THE National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) yesterday over whelmingly voted to approve a report on drawing up the “national strategy” draft bill to create a body that would set strategic directions for future governments. Opponents were concerned that the body could pave the way the junta to retain its power after the election.

The report proposed by the NRSA’s committee on national administration reform was approved by 164 to six votes.The report proposed forming a new body called the “national strategic committee”, which would serve an eight-year term and have the power to set rules and plans that would be valid for 20 years, and binding for every government that takes the reins of power during the period. If they failed to do so, they could face penalties if their policies damaged to the country.The most controversial point in the draft is the national strategic

committee because of the power it could confer to the current junta.The committee would comprise 25 members, including the prime minister and the presidents of the upper and the lower houses, the report suggested. However, in the first four years, the first 25-member committee would include the current prime minister, the president of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) and the chairman of the NRSA, who would set out the first strategic plan for Parliament to approve, the report suggested.

Most of the NRSA members yesterday agreed in principle that a national strategy plan was a necessity.In the past the policies of different governments have been at odds with one another. As a result, the country has no clear vision or direction of where it is headed and what goal it aims to achieve in the long run, according to most NSRA members yesterday.

Only one member, Kasit Piromya, disagreed completely with the idea of a national strategy and the bill.The former foreign minister and prominent figure of the yellow-shirt group said that it was impossible for a non-communist country to have such a long-term strategic plan. “Such a scheme could only be achieved by those countries where a single government ruled for a very long time, like

China,” he said.

Committee ‘too powerful'”The world is changing every day. The country is changing every day.

There is no way for a 20-year plan [to be successful],” he said.Kasit also pointed out that the national strategic committee would be very powerful and could dictate a lot of policy. He questioned whether “[you are] fooling yourself that this is not the National Strategic Reform and Reconciliation Committee [NSRRC] being revived”.Political observers are voicing concerns similar to Kasit’s that the committee would be very similar to the NSRRC proposed in Borwornsak Uwanno’s charter draft.

That draft was shot down by the now defunct National Reform Council (NRC) last year. The committee outlined in the previous charter draft was believed to have had the power to overrule the

government after the election. Another NRSA member, Kamnoon Sitdhisamarn, however, argued on his Facebook page that the new committee would be nothing like the NSRRC.

The national strategic committee did not have the controversial power to rule over the executive branch in a time of crisis like the NSRRC would have, he argued.Vittaya Kaewparadai, an NRSA member who was also an active figure of the People’s Democratic Reform Committee, suggested that the national strategic plan be included in and enforced by the constitution.Despite agreement on the need for the plan, NRSA members posed questions about how much public participation the bill could guarantee.

Because the scheme is a “national strategy”, it would involve and affect the public in general. Additionally, it would set out plans that would last as long as 20 years.

NSRA members yesterday said the people should have a hand in it or it would not be very democratic.Apart from that, they also expressed concern that setting up too many new agencies to take charge of strategic plans would be too expensive. They asked that the committee review whether some of the new bodies could be dissolved and perhaps existing agencies could instead help carry out the plan.

NRSA members can until Friday still submit additional comments to the committee on national administration reform, which is the panel responsible for putting forward the draft bill on the national strategy plan. Subsequently, the report will be forwarded to the Cabinet and to the NLA in accordance with the procedure to pass a bill.

Speaking to representatives of the Association of Thai Professionals in America and Canada (ATPAC) at a California hotel on Sunday afternoon, Prayut said his government has a clear policy to utilise science and the creative economy for economic development.

Prayut was in the United States for the two-day US-Asean summit at Rancho Mirage in California. He welcomed ideas and suggestions from Thai professional associations in the US.

The government was willing to cooperate with developed countries in order to have a technology transfer from them, he said and added that private investment in innovation and technology was welcomed.

The government was promoting special economic cluster zones, the premier told the representatives of ATPAC.

During the meeting, representatives of ATPAC also told Prime Minister Prayutthat they supported the government’s policy to use science and technology for development, as Thailand needed to compete with other nations, according to Werachon.

Engineers from the ATPAC who are keen on water management were ready to cooperate with the government for water management in the country, he said.

Prayut said the US-Asean summit, which he attended yesterday (and is due to attend later tonight Bangkok time), would benefit the relations between the US and Asean.

The government would do its best to get a better understanding from the US that Thailand needs to reform and move ahead, he said.

The Sunnylands summit showed that Washington considers Asean very important, he said.

