He said the CPD suggested the  voting process adopted in the 1997 Constitution. It opposed issues in the draft such as larger constituencies and voting for more candidates - instead of one for a constituency. Such changes were against the one-person, one-vote principle.

Moreover, letting people vote for regional representatives would lead to a lack of representatives selected by voters nationwide.

The CPD also opposed selecting the Senate because it would allow for a patronage system and the process could be interfered with.

And, allowing a special panel for times of national crisis would be like trying to solve problems at the end of a crisis. It could also be dangerous to give a group of people power over the charter, he said.

But not all changes were bad. Suriyasai said the draft was better than the 1997 Constitution in that it gave more people's participation, especially by allowing direct participation in gathering signatures to remove a holder of a political position, or to propose laws. The number of signatures required has been reduced from 50,000 to 20,000.

The CPD also supported more transparency in the government's financial affairs.