So far, many eligible voters still have not read the draft charter and do not know about the content details. However, people in rural areas appear to be more active than their compatriots in urban areas, and seem to wait impatiently to cast their ballots.

Without a clear knowledge about what the draft charter has to offer, these voters are bound to make their decision based on their beliefs. Many of them will vote based on their political leanings and not actual knowledge of the draft. It is a great pity that many voters will also not be taking into account the Constitution Drafting Commission’s efforts.

Observers expect city residents to be key supporters of the draft charter. However, if the turnout is too low, the draft will probably fail in the plebiscite.

This may be a reason why Suthep Thaugsuban, politician-turned-political activist who leads the People’s Democratic Reform Committee, has resurfaced to campaign for PDRC supporters to vote for the draft charter. Suthep, a former Democrat, voices his support for the draft charter in his dailyFacebook Live broadcast, pointing out the benefits and telling his audience that the provisions are in line with the PDRC’s calls for reform. His broadcasts kick off at 2pm daily and last less than 10 minutes.

Meanwhile, Suthep’s arch-rival from the red shirts, Jatuporn Prompan, holds similar Facebook Live broadcasts—except in them he criticises the draft charter. As chief of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship, Jatuporn in effect is trying to prove that if Suthep is allowed to talk in support of the draft, then he too should be allowed to speak against it.

Critics have also been pointing out that detractors of the draft charter are being arrested for allegedly provoking unrest, whereas no legal action is being taken against Suthep, who speaks daily in support of the draft.

Now, people are waiting to see what the authorities will do about this matter.

In order to hold a referendum properly, voters must be provided with enough information before they make a decision. Both sides of the referendum must be allowed to debate publicly in a fair manner. Correct decisions can only be made if people have complete and well-rounded knowledge. It is difficult to tell if people are intentionally distorting the facts when they criticise the draft charter. Maybe they are just interpreting what is written in the legislation and everybody sees things differently.

It is Suthep’s right to speak publicly in support of the draft and nobody should prevent him from doing so. In fact, it is everybody’s right to voice their opinions and ask others to share the same view about a matter that is important to all of us. Similarly, people should also not be prohibited from criticising the draft constitution. They have the right to speak up against it as they too see this matter as important for everyone in the country.

It is the authorities’ job to ensure that both sides are fairly treated. In reality, the authorities are simply undermining the legitimacy of the referendum by allowing one side to speak freely and treating the other side like criminals. Due to this, it is natural that they will be viewed with suspicion and mistrust. Hence, the best thing would be to stop gagging people and allowing those for and against the referendum to spread their message equally.