A GROUP of high-profile human rights advocates and former senators yesterday lodged a petition with the Ombudsman’s Office, seeking the nullification of the newly enacted referendum act, claiming it violates the interim constitution. while carrying a maximum penalty as harsh as that of the killing by negligence

Under the 2007 charter as well as the 2014 interim charter, the Ombudsman can forward the petition for hearing by the Constitutional Court.

The Ombudsman Office secretary-general Raksagecha Chaechai accepted the petition on behalf of Ombudsman Sriracha Wong-sarayangkul and pledged to take immediate action. However, he refused to confirm when and even whether the ombudsman will submit it to court, saying its preliminary review must be carried out first.

The group, led by former senator and director of Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw) Jon Ungpakorn, asked the Constitutional Court via the Ombudsman’s Office to look at the second and fourth clauses under Article 61 of the Act. He said the clauses in question violate Article 4 of the interim charter, which guarantees freedom of expression.

Hence, the act breaches the constitution and should be nullified.

According to the petition, signed by 100 law experts, academics and human rights advocates, the clauses contain broad and vague terms, such as “harsh”, “aggressive” and “seditious”. The group said people in general would not understand these words and know what actions can be considered illegal.

Furthermore, the clauses ban the dissemination of false and harsh messages through the media, and entail penalties such as up to 10 years in jail, a fine of up to Bt200,000 and a 10-year ban from voting.

The maximum penalty should not be equivalent to that of killing by negligence, as people are only expressing their views “peacefully”, the group said. Expressing one’s views in a “rude or aggressive” manner may be inappropriate, but it should not be taken as a violation of law, it added.

Sedition, the group pointed out, also carries a severe maximum penalty of seven years in jail. Plus, the authorities are now applying their legal interpretation of the law far too broadly to threaten people against expressing their views on the draft charter.

Jon said the clauses discourage the general public and the media to voice their opinions on the draft.

“We have no intention to overturn the August referendum, but just want people to be able to arrange debates on the draft during the lead-up to the referendum,” Jon said.

Former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission and the ex-senator who championed human-rights protection, also voiced concerns over the clauses, saying the referendum may end up being a waste due to them.

The referendum aims to hear people’s voices, so why is the law discouraging people from speaking out, he asked.

“Fear has spread throughout the country and is harming democracy,” Niran said.

Krasiak Choonhavan, a former senator on foreign affairs, said that Thailand has come very far in terms of human-rights protection because people are becoming increasingly aware of their own rights.

He is confident that people understand the contents of the draft charter and will be able to decide on their vote themselves, provided the regime allows inclusive debates and discussion.

Pro-democracy law lecturer at Siam University Ekachai Chainuvati said the concerned clauses did not just scare ordinary people, but also legal experts.

Meechai Ruchupan, chairman of the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC), said 167 members of the two assemblies would act as volunteers to help the CDC explain to public members “in the layman’s language” about difficult legal terms in the draft constitution.

He said this project was a cooperation between the CDC and the two assemblies, which is allowed under the Referendum Act on the Draft Constitution.

Meechai also said that with the volunteers being dispatched to all provinces, he believed they would help the CDC’s work considerably.

“They are familiar with the areas of their responsibility. All of them have good knowledge about the constitution although some of them may have different views about the draft constitution. Personally, I think that with more volunteers, voters will get sufficient information before making their decisions,” he said.

The CDC chief also voiced his support to a military campaign for people to come out to vote during the August 7 referendum on the draft constitution.

Regarding the presence of foreign observers for referendum, Meechai said they could do so unofficially. “They may enter the country as tourists,” he said.

Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwan yesterday called on political activists not to hold demonstrations in the run-up to the referendum.

“The referendum is going to take place soon. Please do not come out to cause any unrest. Let the referendum continue as planned,” Prawit said.

He urged people to turn out to vote at the referendum “so that there will be a general election next”. However, Prawit added that whether the draft charter passes the vote or not, the next election “will definitely be held” next year. “But I don’t know what will happen after the election,” he said, without elaborating.

Prawit warned that the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO ) would “enforce all the existing laws” in response to law violations by any “trouble-makers”.

He explained that Army chief General Teerachai Nakwanich, who is the NCPO secretary-general, admitted that he “has already run out of his wits” after repeatedly unsuccessful attempts to “adjust the attitude” of the protesting activists.

Prawit said yesterday that the NCPO would provide security for members of the CDC and the Election Commission who would meet with people to explain about content of the draft charter, particularly in areas where opposition was intense.

“I am sure they will be safe. I don’t think anyone will dare to do anything to them,” he said.