General Anupong chaired a meeting of provincial governors from all over the country at the Interior Ministry yesterday. Participants also included Deputy Interior Minister Suthi Makbun, Interior permanent secretary Grisada Boonrach, and directors-general from all departments.

The interior minister instructed the ministry’s officials to maintain neutrality and help prevent any attempt to create unrest ahead of the August 7 national vote. He also urged them to help encourage eligible voters to turn out in great numbers.

He told reporters that the Interior Ministry expected to rely on village heads and kamnans to help maintain peace in the run-up to the referendum.

“Kamnans and village heads are supposed to know what is going on in their areas. They have to be able to explain what happens. They have to work to the best of their ability and cooperate with all the relevant agencies. If they can’t do it or turn a blind eye to what’s happening, we will see what to do with them,” the interior minister said.

Anupong also said that he wanted the authorities to get the culprits who mailed letters with “distorted information” about the draft constitution to many houses in northern provinces. He said his ministry was working with local police and military authorities on this case.

He said that he had instructed ministry officials to focus on finding the source of the documents that could cause misunderstanding among the voters.

The interior minister said that he had instructed officials of the government’s peace and order maintaining centres to maintain neutrality ahead the referendum.

He urged voters to use their good sense when deciding which way to vote.

“Whatever the result will be, there must be no unrest in the country. Everyone has to accept the result. Neutrality by authorities is essential. If people do not have faith in them, there could be disturbances,” he said.

Police concluded that the documents confiscated in Chiang Mai did not distort the draft charter, Royal Thai Police deputy spokesman Maj-General Songpol Wattanachai said.

He said the conclusion was drawn after a working group from the Parliament Secretariat and Chiang Mai University studied the content of the documents.

The spokesman also said that police were examining a number of documents mailed to different locations in Lampang province to determine if they distorted the draft charter. Police would take legal action against the publisher and printer of the documents if they were found to violate the Referendum Act, he added.

In a related development, Election Commission member Somchai Srisuthiyakorn advised polling station officials to be careful in performing their duty on voting day to prevent possible allegations of vote fraud.

“This upcoming referendum will be watched closely by people in the country as well as foreigners. This is a sensitive issue. You have to strictly follow the regulations and guidelines,” he said during an orientation meeting of polling station officials in Prachin Buri province.

Somchai said no private watchdog workers would be allowed in polling stations but they would be allowed to observe the process outside the stations.

People could wear shirts embossed with “vote yes” or “vote no”, Somchai said. But he advised against doing so, explaining that while the act would not be illegal it would be “improper”.

THE CHIEF charter drafter said he would speak to the Election Commission (EC) and the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) about taking action against efforts to distort the content of the charter.

Meechai Ruchupan, chairman of the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC), said yesterday that copies of a document containing false information about the draft are being distributed just one month before the August 7 referendum.

He said he was convinced that thousands of copies of the document have been printed and it must have been funded by a “certain group”.

Meechai said he had obtained a copy of the document while lecturing at Government Complex in Nonthaburi, adding that a similar document had also recently been found in Chiang Mai.

CDC spokesman Chatchai Na Chiangmai said yesterday drafters had asked the EC to investigate after copies of the document were distributed at Chiang Mai University on Monday. He said the distribution violated the Referendum Law.

The document looks like the booklet produced by the CDC and summarises the draft charter and specific points, he said. However, he added, the document also includes information that does not exist in the draft charter.

Udom Rathamarit, another CDC spokesman, confirmed yesterday that the “fake” booklet looked very much like the one released by the CDC, but also had content that opposed the draft charter.

“Its content focuses on the controversial rights and freedom chapter in the charter and other points like the political structure, including the non-MP prime minister,” he said, adding that it was more interpretation instead of charter content.

He said the CDC and its chief were concerned that whoever was distributing the “copy” of the CDC booklet “did not have good intentions”.

New Democracy Movement

The New Democracy Movement, a group of student activists, yesterday said they produced the document to criticise certain points in the draft constitution.

Pakorn Areekul, a leader of the group, said the cost of publication was covered with donations, denying a suggestion that it was funded by a political group.

He admitted that the group’s standpoint was similar to that of politicians from “a particular party”, but added that the group “has kept some distance” from politicians.

Meanwhile, Meechai said he needs to discuss the matter with both the EC and the NCPO.

“We have to know where this document comes from and how far it has been distributed,” he said.

EC chairman Supachai Somcharoen said yesterday that he was ready to discuss the matter with Meechai, although no formal appointment had been made.

“If the draft charter is really distorted, the EC will take legal action under the Referendum Law,” he said.

