Imagine the hallowed halls of Thailand’s Parliament humming with anticipation as another round of consequential decisions awaits. There’s a tangible buzz in the air—after all, we’re talking about the fate of the nation’s charter, the very DNA of Thai democracy. It’s August 22, and both MPs and senators are diving headfirst into a joint parliamentary meeting, a prelude to a much larger spectacle of political finesse and debate (see, there’s the photo by Chanat Katanyu to prove it wasn’t all a dream).
Flash forward to December, and the plot thickens. The scene is set for a new act in this intricate political dance as parliament swings open its doors once more. Nikorn Chamnong, a maestro of referenda and head of a special sub-panel, steps into the limelight with news that’s going to get every lawmaker’s pen scribbling. He’s dispatching a missive to the podiums of House Speaker Wan Muhamad Noor Matha and Senate Speaker Pornpetch Wichitcholchai, inquisitive and charged with purpose.
A questionnaire is coming their way, an oracle’s script seeking prophetic wisdom on how the Thai people should be consulted on the charter’s amendment. Here’s the kicker: The MPs have till December 14 to unravel the prophecy, while the senators get a generous stretch till December 20.
This isn’t just about ticking boxes and filling blanks. Lawmakers are delving into philosophical musings on whether to start from scratch with a whole new charter or just tweak the existing one, tiptoeing around the intricate ballet of amending Thailand’s constitutional essence. They’re tussling with the notion of whether a referendum should bloom first before the amendment seeds are planted.
And then there’s the question that could spark hours of heated parley: Should at least one formidable third of senators lend their nod for a referendum to pass? Nikorn does indeed tempt them with a zesty twist: Should the architects of the new charter be chosen through the sacred rite of elections or be summoned in some other fateful manner?
It’s a symphony of diverse opinions, each lawmaker’s voice a note in the grander score that the sub-panel is orchestrating, blending together insights from every nook and cranny of professional and social echelons.
By month’s end, this concerto of counsel will journey to the high table of the Deputy Premier himself, Phumtham Wechayachai, before hopping over to the cabinet for the final bow. But Nikorn, the referendum ringleader, has yet another trick up his sleeve. He casts a discerning eye on the demanding “double majority” act, a high-wire demand where over half the eligible populace must cast their votes, and a majority of those voting must echo a ‘yes.’
Our protagonist ponders if this monumental feat is but a politician’s pipe dream and hints at a simpler, more attainable majority for the turnout. Yet, even as he toys with the idea, he’s deep in the study of its nuances.
In an intriguing subplot, the House’s sub-committee dedicated to elections, under the watchful gaze of Parit Wacharasindhu from the Move Forward Party, summons a circle of sages—experts and academics—to pour over the spiritual composition of the charter’s drafting assembly.
Pongthep Thepkanchana, the shrewd former strategist from the Pheu Thai Party with his illustrious background in charter writing, advocates for a blend of intellects in the crafting body, a melting pot of minds to exchange ideas and wisdom. And from the academe’s quarters, Prinya Thaewanarumitkul of Thammasat University’s Law Center pitches for direct selection by the public while musing over how this aligns with typical elections. Less is more, he says about the charter’s next iteration, yearning for brevity and clarity.
As a final note, the Election Commission weighs in with a staggering figure: 3 billion baht is the price tag for this referendum rendezvous, eclipsing the previous one’s budget due to a swollen voter list, freshly minted legalities, and the persistent creep of inflation. So the story goes, as Thailand writes its next chapter, the ledger of democracy ever in flux.
Be First to Comment