote said this means political parties would be allowed a hand in the selection of members of these agencies. The PPP wanted to amend the charter so it would take over the job from judges, who have been empowered to do so by the present charter, he said.

Atthachak Sattayanurak, an academic at Chiang Mai University, said the political situation reflects the polarisation of poor people in rural areas and the middle class in the cities, who both want the government to satisfy their different needs.

‘‘The ideal constitution must provide people with equal opportunities to earn a living and must win consent from most people in society.

‘‘It should not favour the bureaucrats or the liberal capitalists,’’ he said.

Mr Atthachak said new charter drafters should include varied groups of people and the charter must be put to a referendum to ensure it really belongs to the people.

An Abac opinion poll released yesterday showed that 64 per cent of the respondents thought the aim of the PPP’s plan to amend the constitution was to serve the interests of some particular groups. However, 36 per cent did not think so. The survey polled 2,625 people in Bangkok and surrounding areas from April 2 to 19.

Abac poll director Noppadol Kannikar said the survey showed that the plan to amend the charter has divided the people.


---oo0oo---

Earlier Commentary? Or the requested rewrite?

Drafting committee should involve public

MONGKOL BANGPRAPA

Academics and activists have proposed that a constitution drafting committee be formed to draw up a new charter as a way to defuse growing conflict in society.

Setting up such a committee, which would involve the public, would require an amendment to Article 291 of the constitution.

The aim of the proposal was to come up with an alternative to the People Power party’s (PPP) plan to amend the charter that has been strongly opposed by the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and other activists.

Its opponents see the charter amendment move as an attempt by the PPP to avoid possible dissolution and to help save former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra from a raft of charges made against him.

The idea was floated at a forum at Chulalongkorn University’s faculty of political science yesterday.

Participants agreed that such social conflict could culminate in a violent confrontation. They said amending the charter should not be aimed only at solving short-term political problems.

They agreed the present constitution is flawed and some provisions need to be corrected, such as the selection of members of some independent organisations and the appointment of senators.

Participants, including leading scholars from various universities and prominent activists, said the charter amendment plan needed greater public participation involving people from various walks of life.

An efficient public relations campaign should also be launched to present the plan to a wider public.

They suggested that public referendums be held to settle some controversial issues in the present charter.

Pairote Polpetch, a coordinator of the Union for Civil Liberty, said the abrogated 1997 charter is viewed by the government as the best one.

Therefore the PPP-led government should respect the idea of involving people in the process of drafting the constitution, as shown in the 1997 charter.

The government should look to the constitution drafting assembly under the 1997 charter as a model.

The 1997 constitution drafting assembly comprised representatives elected by the people and appointed academics.

Mr Pairote stressed the need to keep politicians who covet power on the sidelines during the drafting process.

The PPP earlier made it clear that it wanted independent agencies to revert to their former working structures under the 1997 charter.

Mr Pairote said this means political parties would be allowed a hand in the selection of members of these agencies. The PPP wanted to amend the charter so it would take over the job from judges, who have been empowered to do so by the present charter, he said.

Atthachak Sattayanurak, an academic at Chiang Mai University, said the political situation reflects the polarisation of poor people in rural areas and the middle class in the cities, who both want the government to satisfy their different needs.

‘‘The ideal constitution must provide people with equal opportunities to earn a living and must win consent from most people in society.

‘‘It should not favour the bureaucrats or the liberal capitalists,’’ he said.

Mr Atthachak said new charter drafters should include varied groups of people and the charter must be put to a referendum to ensure it really belongs to the people.

An Abac opinion poll released yesterday showed that 64 per cent of the respondents thought the aim of the PPP’s plan to amend the constitution was to serve the interests of some particular groups. However, 36 per cent did not think so. The survey polled 2,625 people in Bangkok and surrounding areas from April 2 to 19.

Abac poll director Noppadol Kannikar said the survey showed that the plan to amend the charter has divided the people.

What is the point of having a constitution, if nobody respect it?

Thaksin will be PM again and he will distort it to his own benefits[again]. Or he might just easily create a new to let him become the first President.

So I don't care if the new constitution is written by 100 constitution laws professors or get 99% approve of the parliament.

Thanks. I haven't really been following this issue since the election, and it's good to hear some opinions from those more up to date than I. I recall a similar event to what you predict in Western Australia a copule of years back, when it was reported that an ex-premier who'd since done jail time was secretly manipulating parts of the sitting government still in today. As for the current events in Thailand, it's more or less beyond my understanding, so it's good to be informed by those in the know.

I'm not exactly a front-row fan of Thaksins, but too ignorant to know what is wrong in the stance of his supporters as well.

The only reason they want to amend the constitution is because the constitution section 309 states that any wrongdoer who is a part of a political party committee leading that party, if found guilty, will result in the closure of that party. The constitution stated it clearly even before the election took place in december 2007. They knew and did it anyway. So... for PPP