Meanwhile, the NCPO has found instances of the law being violated in certain areas, although there have not been reports of provocation or violence, NCPO spokesman Colonel Winthai Suvaree said yesterday.

He added that the law would be enforced properly in the run-up to the referendum.

In a related development, CDC spokesman Chatchai met Interior Ministry deputy permanent secretary Prateep Kiratirekha yesterday to discuss disseminating information about the draft charter to eligible voters across the country.

The meeting, which lasted about an hour, focused on the need for state-trained volunteers to make door-to-door visits and explain the charter, a source said.

Meechai has voiced concerns about the draft charter’s content being distorted in the run-up to the national vote, the source added.

The junta chief added that sweeping powers granted by Article 44 of the interim constitution would not be used in place of the embattled article if the court rules today that it is unconstitutional and must be invalidated.

“Still there are other NCPO [National Council for Peace and Order] orders,” he said, implying that the regime would still be able to exert control.

The second clause of Article 61 prohibits the spread of “false”, “rude”, “inciting” or “intimidating” messages concerning the referendum and the charter.

Agencies have often said the article is necessary to prevent chaos and disorder.

However, a protest has been lodged against the article claiming that it potentially could violate freedom of expression protected by the interim constitution of 2014.

Prayut expressed concern that people with different political viewpoints might confront each other at polling stations, where they will cast ballots to decide the fate of the junta-sponsored constitution on August 7. He also said the extension of the roadmap depends on whether the constitution passes the referendum.

“It’s not that I’m forcing everyone to vote ‘yes’. But in theory, a constitution is indispensable for an election. “If there’s no charter, there’s no election,” he said.

To hold an election, the country must be peaceful and free of violence, he said.

Should the charter fail to pass the national plebiscite, a new version that is slightly different from the current one would be written, Prayut said, adding that such a draft had not been written yet.

A source familiar with the Constitutional Court said it is very probable the court would rule against the controversial article because the justices give considerable weight to human rights and freedom of expression.

“Even if they rule that Article 61 is not unconstitutional, they are very likely to recommend that the regime allow people to voice their opinions about the referendum,” the source said.

Other authorities besides the prime minister also addressed public concerns by emphasising that the referendum date would not be postponed as a result of the Constitutional Court’s ruling.

‘Other articles still enforced’

Authorities have consistently said the clause would be invalidated if the court rules against it, but the rest of the Referendum Law would remain in effect.

Udom Rathamarit, a spokesman for the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC), told The Nation that the CDC would not have a problem regardless of the court’s decision today.

Only the controversial clause would be nullified not the entire law, he said, adding that procedures regarding the draft charter would proceed.

The first clause of Article 61 prohibiting actions that cause chaos would still be in effect, he said, addressing concerns that future campaigns could be conducted against the charter affecting the August vote. “The referendum date will remain unchanged. It is a different story from the referendum law,” he said.

Surachai Liengboonlertchai, president of the National Legislative Assembly, agreed the referendum would proceed according to schedule.

“If the court rules [Article 61] isn’t unconstitutional, then everything goes on as usual. But if it rules some clauses are unconstitutional, other articles will still be enforced. “Regardless, the process goes on,” he said.

The Internet Dialogue on Law Reform, or iLaw, whose director Jon Ungpakorn spearheaded the petition against Article 61, also said voiding the embattled clause should not delay the referendum.

The decision to file the petition was motivated by the aspiration that such an important process such as the referendum should be conducted in a free and fair manner, iLaw said, adding that people for or against the constitution should have equal opportunities to speak their mind.

PRIME Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha insisted yesterday that the government would wait for a ruling by the Constitutional Court on a controversial part of the referendum law before considering any further action.

Prayut denied that the junta would cancel the referendum if the second paragraph of Article 61 had to be dropped.

“How could you have such a thought?” Prayut asked during his weekly news briefing. “The court will rule on the specific article. Don’t bring it up as an issue involving the whole act [law].”

Officials from the Ombudsman’s Office submitted a petition to the court on Monday seeking a ruling on whether the second part of Article 61 in the new referendum law violates Article 4 of the interim charter’s guarantee of freedom of expression.

The move was prompted by a petition to the office by a group of scholars asking for the case to be forwarded to the court.

The clause in question prohibits the dissemination of “untrue”, “provocative”, “vulgar” or “aggressive” messages through print, electronic media or other channels that could incite unrest ahead of the referendum.

If the court rules against the section, the government and relevant agencies would be obliged to amend the law.

The red shirts, meanwhile, have also made a request to the court, asking it to decide within seven days whether to accept the agency’s petition for judicial review.

