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.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha threw open the long-connected yet much-ignored door to the neighbouring country when he invited Suu Kyi for a state visit, which included the signing of two agreements on labour cooperation.

Suu Kyi’s trip was solidly focused on the well-being of more than 2 million Myanmar migrants working here, legally and illegally. The Nobel laureate’s stance was evident in this excerpt from her speech on Thursday at Samut Sakhon’s Talad Talay Thai Hall: “Myanmar people are like guests in Thailand, so we should speak to the hosts honestly. It’s normal that problems will occur, so we should cooperate to successfully solve them together,” Suu Kyi said.

Who was she speaking to? Some 300 Myanmar workers chosen from factories selected by the authorities, who were told to keep their etiquette “neat” during the session. No laughing, no cheering, no video recording or photography of the event was allowed for the managed workers. “Stand up when she comes in, clap your hands, and sit down quietly as she speaks,” is what officers told the workers to do.

In the managed quietness inside the Hall, one could hear the ecstatic roar of the crowd outside asSuu Kyi arrived. Thousands of Myanmar workers had gathered outside, many of whom had come since early morning to see Suu Kyi in the flesh.

Not only did they come to admire their revered “Amay Suu”, but also to voice their grievances as aliens, usually considered inferior to the native Thais. Non-governmental organisations were getting ready to file a petition on concerned issues to Suu Kyi.

There were some profound exchanges inside the hall, for example about overcharging by passport middlemen. Suu Kyi‘s compatriots outside also wanted to tell her how they were underpaid, how they could not arrange proper education for their children in Thailand, how they struggled with the identification process, and so on.

For a while, the selected workers seemed to have nothing else to say. It was dead air before Suu Kyi eventually said she also intended to meet the workers outside the hall. But heavy rains dampened her plans.

All that the crowds outside could do was shout: “May Mother Suu have good health!” as they caught a glimpse of her entering the car. None of them could do more except one British human rights defender Andy Hall who managed to get Suu Kyi to promise on labour rights before she left.

Thai authorities persisted with the same sanitised protocol for the rest of Suu Kyi‘s trip. Selected students listened to her at the Foreign Ministry on Friday. There was no official early notice of her visit to Nakhon Pathom’s Sam Phran on Sunday.

But eventually, in Nakhon Pathom, she managed to touch the hands of more than a hundred of her compatriots when she stepped out of her vehicle before reaching the destination on the itinerary.

Evidently, this is what truly democratic leaders do.

Shortly after the CDC completed the first charter draft in late March, it came up with an unprecedented training programme for volunteers nationwide. They were recruited mostly from the state sector to act as the CDC’s mouthpiece in disseminating the charter content. The volunteers have even been given the name “teacher” (kru) in a bid to enhance their authority.

There are three categories: Kru Kor (Teacher A) are recruited from provincial state offices, Kru Khoh (Teacher B) from district offices, and four Kru Khor (Teacher C) are recruited from each community. The latter will play a crucial role within communities, knocking on doors and spreading information in face-to-face contact with voters.

The CDC has designed a pyramid-shaped training course in which Teacher A will pass the message down Teacher B, who will instruct Teacher C.

One problem for the programme, though, lies in the complexity of the charter content, a fact conceded by the CDC itself.

CDC spokesperson Chartchai na Chiangmai told The Nation that the training programme, set to be wrapped up by the end of this week, has been hit by technical errors as well as a lack of understanding of the content among trainees.

Chartchai tried to downplay the issue, saying the problems were minor and “could be fixed”. However, he also conceded that other teething troubles could emerge, including over the volunteers’ capacity to reach their targets given the vast number of voters they are attempting to reach.

Amid a clampdown on freedom of expression, authorities have high expectations that the CDC’s efforts in disseminating information could help bring a strong turnout at the referendum, and thus possibly a higher chance for the charter to be passed.

The issue of voter turnout highlights how apparently minor factors could play a big role in the referendum’s result.

However, the content-dissemination training programme has a built-in problem that is actually far more significant, since it concerns freedom of thought.

As the message is designed and passed down from above to those below, it’s very much a top-down approach which leaves little room for discussion and review, something very much required in the case of the complex content of the charter draft.

Unless this issue is addressed, we can expect to hear more and more hitches arising as the process of dissemination progresses.

The stakes here are high: without well-informed decisions, we won’t be able to forge a credible consensus on a new charter. This problem needs to be fixed now so the country can engage in a real discussion of the issues at the heart of the draft and at the core of our future.

piyaporn_won@nationgroup.com

 

Two of his products – the GT200 and Alpha 6 – were purchased by state agencies in Thailand, including in the insurgency-hit deep South, before growing scepticism prompted tests that demonstrated the devices were useless.

