Two months from now, voters across the country will be asked to decide whether they accept the new constitution, plus whether they agree that the non-elected Senate should jointly choose the prime minister. The charter referendum is now the hottest political issue – from the subject questions to the associated events leading to the big day. The Nation’s Kasamakorn Chanwanpen asked Somchai Srisuthiyakorn, the election commissioner supervising the plebiscite, about the organisation’s role and challenges lying ahead, especially when the referendum law is enforced.

[Referendum explained]

HOW HAS THE ELECTION COMMISSION (EC) PREPARED FOR OR PROCEEDED WITH THE UPCOMING REFERENDUM UNTIL NOW?

Everything is going step by step without any trouble yet. The million charter summaries, to support the CDC [Constitution Drafting Commission]’s information dissemination, are being printed and distributed to the designated destinations.

We have also launched some smartphone applications, which now have been downloaded by users to assist voters to get to the charter’s essence.

We have also dealt with free television channels to help broadcast a 13-part series concerning the constitution and the referendum. And we are negotiating with the digital TV channels to help air programme reruns.

The preparation of polling equipment is going well following procedures, too.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOLDING ELECTIONS AND REFERENDUMS FROM THE EC’S PERSPECTIVE?

When it comes to a general election, there is competition among the political blocs or figures, with which people have close connections. So, people are more motivated to go vote for their favourite or close candidates. But as for a plebiscite, it is rather distant from people. Like the upcoming one, its first question, which involves the approval of the constitution, is already not easy for people in general to understand.

It’s not easy to get to the essence of the constitution, and it’s even more difficult when it comes to all of the 279 articles within it.

The additional question posed by the NLA (National Legislative Assembly) is also lengthy and could be difficult to grasp.

But in a nutshell, the major difference is the distance or connection between voters and the subject of the poll.

DOES THAT POSE CHALLENGES TO THE EC? HOW?

Well, it’s a duty that we have to fulfil, whether in an election or a referendum. So, it’s not challenging or anything. Mainly, we just have the goals that we want to achieve. And for this plebiscite in particular, we have three of them – convenience, fairness and quality.

To provide convenience, we try to make it as easy as possible for people to take part in the polling.

So, we have borrowed from technology, with online registration or smartphone applications on offer.

For fairness, well, this is rather tricky because both sides do not have equal resources from the beginning. So, it is rather difficult to avoid this disparity. We have to admit that.

But we do try hard to create strict regulations and signal concerned agencies including the CDC to follow the rules strictly, so they can only help with disseminating information, but never encourage voters to vote yes or no.

For quality, we want every vote to matter.

Voters should know the subject they are voting for and should not cast a ballot as told or be influenced. That is quality.

YOU MENTIONED “DISPARITY” BETWEEN THE PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS OF THE CHARTER. HOW DO YOU, AS THE RESPONSIBLE AGENCY, BRIDGE THE GAP?

We try to give both sides equal opportunities to express themselves both for and against the draft. That’s why we have the 13-episode programme. All of them can talk and discuss about the charter and voters can see and listen to their stances.

We had proposed the idea (in the referendum draft act) to have both opponents and proponents registered as a group. They could propose their activities to campaign and the EC would give each side Bt50 million.

They could spend the budget on anything – T-shirts, stickers, brochures – anything.

But it was not approved by the NLA. The NLA cut off all the campaign parts. So, the idea has never been realised.

WHY?

You have to ask the NLA.

IS THAT WHY CAMPAIGNS ARE ALL BANNED NOW?

Actually no. That’s a major misunderstanding. You can say anything. You can wear any T-shirt – VOTE YES, VOTE NO. No problem at all.

SO, WHAT ARE THE PROHIBITIONS REALLY, FOLLOWING THE ENACTMENT OF THE REFERENDUM LAW?

We prohibit incitement, distortion of the truth and vulgarity that would lead to inducing voters to vote for or against the charter.

BUT MANY ARE SAYING THAT SUCH PROHIBITIONS HAVE INTERPRETATION PROBLEMS.

I don’t think they pose any problems. If you say something rude, it is obvious that it’s rude. So are lies. And incitement is saying something like “okay we gather together or march”. It’s obvious. I don’t see any problems about interpretation. So far, no actions have constituted such a crime yet.

ISN’T IT DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO CAMPAIGN WITHOUT FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY?

Well, actually, if it doesn’t cause any unrest, it’s okay.

WHAT ABOUT DISTORTING THE TRUTH? WILL EXPRESSING OPINIONS OR POINTING OUT FLAWS IN THE CHARTER BE REGARDED AS DISTORTING THE CHARTER?

No. Everyone can express their views as long as they have reasons backing them without being rude and inciting people. These are no distortions. They can even forecast the future outcomes. That’s fine.

I want to emphasise again – everyone can say anything – vote yes, vote no. They can wear T-shirts, fly flags and hold up banners. Anything as long as it is not rude or inciting.

WHAT IS THE MOST WORRYING POINT ABOUT HOLDING THIS REFERENDUM FOR THE EC?

Quality seems to be the most problematic point. In such a short period of time, I doubt that voters can understand the charter and decide to vote based on that understanding.

I personally doubt how well the constitution mouthpieces – Kru Kor, Kru Khoh – can understand the charter. I’m afraid that in the end they’ll only be informing voters about when and where the referendum takes place. This thing just takes time. And we have less than two months.