Prayut hit out at the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship for filing a petition to the court.

“Do they have rights to accelerate the court? I myself don’t even do that,” he said.

The government’s administrative team would be in charge if a conflict occurs during the referendum process, the prime minister said. However, he said, in regard to whether the Election Commission would continue the vote on the referendum in the event of a conflict arising, or not – both things were possible.

“But I won’t accept people using war [grade] weapons against one another,” he said.

The prime minister also refused to confirm the UDD’s claim that the EC’s referendum budget could be as high as Bt10 billion.

“I only said that the EC had been allocated Bt3 billion and I haven’t approved any further budget. Show me evidence if you’re saying otherwise,” Prayut said angrily.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Court Judge Charan Phakdhi-thanakul declined to disclose the court’s approach to making a judgement on the issue. It would be premature to comment and would contradict the arbitrator’s principle, he said.

However, the judge said the court always tried to be as quick as possible because every issue entering the court matters, and cited the notable quote “Justice delayed is justice denied.”

The director of iLaw, Jon Ungpakorn, who led the scholars’ petition, said the verdict should come this month because it involved rights and freedoms of the people and the court did not have other cases to look into.

Deputy prime ministers, meanwhile, echoed Prayut‘s remark on the impact of the ruling, saying the controversial clause, if annulled, would not invalidate the entire bill and the referendum would not be called off.

Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan, also a key man in the military’s ruling National Council for Peace and Order, said the regime was still following its agenda and had not talked about cancelling the referendum, in response to politicians’ claims that the upcoming vote might not happen.

Given the current peaceful atmosphere, the referendum would be held according to plan, he said.

Prawit said NCPO executives would not interfere in the court’s decision on Article 61. It would depend solely on the court to rule, and the government had no other plans.

Deputy PM Wissanu Krea-ngam said that however the court rules, the referendum planned for August 7 would not be affected. He said there were many chapters in the referendum law and they would remain, even if some clauses were nullified.

“Don’t get too excited. The government is not excited about this because it has no impact on the ballot,” Wissanu said. “Up until now, there was no need to amend or nullify anything. If the court rules that it’s unconstitutional, then only the embattled part becomes invalid.”

 

EC chairman Supachai Somcharoen said the EC had earlier floated an idea to print the disadvantages and advantages of the charter draft after seeing some other countries provided such information for voters in public referendums. He cited for instance, the referendum for Scotland to have autonomy and independence from the United Kingdom.

But he said given that there had been much criticism of the proposal, the EC would not implement the idea to prevent any hassles.

Supachai said the EC would stick with wordings for the additional referendum question as approved by the National Legislative Assembly. He said although the question sounds difficult to understand, the EC only has the duty to print the ballot papers and cannot criticise or object to the question.

The NLA wanted an additional question on whether voters agree with allowing Senators to vote for the PM, apart from the main question of whether to accept or reject the charter draft.

The EC will meet tomorrow to decide the referendum date.

According to the law, the EC must schedule the voting date not less than 90 days and not more than 120 days after it receives the final charter draft from the Constitution Drafting Commission, he said.

The referendum date has tentatively been set for August 7.

Abhisit slams charter as a step backward

DEMOCRATS WILL VOTE TO REJECT REFERENDUM QUESTION ON EMPOWERING SENATE TO CHOOSE THE PRIME MINISTER

WASAMON AUDJARINT,

NATTHAPAT PROMKAEW

THE NATION

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY yesterday called the draft constitution “a democracy in retreat”, but remained silent on how it will vote in the August 7 charter referendum.

“The draft distorts [democratic] will and weakens people’s power compared with state authority,” party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said.

The party opposes the draft, as it undermines the democratic approach, he told a press conference, along with his deputies Ongart Klampaiboon and Jurin Laksanawisit.

“People’s rights have been progressive [in previous charters], but those in the new draft go backward from the [most recent] 2007 one,” he said.

The Democrats have yet to say whether they will accept the draft charter in the referendum, but will clarify their stance if there is “a time to decide” possibly before the referendum date.

The party’s reasoning is quite similar to that of Pheu Thai Party, which last month issued a statement rejecting the charter draft for violating democratic principles and being a product of the coup-installed government.

Pheu Thai has also called on people to vote against the draft in the referendum.

Abhisit criticised the draft for depriving people of their right to participate in the political arena.

For instance, people will not be able to elect the Upper House, which could be empowered along with the Lower House to jointly choose the prime minister if a premier from the parties’ three-candidate lists cannot be selected.

The condition is stated in the draft’s provisional clause, which also stipulates that voters will have only one ballot, preventing them from choosing constituency and party-list MPs from different parties.