Officials involved were undaunted and continued to insist the GT200 and Alpha 6 were effective in detecting explosives and narcotics. Their motives for defending the bogus devices remain murky. After British experts unmasked the devices as cheap, novelty golf-ball detectors, some Thai officials relented but claimed that the devices “used to work”.

In 2013, McCormick was sentenced by a British court to 10 years in jail for selling fake bomb detectors that resulted in considerable loss of life.

Three years later Thai authorities have yet to take any concrete action in response.

A case involving the fake detectors has been gathering dust at the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). In total, Thailand purchased 1,310 of the devices at a cost of Bt1.08 billion, with orders filled for the Royal Thai Army’s Ordnance Department, the Finance Ministry, Royal Thai Police, the Central Institute of Forensic Science, Office of the Narcotic Control Board, the Interior Ministry’s Administration Department, and the Armed Forces Security Centre.

The price for each device varied wildly between Bt500,000 and Bt1 million, according to which agency was doing the buying.

The slow pace of progress of the NACC case is underlined by the news that the British court has now ordered McCormick to forfeit his assets. Meanwhile despite growing and widespread suspicion, Thai authorities are still unable to say whether there were any irregularities in the purchase.

Some officials claim the state agencies were innocent dupes, which prompts real concern that no one will be held accountable for a debacle that reeks of graft and self-serving abuse of power.

The government now has an opportunity to step in and prove it is serious about tackling corruption. Agencies related to the military were major purchasers of the bogus devices. If our current military-backed administration fails to deal with this matter, then we have no hope of action under any civilian government that follows.

The bomb detector fiasco shares important features with the money-losing rice subsidy scheme implemented by Yingluck Shinawatra’s government. Speaking of the latter at the National Legislative Assembly, former NACC member Wicha Mahakhun said, “If you are not corrupt, we will say so. But your actions pointed to corruption. And you failed to terminate the project, which led to severe damage.”

In the case of bogus detectors, the damage came in the form of military and police personnel who were maimed or killed using the devices, as well as suspects who were falsely incriminated.

The government now has a duty to dig deeper into this matter. In particular, it must ensure justice for the families of officials who lost their lives doing dangerous jobs with useless tools purchased in dubious deals.

attayuth@nationgroup.com

Blockchain, which led to the creation of digital currency Bitcoin, has been described IBM executive Robert Morris as a set of distributed ledgers with a majority consensus verifying the records.

The result is cheaper, faster and more reliable records that are more difficult to corrupt or change.

The technology is useful and has the potential to replace the current Swift system in which Bangladesh’s central bank recently lost $81 million to attackers after the central bank’s system access was compromised.

Swift is currently the world’s predominant fund-transfer system, operated by about 3,000 financial institutions around the globe.

Blockchain, however, also has many other applications that promise smarter transactions in the financial sphere and elsewhere.

Blockchains can be used along the entire length of supply chains to ensure sufficient verification and thus prevent fraud. Banking, stock trading, insurance, shipping and virtually any other transaction of values will be more efficient and secure. This, in turn, opens up new opportunities for businesses and industries.

First, according to IBM, blockchain services will help create and manage networks that power a new category of distributed ledger applications. These applications can access existing transactions to support new payment, settlement, supply chain and other business processes.

Second, Internet of Things data will be enabled on blockchain via devices such as WiFi location-tracking, barcode-scan events and device-reported data. These devices can then communicate with blockchain-based ledgers to update or validate smart contracts.

This could be applied, for example, in the movement of an Internet-connected package along multiple distribution points.

In other words, the technology will likely change the entire global logistics business.

In developing new blockchain applications, IBM has also worked with the London Stock Exchange to improve management of risks and increase transparency in global financial markets.

In Thailand, both the central bank and the SEC are preparing measures to facilitate and regulate the coming wave of fin-tech start-ups, such as those planning to offer peer-to-peer lending, crowd-funding and other new forms of financial and related services.

These start-ups have the potential to change the landscape of financial services in the Thai market and become new competitors to existing services provided by banks and other financial institutions.

For example, a peer-to-peer lending service may compete against existing automobile-leasing services as social media offer up a group of potential lenders to someone who wants funds to buy a new car.

Rather than applying for an auto loan with a traditional leasing firm, the person may go to social media and apply for a peer-to-peer loan on a reputable start-up platform which can digitally link, say, 10 potential lenders with the car buyer who’s requesting a loan.

This new way of getting and providing car loans may be available shortly as regulators forge a new set of rules and regulations for the digital economy.

