• 
• 

Published on March 25, 2008

Government leaders are committed to rewriting the Constitution in a pre-emptive move made out of an apparent fear of a repeat of the dissolution of the Thai Rak Thai party. Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej has - again - alluded to "an unseen hand" at work to pick on his People Power Party. The People's Alliance for Democracy has meanwhile resumed its opposition movement. At the heart of the political disagreement is the interpretation of Article 237 of the Constitution, which is seen by the government camp as having been inserted as a secret weapon by the junta to exterminate allies of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

Article 237 states that any electoral candidate who commits, instigates or supports a violation of the organic law involving elections or electoral rules, as per the regulations of the Election Commission, pertaining to the election of members of Parliament and senators, must be disqualified.If such an offence has been committed, and it can be proven that a party leader or any party executive had foreknowledge of it, lapsed in supervision, or failed to rectify the matter upon learning of it, the Charter then decrees that that party has attained power by means other than those sanctioned by Article 68 of the Constitution. If the Constitution Court rules to dissolve the party, the voting rights of the party's leader and its executives are revoked for five years effective from the date of the party's dissolution.

This provision makes it clear that the high court has leeway in deciding whether to break up a party, but that it is not mandatory that a party be disbanded if one of its executives is linked to electoral fraud. The article could lead to a party's dissolution, but this does not mean that this has to be the case. In any event, there was also support for the charter amendment from those outside of the coalition government. Supporters argued that if political parties can be easily dissolved, then the attempt to institutionalise political parties as a part of the country's democracy would be interrupted.

However, the motives behind proposals to amend the Charter should be clearly shown to be in the public's interest. After all, this Constitution was passed by a public referendum.

All sides should look at the issue thoroughly to ensure that the amendment would receive full public support. Otherwise, citizens could turn against the attempt to amend the Constitution if they felt the change was driven by self-interest.

The Nation