The charter will also be too difficult to amend, the Democrat chief said, requiring approval from one-third of the handpicked Senate, which gives it a virtual veto.

With the Senate’s term to coincide with the five-year transitional period, handpicked senators could be involved with more than one government.

There also could be attempts to prolong the provisional period, as was seen with the post-coup charter of 1978.

The Democrat Party is clear that it will vote to reject the additional referendum question proposed by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) on a role for the selected senators in choosing the PM during the transitional period, which would give them the same authority as MPs.

That scenario would create an imbalance within the legislature, Abhisit argued.

Despite being promoted to tackle graft, the charter has loopholes in its anti-corruption mechanisms, Abhisit said, giving the example that the lifting of impeachment powers would mean that wrongdoers would be tried in the courts, which could adversely affect prosecutions.

Allegations of law-breaking by National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) members would be considered by the parliamentary president instead of being turned over to the courts. The Democrat leader said the NACC could negotiate with the government to stall such inquiries.

The charter also reduces the punishment for state officials found guilty of wrongdoing, from a lifetime ban from politics to only five years.

Abhisit said the Election Commission (EC) should state clearly in its recently passed referendum bill what is prohibited during the elections process to reassure the people’s rights to participate, which should be carried out freely and fairly.

The ruling junta should also answer clearly what would happen if the charter is rejected in the referendum, Abhisit said.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha slammed politicians criticising the charter draft and the NLA’s additional question, and asked how such question could worsen the country.

“Politicians dare to criticise the NCPO and [our] reform efforts because if we succeed, people will never turn to them again,” he said.

Prayut also rhetorically questioned whether those politicians had ever succeeded in solving national problems without negative consequences. For instance, he said, they merely provide a budget to solve the problems year after year, instead of finding ways for sustainable fund-raising.

Former Pheu Thai MP Somkid Chueakong said the NLA’s referendum question indicated that the junta wanted to cling to power, and the NLA was under the military government’s thumb.

The EC should be open and not obstruct people from expressing their opinion, he added.

Suriyasai Katasila, deputy dean of Rangsit University’s College of Social Innovation, also urged the junta to clearly tell the public what would happen if the charter is rejected, so voters will know what is going to happen and which charter will be promulgated as an alternative.

“The question has been added to the referendum, but no answer [about what will happen if the charter is rejected]. This referendum will endlessly bring about problems,” he said.

A Suan Dusit poll released on Saturday said most respondents agreed with adding the NLA’s question to the referendum, saying that senators are senior figures with special expertise.

 

THOSE who work for the failure of the upcoming referendum on the charter could face imprisonment for up to 10 years, according to the referendum bill written by National Legislative Assembly (NLA).

Article 62 of the bill partly stipulates that any one who causes disturbance, deceives, forces, or threatens voters in a bid to prevent them from exercising their right or to make them cast a particular vote in the referendum set to take place on August 7 would face imprisonment of 10 years or Bt200,000 fine. In addition, the court could also consider banning their electoral rights for a maximum of five years, too.

The bill would be taken up for the second and third readings at the NLA meeting today, said Jate Siratharanon, the assembly’s whip spokesman.

Meanwhile, amid questions being raised about the options for the country if the present charter draft bites the dust in the planned referendum in August, Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam said the only recourse would be to revert to a recent charter or adopt a mixture of past ones. And the government would not organise a referendum because the process would delay a promised general election in 2017, he added.

Charter must be temporary

Scholars said any charter should only be a temporary one that could allow an election to take place. A permanent charter should be drafted after the next government takes power. Wissanu’s remark came in response to a call from politicians that the government make clear its plans for a new constitution, if the referendum outcome turned out to be negative.

Wissanu noted it was not appropriate to unveil charter alternatives now because they could distract voters. However, he said a backup constitution could possibly be one of the recent previous versions, or a new one written from the 1997, 2007, 2014, and the current charter drafts blended together.

“The government would reveal soon enough [about an alternative plan] because if the referendum outcome is negative, the [2014] interim charter will need amendment as to which constitution will be adopted,” he added.

Wissanu also said he wondered why a referendum should be held at all on the present charter draft. “Personally, I think there are some other ways that are cheaper and take less time, but we didn’t opt for them,” the deputy PM said, without saying what those ways were.

Concerning an additional referendum question to be posed by the NLA, Wissanu said that if legislators resolved to pose one, it would be sent for the Election Commission (EC) to process.

He said no matter how the result of the referendum turned out, nothing would be in vain because at least it revealed what people thought about the issues.