Nophakhun@nationgroup.com

The core criticism levelled at the National Council for Peace and Order since 2014 is that it has operated a dictatorial regime in which civil liberties are rescinded.

In a bid to calm public sentiment, the coup-makers promised to pave the way back to democracy, with Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha even insisting that “today, we are 99 per cent democratic”.

The junta attempted to burnish that claim by bowing to public demands for a referendum on the charter draft when the drafting process started in late 2014.

If voters endorse the junta-sponsored draft in two months’ time, the NCPO will also claim a degree of legitimacy to continue in power. But if the poll result goes the other way, the junta will face new challenges and an uphill battle.

As such, it is perfectly understandable that the NCPO wants the referendum to go smoothly and render a result that offers the credibility it sorely needs. However, if that process includes the convenient burial of all opposition voices, the end result will be neither impressive nor an endorsement of junta rule.

The recent suppression of referendum-monitoring stations set up by red shirts is a case in point. The NCPO has successfully thwarted their launch, but this does not mean that it has secured a victory. If anything, the opposite is the case.

Because the claimed purpose of the centres was to monitor for fraud, red-shirt leaders like Jatuporn Prompan and Nattawut Saikuar can now ask, “If you’re not planning to cheat, then what are you afraid of?”

They also have an excuse to seek assistance from international agencies for scrutiny of the vote, adding pressure to an NCPO already facing strong criticism over its restrictions against campaigning and its wider ban on political activities. Of particular concern is vague wording in the referendum law that seems aimed at instilling an atmosphere of fear and silence rather than open debate.

The situation is exacerbated by contradicting statements made almost daily by the authorities. We were assured that wearing a T-shirt with a “vote no” slogan was not illegal, only to be told a day or two later that it is an offence. Prayut announced that red shirts could set up referendum monitoring centres, then the next day said something entirely different.

Amid all the restrictions and confusion, concern is growing over whether the referendum can be free and fair.

The atmosphere is an unhealthy one not just for the public, but also for the regime that has imposed it. While the public is denied the information necessary to making informed decisions at the polling booth, the referendum result cannot be considered an endorsement of the current regime. If the draft charter passes under these undemocratic conditions, the junta’s claim to be safeguarding the passage back to democracy will ring more hollow than ever.

chanwanpen92@gmail.com

Steered through Cabinet last week by Deputy Prime Minister Somkid Jatusripitak, who is responsible for economic affairs, the land and buildings tax bill will levy rates of up to 5 per cent on undeveloped plots and 2 per cent annually on land and buildings used for commercial and farming purposes.

In this respect the new law is progressive, promising to deliver more public revenue from taxation applied in a more fair and equitable fashion than the current, obsolete regime.

But a startling feature of the new law is the generous provision on tax exemption for first-time house buyers. No tax need be paid on the purchase of properties valued up to Bt50 million, which is where the “prosperity line” has been set.

Under the previous property tax bill that line was set at houses worth just a few million baht.

Now, incredibly, owners of a house and land worth Bt50 million won’t need to pay a penny in property tax into government coffers for national development.

In addition, since the law decrees that second-time house buyers get no tax exemption, the gap between rich and poor could widen: A person with one house worth Bt50 million would pay nothing whereas someone with, say, two Bt5-million houses would be subject to tax. Why should a person with property worth Bt10 million be taxed while someone with property worth Bt50 million is exempt?

One question being asked by authorities in a bid to gain public support for the new bill is, “Would you like to see a fairer tax regime that places more burden on the rich?”

The Agency for Real Estate Affairs, an independent consultancy firm, reports that Thailand has just 1,351 homes worth Bt50 million or more, of which 572 units are detached houses and 764 are condominiums. They represent only 0.007 per cent of the total 4.7 million registered units.

Imagine that the tax exemption ceiling were dropped from Bt50 million to, for example, Bt10 million, and you get a sense of the amount of tax revenue we lose under the proposed system.

Meanwhile though it seems the government will be able to collect more tax on undeveloped land, that picture could be deceptive too.

The maximum rate to be imposed on undeveloped land is 5 per cent for the first three years, then double that from year 4-6. Meanwhile farmland is subject to a maximum rate of 0.2 per cent.

If the ceiling for tax exemption on houses is too high, we might see owners of undeveloped land exploit a loophole by placing houses on the land to reap the benefit of the 0.5 per cent maximum tax rate against 5 per cent or more.

The bill will now be sent to the National Legislative Assembly for its consideration. Hopefully, its members will do the right thing and drop the ceiling for tax exemption.

sasithorn@nationgroup.com