VOTE-NO CAMPAIGN | SootinClaimon.Com

THE new charter draft proposes mechanisms with a tendency to deprive people of their power, such as voting on a non-elected prime minister and selection of non-elected senators, the Network of Academics for Civil Rights has said.

The group led by the dean of Thammasat University’s Faculty of Sociology and Anthropology Anusorn Unno called on the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) to arrange a general election as soon as possible – so a new government and parliament can write a new charter draft.

The group wore T-shirts with a “Vote No” logo when they read a statement outlining five arguments against the draft at a press conference held yesterday at Thammasat University’s Tha Phra Chan campus.

The group said, firstly, people had not had a proper chance to participate in the charter drafting process, so this made them to think it was designed to serve only certain groups’ interests. The Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC), they claimed, had only taken suggestions from the so-called “four rivers of power” while turning down public opinions, according to Kasetsart University economics lecturer Decharut Sukkumnoed.

Second, the draft deprived people of “political voices” as it had been sidetracked to allow a non-elected prime minister to win office, plus a Senate selected by the National Council for Peace and Order.

Third, it would empower the Constitutional Court and independent agencies to check the parliament’s administration, without checks-and-balances mechanisms.

Fourth, security personnel could resort to the enforcement of security related laws as there were no specific clauses limiting this, such as whether the state can infringe on people’s rights and liberty.

Finally, the charter draft gives little room for the constitution to be amended as per the will of the people.

The group also voiced concern over the NCPO’s “threats” that if the draft was rejected, it would stay in power and adopt a new or “worse” charter.

The group, previously known as the Network of Lecturers Concerned for Detained Students, who campaigned for the release of student activists who had been detained, claims that it now has about 400 academics as members.

Anusorn said the group would propose a road map for the country before the referendum and hold seminars to explain each section of the draft in a bid to point out problems in the draft.

“We will carry out [academic seminars], which the referendum bill allows us to do … as we are citizens who abide by the law,” he said.

The lecturers were concerned about “one-sided information” that people have received, as individuals opposed to the junta are generally targeted, Thammasat economics lecturer Pichit Likitkijsomboon said.

“The referendum with suppression [of public debate] would bring about damage to society, whether or not the draft is passed,” Decharut said.

Meanwhile, CDC spokespersons came out swiftly yesterday to respond to the group’s statement. They said arguments against the charter draft appeared to be distorted and discriminatory.

Spokesman Norachit Sinhaseni said the academics’ opinions against the charter draft were not thorough and it looked as if they had not read the whole content of the draft before making their comments.

For instance, the CDC has written a blanket guarantee for people’s rights and freedom and this was more than any previous charter, Norachit said.

He urged listeners and students to study the charter draft thoroughly before making judgements.

CDC spokesman Udom Ratamarit said the academics had distorted views and the draft was not aimed at opening the way for a non-elected PM. But he was not concerned about the group’s statement, he said, as he trusted people would make their own judgements.

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Parties-turn-to-social-media-to-fight-charter-30279843.html

VOTE-NO CAMPAIGN

Kasamakorn Chanwanpen
The Nation February 22, 2016 1:00 am

With millions of Facebook fans we don’t need to rally, Weng says

With the ban on political gatherings still in effect, the fate of political campaigns ahead of the public referendum on the charter draft remains uncertain despite the Election Commission’s measures meant to facilitate such activities.

So, several political figures and factions are looking for space both on social media and in public briefings to outline their stances. They hope these platforms will be more effective in drumming up support than campaigning in the field – at least for now.

Chaturon Chaisang, a key figure in Pheu Thai Party, has focused on Facebook to express his views on the charter draft.

His cover photos are regularly changed to show either highly charged or thought-provoking phrases, suggesting “vote no”. One recent photo read, “Shoot down the charter draft”, while the latest one said, “When to go for an election is not as critical as the regime who is behind the election”.

Last Wednesday, Chaturon openly questioned the possibility of having a public debate on the charter draft, saying, “it won’t be that easy this time” and posting clips of 2007 charter debates he participated in.

He also slammed the military, accusing them of trying to suppress freedom of expression, even on social media. He said the referendum would be pointless with just one-sided information provided.

Chaturon said the charter draft was like a blank cheque for those in power, claiming they could add anything they wish later.

“This is much more critical than previous charters as several things in the draft have been left vague or blank, and will be added after the referendum,” Chaturon posted. “Those who sign this cheque [vote yes in the referendum] will be shocked about what is added later, and will find it difficult to make changes as there is hardly any room for amendment and practically no public participation is encouraged.”

Weng Tojirakarn, a key member of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), said campaigning on social media was as good as going out in the field.

Through social-networking sites, messages could be conveyed efficiently, he said, adding that each red-shirt leader has hundreds of thousands of followers, especially on Facebook.

Former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, for instance, has approximately 5 million fans on the social-networking site, Weng claimed, adding that this was why it was no longer necessary to go into the field.

“We no longer have to campaign, because whatever Yingluck posts on her fanpage already reaches millions of people out there,” he said.

Interestingly, they believe that though they may not “go out on the field with campaign banners, bands and bullhorns”, they are confident that their supporters will vote in the direction they have been pushing for.

“After reflecting on facts and accurate information, I strongly believe that fellow eligible voters will definitely vote down the draft charter,” he said. However, he pointed out that the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) was reaching out to people using troops of Army students to help spread the good points of the charter.

Democrat Party’s deputy leader Nipit Intrasombat, meanwhile, said his party would rely on press conferences and Facebook posts to publicise its views on the draft charter. He added that he was confident that the party’s stance would reach its supporters.

PDRF ‘neutral on charter’

When asked whether he thought Democrat supporters would vote in line with the party’s sentiments, Nipit said: “I believe so.”

He explained the voters had the right to cast their vote as they please, and all the Democrat Party could do is voice its stance, especially on crucial subjects such as the constitution.

Nipit insisted that his party would not arrange any political campaigns to influence voters, partly due to the NCPO’s ban on gatherings.

Meanwhile, the People’s Democratic Reform Foundation (PDRF), previously the People’s Democratic Reform Committee that fuelled the 2014 coup, has chosen to stay neutral on the issue.

PDRF spokesman Akanat Promphan said the foundation would rather see the final version of the charter before it decides to take a position. He said a crucial factor that could drive its decision is to deal with reforms, adding that the foundation was monitoring its development and has not yet made any public moves regarding the draft. Though personally, he said, he did not consider the draft undemocratic or find anything wrong with it.

Despite differing views on the charter draft, the one point everybody seems to agree upon is “equal rights”.

Pongthep Thepkanchana, another key Pheu Thai figure, said he wouldn’t boast that the referendum result will be in line with his party’s preference, but the most important thing would be that “voters reserve the right to receive well-rounded, and not one-sided, information on the subject”.

“The constitution is the supreme law that is imposed on every single person in the country. Therefore, everybody must have the chance to speak their minds about it,” Pongthep said. “If only one side can speak or run its propaganda, then it is not a referendum.”