The government has not given final approval of the EC’s rule on campaigning, which is one of several recently floated in proposed legislation.

The EC will meet today to decide whether to redefine different types of criminal and election-related offences as it prepares the legislation to govern the referendum.

Among the penalties specified, people could face up to 10 years in prison if they instigate trouble or cause turmoil during the referendum, according to the EC’s proposed bill.

The commission may write the legislation as a royal decree, as suggested by Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam, or leave it to the government to decide whether to frame it as an act or a royal decree.

The proposed legislation states that people who instigate turmoil during a referendum or intimidate voters in any way, including via the media, could face a fine of up to Bt200,000 in addition to 10 years in prison.

Anyone who offer bribes to voters or blocks the distribution of ballot boxes and ballots would also face up to 10 years in prison or a fine of Bt200,000.

The EC has proposed 16 articles related to voting in the referendum, most of which are similar in content to those specified in the referendum law of 2007.

Under the proposed law, anyone who disseminates messages, pictures or voice recordings via the media that distort the truth would be regarded as having committed an electoral crime.

Similarly, any parties that are not registered with the EC who disseminate content advocating for or against the charter draft, or calling for a boycott of the referendum, would be considered guilty of a crime.

Anyone who causes a referendum to be reorganised would also face civil liability and be held responsible for the expenses of holding a new referendum.

Election officials or their aides who intentionally commit corrupt acts, break the law or abuse their authority also face a fine up to a Bt200,000 and 10 years in jail, and their right to participate in elections revoked for 10 years.

The EC also reserves the right to prevent election officials from carrying out their duties if it believes their actions may have an unfair influence on the election process.

Anyone found to be blocking election officials from carrying out their duties would face up to one year in jail and a fine of up to Bt20,000. If someone uses force to block officials from carrying out those duties, they face up to two years in jail, a Bt40,000 fine or both. Employers who do not allow their employees to exercise their right to vote face the same punishment.

Voters who are found to have destroyed ballots face up to 10 years in jail and a Bt20,000 fine.

During official voting hours, people who do not have the right to vote in a particular polling booth may not take a ballot from the booth, they are banned from indicating to others in any way that they are eligible to vote, and they may not take a picture of a marked ballot on penalty of up to five years in jail, a Bt100,000 fine or both.

A CIVIC GROUP yesterday demanded that the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) stop acts of intimidation after banning the group’s planned event in Amnat Charoen province, which the group said was meant to educate the public about the charter draft ahead of the referendum.

The Women’s Movement in Thai Political Reform (We-Move), led by Sunee Chairot, complained that security officials in the province cancelled the event, which was set for Saturday.

A source said We-Move issued the statement calling on the NCPO to stop acts of intimidation after officials followed its team members into a hotel where they were staying. The alleged intimidation took place after the event was cancelled, the source said.

Sunee said banning the event was intimidatory and prevented people from participating in the charter drafting process, although she admitted she had not sought permission to hold it.

She argued the event was meant to educate the public about the draft and was not political.

She said her group had held similar events in Bangkok and Lampang provinces without a problem. She added that events in Amnat Charoen would not stop her group’s planned charter education event in Phatthalung province at the end of this month.

Former labour minister Ladawan Wongsriwong expressed concern over what had happened to We-Move, saying the government’s image had been tarnished. She urged Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) chairman Meechai Ruchupan to heed public recommendations on amending the first version of the charter draft.

Former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama called on the government to hold a broadcast debate over the charter draft and allow the media, the public and politicians to join it.

He dismissed claims by the CDC that the charter draft was democratic by international standards, pointing out that in Germany and France the selection of the senate and the constitutional court is linked to the people or representatives of the people.

“Critics have questioned why the CDC gives too much power to the Constitutional Court, which has the power to decide the fate of other agencies, without providing effective checks and balances on the court itself,” he said.

Democrat Party deputy spokesman Ramet Rattanachaweng urged the CDC to be open-minded and accept public reflection on the charter draft and to review controversial points such as those covering people’s rights and liberty.

“If the CDC believes that politicians only present ideas that benefit them, or the charter writers really shun politicians, they can write that there should be no politicians or people’s representatives,” he said.

Democrat Party deputy leader Ong-art Klampaiboon said the draft lacked a guarantee for people’s rights and liberty, especially the rights of communities to manage national resources.

There was also no provision on human dignity like in the 1997 and 2007 charters, Ong-art said.