"We will listen to all groups of people but only as a reference," CDC chairman Prasong Soonsiri told his fellow charter writers. "Even if the public's view is the majority one, the committee will have to decide by weighing the pros and cons of the matter."

Prasong's remarks came amid growing expectations by several groups who have been submitting their own views and demands of what the new constitution should contain.

Before Prasong spoke, another senior charter writer, Sriracha Charoenpanich, said the public should not have false expectations about their participatory role in the drafting process.

"After listening to people's views, if we have a reason to reject any, then we can explain why to the public; otherwise, we don't need to be here [as drafters]. The public is now confused and trying to claim that we must follow their wishes. The Constitution Drafting Committee will be the main organ for coming up with a good charter that can be rationally justified and explained to the public."

Sriracha's remark followed that of drafter Sodsri Satayatham, who complained that some of the questions being prepared for seeking feedback from the public are based on some pre-assumptions by the committee.

Krirkkiat Pipatseritham, another drafter and former rector of Thammasat University, supported Prasong's idea.

"It is important to listen to people's views but not binding, so we'll just include what we think we should," he said.

As an example of the committee's intention to reduce the number of MPs in order to reduce the power of political parties, Sodsri pointed out one question that asked whether the number of MPs should be reduced or not. She said the question did not even ask whether the number of MPs should be increased instead.

"If we want the public to express their views, we shouldn't direct them through the questions," said Sodsri.

The committee will likely come up with some 28 questions to be posted throughout the Kingdom. The details of some questions are still being worked out, but yesterday saw a few new ones being proposed.

They included whether politicians being sentenced by a court should immediately leave their post; whether secret funds of various agencies should be scrutinised; whether to consider it a criminal offence for voters to accept monetary bribes during an election period; whether to set up a fund to help support people's political participation; and whether the public should be able to amend laws and seek the removal of politicians.

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation