• 
• 

Published on August 17, 2007

In fact, I don't think there is a foolproof logical argument for an unequivocal "yes" or "no" to the charter. The world has yet to see an encompassing legal treatise without flaws.

But the country's highest law is not about logic or legal finesse; it is about establishing a road map for the political system.

Voters are going to cast their first-ever referendum ballots in Thailand to chart a course for democratic rule. And I believe that one's conscience is the best guide when voting on the draft constitution.

I have no doubt about a successful referendum because a clear majority of voters are expected to vote with a clear conscience. Unlike past votes, preparations for the referendum have been surprisingly free from cheating.

Political rivals may try to outwit one another about the pros and cons of the charter, however, in the end, voters will enter the balloting booths alone and have only their inner voices to listen to.

Allow me, dear readers, to share with you how and why my conscience dictates a "yes" vote.

Thais are known to be free people. From ancient history to modern times, Thais have fought against all kinds of oppression and always upheld the rule of law.

Under absolute monarchy, kings bowed to no one but the law laid down by their royal ancestors. Rogue leaders acting on whims often met with an unhappy ending.

In 1932, a peaceful transition brought about democracy with the King as head of state - a Thai concept for constitutional monarchy.

Democratic rule has thrived on Thai soil as the people find it compatible with their aspirations for freedom.

From its start, the introduction of popular democracy was unfortunately jinxed, admittedly a superstitious sentiment that can help explain many subsequent political events that happened without rhyme or reason.

Unlike popular democracy in other countries, the terms of elected governments in Thailand have been interspersed with periodic military interventions.

The country is at the forefront of democratic rule, yet it has seen no less than 17 coups and no one can say for certain when the vicious cycle of coup-to-charter-rewrite-to-elections will end.

For lack of a better explanation, many political observers have blamed the 1932 bloodless coup to end absolute monarchy as setting a bad precedent and why soldiers keep marching out of their barracks.

Last September 19 saw the latest repeat of this vicious cycle. The coup happened without any notable resistance. The charter rewrite is now completed. The country is about to bring about a general election in order to complete the restoration of popular democracy.

Listening to my conscience, I see the referendum as an indispensable link to cross over from military rule to an elected government.

I stand for democracy without wavering. I expect my "yes" vote to contribute to the resumption of popular democracy.

My referendum vote is not about the coup or the junta or whether the charter is good or bad, or any political figures, but rather it is about bringing back democracy and ending military rule as soon as possible.

For the past 75 years, every Thai constitution has been linked to a coup in one way or the other. Even the suspended 1997 constitution was a byproduct of the 1990 coup.

I see no difference between the 2007 junta-sponsored charter and the suspended provisions initiated by previous military interventions. Why should one charter linked to a junta be preferable to another?

In case of a 'no' vote in the referendum, the junta will step in and enact a charter rewrite of its own choice. No one will be any wiser with a charter offered for a referendum vote or another version completely imposed by the junta.

But everyone may have to brace for a delayed general election in light of political glitches in connection with a charter rejection.

The Thai political system keeps evolving over time as reflected by a series of constitutions. And the people's aspirations have advanced in every charter rewrite.

If anyone cares to notice, the duration of an elected government's term in office keeps getting longer while the span of military rule gets shorter and shorter.

For the last two interventions, coup leaders promptly set a one-year limit in order to avoid the people's wrath.

My conscience says vote "yes" in order to advance democracy forward. I hope voters will cast ballots for the future rather than dwell on the past.

Avudh Panananda

The Nation