From left, Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, Thai Rak Thai Party caretaker leader Chaturon Chaisang and Chat Thai Party deputy leader Somsak Prissanananthakul head to a forum on the new constitution organised by the Thammasat Association under Roya

Leaders of major political parties voiced doubt yesterday about the real intent for the junta-sponsored rewrite of the constitution and remain sceptical about the finished product and whether it would help solve political crises.

"The Constitution in itself can't solve the national crisis and any constitution which is non democratic will not only not solve the crisis but will create a new crisis," Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva warned.

"Much correction and improvements need to be done to our political culture. At the moment, the bias of those in power against politicians is rather big," said Abhisit. He pointed to the current ban against activities by political parties, five months after the coup. "They should tell us what is so wrong with engaging in political activity."

Chart Thai Party Deputy leader Somsak Prisanananthakul, who joined the first ever symposium on the new constitution attended by heads of the major parties, went even further, saying the public would eventually look forward to yet another new constitution.

"There will surely be the drafting of yet another new constitution. The voices of the people will demand that," said Somsak. "I agree with Abhisit. The democratic principle must be upheld when drafting the charter; that is, it must belong to the people, be drafted by the people and be for the people. But this is impossible at present because it's being drafted under the coup climate.

"The 100-person Constitution Drafting Assembly are picked by the Council for National Security chief - so let's not talk about democratic spirit. The level of people's attachment is also zero."

Somsak warned the junta that Thais and the world community would not be fooled by the drafters and junta if the charter turned out to be a sham based on a preconceived blueprint by military chiefs.

"The international community will refuse to accept it too," he said. "Many people are now closely watching the transfer of power and some political groups such as Suwat Liptapanlop are being linked to junta leaders - though it may not be true."

Caretaker leader of the Thai Rak Thai Party, Chaturon Chaisaeng, expressed a similar view. He went further to allege that a hidden motive to limit or even destroy some political parties, may be the real raison d'etre of the new charter.

"They will try to make sure that the future prime minister will not have to come from members of parliament and will use the appointed Senate to control the fate of the prime minister," said Chaturon, at the forum organised by the Thammasat Association under Royal Patronage.

"This is like taking society back to a very backward and old problem," Chaturon said, adding that he expected more constitutions to be torn up in the future, including the one now being drafted, as long as people resort to force or violence to solve political crises.

"It won't change as long as we fail to create a new understanding in society that doesn't approve of tearing up the constitution whenever they dislike the political situation."

Chaturon warned of social unrest if this attitude wasn't altered. "Society doesn't really accept the constitution as the supreme law."

Likhit Theeravekin, leader of the new Phandin Thai Party, said that at best a good charter could only address 20 per cent of the current crisis, but the rest of the problems would be up to other factors. "I wonder if the charter will pass the referendum because it has lacked legitimacy from the beginning."

Despite their sharp criticism of the charter drafting process, different party executives took a more pragmatic turn to also address what they want to see included in the new constitution, even if some elements end up being temporary.

On whether to keep the party-list MP system or not, Abhisit said he was ambivalent and could accept it either way, as the system had both strengths and weaknesses.

Chaturon said he wanted the party-list system to continue, as there was a need to strengthen party policies and help promote voters to choose a party based on policy platforms.

The Democrat leader, meanwhile, backed an elected Senate, saying "there's nothing more legitimate than the election process".

The acting TRT leader agreed. "It's a conflict if you have a Senate that can impeach the prime minister but is not elected by the people. We can set new criteria, however. We shouldn't bar them from campaigning and they should be able to stay longer than one term."

Suwat Liptapanlop, leader a group of MPs called the National Reconciliation Front, said he backed a mixture of elected and appointed senators to assure that able people would man the upper house. "The election is not a guarantee and we must admit that political parties have supported Senate candidates before."

On the whether the number of MPs should be reduced or not, Abhisit said he could accept any decision as long as it could be justified.

Chaturon warned against adopting a one-man-one-vote system, saying it would lead toward a much weakened political party system. He also criticised any move towards freeing parliamentary candidates from belonging to a political party as very backward. He said two possible amendments could allow outsiders to manipulate representative democracy.

Suwat said candidates need not hold a university degree to run for the lower house although ministers should have it as minimum requirement. He also proposed that in the future, the so-called independent bodies should be elected.

The issue of establishing a political court to punish electoral offenders and politicians received support from Abhisit and Likhit.

Party leaders also voiced concern that "citizen politics" needed to be nurtured. Likhit proposed setting up a Council of Politics to systematically nurture grassroots democracy and political participation.

Somsak lamented that some 50 per cent of the Thai population still did not know what a constitution was - and had never read it in the past.

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation