Former senator Chirmsak Pinthong reports to Parliament House as a member of the Constitution Drafting Assembly. Some 51 other members appointed by the Council for National Security also registered yesterday.

Last year saw "the People's Constitution" consigned to the bin of history. This year promises a rebirth of democracy after flaws in the political system are repaired.

Thailand appears unable to escape the vicious cycle of tearing up its basic law and making a fresh start.

Of the 17 constitutions promulgated since 1932, only three have lasted for any significant period. The 1932 Constitution served for almost 13 years. The 1978 Constitution was intact for about 11 years. And the 1997 Constitution was in force for about nine years.

The September 19 coup occurred because of the rise of the Thaksin Shinawatra regime and the way it clung to power.

In the assessment of public law expert Amorn Chandara-somboon, the suspended charter might be one of the best-written laws but it was too focused on empowering political parties to safeguard government stability. It failed to anticipate runaway power.

From 1997 to the coup, electioneering pork-barrel politics, rural patronage and weak civic society dominated the political landscape.

In Amorn's opinion charter writers should have factored in the reality of politics before allowing political parties a free rein over state power. The gist of his argument is that most parties are not truly public institutions that represent the people's aspirations.

To him, parties are the puppets of capitalists and big business. The political crisis ensued because the richest of the capitalist class decided to enrich himself and his supporters through political manipulation.

In fewer than five years the political landscape became the playground of one mighty party. The system of checks and balances collapsed. Elected representatives were bound by partisanship to serve one political boss instead of their constituents.

The majority of the people were sedated by populist policies while government leaders took control of the voting system to perpetuate their power and plunder the country with lopsided policies to favour selected businesses.

The key to restoring democracy is to solve the weakest links allowing an individual or a group to dominate political parties, Amorn said.

Amorn is presently a legal adviser to Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont. He is set to spearhead the drafting of the country's 18th constitution. Much of the public debate will be framed by his ideas on the political system.

The 35 charter writers, including Amorn, have a pivotal role to guide the country back to a path of democracy.

At the heart of the debate is the future of political parties. This is likely to trigger fiery arguments from political veterans and activists of all stripes. Partisanship is indispensable in a democracy and society will have to decide how to separate parties from vested interests.

Political reforms on the drawing board are expected to take two tracks - one will involve forming an institution in charge of political development, and the other rewriting the constitution.

The soon-to-be-formed institution will be asked to strengthen civic society and ensure the sustainable development of political parties as public institutions. It is supposed to be in place before the interim government completes its one-year term.

At the moment, it remains unclear if this institution will act like a think tank similar to the King Prajadhipok's Institute or be a regulatory body like the Election Commission.

In regards to the drafting of a new charter and relevant organic laws, the debate is likely to focus on six key issues - the roles of the monarchy, political parties, the Senate, checks on executive power, independent organisations and rights and liberties.

For the monarchy many leading figures have floated the idea of codifying royal intervention to resolve political crises or a power vacuum triggered by unforeseen circumstances.

Before the coup, a political crisis persisted because there was no constitutional provision to address the relevant issues. On royal advice the judiciary stepped in to dissipate tensions triggered by the botched April 2 election.

With the prevailing sentiment for the revered monarchy, certain pro-democracy activists might raise token opposition only for provisions designed to enhance royal intervention.

The heated debate will be over the future of political parties. Charter writers are likely to face resistance from political veterans if they try to weaken control of the political system by partisanship.

The new charter and amended organic laws will aim to prevent any party financiers or cliques from dominating a party. Party mergers are likely to be made difficult to prevent a single party dominating.

Members of Parliament will not be required to have party affiliations, and will be allowed to vote in accordance with their conscience instead of adhering to party lines.

Many political veterans are concerned about the lessening of party control over members of Parliament. This has prompted them to rekindle a debate about the requirement for prime ministers to stand for election.

The underlying issue is whether members of Parliament must belong to a party to contest a poll. If members are free to run independently then partisan control of prime ministerial nominations is moot.

The lesson from the Thaksin regime has led to a proposal to cap prime ministerial terms.

Should charter writers manage to prevent any one party gaining domination it is unlikely any government will last four years.

On the future of the Senate, options are either to turn it into an appointed chamber or to keep it elected but with changed rules. The non-partisan elected Senate of recent times proved ineffective.

Charter writers may allow Senate candidates to campaign for votes or opt for a quota system to appoint them from professional groups. Opponents of an appointed Senate will argue against what they see as reverting to the half-baked democracy of the 1980s.

Anti-coup activists are bracing for a fight over what they see as an attempt by coup leaders to perpetuate control via the bureaucracy.

Political veterans and the elite are in agreement that future governments must not be allowed to amass power. Charter writers are expected to do away with many ironclad rules designed to ensure the survival of a government.

New rules will aim to facilitate checks on the government either by lawmakers or civic groups.

The future of independent or-

ganisations will lean towards the judiciary and away from political influence. Charter writers are likely to increase the involvement of judges to screen office holders. Political parties will be banned from the nomination process.

The People's Constitution was heralded for enshrining rights and liberties as no previous charter had done.

Charter writers are expected to come up with amendments to ensure actual implementation instead of lofty words. Relevant issues include media freedom, government decentralisation and community involvement in decision-making processes.

Avudh Panananda

The Nation