ACADEMICS yesterday voiced opposition to the junta’s perceived move to cling on to power via selected senators, even as Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan said he saw nothing wrong in members of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) getting appointed as senators.

In a democratic system, senators have to get their mandate from the people if they are to have the checks-and-balances power, the academics pointed out.

The comments came after key figures in the government and the ruling NCPO, notably Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha and his deputy Prawit, called for selected senators to undertake reforms and national strategy plans during the five-year transitory period.

The draft constitution proposes indirect election of senators by representatives from 20 occupational groups.

Many National Legislative Assembly (NLA) members are pushing for selected senators, though critics allege that some of them want to be among those appointed to the next Senate. Some NLA members suggest that if the drafters remain firm in their original clauses regarding senators, the referendum on the charter draft should accommodate a question on selected senators.

Prawit said yesterday that it was his personal view to call for selected senators during the five-year transition period after the next general election and that he would have no problem if the CDC did not heed his proposal.

When asked if NCPO members would become selected senators, he responded: “Maybe. Why? Is there anything wrong with it? I see nothing wrong.” However, some academics said it was inappropriate for the NCPO to “cling to power” in the form of selected senators.

Political analyst Sukhum Nuansakul, formerly a rector of Ramkhamhaeng University, views this as the NCPO’s attempt to hang on to power.

“They are not letting go. It’s as simple as that. They may be confident because they have seemingly been successful in keeping peace and order,” he said. “But I disagree if they want to stay on in power by sitting on the Upper House because it is just an obsolete idea. I think many people disagree too. [Parliament] must be connected with the people.”

He added: “If they think an elected Senate would be the same as the House of Representatives, then why not just remove it from the system. Many countries still thrive with a single-house system.”

Yuttaporn Issarachai, a political scientist from Sukhothai Thamma-thirat Open University, said yesterday that senators since the 1997 constitution had a wide range of authority, including the Senate’s power to “check and scrutinise” the assembly. It did not act only as a deliberative house as before. The scholar said it should be connected with the people.

“If the Senate is given the authority to check or scrutinise other branches of power, it should be linked with people who in a democratic society have the rights and liberties to take part in the decision-making process,” Yuttaporn explained.

He declined to say whether it would be appropriate to have NCPO members be part of the Upper House. The academic, however, did say that if the junta was looking at the matter from an administrative perspective, having a selected Senate could be effective but it might not be the best answer for a democracy.

Likhit Dhiravegin, a senior political scientist and former lecturer at Thammasat University, reacted to the junta’s move by asking: “What does this [selected Senate] mean after all this time they have been saying they will not retain the power?

“It is okay to continue being in power for a long time. But this has to be done via electoral means. Look at the presidents of the United States, they usually stay for eight years. But they are elected by the people,” the scholar said.

“However, retaining power via self-written rules and regulations is a different story. Where are the people under this system? If they want to remain in their position, they simply have to run in the election. It is that simple,” Likhit added.

He noted that the selected Senate was problematic at many levels, questioning who the selecting committee would be and who would be picked.

Echoing Yuttaporn’s remark, the senior political scientist said senators were not only deliberative but also authorised to determine the fate of the elected ones.

However, the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) had many times assured that the Upper House would not have the authority to impeach politicians. The House members could still select commissioners of independent organisations that subtly had such authority.

Meanwhile, CDC chief Meechai Ruchupan said yesterday that his panel had not received any official documents from the NCPO or the government concerning the proposal for a selected Senate. Hence, they had not yet considered the matter.