THE referendum on the military-sponsored charter draft has hit shaky ground with the Constitution Court due to rule on a dubious clause in the referendum law, the red shirts setting up centres to monitor fraud during the voting, plus controversial lyrics in a song for the Election Commission. Meanwhile, a survey has suggested that more than half of Thais have no faith in the charter.

These factors including questions about the role of the Election Commission suggest that the coming referendum could renew political conflict, according to Suriyasai Katasila, deputy dean of the College of Social Innovation at Rangsit University.

“I am not sure if there will be a referendum and not sure if the country will be steered into reform mode and get out of conflicts,” Suriyasai said.

The Constitution Court has agreed to a request by the Ombudsman’s Office to rule on whether Article 61 of the referendum law violates the 2014 Interim Charter.

And a noted composer who wrote the song ‘Participate in August 7 Referendum’ said yesterday the Election Commission (EC) will meet tomorrow to decide if the song’s lyrics should be altered.

Phra Sanyaluk Donsri, who wrote the song for the EC, posted on his Facebook page that the commission will discuss whether the song’s lyrics should be adjusted to allay public criticism, at a meeting tomorrow.

Key EC members have denied that the song insults anybody, saying there was no need to suspend it. Part of the lyrics say: “Isaan brothers, don’t let anyone dictate your decision. Use your judgement, look at content and important principles. Exercise your voting right, take responsibility for the country. Get to know yourself and others. Do not let others cheat you.”

Critics have claimed the song replays a discourse labelling people from the North and Northeast as low quality voters who allowed politicians to manipulate their political decisions. The song praised southerners for having high spirit in the struggle for democracy. It was southerners who dominated the street protest against the Yingluck Shinawatra government before the 2014 coup.

While the EC is campaigning for the national referendum on the draft charter on August 7, most people do not know how the new charter will affect them, according to a recent Dusit Poll.

Of 1,182 people surveyed nationwide from Monday to Saturday, 53 per cent did not know what the charter would do for them, but 46 per cent knew the charter was the country’s supreme law and meant to protect their rights and liberty. Some 80 per cent did not know what the ramifications of the new charter may be in relation to their voting rights, while 18 per cent knew that people over 18 have the right to vote, express their opinion and participate in politics.

About 56 per cent did not know what reforms the government was planning, but the rest knew that the government was reforming the economy, education, transport, politics, administration and other areas to address social ills such as drugs.

Around half believed the new charter would not improve their well-being because that takes time and the country’s economy is still in the doldrums.

Some 36 per cent believed the charter would improve their lives because national reforms would help lift business confidence, boost the economy and steer the country on a stable and sustainable path.

About 12 per cent believed the new charter would worsen their life because politicians put self-interest before public interest and the country may face political turmoil after.

Meanwhile, members of the National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) and National Legislative Assembly (NLA) suspect the red shirts’ anti-referendum fraud centres have a hidden agenda. The NRSA’s political reform panel spokesman Wanchai Sornsiri said the red shirts’ United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) had an agenda to jeopardise the referendum.

National Legislative Assembly member Somjet Boonthanom said the UDD’s plan was to stage an uprising against the junta.

UDD co-leader Nattawut Saikuar vowed to continue operating the centres. He called on the military to stop threatening their members, as they had not broken any laws.