Constitution Drafting Assembly chairman Noranit Sethabutr, left, and charter writer Charan Pakdithanakul, second left, take part in a seminar at Thammasat University yesterday on writing the new constitution. The panel speakers agreed the prime minister m

This is aimed at rectifying flaws in the past Upper Houses - which were either appointed or elected.

Emerging from the meeting, Charan said it was agreed that the screening process for senators might start by each professional group nominating its senatorial candidates.

A selection committee would then be formed to scrutinise the nominations and its members might include leading figures like former premiers and court presidents.

The panel also suggested the number of senators might be reduced.

"The Senate's main task is to scrutinise draft laws and its seats may not be as many as 200," Charan said.

In a separate meeting of the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), many constitution drafters yesterday expressed support for keeping the prime minister's post an elected one, discarding the minimum education requirement to run for the Lower House, and maintaining a bicameral system.

The views were expressed during the CDC's initial round of discussions on political institutions.

The talks were not intended to produce resolutions and were not binding on the committee's 35 members.

Most of the drafters who spoke agreed that the prime minister should continue to come from the ranks of elected MPs. One, however, said the topic was too sensitive to discuss without the risk of making the CDC look like a tool of the junta.

"Do not touch [the issue] and turn it into a problem. We may be accused of assisting the Council for National Security [CNS] and faced with a rejection during the referendum [on the new charter]," warned Pairoj Phromsarn. He added that all drafters should remember that the October 14, 1973 revolt and the May 1992 uprising occurred because people wanted an elected prime minister.

This did not prevent at least two drafters from suggesting that a non-elected prime minister should be allowed.

"Prime ministers don't have to come from the ranks of MPs because when they invest through an election to become MPs they must seek returns," said charter writer Sriracha Charoenpanich, adding: "If one day we get a bad lot of MPs, should we then put up with a lousy PM? We will most likely get an unsuitable PM too."

However, there appeared to be a consensus on doing away with a university degree being a requirement for aspiring MPs.

"I don't see any reason why a barrier should be placed against those who have not graduated from university but are more mature than those with PhDs. It's against fundamental rights and tantamount to segregation of the people," said Prakorn Priyakorn.

Many agreed the bicameral system should be continued, but their views diverged on the fine points of the two houses. Some called for an upper house comprised of both elected and appointed members, while others said the qualifications for senators needed to be raised.

When they turned their sights on the Lower House, a few drafters toyed with the idea of reducing the number of MPs to about 300.

"The challenge is how to make the houses truly representative of the people," said drafter Nakarin Mektrairat, dean of Thammasat University's Political Science Faculty.

Other divisive issues included whether to continue the party-list quota system introduced by the 1997 constitution.

"We should just do away with the party list," insisted Nurak Mapraneet.

Others said party-list MPs had been non-performers and that the system provided rewards for the financiers of political parties.

Pravit Rojanaphruk,

Sathien Wiriyapanpongsa

The Nation