• 
• 
• 

It said that the new round of reforms was not welcomed by people other than the red-shirts.

For instance, Banharn Silapa-archa, former leader of Chart Thai Party, said the government should not have wasted its time setting up a committee to study new political reforms because it only needed to amend a few problematic clauses in the Constitution.

To this Thai Rath asked: "Should we admit that the first round of political reforms according to the Constitution of 1997 was a failure?"

Even though the 1997 Constitution was seen as one of the most complete ones that Thailand had ever had, there were accusations that independent organisations and the Senate had been influenced, thereby wrecking the checks-and-balances system.

This failure of the checks-and-balances system later led to political conflicts and then a coup, thus disrupting the process of democracy.

Actually, the first round of political reforms started in 1996 when the leaders in Thai society agreed that "the power of money" was the biggest evil in Thai politics as businessmen and politicians used fat bundles of cash to purchase power and votes.

This buying and selling system is alive and well as politicians keep becoming more and more powerful.

The 1997 Constitution tried to end this problem by empowering independent agencies to check on politicians as soon as they came into power.

However, the independent agencies couldn't stand the abuse from the powerful politicians.

The upper house was dubbed a slave house because of the alleged monetary influence some people had.

So the 2007 Constitution was written to take strong action against politicians who bought votes.

Some allegedly spent Bt20 million to Bt30 million on vote-buying, even though the law stipulates that contenders can spend no more than Bt2 million during an election.

The key question that Thailand should address is not what clauses of the charter should be amended but rather what measures should be implemented to reduce the power of money during the general election.

Money is not only spent to buy votes but also to win politicians or even an entire political party.

The problem is ensuring that vote-buying doesn't become an effective tool for a politician's victory.

Bangkok and its peripheral areas are prime examples that vote-buying cannot always guarantee victory.