What's your view on the electoral-fraud case that could lead to the Democrat Party's dissolution?

This case details Thailand's political history over the past four or five years, because it highlights behaviour in the process of politics, the justice system and the independent agencies - and that of the officials of those agencies.

First, it revealed interference in the justice system at both the police and public-prosecutor levels. In essence, the attorney-general indicted the Democrats under the influence of the political power-wielders under Thaksin's regime.

Second, it was clear that an independent agency - the Election Commission (EC) - had become a political tool. The most pathetic practice was information in the EC's computers being modified to favour politicians.

It was lucky that eventually the Constitution Court was abolished and the Constitution Tribunal appointed in its place after the September 19 coup.

The Constitution Tribunal members are not the same as the Constitution Court judges. The Constitution Tribunal is composed of the presidents of the Supreme and Supreme Administrative courts and will make us more confident in terms of the Tribunal's justice.

What is the future of the Democrats after May 30 [when the Constitution Tribunal will deliver its electoral-fraud verdicts]?

We haven't prepared anything. Honestly. We haven't even registered for a new party. We believe nothing is better than using the truth to defend ourselves. We must accept the result - and trust in justice. We are not careless about not preparing, but we believe justice exists.

What will be the effect if the Thai Rak Thai and Democrat parties are dissolved or neither is dissolved?

It won't be a crisis for the country, but it will affect politicians and political-party executives.

It won't be so bad that we will lack good people to work for the country.

What are your thoughts on the drafting of the constitution?

I think it's strange the draft constitution isn't in line with the democratic parliamentary system on many issues. It's lucky that the judges have refused to play the roles cited in the draft.

We should not get judges in trouble. Having them select people for positions makes it hard to protect them from criticism. It's impossible for them to know all the people who are good and bad. No one can. The only way is to let the majority decide.

Don't avoid the electoral system. Some Constitution Drafting Committee members have prejudged politicians and see them all as bad people. They may have seen the behaviour of some politicians, but you will still get these kinds of people [in Parliament] for the next few decades. The point is to limit the bad people from getting in.

Don't be biased against a "husband-wife Parliament". Allow it. If they're really good, let them get in. The problem is how to make an election free and fair. I think the charter-drafters have given the matter too little attention.

All in all, we still have time to fix it. We can revise it, make it realistic and accept the election process. When you are in the legislative branch, you must come from an election, no matter what house you're in.

And be prepared to accept that both good and bad people will get in. The cleaner an election is, the more good people we will get in. So don't worry if both the husband and wife come, if they are good.

Second, when the Constitution Drafting Assembly deliberates and fixes the draft, such details as large or small constituencies won't be a problem. One or three MPs for a constituency is all right. But please make it clear whether to keep party-list MPs. All 400 constituency MPs is all right. The party-list MPs are all right, but you have to make it clear how to get them and why.

I want the drafters to understand this first, then revise the 299 Articles and fix it to be realistic. Don't just dream that MPs will be perfect. Accept ordinary people as MPs, both good and bad. When the election process is good, the experience can be a lesson for people. Don't worry about problems too much. No matter what we do, we'll have to face problems.

Experience has shown me that a selected person will be a good person in the selector's eyes.

Electoral fraud is a weakness of Thai politics; people aren't immune from it. They don't know what they will lose from an election based on fraud and cheating.