Abhisit Vejjajiva, former PM and leader of the Democrat Party, said yesterday the government should clarify to the people exactly what would happen if they did not accept the present constitution draft.

“The people have the right to know what would be the options before deciding on how to vote in the referendum,” he said.

‘No more referendums’

Gothom Arya, a constitution enthusiast and a human rights advocate from Mahidol University, gave the opinion it was not beyond his expectation that there would not be any more referendums if the present draft was rejected.

“However, I [believe] that any charter adopted after that should only be another interim one. The whole process should restart after an elected government takes office,” Gothom explained.

Yesterday, young activists of the New Democracy Movement showed up at the National Book Fair taking place at Queen Sirikit Convention Center to campaign against the charter draft, with the slogan “Vote No to the Unchosen future”.

THE PHEU THAI PARTY yesterday rejected the charter draft and called on the electorate to vote against the draft in the public referendum even as the Democrat Party appeared to be split on whether to accept or reject the draft.

A statement issued by Pheu Thai said the draft violated democratic principles and was the product of a coup-installed government. It has been written by the CDC, appointed by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), and it caters to the desires of the NCPO more than the public interest, it said. The party said it rejected the charter draft because it would create more problems for the electoral and political systems.

The Democrats will hold a meeting next Tuesday to make a decision on whether to vote for or against the charter draft in the referendum, a party source said.

Opinion of party members appeared to be split with key party leaders seeming to favour rejection of the draft while young members appeared to accept it.

“Abhisit [Vejjajiva, party leader] has yet to show his clear stance but he appears to feel obligated to Suthep [Thaugsuban, former party secretary-general and anti-Yingluck movement leader], who wants the party to vote to accept the draft,” the source said.

Democrat deputy leader Jurin Laksanawisit will do a survey of the members before making the decision.

“The CDC is proposing a trial and error method with its new electoral system that has never been adopted anywhere in the world and takes the public hostage. The election system will result in a weak and unstable government that cannot bring about development of the country,” the Pheu Thaistatement said in strong criticism of the draft.

The party statement said Thais had lost flesh and blood in their lengthy political struggle to have an elected PM, but this draft paves the way for a non-elected PM to take the country’s helm.

“If the non-elected PM belongs to the NCPO, the junta will take absolute control of the country. The junta will steer the country in the direction it wants, not [where] |the public wants,” the statement said.

The statement said the charter draft included a mechanism to reduce the power of the people by creating a Senate with 250 appointed senators. They would have significant power to veto legislation of a government elected by the people. “The undemocratic charter will lead the country into an economic abyss because foreign investor confidence in the country will plunge,” the Pheu Thaiwarned.

“The charter draft also gives unprecedented power to the Constitutional Court – more than the government and Parliament. The court can impeach MPs, senators, the Cabinet and independent agencies. The court has often created a crisis of faith,” it said.

“The charter writers claim this draft was a ‘corruption buster’ aiming to block corrupt politicians from power. In fact the draft does not have any effective mechanisms to stop corruption but empowers permanent officials to have more political power,” according to the statement. The draft included “20-year national strategies” that would prevent elected governments from steering the country in the direction the public would want to go, as it would have to comply with the NCPO’s 20-year plan.

“This draft will lead the country backwards with some people offering an analogy that Thailand’s future will be like Myanmar’s 20 years [ago],” the statement said.

The draft would also bring about more political conflict and not bring about national reconciliation, the critics said.The party also suggested that the government adopt the 1997 charter temporarily and hold an election within six months.

CDC chairman Meechai Ruchupan hit back at the Pheu Thai’s opposition to the charter draft, saying the party had rejected it several times even before its completion.

He refused to comment if the Pheu Thai statement would mislead the public, saying any decision was entirely up to the voters.

He expressed optimism that people would accept the charter draft if they wanted the country to move forward and to be governed under the rule of law.Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan said he believed the Pheu Thai campaign for voters to reject the charter draft was illegal though it does not affect national security.

General Somjet Bunthanom, who chairs a special committee scrutinising the bill on a public referendum on the charter draft, said opponents and supporters of the charter draft are allowed to point out the drawbacks and disadvantages of the draft, but telling the voters to reject or accept the draft or distorting the content is illegal.

Abhisit said the party would make a decision on whether to accept or reject the charter early next month, after taking into account the country’s political situation. “Our ultimate goal is for the country to move forward with a sustainable democracy,” he said. Abhisit said he personally felt that the charter was a step back in terms of democracy, rights and liberty.

He pointed out giving a significant role to appointed senators against an elected government and the difficulty in amending the charter as some of the drawbacks of the constitution draft. He, however, thought the draft had a strong anti-graft mechanism.