POLITICIANS FROM the major parties have expressed dissatisfaction with the revision of the political parties law, casting doubt over why politicians and party members have been singled out as the only persons subject to the death penalty if found guilty of trading political positions for money.

Ongart Klampaiboon, a prominent member of the Democrat Party, yesterday said he had observed that the severest punishment would be enforced only in regard to politicians or members of political parties, and would not apply to those in other high-ranking positions, such as civil servants or a non-MP prime minister.

Kanin Boonsuwan of the Pheu Thai Party voiced similar sentiment, as well as concern over possible slander and abuse or arbitrary use of the law.

The reaction came after the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) on Tuesday announced several changes to the organic law, including the individual contribution to a capital fund and the number of members a party had to recruit.

The provision setting out capital punishment for party members found guilty of trading positions remained unchanged, however.

Apart from concern over the capital-punishment issue, Nipit Intarasombat, deputy leader of the Democrat Party, said the revisions made by the CDC were “rather irrelevant”.

Although he welcomed the individual-contribution reduction to Bt1,000, he said it would not bar financiers from interfering in political parties.

However, Nipit added that the idea of keeping financiers out of politics might have been unrealistic from the outset.

He suggested that they were essential, and that the minimum capital-fund of Bt1 million that the CDC proposed for each party was not adequate, as electoral campaigns were very expensive.

In a related development, the Election Commission (EC) will make an official submission to lawmakers on the draft organic law governing its activities, insisting on the preservation of provincial election committees and opposing the proposed electoral inspectors.

Chief drafter Meechai Ruchupan said yesterday the idea of electoral inspectors had arisen in response to the EC’s observation that the provincial committees, whose members were mostly civil servants, were influenced by politicians.

Hence, the lawmakers had decided to replace them with independent inspectors, he said.

Moreover, the central EC office should also superintend its provincial offices in order to prevent outside influence, Meechai said, adding that it was laid out that the EC should issue rules and regulations to cope with this weakness.

The CDC still welcomes further recommendations regarding the issue, he stressed.

EC member Somchai Srisuthiyakorn said the commission would submit a proposal to the CDC to preserve the agency’s provincial committees and their regulations.

The electoral commission agreed that the law should retain the provision that provincial committee members, comprised of representatives from various sectors, excluding civil servants, would receive a meeting allowance as their main source of income – not a monthly salary – as well as a provision that the committees should serve a term of four years, he said.

Somchai however dismissed the allegation that the provincial representatives were not independent, arguing that there was no concrete evidence to support such a claim.

Besides, the notion that the inspectors would not be swayed by politicians was mere wishful thinking, he added. He also said politicians would do anything to ensure their interests, and there was no guarantee that the inspectors would not be free from political influence.

“The ad hoc inspectors would work only for two months each time. There would be no continuity and they could lack responsibility. This is a loophole through which someone in the political sphere could get in – and it would be impossible to bring disciplinary proceedings against them,” Somchai said.

The EC was, however, willing to comply with the rules even though they had not been revised as the agency recommended, he stressed.